Our Comeuppance Is Coming
By Philip Ringstrom
Posted Wednesday, March 14, 2001, at 11:55 AM ETWho are these people?
Glen, I'm with you in being struck by how well the therapy presented during the first two seasons of The Sopranos approximates our work, warts and all. Thankfully the writers grasped the gritty entertainment in what works and doesn't in the intimate engagement of psychoanalytic psychotherapy. I'm troubled less than you are that this season they slipped into arcane analytic theory (recovered memory) to explain Tony's panic attacks.
What bothered me more is what feels like a shift in characters. Episode 3's therapy session on Sunday night was peculiarly jocular. When Tony protested about wanting some real therapeutic change, Melfi was too swift to propose "managed care" alternatives in the form of behavioral treatment. Nothing essentially wrong with her prescription as adjunctive treatment, but won't Tony feel intolerably abandoned by being shunted off to another therapist? Such provocation in Season 1 was the stuff of bolting for the door or coffee table-smashing narcissistic injuries. And equally strange was how much Jennifer has recovered from her own traumatic reactions to having to "lam it" at the beginning of the second season. Remember, that trauma had her nipping Belvedere vodka right before her sessions with T.S., not to mention (appropriately) turning to her own therapist for treatment. Of course, the brilliance of The Sopranos' writing crew is that they are perpetually setting us up for some sucker punch. So we armchair analysts will likely get our comeuppance shortly.
Our Comeuppance Is Coming
By Philip Ringstrom
Posted Wednesday, March 14, 2001, at 11:55 AM ETThis spring, Slate will ask Dr. Melfi's real-life counterparts to examine developments on The Sopranos
. Glen O. Gabbard, M.D., is a professor of psychoanalysis at the Menninger Clinic and co-author of Psychiatry and the Cinema. Philip A. Ringstrom, Ph.D., Psy.D., is an analyst at the Institute of Contemporary Psychoanalysis in Los Angeles and a full-time practitioner. Joel Whitebook, a practicing analyst in New York, is on the faculty of the Columbia Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research. Margaret Crastnopol, Ph.D., is on the faculty of the Northwest Center for Psychoanalysis and a practicing psychologist/psychoanalyst in Seattle. Click here to comment on Sunday night's episode. Reader Comments From The Fray:
Margaret Crastnopol hit it right on the head: we are being too easy on Melfi (or at least the portrayal of Melfi). Fact is, Tony Soprano is an idiot and she's physically intimidated by him. She's also turned on by him--which is a revolting possibility. Thing is, thousands of women are, in fact, turned on by Tony and his merry band of thugs. Crastnopol's suggestion that the doctor-patient and doctor-doctor power positioning does little to counter stereotypes of weak women being pushed around by angry, stupid men--this is all correct, too. Actually, the whole program is misogynistic and ought not be watched by anyone....yet, I'm strangely attracted to it, bad writing/acting and all. Is it that I'm that desperate for entertainment or is this representative of some deep misogyny within? Doctors, tell me: what drives us (me) to watch this thing, even when I know it's negative TV? There are too many men and women out there watching this and thinking that this is an acceptable way of life. What's wrong with us? A diagnosis, please.
--Phil H.
(To reply, click here.)
To Phil H:
There is nothing wrong with "us." But there is a problem with your formulation of the problem. To enjoy this well-written and well-acted drama, we are not obligated to find that the fictional characters pursue "an acceptable way of life." On the contrary, I would guess that 99.9% of viewers strenuously object to the way Tony puts bread on the Sopranos' table.
We enjoy the bravura plot twists, the odd contrasts, the marvelous characterizations, and the Machiavellian tactics--and the occasionally absurd results of the characters' efforts. The monstrous is combined with the mundane in a striking and amusing way. Consider Tony strangling a mafia traitor as his beloved daughter is interviewed for admission to a genteel New England college.
Millions of people have read and admired Crime and Punishment. Do you suppose they accepted the grotesque reasoning that drove Dostoyevsky's main character? Must we approve of step-patricide to enjoy Hamlet?
Relax and enjoy the series. If you feel the urge to emulate the main characters, call your therapist (or your local sheriff).
--Gary
(To reply, click here.)
On the question of the Mafia don who approved of Tony's therapy: Remember that this was a leader of the Manhattan mob. Probably they are a little more sophisticated than the Jersey crowd. Remember, it was only Junior and Tony's assumption that seeing a shrink was taboo. The New York family was probably way ahead of them.
--Aurora Duane
(To reply, click here.)
(3/15)
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
SPONSORED CONTENT
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
What It Will Cost You To Deny Illegal Immigrants Health Insurance
Stupid Drug Story of the Week: NBC's Today Show Discovers Huffing
Can the Government Call God Jesus? What About Allah?
How Twilight Made Goth Fashion Mainstream
Is Disney's The Suite Life Making Your Child Into an Evil Lothario?
What Sarah Palin Wrote in Obama's Facebook Feed
Reader Comments From The Fray:
Margaret Crastnopol hit it right on the head: we are being too easy on Melfi (or at least the portrayal of Melfi). Fact is, Tony Soprano is an idiot and she's physically intimidated by him. She's also turned on by him--which is a revolting possibility. Thing is, thousands of women are, in fact, turned on by Tony and his merry band of thugs. Crastnopol's suggestion that the doctor-patient and doctor-doctor power positioning does little to counter stereotypes of weak women being pushed around by angry, stupid men--this is all correct, too. Actually, the whole program is misogynistic and ought not be watched by anyone....yet, I'm strangely attracted to it, bad writing/acting and all. Is it that I'm that desperate for entertainment or is this representative of some deep misogyny within? Doctors, tell me: what drives us (me) to watch this thing, even when I know it's negative TV? There are too many men and women out there watching this and thinking that this is an acceptable way of life. What's wrong with us? A diagnosis, please.
--Phil H.
(To reply, click here.)
To Phil H:
There is nothing wrong with "us." But there is a problem with your formulation of the problem. To enjoy this well-written and well-acted drama, we are not obligated to find that the fictional characters pursue "an acceptable way of life." On the contrary, I would guess that 99.9% of viewers strenuously object to the way Tony puts bread on the Sopranos' table.
We enjoy the bravura plot twists, the odd contrasts, the marvelous characterizations, and the Machiavellian tactics--and the occasionally absurd results of the characters' efforts. The monstrous is combined with the mundane in a striking and amusing way. Consider Tony strangling a mafia traitor as his beloved daughter is interviewed for admission to a genteel New England college.
Millions of people have read and admired Crime and Punishment. Do you suppose they accepted the grotesque reasoning that drove Dostoyevsky's main character? Must we approve of step-patricide to enjoy Hamlet?
Relax and enjoy the series. If you feel the urge to emulate the main characters, call your therapist (or your local sheriff).
--Gary
(To reply, click here.)
On the question of the Mafia don who approved of Tony's therapy: Remember that this was a leader of the Manhattan mob. Probably they are a little more sophisticated than the Jersey crowd. Remember, it was only Junior and Tony's assumption that seeing a shrink was taboo. The New York family was probably way ahead of them.
--Aurora Duane
(To reply, click here.)
(3/15)