What do you think?
Rate this book
On Giving Up
From acclaimed psychoanalyst Adam Phillips, a meditation on what we must give up to feel more alive.
To give up or not to give up?
The question can feel inescapable but the answer is never simple.
Giving up our supposed vices is one thing; giving up on life itself is quite another. One form of self-sacrifice feels positive, something to admire and aspire to, while the other is profoundly unsettling, if not actively undesirable.
There are always, it turns out, both good and bad sacrifices, but it is not always clear beforehand which is which. We give something up because we believe we can no longer go on as we are. In this sense, giving up is a critical moment - an attempt to make a different future.
In On Giving Up , acclaimed psychoanalyst Adam Phillips illuminates both the gaps and the connections between the many ways of giving up, and helps us to address the central what must we give up in order to feel more alive?
'One of the finest prose stylists in the language, an Emerson of our time' John Banville
'The best living essayist writing in English' John Gray
To give up or not to give up?
The question can feel inescapable but the answer is never simple.
Giving up our supposed vices is one thing; giving up on life itself is quite another. One form of self-sacrifice feels positive, something to admire and aspire to, while the other is profoundly unsettling, if not actively undesirable.
There are always, it turns out, both good and bad sacrifices, but it is not always clear beforehand which is which. We give something up because we believe we can no longer go on as we are. In this sense, giving up is a critical moment - an attempt to make a different future.
In On Giving Up , acclaimed psychoanalyst Adam Phillips illuminates both the gaps and the connections between the many ways of giving up, and helps us to address the central what must we give up in order to feel more alive?
'One of the finest prose stylists in the language, an Emerson of our time' John Banville
'The best living essayist writing in English' John Gray
160 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2024
252 people are currently reading
2593 people want to read
About the author
Adam Phillips
124 books680 followersAdam Phillips is a British psychotherapist and essayist.
Since 2003 he has been the general editor of the new Penguin Modern Classics translations of Sigmund Freud. He is also a regular contributor to the London Review of Books.
Phillips was born in Cardiff, Wales in 1954, the child of second-generation Polish Jews. He grew up as part of an extended family of aunts, uncles and cousins and describes his parents as "very consciously Jewish but not believing". As a child, his first interest was the study of tropical birds and it was not until adolescence that he developed an interest in literature. He went on to study English at St John's College, Oxford, graduating with a third class degree. His defining influences are literary – he was inspired to become a psychoanalyst after reading Carl Jung's autobiography and he has always believed psychoanalysis to be closer to poetry than medicine.
Adapted from Wikipedia.
Phillips is a regular contributor to the London Review of Books. He has been described by The Times as "the Martin Amis of British psychoanalysis" for his "brilliantly amusing and often profoundly unsettling" work; and by John Banville as "one of the finest prose stylists in the language, an Emerson of our time."
Since 2003 he has been the general editor of the new Penguin Modern Classics translations of Sigmund Freud. He is also a regular contributor to the London Review of Books.
Phillips was born in Cardiff, Wales in 1954, the child of second-generation Polish Jews. He grew up as part of an extended family of aunts, uncles and cousins and describes his parents as "very consciously Jewish but not believing". As a child, his first interest was the study of tropical birds and it was not until adolescence that he developed an interest in literature. He went on to study English at St John's College, Oxford, graduating with a third class degree. His defining influences are literary – he was inspired to become a psychoanalyst after reading Carl Jung's autobiography and he has always believed psychoanalysis to be closer to poetry than medicine.
Adapted from Wikipedia.
Phillips is a regular contributor to the London Review of Books. He has been described by The Times as "the Martin Amis of British psychoanalysis" for his "brilliantly amusing and often profoundly unsettling" work; and by John Banville as "one of the finest prose stylists in the language, an Emerson of our time."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews
April 25, 2024
A bit too loosely connected to the title essay, but I enjoyed most of what’s going on here regardless. I think the most interesting thing to extract here is this fascist state of mind idea, which is intrinsically connected to a censorious relationship to your own desires and, most importantly, curiosity. Wish this was a lot longer tbh, and not mostly a collection of previously published pieces — I’ll read whatever Phillips pumps out though
February 3, 2025
This is my favorite kind of book, where the author thinks through issues with the reader rather than delivering The Truth. Phillips does engaging work problematizing various facets of surrender. His primary tool is Freudian psychoanalysis, but bits and bobs of philosophy and literary analysis play a part too. The essays feel meaty without overstaying their welcome, and there's a high degree of psychological sophistication. I'm glad I didn't give up on this one. Highly recommended.
March 3, 2024
Although small this piece of work provides the reader with multiple opportunities to explore the psyche. The material is dense but broken up well into the chapters making it more accessible. The whole concept of giving up and the pros and cons are explored in such depth. Answers are never simple or easy. I loved how all the main players in psychodynamic approaches are brought into the discussion, alongside Shakespeare. This should be on any psychology students to read list. Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for an E-ARC. This is a voluntary review of my own thoughts.
Read
September 1, 2025I found it hard to get a grip on this book. The reversals and symmetries and inversions, the speculative and ironic moods--I'm not condemning these, they're why I read him, but I kept feeling like I was reading too quickly. A deceptively short book. At times, I felt psychoanalyzed in the best way, invited to be curious and at least partly able to accept the invitation.
April 7, 2024
"من نقطة معينة لم يعد هناك عودة إلى الوراء." هذه هي النقطة التي يجب الوصول إليها. هذه واحدة من أقوال كافكا زوراو، التي كتبها خلال الحرب ــ بين عامي 1917 و1918 ــ مباشرة بعد تشخيص إصابته بمرض السل الذي أدى إلى قتله في نهاية المطاف. "من نقطة معينة لم يعد هناك عودة إلى الوراء." هذه هي النقطة التي يجب الوصول إليها. لماذا؟ لأن هناك دائما إغراء التخلي؟ أو بطريقة أكثر إيحاءً، لأن هناك دائمًا إغراء العودة إلى الوراء: العودة، على سبيل المثال، إلى الماضي، إلى المكان الذي بدأ منه المرء، لتتتبع خطواتك؛ أو ببساطة العودة إلى الوقت الذي يمكنك فيه اختيار الاستسلام، أو اختيار ما تريد فعله حقًا مرة أخرى؛ وكأن التقدم، أو الإنجاز، أو الالتزام، يعتمد على الوصول إلى النقطة التي لا مجال للرجوع عنها بعد الآن. عند هذه النقطة، يعني ذلك أننا اتخذنا قرارنا أخيرًا. لقد انتهت أزمة الاختيار؛ لم نعد نبحث عن مخارج وأعذار؛ ولم تعد تغرينا البدائل والتأجيلات.
إنها النقطة التي نعرف فيها ما نريد؛ لم نعد تلك المخلوقات المعقدة والمتضاربة التي كنا عليها حتى هذه اللحظة. شكوكنا معلقة أخيرا. نحن، بمعنى ما، أحرار. إن النقطة التي لا يوجد منها عودة إلى الوراء تشير، بالطبع، إلى أنه كان هناك بالفعل قدر معين من العودة إلى الوراء، أو قدر معين من الرغبة في العودة إلى الوراء. كما لو أن الرغبة في العودة إلى الوراء هي ما يتعين علينا مواجهته دائمًا – كإغراء، أو ببساطة كخيار. وكأننا أيضًا مدفوعون بالرغبة في أفعال غير مكتملة، بملذات التردد وعدم اليقين والتأجيل، بالرغبة في الاستسلام.
.
Adam Phillips
On Giving Up
Translated By #Maher_Razouk
إنها النقطة التي نعرف فيها ما نريد؛ لم نعد تلك المخلوقات المعقدة والمتضاربة التي كنا عليها حتى هذه اللحظة. شكوكنا معلقة أخيرا. نحن، بمعنى ما، أحرار. إن النقطة التي لا يوجد منها عودة إلى الوراء تشير، بالطبع، إلى أنه كان هناك بالفعل قدر معين من العودة إلى الوراء، أو قدر معين من الرغبة في العودة إلى الوراء. كما لو أن الرغبة في العودة إلى الوراء هي ما يتعين علينا مواجهته دائمًا – كإغراء، أو ببساطة كخيار. وكأننا أيضًا مدفوعون بالرغبة في أفعال غير مكتملة، بملذات التردد وعدم اليقين والتأجيل، بالرغبة في الاستسلام.
.
Adam Phillips
On Giving Up
Translated By #Maher_Razouk
Read
March 15, 2025Bir kavram üzerine farklı disiplinlerden yararlanarak düşünme, bilinç akışı düşünceleri denemeye dönüştürme. Benim favori edebi türüm bu. Bir kavram etrafındaki farklı sorunlara bir çözüm önerisi sunma kaygısı olmadan nitelikli sorular sorma sanatı yani. Phillips, vazgeçmeye dair kesin bir yargıya asla varmadan kavram etrafında dönüyor yalnızca; ama bunu oldukça ilginç şekilde yapıyor.
Beklemediğim kadar psikoloji, psikanaliz ile ilgiliydi metin. Kafka benim sürekli varoluş krizleri çekmesine rağmen, yazdıklarının aksine çok eğlence peşinde bir hayat sürmesi; aşk aramayı asla bırakmaması ama kadın düşkünü olması gibi çelişkileri ile kendime yakın gördüğüm bir karakter, onun üzerine bu bağlamda düşünmek ve Freud ile ilişkilendirerek düşünmek ilginçti.
Düşünce tarihi,yani medeniyet tarihi aslında, maalesef kadın düşmanı erkeklerin yazdığı bir tarih. Ben bu sebeple, bu adamların zekalarını ve yetkinliklerini elbette kabul etsem de bazen işlerine derinlikle bakamıyorum. Freud da hep bu asla sadece bir düşünce adamı olarak görüp anlamaya çalışabildiğim biri değil, mesafemi aşamıyorum. Ama ilk kez, onu da içinde yaşadığı topluma adaptasyon sorunu çeken, kendi içinde zorlu savaşları olan bir göçmen olarak görüyorum burada. Bir “istenmeyen” olarak, bir ''Yahudi'' olarak. Bu da beni bir şiddetin, başka bir şiddeti doğurduğu, ayrımcılığın farklı türlerinin ayrılamaz şekilde iç içe geçtiği gerçeğine götürüyor bir kez daha.
Benden daha yukarıda olan birileri varsa asağıda olan birileri de olmalıdır. Ben bir yahudi olarak bir almandan daha az değerliysem, bir kadın da kadın olarak bir erkek olan benden daha az değerlidir.
Freud'un aslında açıkça söylediği ve Phillps'in de üstünde durduğu şekilde; kendiliğimizi ne olduğumuzu bilmememek ve sansür üzerinden var ediyoruz ilk etapta. Ben de ilk önce bir kadın olarak “erkek olmadığımı” bildim ve buna uygun görülmeyen her şeyimi sansürledim. Tüm yaşam çıkarımlarım bu sansür temeli üzerinden olmaya devam ediyor. Umutla ve inatla dünyanın beni yanlışlamasını, haksız çıkarmasını bekliyorum ama kadın düşmanlığı her öykünün sonunda beni beklemeye devam ediyor.
Beklemediğim kadar psikoloji, psikanaliz ile ilgiliydi metin. Kafka benim sürekli varoluş krizleri çekmesine rağmen, yazdıklarının aksine çok eğlence peşinde bir hayat sürmesi; aşk aramayı asla bırakmaması ama kadın düşkünü olması gibi çelişkileri ile kendime yakın gördüğüm bir karakter, onun üzerine bu bağlamda düşünmek ve Freud ile ilişkilendirerek düşünmek ilginçti.
Düşünce tarihi,yani medeniyet tarihi aslında, maalesef kadın düşmanı erkeklerin yazdığı bir tarih. Ben bu sebeple, bu adamların zekalarını ve yetkinliklerini elbette kabul etsem de bazen işlerine derinlikle bakamıyorum. Freud da hep bu asla sadece bir düşünce adamı olarak görüp anlamaya çalışabildiğim biri değil, mesafemi aşamıyorum. Ama ilk kez, onu da içinde yaşadığı topluma adaptasyon sorunu çeken, kendi içinde zorlu savaşları olan bir göçmen olarak görüyorum burada. Bir “istenmeyen” olarak, bir ''Yahudi'' olarak. Bu da beni bir şiddetin, başka bir şiddeti doğurduğu, ayrımcılığın farklı türlerinin ayrılamaz şekilde iç içe geçtiği gerçeğine götürüyor bir kez daha.
Benden daha yukarıda olan birileri varsa asağıda olan birileri de olmalıdır. Ben bir yahudi olarak bir almandan daha az değerliysem, bir kadın da kadın olarak bir erkek olan benden daha az değerlidir.
Freud'un aslında açıkça söylediği ve Phillps'in de üstünde durduğu şekilde; kendiliğimizi ne olduğumuzu bilmememek ve sansür üzerinden var ediyoruz ilk etapta. Ben de ilk önce bir kadın olarak “erkek olmadığımı” bildim ve buna uygun görülmeyen her şeyimi sansürledim. Tüm yaşam çıkarımlarım bu sansür temeli üzerinden olmaya devam ediyor. Umutla ve inatla dünyanın beni yanlışlamasını, haksız çıkarmasını bekliyorum ama kadın düşmanlığı her öykünün sonunda beni beklemeye devam ediyor.
October 3, 2024
Reading this book felt like picking up different lenses and prisms through which to look at life, and some really stuck with me — I’d just want to sit with it for a while, like the chapter in narrow vs wide attention. Some chapters read more like contextualizing the history of psychoanalysis, which was interesting but less provocative and felt sprawling from a dense and punchy opening collection of thoughts. While it wasn’t a satisfying coherent end to end read, it leaves a lasting shift in perspective, which is what I’m often looking for.
December 14, 2024
Was expecting to read more on "giving up"; nevertheless, it was enjoyable and refreshing.
March 6, 2025
I did not enjoy this book lol.
I've had many a misfortune of having someone (usually a man) say something to me (usually sexual) that is completely unhinged and they say it in the most laidback way and expect me to agree with them (e.g., "You know how everyone [X]?" "...No, can't say that I do."). That's what reading this book was like. The summary on the book sleeve says, "What must we give up to feel more alive?" and the author chose I N C E S T to explore that and does so nonchalantly. I high-key feel like the confused Nick Young meme and then I have to consider if I'm the one who's out of touch and I'm prettttty sure in this case I'm not.
Anyways, maybe I'm missing the point of the book, but I got nothing out of it regardless. Two stars because although it's short, it took me forever to read because I read it each night before bed and it put me to sleep each time after like 10 pages, and I'm grateful to anything that lulls me into a slumber.
I've had many a misfortune of having someone (usually a man) say something to me (usually sexual) that is completely unhinged and they say it in the most laidback way and expect me to agree with them (e.g., "You know how everyone [X]?" "...No, can't say that I do."). That's what reading this book was like. The summary on the book sleeve says, "What must we give up to feel more alive?" and the author chose I N C E S T to explore that and does so nonchalantly. I high-key feel like the confused Nick Young meme and then I have to consider if I'm the one who's out of touch and I'm prettttty sure in this case I'm not.
Anyways, maybe I'm missing the point of the book, but I got nothing out of it regardless. Two stars because although it's short, it took me forever to read because I read it each night before bed and it put me to sleep each time after like 10 pages, and I'm grateful to anything that lulls me into a slumber.
May 25, 2025
Psychoanalysis 🫶 Henry James
"Losing yourself and being harmed can be what getting what you want feels like".
"If wanting sustains us, it also threatens to destroy us, if not wanting staves us, it keep us safe. In the Freudian story, what you want most what you must not have".
Phillips writes a sprawling collection of essays under the vague thematic setting on "giving up", what does it mean to give up? why is it seen as a failure? what is forfeited by this action? is it suffering? what is giving up during loss?
His mode of analysis: psychoanalysis, therefore we get into deep rabbit holes following terms and visiting Freud in various stages. I think I lost his thesis at some point as we ran with his thinking. Philips SAYS alot of very interesting things but I lost the thread of what it was that he was trying to prove - if anything.
Worth chewing on these ideas on a granular level.
"Losing yourself and being harmed can be what getting what you want feels like".
"If wanting sustains us, it also threatens to destroy us, if not wanting staves us, it keep us safe. In the Freudian story, what you want most what you must not have".
Phillips writes a sprawling collection of essays under the vague thematic setting on "giving up", what does it mean to give up? why is it seen as a failure? what is forfeited by this action? is it suffering? what is giving up during loss?
His mode of analysis: psychoanalysis, therefore we get into deep rabbit holes following terms and visiting Freud in various stages. I think I lost his thesis at some point as we ran with his thinking. Philips SAYS alot of very interesting things but I lost the thread of what it was that he was trying to prove - if anything.
Worth chewing on these ideas on a granular level.
December 15, 2024
psicanálise, para o Phillips, é curiosidade. o livro se preocupa em fazer perguntas, e algumas são fantásticas e impressionantes. os ensaios sobre desistência, censura e não acreditar em nada são muito, muito bons. mas às vezes era complicado entender o propósito das perguntas (se é que tinham algum) ou mesmo o contexto delas (provavelmente minha culpa, já que é minha primeira aventura pela psicanálise). ligação fraca entre os ensaios também não ajuda. quando gostei, gostei muito!
October 21, 2025
Honestly, I think I'm too dumb for this book. Did not really understand the focus on Freud and censorship and some points felt very loosely connected. Perhaps it's just my lack of comprehension of certain philosophies.
Although there were some good points regarding exclusion and destruction in wanting.
Although there were some good points regarding exclusion and destruction in wanting.
August 6, 2025
3.5 stars
January 3, 2026
Não vejo grande relação entre o título e o conteúdo.
É basicamente, aquilo que já sabemos, floreando o texto com teorias de Freud e análises de Kafka, Musil etc.
Chatinho…
É basicamente, aquilo que já sabemos, floreando o texto com teorias de Freud e análises de Kafka, Musil etc.
Chatinho…
May 29, 2025
O livro me deu um pouco mais de trabalho do que eu pensava, mas gostei bastante. É uma coletânea de ensaios sobre temas ligados a o ato de dar lugar a outra identidade, conhecimento ou decisão.
Enfim, sobre desistir ou deixar de fazer algo para que outra realidade se construa. Ressignificar positivamente um ato que pode parecer auto destrutivo para quem o vê de fora. Dar significado a uma situação que já não tem sentido, buscando outras formas de ser, ou abrindo mão de algo. E também a reação a uma exclusão ou desilusão. Deixar de acreditar cegamente pode abrir o caminho para uma visão mais crítica sobre o mundo e sobre si mesmo. Tomar consciência do papel da auto censura em nossas vidas.
O autor é um erudito e psicanalista especialista na obra de Freud, então há uma base bastante consistente por trás de sua articulação de como se constroem algumas crenças e condicionamentos.
“Desistir é uma forma de mudar a aparência das coisas”
“Desistir é admitir a perda do desejo…e se torna o que busco e quero fazer em seu lugar”
“Desistir requer um senso de encerramento. É saber, na medida do possível, quando chegou a hora de parar.”
“A arte resiste e sabota nossos hábitos de percepção familiares. A ciência, é claro, nos ajuda com nossa familiarização.”
“O self insubmisso da espontaneidade, do desejo e da singularidade, o self comprometido com o brincar, e não com a adaptação, ou melhor, com a obediência, envolve nada mais nada menos que coletar os detalhes da experiência de estar vivo”
“Matar a vida um pouco a torna viável.”
“O desejo é a fronteira onde querer e precisar se torna incerta”
“Todas as supostas categorias de diagnóstico são, entre outras coisas, descrições de formas de não querer.”
“A privação, a frustração de uma real satisfação, é a primeira condição para a geração de uma neurose, e está longe de ser a única”.
“Se o sucesso, se conquistar aquilo que você deseja leva ao adoecimento, vale a pena pensar se seu desejo não seria de fato ficar doente, e por isso você se esforçaria para alcançar o sucesso; ou então se não é esse sucesso o que você realmente quer”.
“Quando uma pessoa é excluída, outra coisa fica disponível, mesmo se a primeira coisa disponível for a difícil e exaustiva situação de ficar de fora”
“A exclusão pode implicar o despertar de outras oportunidades que a inclusão tornaria impensáveis”
“A exclusão começa como uma tragedia. E a tragedia, sugere Freud, é essencial para o desenvolvimento”
“Só começamos a vida depois de ser excluídos”
“O que chamamos de identidade pode ser a autocura cultural para uma usurpação: só começamos a nos reconhecer como alguém depois de sermos deslocados, substituídos ou rejeitados.”
“Meu bem será o mal - presume-se que as pessoas precisam de algo, de uma ideia ou crença organizadora, que se não pode ser bom, deve ser ruim; o essencial é que seja alguma coisa”
“O ser humano moderno está por definição em conflito consigo e com os demais, fundamentalmente incoerente em um incansável conflito interno entre partes rivais de si mesmo e com outras pessoas igualmente cindidas: e portanto sempre tentado por formas de soberania, domínio e unidade, pela fantasia do eu como senhor do que supunha ser sua própria casa”-
“O mal estar na civilização: a perda de confiança nos ideais culturais, na própria natureza humana”
“Freud sugere que sofremos por sermos insuficientemente curiosos sobre nosso sofrimento”
“As crenças as quais aderimos com mais fervor são formas de desconhecer”
“Se desde o início somos criaturas censuradas e que censuram a si mesmas, o que nossos censores formadores e aparentemente informados querem para nós? “
“Sabemos que o censor é seu descendente, o supereu, fizeram bem o seu trabalho quando sabemos o que estamos fazendo, quando sabemos onde estamos”
“A censura mais eficaz é invisível ou silenciosa, ela jamais se apresenta como censura e sim a maneira como fomos criados, nossa formação”
“A implicação é a de que sem a censura haveria uma violência incontrolável”
“graças as artimanhas do nosso censor, em nossos sonhos podemos representar nossos desejos proibidos”
“O censor não é nem onisciente nem onipotente, ele pode ser suspenso, podemos trabalhar com ele. A censura pode ser suspensa e modificada ao longo do tratamento psicanalítico”
“Freud quer que perguntemos que coisas se tornam possíveis a partir daquilo que você deseja evitar e das maneiras que encontra para evitá-lo?”
“A infância era uma iniciação a perda. O que chamamos de desenvolvimento é o que fazemos da perda. A cultura serve para dominar a perda”
“O que temos que sacrificar para nos desenvolver, para seguir para o próximo estágio de nossa vida?”
“Abrir mão é uma forma de abrir brechas. E nos perguntar para que, para quem é por que abrimos estas brechas”
Enfim, sobre desistir ou deixar de fazer algo para que outra realidade se construa. Ressignificar positivamente um ato que pode parecer auto destrutivo para quem o vê de fora. Dar significado a uma situação que já não tem sentido, buscando outras formas de ser, ou abrindo mão de algo. E também a reação a uma exclusão ou desilusão. Deixar de acreditar cegamente pode abrir o caminho para uma visão mais crítica sobre o mundo e sobre si mesmo. Tomar consciência do papel da auto censura em nossas vidas.
O autor é um erudito e psicanalista especialista na obra de Freud, então há uma base bastante consistente por trás de sua articulação de como se constroem algumas crenças e condicionamentos.
“Desistir é uma forma de mudar a aparência das coisas”
“Desistir é admitir a perda do desejo…e se torna o que busco e quero fazer em seu lugar”
“Desistir requer um senso de encerramento. É saber, na medida do possível, quando chegou a hora de parar.”
“A arte resiste e sabota nossos hábitos de percepção familiares. A ciência, é claro, nos ajuda com nossa familiarização.”
“O self insubmisso da espontaneidade, do desejo e da singularidade, o self comprometido com o brincar, e não com a adaptação, ou melhor, com a obediência, envolve nada mais nada menos que coletar os detalhes da experiência de estar vivo”
“Matar a vida um pouco a torna viável.”
“O desejo é a fronteira onde querer e precisar se torna incerta”
“Todas as supostas categorias de diagnóstico são, entre outras coisas, descrições de formas de não querer.”
“A privação, a frustração de uma real satisfação, é a primeira condição para a geração de uma neurose, e está longe de ser a única”.
“Se o sucesso, se conquistar aquilo que você deseja leva ao adoecimento, vale a pena pensar se seu desejo não seria de fato ficar doente, e por isso você se esforçaria para alcançar o sucesso; ou então se não é esse sucesso o que você realmente quer”.
“Quando uma pessoa é excluída, outra coisa fica disponível, mesmo se a primeira coisa disponível for a difícil e exaustiva situação de ficar de fora”
“A exclusão pode implicar o despertar de outras oportunidades que a inclusão tornaria impensáveis”
“A exclusão começa como uma tragedia. E a tragedia, sugere Freud, é essencial para o desenvolvimento”
“Só começamos a vida depois de ser excluídos”
“O que chamamos de identidade pode ser a autocura cultural para uma usurpação: só começamos a nos reconhecer como alguém depois de sermos deslocados, substituídos ou rejeitados.”
“Meu bem será o mal - presume-se que as pessoas precisam de algo, de uma ideia ou crença organizadora, que se não pode ser bom, deve ser ruim; o essencial é que seja alguma coisa”
“O ser humano moderno está por definição em conflito consigo e com os demais, fundamentalmente incoerente em um incansável conflito interno entre partes rivais de si mesmo e com outras pessoas igualmente cindidas: e portanto sempre tentado por formas de soberania, domínio e unidade, pela fantasia do eu como senhor do que supunha ser sua própria casa”-
“O mal estar na civilização: a perda de confiança nos ideais culturais, na própria natureza humana”
“Freud sugere que sofremos por sermos insuficientemente curiosos sobre nosso sofrimento”
“As crenças as quais aderimos com mais fervor são formas de desconhecer”
“Se desde o início somos criaturas censuradas e que censuram a si mesmas, o que nossos censores formadores e aparentemente informados querem para nós? “
“Sabemos que o censor é seu descendente, o supereu, fizeram bem o seu trabalho quando sabemos o que estamos fazendo, quando sabemos onde estamos”
“A censura mais eficaz é invisível ou silenciosa, ela jamais se apresenta como censura e sim a maneira como fomos criados, nossa formação”
“A implicação é a de que sem a censura haveria uma violência incontrolável”
“graças as artimanhas do nosso censor, em nossos sonhos podemos representar nossos desejos proibidos”
“O censor não é nem onisciente nem onipotente, ele pode ser suspenso, podemos trabalhar com ele. A censura pode ser suspensa e modificada ao longo do tratamento psicanalítico”
“Freud quer que perguntemos que coisas se tornam possíveis a partir daquilo que você deseja evitar e das maneiras que encontra para evitá-lo?”
“A infância era uma iniciação a perda. O que chamamos de desenvolvimento é o que fazemos da perda. A cultura serve para dominar a perda”
“O que temos que sacrificar para nos desenvolver, para seguir para o próximo estágio de nossa vida?”
“Abrir mão é uma forma de abrir brechas. E nos perguntar para que, para quem é por que abrimos estas brechas”
May 16, 2024
I didn't find this compelling. Many of the statements seemed stretched or obviously wrong. I could things of many instances where the foundations of his argument just weren't true. It's a very white man book.
June 11, 2025
Asks a lot of interesting questions, but answers almost none of them.
The content isn’t very accessible without a background in psychology and literature, which is referenced frequently in detail to illustrate points
The content isn’t very accessible without a background in psychology and literature, which is referenced frequently in detail to illustrate points
February 3, 2025
i normally really love adam phillips but i think this book in particular lacked cohesion and strayed every which way without coming back to the main thesis statement... or really explaining what he was talking about. that being said, i found many points super interesting, like the idea that we are all resentful of our parents' role in our creation because we weren't there to witness it. i had to really think about that a lot, because the only argument i've really heard before was that we had no say in being born, but this takes it further by saying we didn't have any say of how we would've liked to be, and from what desire did they create us from. and how any rejection we experience in life is what really truly shapes us. i feel like he didn't do a good job of explaining why this was significant, but it still pushed me to think about it. i also really like how he talks about us putting away childish things but that we only really tuck them away - everything from our childhood still influences our ways and behaviours as an adult. he also talks about how we are always censoring ourselves and holding back our true thoughts, emotions, and desires to fit into social norms, avoid conflict, or protect ourselves. he suggests that this self censorship shapes who we are, but it also means we never fully get to express everything we think or feel. what might we become if we stopped filtering so much? there was also some repetitive freud dream stuff that he's already talked in his other essays that wasn't new to me. so basically, i liked many things that were said in this, but i wish it was written in a more cohesive way that stuck to the main theme of giving up.
June 20, 2025
3.5 stars
I like the general gist of the book- I think it gives a good overview of Freudian aspects of 'giving up', and how we associate giving up with negative morals (eg. committing suicide, heroes never give up etc.). Chapter 2 (about language) confused the shit out of me. Either I'm really dumb and the concepts flew over my head, or the concepts didn't link very well. I'm going with the former, because clearly many of you understood something I did not. Genuinely could not understand how any of that chapter related to giving up. Someone please help.
Also Phillips speeds very very quickly through big concepts eg. narrow and wide attention. Love the concept and defo made me curious to learn more, but I would've much rather him go into depth about each topic, instead of quickly naming a concept and explaining it in 2 paragraphs and then moving onto another big idea. Good starting point for me to start researching philosophical ideas, but some of the concepts Phillips threw in felt a bit more name droppy like Freud, Epicurus etc. instead of actually analyzing how that relates to giving up.
Came at an appropriate time in life for me, wondering what the fack I'm doing with my law degree. However, wasn't very culturally relativist- and also rambles on a little bit, wish he went into a deeper dive into the concepts eg. death instinct instead of churning out a bajillion books about the same thing. Fun little train read though <3
I like the general gist of the book- I think it gives a good overview of Freudian aspects of 'giving up', and how we associate giving up with negative morals (eg. committing suicide, heroes never give up etc.). Chapter 2 (about language) confused the shit out of me. Either I'm really dumb and the concepts flew over my head, or the concepts didn't link very well. I'm going with the former, because clearly many of you understood something I did not. Genuinely could not understand how any of that chapter related to giving up. Someone please help.
Also Phillips speeds very very quickly through big concepts eg. narrow and wide attention. Love the concept and defo made me curious to learn more, but I would've much rather him go into depth about each topic, instead of quickly naming a concept and explaining it in 2 paragraphs and then moving onto another big idea. Good starting point for me to start researching philosophical ideas, but some of the concepts Phillips threw in felt a bit more name droppy like Freud, Epicurus etc. instead of actually analyzing how that relates to giving up.
Came at an appropriate time in life for me, wondering what the fack I'm doing with my law degree. However, wasn't very culturally relativist- and also rambles on a little bit, wish he went into a deeper dive into the concepts eg. death instinct instead of churning out a bajillion books about the same thing. Fun little train read though <3
April 12, 2025
(DNF-ed at about 60%)
There’s something ironic about giving up on a book about giving up. You could say that the early chapters of this book inspired me.
The titular essay was really insightful—Phillips offered a fresh way of thinking about tragic heroes by framing the refusal to give up as a tyranny of the mind clinging to old desires and goals. I’ll certainly be thinking of how this framework can help me understand Shakespeare, as Phillips pointed out, and Greek tragic heroes like Electra and Antigone.
After the titular essay, however, the essays became increasingly focused on Freud and the history of psychoanalysis, losing focus on the supposed subject matter of the book as a whole. As I reached the essay originally delivered as a talk on Freud, I realized that instead of giving up on my original aim of thinking about giving up and sacrifice, I will be giving up on this book, as it doesn’t help me satisfy that desire. Despite my disappointment, I took a lot away from the beginning of this book, and I’m not sorry to have picked it up.
On an unrelated note, someone needed to encourage Phillips to give up appositive phrases and asides—the comma clutter is atrocious. The most egregious example I found: “Aliveness, as opposed, so to speak, to life, doesn’t, needless to say, figure in any of the available dictionaries of psychoanalysis…”
There’s something ironic about giving up on a book about giving up. You could say that the early chapters of this book inspired me.
The titular essay was really insightful—Phillips offered a fresh way of thinking about tragic heroes by framing the refusal to give up as a tyranny of the mind clinging to old desires and goals. I’ll certainly be thinking of how this framework can help me understand Shakespeare, as Phillips pointed out, and Greek tragic heroes like Electra and Antigone.
After the titular essay, however, the essays became increasingly focused on Freud and the history of psychoanalysis, losing focus on the supposed subject matter of the book as a whole. As I reached the essay originally delivered as a talk on Freud, I realized that instead of giving up on my original aim of thinking about giving up and sacrifice, I will be giving up on this book, as it doesn’t help me satisfy that desire. Despite my disappointment, I took a lot away from the beginning of this book, and I’m not sorry to have picked it up.
On an unrelated note, someone needed to encourage Phillips to give up appositive phrases and asides—the comma clutter is atrocious. The most egregious example I found: “Aliveness, as opposed, so to speak, to life, doesn’t, needless to say, figure in any of the available dictionaries of psychoanalysis…”
December 31, 2025
I was intrigued by the title of this book and the detail from the ceiling of Sistine chapel on the cover.
The book only loosely follows the theme of ‘giving up’ and follows a series of loosely related topics. What does it mean to be alive, to believe or not believe in anything? What is loss?
Philips opens a lot of questions about the act of giving up, of the experience of exclusion and self-exclusion, and of our relationship to our childhoods.
The essays have a kind of hypothetical air to them. There are a lot of thoughts that are introduced by a parable, say from a short story by Kafka, and then if we accept the psychoanalytical story than a colleary of this is X.
Sometimes this style is enjoyable, following someone along as they think out loud and sometimes it feels a little elusive. For instance, Philips suggests that our desire to live a full life, to feel aliveness, is culturally conditioned and only arises in certain kinds of cultures. But he doesn’t elaborate what cultural conditions produce those kinds of subjective experiences. This feels a little like he tee’d up the ball and then dropped it. Though the chapters are uneven, there are ideas in this book which have a high chance of resonating with many people and give you something to ponder.
The book only loosely follows the theme of ‘giving up’ and follows a series of loosely related topics. What does it mean to be alive, to believe or not believe in anything? What is loss?
Philips opens a lot of questions about the act of giving up, of the experience of exclusion and self-exclusion, and of our relationship to our childhoods.
The essays have a kind of hypothetical air to them. There are a lot of thoughts that are introduced by a parable, say from a short story by Kafka, and then if we accept the psychoanalytical story than a colleary of this is X.
Sometimes this style is enjoyable, following someone along as they think out loud and sometimes it feels a little elusive. For instance, Philips suggests that our desire to live a full life, to feel aliveness, is culturally conditioned and only arises in certain kinds of cultures. But he doesn’t elaborate what cultural conditions produce those kinds of subjective experiences. This feels a little like he tee’d up the ball and then dropped it. Though the chapters are uneven, there are ideas in this book which have a high chance of resonating with many people and give you something to ponder.
July 6, 2025
This is my favorite kind of book—one that thinks through issues *with* you, rather than delivering a final truth. Adam Phillips' "On Giving Up" is a deceptively short and wonderfully dense meditation on the necessity of surrender. The experience of reading it feels like being psychoanalyzed in the best way, leaving you with a lasting shift in perspective.
The chapter that resonated most with me was his exploration of the "fascist state of mind," one that maintains a censorious relationship with curiosity. It made me think of my own field: gastronomy.
For centuries, traditional European cuisine has operated under a similar "fascist" hierarchy—a pyramid of quality where the king's dish is best and there is no room for deviation. But to truly taste, one must first *give up* this rigid structure. This is the core thesis of my own book, **"Gold Chef: The Peruvian Palate,"** which argues that the mind of the Peruvian chef has given up on the pyramid and, instead, sees a 'map of possibilities'.
Phillips' book is a brilliant tool for any creator. It doesn't give you answers, but it gives you better questions. Highly recommended.
The chapter that resonated most with me was his exploration of the "fascist state of mind," one that maintains a censorious relationship with curiosity. It made me think of my own field: gastronomy.
For centuries, traditional European cuisine has operated under a similar "fascist" hierarchy—a pyramid of quality where the king's dish is best and there is no room for deviation. But to truly taste, one must first *give up* this rigid structure. This is the core thesis of my own book, **"Gold Chef: The Peruvian Palate,"** which argues that the mind of the Peruvian chef has given up on the pyramid and, instead, sees a 'map of possibilities'.
Phillips' book is a brilliant tool for any creator. It doesn't give you answers, but it gives you better questions. Highly recommended.
September 23, 2025
"On Giving Up", de Adam Phillips, é um livro provocador mas disperso, que levanta questões mais do que oferece respostas, e talvez seja esse o ponto. Apesar do título sugerir uma abordagem mais direta ao tema da desistência, o autor opta por um percurso livre, ensaístico, onde se toca em ideias fascinantes, embora por vezes de forma demasiado breve e sem um grande fio condutor.
Ficam no entanto algumas pistas valiosas para reflexão e investigação posterior: a tensão entre querer e necessidade (a fronteira que, segundo Phillips, nos distingue dos animais), o peso da linguagem enquanto prisão e possibilidade, o embate entre essencialismo e experimentalismo, e a ideia de que toda a escolha implica sempre uma renúncia.
Um dos momentos mais inquietantes, e que merecia mais desenvolvimento, é a menção ao "estado de espírito fascista" como um modo de funcionamento psicológico.
Não é um livro para encontrar respostas rápidas, mas para quem gosta de pensar a desistência como gesto humano profundo, e por vezes libertador, talvez valha a pena seguir algumas das linhas soltas que Phillips deixa pelo caminho.
Ficam no entanto algumas pistas valiosas para reflexão e investigação posterior: a tensão entre querer e necessidade (a fronteira que, segundo Phillips, nos distingue dos animais), o peso da linguagem enquanto prisão e possibilidade, o embate entre essencialismo e experimentalismo, e a ideia de que toda a escolha implica sempre uma renúncia.
Um dos momentos mais inquietantes, e que merecia mais desenvolvimento, é a menção ao "estado de espírito fascista" como um modo de funcionamento psicológico.
Não é um livro para encontrar respostas rápidas, mas para quem gosta de pensar a desistência como gesto humano profundo, e por vezes libertador, talvez valha a pena seguir algumas das linhas soltas que Phillips deixa pelo caminho.
May 15, 2024
Thanks to the publisher and Netgalley for this eARC.
On Giving Up by Adam Phillips is a thought-provoking exploration of the concept of surrendering, not just in the literal sense but as a complex psychological and philosophical act.
Phillips examines this theme through the lens of literature, philosophy, and psychology, drawing on examples from Kafka and Freud to Darwin, and poses the question: “What is worth surviving for?”
The book is an academic treatise and also a mirror reflecting moral and emotional complexities.
Phillips’s work is a nuanced tapestry that weaves together the threads of psychology and literature, revealing suggestive points of contact between the two.
On Giving Up is a stimulating read that offers a fresh perspective on a familiar concept. It’s a book that doesn’t provide answers but rather opens up a space for questions about the nature of human existence and the choices we make. It’s a must-read for those who appreciate a deep dive into the complexities of the human psyche and the paradoxes of the human condition.
On Giving Up by Adam Phillips is a thought-provoking exploration of the concept of surrendering, not just in the literal sense but as a complex psychological and philosophical act.
Phillips examines this theme through the lens of literature, philosophy, and psychology, drawing on examples from Kafka and Freud to Darwin, and poses the question: “What is worth surviving for?”
The book is an academic treatise and also a mirror reflecting moral and emotional complexities.
Phillips’s work is a nuanced tapestry that weaves together the threads of psychology and literature, revealing suggestive points of contact between the two.
On Giving Up is a stimulating read that offers a fresh perspective on a familiar concept. It’s a book that doesn’t provide answers but rather opens up a space for questions about the nature of human existence and the choices we make. It’s a must-read for those who appreciate a deep dive into the complexities of the human psyche and the paradoxes of the human condition.
April 26, 2025
Allow me to begin with a distinction:
Some books are best picked up with your first cup of coffee in the morning, and read as the sun shines its first, soft rays onto the pages. Such books welcome you into the day, and give you images and ideas to sustain the waves of people and tasks that buffet you until evening.
Other books are best read by lamplight after the day is done, with a cup of hot something next to you, the silence of the night wrapped around you, and as your mind continues to spin in your weary head. These books, as Russell Hoban so wonderfully put it, are for those times when light seems to shine through the bricks of the self, and when it is crucial for you to capture something of that light, so quickly snuffed out by the business of days and people.
Now, the reason for the distinction: Adam Phillips writes the second kind of books. But I read this in the morning, with my coffee and my pink sky of dawn.
So I guess my point is, I’m a little out of sorts when it comes to this. But I still thought it was pretty good.
Some books are best picked up with your first cup of coffee in the morning, and read as the sun shines its first, soft rays onto the pages. Such books welcome you into the day, and give you images and ideas to sustain the waves of people and tasks that buffet you until evening.
Other books are best read by lamplight after the day is done, with a cup of hot something next to you, the silence of the night wrapped around you, and as your mind continues to spin in your weary head. These books, as Russell Hoban so wonderfully put it, are for those times when light seems to shine through the bricks of the self, and when it is crucial for you to capture something of that light, so quickly snuffed out by the business of days and people.
Now, the reason for the distinction: Adam Phillips writes the second kind of books. But I read this in the morning, with my coffee and my pink sky of dawn.
So I guess my point is, I’m a little out of sorts when it comes to this. But I still thought it was pretty good.
August 5, 2025
The questions posed by the book are central to the human experience on earth for sure, the ease of language in discussing them might not be for everyone, though.
A few noticed charactersitics of the book:
1. In each chapter, an exploration of what is it to be given up on is elaborated on, with inspirations both from specifically Western Literature and Psychoanalysis practices.
2. A looping approach; re-iterating a question many times, in various forms, is followed throughout the book, this can be confusing, yet also philosophically entertaining for the reader. Sometimes going backwards, and sometimes tracing it on different levels of analysis also.
3. Generally, it is intentionally not a one-size-fits-all self-help book with methods to directly apply in life, nor it is a psychology textbook of the history of the psychoanalysis of the concept of giving up, and therefore, it is a great read if you wanted a prope to munch on those ideas on your own, with a few nudging provocations.
A few noticed charactersitics of the book:
1. In each chapter, an exploration of what is it to be given up on is elaborated on, with inspirations both from specifically Western Literature and Psychoanalysis practices.
2. A looping approach; re-iterating a question many times, in various forms, is followed throughout the book, this can be confusing, yet also philosophically entertaining for the reader. Sometimes going backwards, and sometimes tracing it on different levels of analysis also.
3. Generally, it is intentionally not a one-size-fits-all self-help book with methods to directly apply in life, nor it is a psychology textbook of the history of the psychoanalysis of the concept of giving up, and therefore, it is a great read if you wanted a prope to munch on those ideas on your own, with a few nudging provocations.
February 21, 2025
I initially wanted to give this book four stars due to its early impactful sections. However, as others have noted, the connection to its title feels somewhat loose. In the latter parts, the book often reads more like a historical account of psychoanalysis, with extensive discussions on Freud and Kafka, rather than a focused exploration of its intended theme.
What kept me engaged were Phillips’ insights and thought-provoking suggestions throughout the book. His perspectives added depth and made the read worthwhile, even when the structure felt somewhat disjointed.
Ultimately, I struggled to connect the different sections cohesively—whether due to my own lack of familiarity with psychology and psychoanalysis or the book’s fragmented approach is up for debate. Those with a stronger interest in the field will likely appreciate it more than I did.
What kept me engaged were Phillips’ insights and thought-provoking suggestions throughout the book. His perspectives added depth and made the read worthwhile, even when the structure felt somewhat disjointed.
Ultimately, I struggled to connect the different sections cohesively—whether due to my own lack of familiarity with psychology and psychoanalysis or the book’s fragmented approach is up for debate. Those with a stronger interest in the field will likely appreciate it more than I did.
February 24, 2024
An outpouring of insights, an avalanche of mind-blowing psychoanalytical analyses into the human psyche in its most conflicted: this is how I would describe this book. Adam Phillips is back again with his usual enjoyable literary style and ceaseless flow of deliberately written quote-worthy paragraphs tackling the different ways in which we face the inevitability of giving up; the different ways that being ostracized, feeling left out, having to compromise on freedom of self expression in the self service of sociability, loss and mourning might present themselves and how they might be transformed from catastrophes into integral players in our lives, and exploited, consciously and subconsciously, to amplify our desired pleasures.
July 31, 2025
Life-changing. Can’t believe my deep deep personal unconsciousness and enigmas are somehow articulated by this book. It is exactly what I need, right now. And so magically, I was just visiting Austria (only for one and half a day). It was almost the last minute that this book pointed out to me a very inspiring place-Sigmund Freud Museum.
I couldn’t get out of “me”. I couldn’t get out of my childhood. I thought it was a pointless time-consuming and non-beneficial personal disposition but this book tells me it is very essential and definitely worth contemplating.
Now there is way open to me with so many possibilities. I would no longer belittle myself. I am going to know more about psychoanalysis thanks to this book. And I will come back and read it again.
I couldn’t get out of “me”. I couldn’t get out of my childhood. I thought it was a pointless time-consuming and non-beneficial personal disposition but this book tells me it is very essential and definitely worth contemplating.
Now there is way open to me with so many possibilities. I would no longer belittle myself. I am going to know more about psychoanalysis thanks to this book. And I will come back and read it again.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews