Sigmund Freud, in Dora: An Analysis of a Case of Hysteria, provides an example of the patriarchal abuse of power in the psychoanalytic setting. This abuse would be nothing new in that profession, were it not for the fact that Freud has hidden from himself the truth of what is occurring in his attempt to create out of the hysterical Dora a new human being more to his liking and approval. What is actually happening is that Freud himself has fallen in love with Dora, and every interpretation he makes of her case reflects his obsession with her, and his rage at the fact that she has shown the independence, audacity and wisdom to leave him before he has been able to re-create her in his own image.
This assertion may seem outlandish at first, but if we examine the case of Dora and Freud's interpretation (and manipulation) of it and her, we will see that it is not so outlandish at all. And even if the reader still maintains at the end that it is outlandish, the question must be asked, Is it any more outlandish than some of the claims made by Freud himself, who appears to see himself not as a psychoanalyst, but as a god, or God?
Consider, for example, Freud's claim that
I showed that dreams in general can be interpreted, and that after the work of interpretation has been completed they can be replaced by perfectly correctly constructed thoughts which find a recognizable position in the texture of the mind (Freud 8).
To this reader, Freud's words above appear to coincide with the mad thoughts of Dr. Frankenstein in his efforts to create a new being based on his longing for power. He is going to take Dora's dreams, analyze them, and then replace them with thoughts he feels are healthy and appropriate.
It is clear that Freud is deeply taken with Dora as an exciting patient and an exciting young woman: "Dora was by that time in the first bloom of youth---a girl of intelligent and engaging looks" (16). He sees her as so signi...