we will always learn more about human life and human personality from novels than from scientific psychology. (Noam Chomsky). To what extent would you agree?

To begin with, I will discuss some of psychology’s theories and methods of exploring the human mind and soul. “Everywhere I go I find that a poet has been there before me,” said Sigmund Freud. This quote demonstrates the close relationship between scientific psychology and fictional literature. Part of what psychologists have achieved over the years is that they have managed to set patterns and give explanations for aspects of human nature that have already been described in novels and poetry. There are numerous works of literature that bring us characters and personalities, in which we manage to find ourselves, to experience pains and worries so familiar to us, and eventually to find new perspectives, giving us better insight to things that seemed unclear before. Psychology, however, is useful in that respect too, because it has managed to reduce the wide range of personality traits to several psychological types we are all familiar with, but not always conscious of.

Perhaps the most popular and yet controversial example of how psychology has set patterns about human personality and human life is Freud’s distinction between Id, Ego and Super-Ego. Id is the subconscious part of the spirit, which represents all hidden desires and instincts. It is in direct opposition with the Super-Ego, which acts as one’s conscience, sense of morality and set of taboos formed by social and cultural regulations. The Ego, according to Freud, is the “battlefield” between the Id and Super-Ego; it ensures the individual’s safety, when one is experiencing needs, which do not correspond with one’s norms. Through the Ego, we express ourselves in a both adequate and still egoistic manner. Freud’s psychological theory has succeeded in explaining human behaviour as a whole in a manner which is both logical and comprehensible.

Karl Kraus, an Austrian writer, states that “Psychology is a bus that accompanies an airplane.” Life and personality are represented by the airplane that is beyond the reach of the bus, which in turn symbolizes psychology dragging behind, only capable of getting a small glance of what is going on in the sky. But does this mean that the psychologists’ observations are just vague reflection of human nature? Similarly, Freud compared human spirit to an iceberg, where the tip above the water stands for consciousness, and the large region beneath the surface represents the unconscious part of the mind. This implies that only a tiny part of human personality is shown on behaviour and the rest remains hidden.

Psychoanalysis, which is believed to be founded by Freud, is based on the theory that individuals are often unaware of the factors determining their emotional experiences and behaviour. These unconscious factors may lead to unhappiness, neurotic personality traits, difficulties in relationships, or disturbances in mood and self-esteem. By tracing the origins of the traumas, which are causing those psychological problems, Freud believed that one could reclaim their normal lives and gain emotional stability.

But such ideas about the role of the subconscious are often present also in works of literature. Many novelists have tried to portray the characters’ hidden experiences and unrealised desires, which may be considered a form of psychoanalysis. But novels, poems and literary works in general present their ideas mostly by means of individual examples the readers are capable of understanding and interpreting.

For instance, William Golding’s novel Lord of the Flies is an allegory which describes the fundamental struggle between good and evil, civilization and savagery, lofty values and basic insticts. His idea certainly seems similar to Freud’s theory of Id, Ego and Super-Ego. Golding, however, has used symbolism and other literary approaches to present his understanding of human nature and personality. But still there is a connection between the ideas presented in his novel and some of Freud’s theories about human personality.

Another example is Robert Stevenson’s novella The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, which also explores the duality of human nature. It certainly applies to humans in general, but is represented by just one particular case. The metaphor of the iceberg and the subconscious seems to be at the core of the book’s story. Dr. Jekyll symbolizes the Super-Ego, the way man appears in society in accordance with all its norms and expectations. It is the tip of the iceberg, which is the only part visible to the others. Then, Mr. Hyde can be regarded as the Id, representing all the basic instincts and hidden desires occurring in one’s mind. They remain hidden in order to protect one’s existence, but if unleashed, they might lead to tragic consequences, as in the case of Dr. Jekyll.

 The characters in both literary works I have discussed earlier are vivid and described in great detail. Furthermore, their actions and thoughts represent the author’s personal beliefs that may differ from the commonly accepted views on the given issues. This is what often makes books more useful for understanding concrete human lives and personalities – we are given actual plots, feelings and emotions, which affect us personally and seem closer to us than the theories of some of the greatest psychologists. Moreover, novels are open for further interpretation and are often as irrational and unpredictable as humans themselves.

A famous sentence by Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev provides a good explanation for this: “A poet must be a psychologist, but a secret one: he should know and feel the roots of phenomena but present only the phenomena themselves – in full bloom or as they fade away.” In a way, novels and poetry identify themselves to the character’s life, or at least they reflect it realistically enough. They are not obliged to give a logical explanation or justifications. By discovering oneself in a work of literature, one can manage to learn a whole lot about his/her personality.

But to what extent is this statement true? After all I have mentioned above, I can conclude that it is only partially true and, therefore, cannot agree with it to a full extent. Noam Chomsky’s opinion is quite extreme, at least because of the word “always”. And his claim is not always the case. Novels sometimes manage to portray human life and personality in a more believable way, but usually it is not their task to give a scientific explanation and discover general patterns within human minds, although sometimes psychological theories are included in novels and poems. On the other hand, psychoanalysis, similarly to novels, is oriented towards the individual and not so much towards “general cases”, which shows that psychology and literature can be very close.

This demonstrates that one cannot treat scientific psychology and literature as two completely separate fields and, therefore, state that the one is completely and always better than the other. There will always be great psychologists, writers, poets and other kinds of people, who would manage to present convincing insights to human personality and behaviour. However, I highly doubt that this mystery will ever be fully revealed and understood by humankind. After all, it is namely the exploration of the new questions humanity raises that makes the world unique and life worth living.