Jacques Lacan's impact upon the theory and practice of psychoanalysis worldwide cannot be underestimated. Lacanian Psychoanalysis looks at the current debates surrounding Lacanian practice and explores its place within historical, social and political contexts. The book argues that Lacan’s elaboration of psychoanalytic theory is grounded in clinical practice and needs to be defined in relation to the four main psychiatry, psychology, psychotherapy and spirituality. As such topics of discussion Lacanian Psychoanalysis draws on Lacan's work to shed light on issues relevant to current therapeutic practice and as such it will be of great interest to students, trainees and practitioners of psychoanalysis, psychotherapy, counselling and other domains of personal and social change.
Ian Parker is a British psychologist who has been a principal exponent of three quite diverse critical traditions inside the discipline. His writing has provided compass points for researchers searching for alternatives to ‘mainstream’ psychology in the English-speaking world (that is, mainstream psychology that is based on laboratory-experimental studies that reduce behavior to individual mental processes).
The three critical traditions Parker has promoted are ‘discursive analysis’, ‘Marxist psychology’ and ‘psychoanalysis’. Each of these traditions is adapted by him to encourage an attention to ideology and power, and this modification has given rise to fierce debates, not only from mainstream psychologists but also from other ‘critical psychologists’. Parker moves in his writing from one focus to another, and it seems as if he is not content with any particular tradition of research, using each of the different critical traditions to throw the others into question.
This book attempts to apply Lacanian psychoanalysis to revolutionary social change, and to contrast it favourably to psychiatry and psychology, which it deems too linked to capitalism and feudalism before it. I like the idea of applying Lacan to progressive leftist politics, but the obscurantist writing style, as well as its leaning towards Trotskyism (I'm turned off whenever I read the word 'Stalinist'.), made me lose interest rather quickly. If you like Trotsky, though, you'll probably like this book, too.