(by Derick Olson)
Mr. Schreber wants to be a woman. Not just any woman, but the “wife of God,” ready to be miraculously impregnated by the “holy rays” of the Creator in order to give birth to the “new race of mankind.” From the initial delusion that his psychiatrist, Dr. Flechsig, would steal his soul and transform his body into a woman's for sexual pleasure, Schreber extends the delusion to a persecution from God and finally, the impregnation from God to save humanity. In “The Phychotic Dr. Schreber,” Sigmund Freud takes on the task of interpreting such delusions.
To start, it is a question of which comes first: the illusion or the fantasy? This chicken or the egg scenario leads to two possibilities: Does Schreber thirst for eternal glory and use his transformation into a woman as a means to such glory? Or does he secretly fantasize about being a woman, and justify the desire with the idea that it is necessary for him to save humanity as a woman?
Freud argues for the latter. He begins with the larger fantasy of saving the world, and dismisses it as a justification for Schreber's desire to be a woman. He then interprets the desire to be a woman as a form of Schreber's repressed homosexuality. This latent homosexuality, Freud says, is present in everyone, but is usually exerted through “brotherly love” and “comradeship.” Dr. Schreber consciously believes that he is interested in women, but his subconscious push for his true homosexual desires cause an internal struggle that, when paired with the stress of overwork, lead to psychotic delusions. He initially justifies his love of men with a desire to become a woman. But such a desire goes “against the order of things,” so he states that his psychiatrist, Dr. Flechsig, and later God Himself, is “persecuting” him in order to make him a woman for a male's sexual gratification (which is all Schreber really wants from mankind). Finally, Dr. Schreber creates a new reality where his delusions can thrive, the post-apocalyptic world in which an impregnation from God is the only way that he (or she) can save humanity.
Freud's interpretation of Dr. Schreber seems generally sound, especially when the added allusions to Schreber's life are taken into account (the links between the love for his lost father relate to his image of God, and his wish to continue his family line despite his lack of children). Yet the conclusions are solely based on the Freudian interpretation of the mind that it all originates with the libido and its consequent sexual urges. This view leaves no room for the inverse interpretation, that perhaps Dr. Schreber's desire was for glory and recognition, and the idea of becoming a woman was just a means to that end.
Let's say that Schreber felt that his life was devoid of meaning; nobody saw his genius as worthy of the glory that he desired. He had come from a prestigious family and was active in German politics, but it was not enough. Perhaps he felt that his superior intellect was worthy of divine recognition, that he should be in direct contact with God. As Schreber fell into delusions of heavenly contact, he needed a way to separate himself from God as not to confuse his well-deserved glory to that of God's. So he took the blow to his masculinity and decided to become the wife of God. Now, in Schreber's false reality anything was possible. If he could become the mother of a new humanity, he would be the savior of all men, and gain the recognition he deserved.
It seems that there could be an infinite number of interpretations of Dr. Schreber's psychosis, and that Freud simply chose one that fit his already-established views of the mind. He takes a fairly narrow angle in his interpretation, dismissing the point that some actions may be based on non-sexual tendencies, drawing lines that favor his theories while ignoring the fact that they could be drawn in infinitely many directions, and justified nonetheless. What Freud claims to be an analysis of the subconscious may be none other than an analysis of coincidence.
While I do admit that Freud's interpretation of the issue is most convincing, his one-sided approach and complete dismissal of the inverse option seems unjustifiable. To reduce the complex nature of the mind to a mere exchange of sexual energy (which I do agree is a large part) is to ignore all other facets of humanity. Although our primordial sexual nature is a dominant trait in our lives, desires of knowledge, power, and meaning seem independent of the libido rather than the outward appearance of our subconscious urge for sex.
