• Raluca Soreanu
Part of the Studies in the Psychosocial book series (STIP)


Soreanu discusses a common spectre that haunts social and psychoanalytic theories: that of the ‘mob’, the irrational crowd, the destructive or regressed collective. She approaches this spectre from the angle of a psychoanalytic theory of recognition and she proposes a trauma theory that accounts for the social life of psychic fragments. Soreanu also argues for the importance of a psychosocial ethnography that traces the precision of the creativities of the collective, in relation to its traumatic wounds. The collective discussed here is one that is able to mourn, to create symbols, and to organise complicated scenes of re-enactment. The chapter also argues that Sándor Ferenczi’s voice is important for filling some of the phenomenological gap that exists in psychoanalysis around the problem of psychic splitting.


  1. Aron, L. E., & Harris, A. E. (Eds.). (1993). The legacy of Sandor Ferenczi. London: Analytic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Badiou, A. (1988). Being and event. London: Continuum, 2005.Google Scholar
  3. Balint, M. (1968). The basic fault. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  4. Benjamin, J. (1988). The bonds of love. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  5. Benjamin, J. (2018). Beyond doer and done to: Recognition theory, intersubjectivity and the third. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Bergmann, M. S. (1996). The tragic encounter between Freud and Ferenczi. In P. Rudnytsky, A. Bokay, & P. Giampieri-Deutsch (Eds.), Ferenczi’s turn in psychoanalysis (pp. 145–159). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brabant, É. (2003). Les voies de la passion. Les rapports entre Freud et Ferenczi. Le Coq-Héron, 3, 100–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Butler, J. (1997). The psychic life of power: Theories in subjection. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Butler, J. (2006). Precarious life: The powers of mourning and violence. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  10. Butler, J. (2015). Notes toward a performative theory of assembly. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cocco, G. (2014a). Korpobraz: por uma política dos corpos. Rio de Janeiro: Mauad X.Google Scholar
  12. Erős, F., Kapás, I., Kiss, G., & Giampieri, P. S. (1987). ‘Sándor Ferenczi and the Budapest University 1918–1919. Documents of the History of a University Department. Pszichológia, 7, 584–592. (In Hungarian).Google Scholar
  13. Ferenczi, S. (1905). États sexuels intermédiaires. Les Écrits de Budapest (trans: Kurcz G. & Lorin, C., pp. 243–255). Paris: E.P.E.L., 1994.Google Scholar
  14. Ferenczi, S. (1915a). The analysis of comparisons. Further contributions to the theory and technique of psycho-analysis (trans: Suttie, J. I., pp. 397–407). London: Karnac, 1994.Google Scholar
  15. Ferenczi, S. (1932a). The clinical diary of Sándor Ferenczi (trans: Balint, M. & Jackson, N. Z.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  16. Harris, A., & Kuchuck, S. (Eds.). (2015). The legacy of Sandor Ferenczi: From ghost to ancestor. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Haynal, A. (1997). The Freud-Ferenczi relationship and its bearing on contemporary psychoanalysis. East Central Europe, 24(1), 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haynal, A. (2002). Disappearing and reviving: Sándor Ferenczi in the history of psychoanalysis. London: Karnac.Google Scholar
  19. Honneth, A. (1996). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  20. Honneth, A. (2012). The I in we: Studies in the theory of recognition. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  21. Keve, T., & Szekacs-Weisz, J. (Eds.). (2012). Ferenczi and his world: Rekindling the spirit of the Budapest School. London: Karnac.Google Scholar
  22. Lefebvre, H. (2004). Rhythmanalysis: Space, time and everyday life. London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  23. Martín-Cabré, L. (1997). Freud-Ferenczi: Controversy terminable and interminable. International Journal of Psycho-analysis, 78(1), 105–114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Mészáros, J. (2010). Sándor Ferenczi and the Budapest School of Psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Perspectives, 7(1), 69–89.Google Scholar
  25. Mészáros, J. (2014). Ferenczi and beyond: Exile of the Budapest School and solidarity in the psychoanalytic movement during the Nazi years. London: Karnac.Google Scholar
  26. Rudnytsky, P. L., Bókay, A., & Giampieri-Deutsch, P. (Eds.). (1996). Ferenczi’s turn in psychoanalysis. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Safatle, V. (2016). O circuito dos afetos: corpos políticos, desamparo e o fim do indivíduo. São Paulo: Autêntica.Google Scholar
  28. Schneider, M. (1988). Le trauma et la filiation paradoxale: de Freud à Ferenczi. Paris: Ramsay.Google Scholar
  29. Stanton, M. (1990). Sándor Ferenczi: Reconsidering active intervention. London: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
  30. Žižek, S. (1997). The plague of fantasies. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raluca Soreanu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Psychosocial StudiesBirkbeck CollegeLondonUK

Personalised recommendations