ABSTRACT
When reading literature dealing with genocidal events, a set of recurring questions comes to mind: What position does a psychoanalyst take? What can psychoanalysis contribute to a better understanding of the event and of the experience of genocide? By and large, such literature conveys a sense of immediacy, of being closely in touch with the experience, even though it may have occurred decades ago. At the same time, there is often an attempt to make sense, to comprehend, and to explain. Balancing these two dialectical poles can prove difficult. Sometimes, it is as if the available theoretical tools built no bridge between the observed and its interpretation and understanding. While this does not come as a surprise to the psychoanalyst, other disciplines in the social sciences that study genocide do not consistently consider the human mind – on an individual or collective level – as an intervening variable. Neither do they utilise psychological processes or data derived from clinical work in their theory building. The explanatory power of such theories is limited at best.
