TRANSFORMATIONS OF UNCONSCIOUS

Uncotlscioiu fantasy is coiiceptiiatizecl as a represeiitaiioii f o r clrive-related, coiiflict-laden, ioi~Ii-fiilJjNiiig vieiis of Ii i i~i iai i ex/ierieiice. These are iutialb related to sexiiality, a i d reJer to birth, intraiiteriiie existence, priinnl sceiie, castratioii, a i d sedtictioii. Uiicoirscioiis f a n-tasj 11iay be trai~sfori~ied into morks of art throiigli n varietj of artistic viea)w. The e~iiplojiiieiit of forinal iiieaiis for the repeseii-tatiori of faiitasj ~ i a j be the product of m i eiidopsjcliic fierceptioii. Ths, stnicltiral cittributes of tlie psyfie 111ay also f i t i d represetita-lion. An exaiiiple is tued froin the creative process in the coiutrtictioii of a novel by H e i q J a m s, The Spoils of Poynton. Iir the process of fiirfrrrilrg artistic purposes in [lie coiistriictioii of his /dot, the author inade use of derivatives of tincoiuciotis fatitmj diicli stirfnce in the process of creatioii. The zuork of art is tlie iiilegralioii of zciicoiwciotls ilerivalives udiicli becoine transfornieil into iirtistic sirticlure. N ANY CONSIDEKATION OF T H E Nr\-ruKE of unconscious fan- I tasy, it is useful to differentiate fantasies that are of universal or primal nature from those that are idiosyncratic, specific to a particular individual, and characterized by peculiarities, sin-gularities, and originality. Among the universal fantasies one may speak of prinial o r generic structures which are “respon-sible for the organization of fantasy life regardless of the per-sonal experience of different subjects ” (Laplanche and Pontalis, 1973, p. 331). M7e need not get into the ancient argument about whether the universality of these fantasies is to be accounted for on the basis of a phylogenetically transmitted inheritance. It is enough today to indicate that psychoanalysts have devel