2018Unpublished venueRequires access

Coprophilia and creativity

Leo Abse

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Coprophilia—the clinical term given to the pleasure of touching, looking at and eating faeces—was always a temptation for Daniel Defoe. Sometimes, ingeniously, he did find means of yielding to his desire in ways that did not invite disapprobation. His handling of clay, freeing it from excessive soil to manufacture bricks and pantiles in the works he established in Tilbury, no doubt, brought him displaced illicit pleasures as well as one of his rare commercial successes. But in The King of Pirates his coprophilia emerges unashamed. Many and various were the circumlocutions practised by Defoe, in defiance of the original imperious parental command, to regain the coprophiliac joys insensitively denied to him in infancy. By thus relating Defoe’s early coprophiliac yearnings to his works, we are following a well worn path. The enigmatic relationship between perversion and creativity has been continuously explored since S. Freud’s message: that, in effect, the artist and the pervert emerge from the self-same ecology.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Coprophilia—the clinical term given to the pleasure of touching, looking at and eating faeces—was always a temptation for Daniel Defoe. Sometimes, ingeniously, he did find means of yielding to his desire in ways that did not invite disapprobation. His handling of clay, freeing it from excessive soil to manufacture bricks and pantiles in the works he established in Tilbury, no doubt, brought him displaced illicit pleasures as well as one of his rare commercial successes. But in The King of Pirates his coprophilia emerges unashamed. Many and various were the circumlocutions practised by Defoe, in defiance of the original imperious parental command, to regain the coprophiliac joys insensitively denied to him in infancy. By thus relating Defoe’s early coprophiliac yearnings to his works, we are following a well worn path. The enigmatic relationship between perversion and creativity has been continuously explored since S. Freud’s message: that, in effect, the artist and the pervert emerge from the self-same ecology.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Coprophilia—the clinical term given to the pleasure of touching, looking at and eating faeces—was always a temptation for Daniel Defoe. Sometimes, ingeniously, he did find means of yielding to his desire in ways that did not invite disapprobation. His handling of clay, freeing it from excessive soil to manufacture bricks and pantiles in the works he established in Tilbury, no doubt, brought him displaced illicit pleasures as well as one of his rare commercial successes. But in The King of Pirates his coprophilia emerges unashamed. Many and various were the circumlocutions practised by Defoe, in defiance of the original imperious parental command, to regain the coprophiliac joys insensitively denied to him in infancy. By thus relating Defoe’s early coprophiliac yearnings to his works, we are following a well worn path. The enigmatic relationship between perversion and creativity has been continuously explored since S. Freud’s message: that, in effect, the artist and the pervert emerge from the self-same ecology.

Key concepts: Creativity, Psychology, Computer science, Social psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Coprophilia and creativity — Research Paper | ScholarLens