The majority of book-to-film adaptations operate more or less important adjustments on the initial text. In this respect, the present article attempts to investigate the psychoanalytical relevance of such a textual intervention in Roman Polanski’s 1992 film, “Bitter Moon”, based on Pascal Bruckner’s novel, “Lunes de fiel” (1981). The analysis takes the Freudian theories on sadomasochism and death instinct as a starting point.
Creation is a fundamental definition of genius, and we are wondering if those minds that created totalitarian systems, could remain in human history through destructive impact on millions of people’s minds, and could they possibly be included in genius category. Certainly, we could support the idea of the participation of these people in the creation process – in the creation of ideology of a new world, of a new Human etc. At the same time, the Real Human is perceived only as an object that can be manipulated, overwhelmed, dominated, controlled, destroyed etc., “love” and “investment” of the evil genius being dedicated to a non-existent Ideal Human. We are trying to understand what are the pillars of the relationship with the Others, and the dictators’ great seduction capacity. In the condition of the incapacity and inability of these personalities to appreciate humanity, most of them were able to provoke admiration. In the context of these paradoxical relations, becomes noticeable the responsibility of understanding the way perverse mind speaks with our minds in a way that we became available consciously or unconsciously to join in this destructive creation.
The clinical vignettes evoked in this text open up, I hope, new lines of thinking and reflection, necessary in approaching the following fundamental issue: what does the archaic aspect of the analytic relationship consist of, considered a determining element for the changes and transformations induced by the psychoanalytical protocol? An indispensable question for the deepening of means of evolution for the psychoanalytical technique, directly determined by the diversity of personality structures and defence mechanisms which the method has been confronted with the past years. All the more so that what can be brought to light from the past never represents a faithful witness of the prehistoric age, but rather a heterogeneous product to the extent that every stage of life traversed by the human subject modifies in its turn « primitive » experiences. This is also the reason for which states of pathogenic regression do not allow an exact reconstitution of original situations. Especially since there is not much said about origin. Only the paradox can be noticed, that the origin is different from the archaic. An archaic that continues to produce meaning in the present, forcing psychoanalytical practice and its practitioners to adapt to modernity, thorough the strangest and most unexpected clinical forms thus convoked.
When describing the two instincts in his work “The Ego and the Id”, Freud says that the “Eros, by bringing about a more and more far-reaching combination of the particles into which living substance is dispersed, aims at complicating life and at the same time, of course, at preserving it”. This complication, which I consider to be rather an increased complexity, can be found in the patients’ discourse through the diversification of means of expression and attributed significations, when their “stories” open up to us and to new meanings… However, when stories are meant to free the body of the burden of a stigmata, which must be covered with histories and significants, how can we identify the flux of the Eros in the counter-sense of a Thanatos that, as Freud said, “tends to return the organic to the lifeless state”? I therefore propose that we try and explore this effort to tell the story of the body expression forms trough words, in Mario Vargas Llosa’s novel, The Storyteller…