Jessica Enzi

C LIT 396

Midterm Paper

enzij@u.washington.edu

The Ambivalent, Culturally Frustrated Prufrock

The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock, a poem by T.S. Eliot, provides an abundant source of material for applying Freudian analysis.[1] Specifically, it is the character Prufrock who supplies this rich source. Although many Freudian themes could have been addressed in relation to Prufrock, in this paper it will be narrowed to the prevalent themes of ambivalence and cultural frustration found in Freudπs work and the contributing role the super-ego plays in their occurrence. In fact, Prufrock exemplifies ambivalence and its necessary conditions so well that Freud himself would have probably labeled him a neurotic.

Before applying Freudian analysis to Prufrock, it is important to address one issue that will have an immediate effect on the interpretation of the poem. It stems from the following translated passage found in Danteπs Inferno that appears right before the body of the poem. The passage is spoken by a person within the eighth chasm of hell.[2]

If I believed that my answer would be

To someone who would ever return to earth,

This flame would move no more,

But because no one from this gulf

Has ever returned alive, if what I hear is true,

I can reply with no fear of infamy. (Eliot, 3)

Although this passage may suggest that Prufrock is speaking to someone who he can trust, his character would suggest otherwise. Prufrock is far too consciously anxious when it comes to what people think of him. This can be displayed by his enduring indecisiveness found in the many questions he asks throughout the poem, such as, ≥Do I dare / Disturb the universe?≤ (45-46) and ≥So how should I presume?≤ (54).[3] His social anxiety is also revealed by how he thinks others will react to him, the following line being a perfect example. ≥(They will say: åBut how his arms and legs are thin!π)≤ (44). Yet, the best example of his extreme social anxiety is when he describes how he feels when in social settings.

And I have known the eyes already, known them all –

The eyes that fix you in a formulated phrase,

And when I am formulated, sprawling on a pin,

When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall. (55-58)

The allusion made is a reference to bug collecting where the insect is pinned down and further inspected. Prufrock feels he is scrutinized in such a way that he cannot escape, hence his being pinned to the wall. He stills wriggles because he is uncomfortable, but it is to no avail. Due to this severe social anxiety, allowing even one person to know of the extreme vulnerability he exposes through the thoughts in the poem would be too stressful for him. The only person who Prufrock could be certain would never betray these thoughts is himself. Thus, the text of the poem represents his own stream of consciousness. Despite the fact that Prufrock appears to refer to another person in lines one, 11, 31, 78 and 90, it could be argued that this is a rhetorical method employed by him to express his thoughts. It is as if another person were listening. Acknowledging this as true further explains his solitude, for it displays his longing to express these feelings to another. Therefore, what is expressed in the poem is not said to anyone in particular, but is rather Prufrockπs inner monologue.[4]

Prior to his explanation of ambivalence in Civilization and Its Discontents, Freud identifies three sources of suffering. These restrict our ability to be happy, which is what all people strive for in life (729). Of these three, Prufrock is continuously bothered by the first and last sources identified. The first threat of suffering is ≥from our own body, which is doomed to decay and dissolution and which cannot even do without pain and anxiety as warning signals≤ (729). The reader gets the feeling Prufrock is well aware of his aging, even though it is mentioned sporadically. He notes his bald spot and the expected response, ≥(They will say: åHow his hair is growing thinπ)≤ (Eliot, 41). This concern of aging is displayed even when he is not directly talking about himself. When discussing the mermaids who will not sing to him, he notes ≥I have seen them riding seaward on the waves / Combing the white hair of the waves blown back≤ (129-130, emphasis added). Prufrock also explicitly states, ≥I grow old ä I grow old ä≤ (Eliot, 123). The fact that this last line appears so late in the poem might speak to Prufrockπs denial, or at least his attempt at ignoring the inevitability of death, with the intentional pauses suggesting he still stalls when admitting it. Through the example of Prufrock we see just how much anxiety the bodily source of suffering can cause.

The third source of suffering is from ≥our relations to other menä[which] is perhaps more painful to us than any other≤ (Freud, 729). Certainly Prufrock can attest to the intensity of this pain since its severity causes him to fantasize about ultimate solitude. ≥I should have been a pair of ragged claws / Scuttling across the floors of silent seas≤ (Eliot, 73-74). Here he wishes to escape relations to other people by admitting he is better suited to be one of the few creatures to access the bottom of the sea, diminishing his chances of contact with anything, but more importantly severing all ties with humans. This suffering caused by interaction with other people is further complicated by the necessity of such contact within civilization, which leads into the issue of ambivalence.

According to Freud, ambivalence is the result of the conflict between the two primal instincts of love and aggression/death (766). Within the community setting, the love instinct strives for bonds with others, while the death instinct seeks dissolution of those bonds. Prufrock desperately wants to connect with others in some significant way, which is exhibited by the way he thinks. Throughout the poem it is as if he was expressing these feelings to another person, yet we know from one of the above paragraphs this is not the case. However, Prufrock also wants no connection with others, hence his wish to scuttle across the sea floors alone. The result of these two conflicting desires is an ambivalent, indecisive Prufrock who acknowledges that "In a minute there is time / For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse" (Eliot, 47-48). Thus, instead of action he chooses rather to avoid the possibility of acting by employing strategies such as directly challenging it, ≥Should I, after tea and cakes and ices, / Have the strength to force the moment to a crisis?≤ (Eliot, 79-80), or by doubting whether it ≥Would have been worth while≤ (Eliot, 101 and 109). As a reader, one gets the sense that Prufrock has internalized these thoughts for too long, and may remain as inactive as "a patient etherised upon a table" (Eliot, 3).

Not only is Prufrock suffering from ambivalence, but he is also afflicted by cultural frustration, which is arguably more of a problem for him.

äit is impossible to overlook the extent to which civilization is built up upon the renunciation of instinct, how much it presupposes precisely the non-satisfaction (by suppression, repression, or some other means?) of powerful instincts. This åcultural frustrationπ dominates the large field of social relationships between human beings. As we already know, it is the cause of hostility against which all civilizations have to struggle. (Freud, 742)

Since civilization is threatened by the satisfaction of the primal instincts, especially that of aggressiveness, it has to place restrictions on them. It will, for example, limit the choice of sexual partners (Freud, 745-746) or integrate itself into our psyche as the super-ego (756) in order to do so. Thus, ≥If civilization imposes such great sacrifices not only on manπs sexuality but on his aggressivity, we can understand better why it is hard for him to be happy in that civilization≤ (Freud, 752). Prufrock certainly seems to be suffering from a sense of cultural frustration, which is illustrated by his feeling of tediousness towards social convention. He seems bothered to ≥have measured [his] life with coffee spoons≤ (Eliot 51). Moreover, he parodies ≥the women [who] come and go / Talking of Michelangelo≤ (Eliot, 13-14 and 35-36), suggesting that they do not truly understand this high point of cultural achievement, but only feign understanding because it is the 'thing to do.' Indeed, Prufrock's cultural frustration may be an adequate explanation of the source of his unhappiness. But if this is so, if Prufrock is so frustrated with the civilization that surrounds him, why can he not articulate this feeling?

Not only is Prufrock suffering from ambivalence, but he is also afflicted by cultural frustration, which is arguably more of a problem for him.

Since civilization is threatened by the satisfaction of the primal instincts, especially that of aggressiveness, it has to place restrictions on them. It will, for example, limit the choice of sexual partners (Freud, 745-746) or integrate itself into our psyche as the super-ego (756) in order to do so. Thus, ≥If civilization imposes such great sacrifices not only on manπs sexuality but on his aggressivity, we can understand better why it is hard for him to be happy in that civilization≤ (Freud, 752). Prufrock certainly seems to be suffering from a sense of cultural frustration, which is illustrated by his tediousness towards social convention. He seems bothered to ≥have measured [his] life with coffee spoons≤ (Eliot 51). And he parodies ≥the women [who] come and go / Talking of Michelangelo≤ (13-14 and 35-36), suggesting that they do not truly understand this high point of cultural achievement, but only feign understanding. But if this is so, if Prufrock is so frustrated with the society that surrounds him, why can he not express this feeling?

Freud provides an answer to the above question, it is because the malaise which is felt towards civilization, this dissastisfaction with it, is ≥to a large extent unconscious...for which people seek other motivations≤ (764). Prufrock displays this ability to look to other sources to explain his malaise, such as his lack of success. "I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker / And I have seen the eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker, / And in short, I was afraid" (85-87). How the cultural frustration remains (mostly) unconscious is thanks to the work of the super-ego. Since the influential super-ego is an important Freudian concept, it is helpful to briefly cite how it develops.

His aggressiveness is introjected, internalized...it is taken over by a portion of the ego, which sets itself over against the rest of the ego as super-ego, and which now, in the form of 'conscience,' is ready to put into action against the ego the same harsh aggressiveness that the ego would have liked to satisfy upon other, extraneous individuals. The tension between the harsh super-ego and the ego that is is subjected to it, is called by us the sense of guilt; it expresses itself as a need for punishment. (756)

Therefore, civilization is spared from (or as Freud puts it "obtains matery over") the individual's aggressive instinct because it is now given an alternate outlet within the person for its expression. Although Prufrock never admits his feeling of guilt (tension between the super-ego and ego), it can be implied from his constant doubt about expressing his dissatisfaction with social convention (super-ego restricting the ego) and the fact that he sometimes suddenly changes the target of his criticism from the external[footnote - although it may seem vague, it is arguable that he does want to critique his society. But the mere fact that the super-ego interferes can illustrate just why it doesn't seem that clear in the poem, why he can't even formulate that "overwhelming question" (10 and 94)] to the internal, from others to himself (super-ego internalizing aggressiveness that the ego is trying to express). So while we receive benefits from society, we also have to endure the super-ego, which is essentially an internalized form of society that prescribes what we ought and ought not do.

Certainly, the polite society containing toast and tea, porcelain, and "skirts that trail along the floor" (103-104) that provided the framework for his super-ego, would not endorse Prufrock's criticism of it. Consequently, the super-ego itself will not endorse the action either. So instead it internalizes the need to criticize (the aggressive instinct, if you will) onto Prufrock's ego. A particularly illustrative example of this can be found when he refers to himself as an attendant lord, rather than a Prince Hamlet. This reveals his feelings of inadequacy by stating that he will never serve the role of a main character, but rather will remain in the background providing minimal help.[footnote] Not only that, but Prufrock then describes himself as "Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse; / At times, indeed, almost ridiculous - / Almost, at times, the Fool" (120-123). According to Freudian theory, it is plausible that these same criqitues, of ridiculousness and foolishness, is what Prufrock would apply to his society's conventions. Thanks to his ambivalence and super-ego, Prufrock provides an example of a person who is rather beneficial to civilization's existence. This is not only because of his tendency not to act, but also due to the success of his super-ego in repressing or redirecting his aggressive instinct. Therefore, the threat of dissolution to his surrounding society that he would otherwise be hostile towards is removed. We see no evidence of hostility towards others in Prufrock. Instead, at the mere thought of criticism, he implies how polite the setting is and how rude it would be of him to interject at this point in time. The thought of doing so makes him extremely nervous (107-108), suggesting also a fear of punishment by the super-ego.

Prufrock has proven to be an intriguing character that could still be further analyzed by Freudian psychology. The issue of sexual repression, an example being when he asks "Do I dare to eat a peach?" (125), could easily be another thematic focus. Also, one could focus on the dream-like structure of the poem, and how the issues of manifest and latent content come into play. Of course, as alluded to, repression (not just the sexual kind) is extremely prevalent throughout the poem, and would thus provide an excellent case study for Freudian analysis. However, it was interesting to address the issues of ambivalence and cultural frustration because when applying these to the poem Prufrock's character began to make more sense. There was an explanation provided for his previously inexplicable behavior. Also, there was a vivid example of Freudian theory at work. In this sense, the coupling of Freudian theory and this poem, made both even more comprehensible and enriching.

[1] It was quite a struggle to fully and completely address the impression one gets of Prufrock as a character in this essay. I would suggest reading the poem to get a better feel of just how nervous and anxious Prufrock is. To use Freudian terms, it takes a couple times reading the manifest content to be able to adequately understand the large amount of latent content present in the poem.

[3] For the sake of clarity, when citing the poem I will be citing the line number instead of a page number (of the edition my poem happens to be from).

[4] While it may have seemed like this was a minor or inconsequential point to make, it becomes important when applying Freudian analysis to know whether or not Prufrock was speaking or just thinking his thoughts. Since his social anxiety is so severe, if he were speaking to another he would probably heavily censor what he said. By identifying the poem as being an inner monologue it provides the most dependable description of his character (even though his own thoughts will be censored by the super-ego regardless).