ABSTRACT
Psychoanalysis is a controversial account of mental life and a troublesome form of knowledge. Unsurprisingly, therefore, there are no accepted psychoanalytic concepts which can be easily transposed into, superimposed onto, or mapped alongside, geography - regardless of the kind of geography. In Part I, I demonstrated that various forms of geography have avoided a layer of explanation and understanding, the unconscious, that psychoanalysis is particularly well informed about. Nevertheless, psychoanalysis has been left aside by geographers. It is easy to claim that psychoanalysis has been systematically misrepresented, but I would prefer to suggest that particular aspects of psychoanalysis have been selected and presented as if they were symptomatic of the whole approach. Until very recently, then, only specific characters from psychoanalysis, wearing grotesque masks, have been allowed to take the stage and they have been booed off. From stage left, however, psychoanalysis has appeared in other, different guises. The audience waits - tentatively and suspiciously.
