Concrete Psychology of the Actor’s dvoistvennost’: emotions and art as Vygotsky’s means for rethinking methods of psychology

• Autor(a) principal: Reinecke, Willi
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Pro-Posições (Online)
• Texto Completo: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/proposic/article/view/8675278
• topic: Perezhivanie; Formalismo russo; Emoções; Subjetividade; Drama; Perezhivanie; Formalismo russo; Emoções; Subjetividade; Drama; Perezhivanie; Russian formalism; Emotions; Subjectivity; Drama

Vygotsky’s article about the psychology of the actor is a good example of continuities and connections between the early and late work of this psychologist and theater critic. Contrary to a divide between an “instrumental”, “mechanistic” and “reductionist” phase before 1930 and later a “holistic” phase (Yasnitsky, van der Veer, 2016, p. 92), the discourse about the actor and Diderot’s notion of “artificial feelings” (sensibilité artificielle) proves Vygotsky’s ongoing commitment regarding questions of experience (perezhivanie), catharsis and the status of emotions. The dichotomy of the actor’s emotions as shown by Diderot in Paradox of Acting is a key for Vygotsky to insist on the historicity of emotions and a transformation of psychology’s methods. As part of the creative work, the actor’s emotions are divided with opposing forces. In Vygotsky’s Psychology of Art, the formalist term for such a division is dvoistvennost’ (twofoldness). Only by overcoming naturalist assumptions and by placing emotions in the context of other mental functions, psychology with indirect methods would be capable of dealing with this historicity. This is a “psychology in terms of drama”, as suggested in “Concrete Psychology”. My paper will focus on the connections between early reviews, “The Psychology of Art” (1925), “Concrete Human Psychology” (1929) and “The Psychology of the Actor’s Creative Work” (1932).