Historical and Psychoanalytic Account; Place of the Collective in Singular History and of the Singular in Collective History

Abstract

This work, about the place of the collective in the individual history, and the singular in the collective history, consist, in big terms, of three parts. In the first of it, Y try to get the theme of the narration in Psychoanalysis, enacting parallelisms with history, literature. I started feeling quite constrained: the tendency to remit myself to other authors was strong, even with a profusion of textual quotation which later Y tried to moderate, not because of being against with the quotations it selves, but they gave the real tedious tone of defensive distance. The second part belongs to the vivid narration, to which before Y alluded, and which imposed itself to me like that, coinciding with the situation of sense constraint, for a sense of more freedom; for diverse reasons that Y will later explain, Y thought that this part which Y called the deaf terror, was not taking part of the final work, but it simply obeyed to the necessity of transforming in words, some vividness’s, may be shared with many of my pairs or contemporary people. This narration is interlaced with the reflections around the events of those years. In the third place, I briefly aboard some considerations about the present, an outline of a very vast theme, that can answer the necessity to confirm that, no matter this past (that the simple passing of the time didn’t bury in forgetfulness), the present, with its complexity, presents itself like a living challenge, and it opens to a future sometimes difficult to imagine, but not for that reason, apocalyptic. One of the things that painfully we have learned is that there are not infallible methodological tools, which permit to make projections to the future. This shows itself always untrue. We have less certitude, we no longer affirm that history “always goes ahead”, we have less omnipotence.