English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

It has been argued that the relationship between psychoanalysis and sociology is one of the repeated opening and closing of the latter to the former (Cavalletto and Silver, 2014). In the current conjuncture, while work inspired by Freud continues to be produced in the realm of psychosocial studies (see Frosh, 2010) it might be possible to suggest Craib’s (1998: 61) claim that Freud has an ‘important message for sociology’ has not fully been accepted. In light of this, it seems an opportune time for sociology to revisit Freud’s work. But, revisiting or remembering a theorist is no easy task. Inevitably their work is open to reinterpretation, critique and appropriation; in short who is the ‘Freud’ we would be revisiting? Each of these books presents a different ‘Freud’ and, in doing so, demonstrate to us that the means of representing theorists are often as important as the content of the theories.

Revisiting Freud as a Social Theorist – but Which ‘Freud’?