Freud

Freud has always been one of those thinkers about whom I've wanted to know more. And so, having enjoyed selections from Oxford's series of Very Short Introductions, I picked up Anthony Storr's overview of Freud. 

I must say, I was disappointed. While Storr highlights the foundations of Freudian thought, and does a good job, too, hinting at the weaknesses of Freud's theories, his analysis lacks an enthusiasm, a willingness to take things to the next level. 

True, you could argue that Very Short Introductions are not meant to do this, but I think that's not entirely accurate. 

Storr sticks with what he knows (and where Freud spent most of time): the infantile underpinnings of neurosis and the tendency among humans to discharge tension resulting from sexual discomfort and social pressures linked with the super ego. 

This is all well and good, but I would have liked a more complete application of these theories to other areas - indeed, areas where Freud's theories were perhaps not as persuasive. The chapters on literature and religion, for instance, were underdeveloped. In short. they left me wanting more. 

But in the end, Storr does make a convincing case for one thing: the totality of Freudian thought. Because while Freud failed in the end to convince critics of the "science" behind his theories, the very fact that he sought to apply them across so many fields outside psychology was itself a herculean effort - and one, in terms of its sheer intellectual effort, which is worthy of praise.