Why has shame recently displaced guilt as a dominant emotional reference
in the West? After the Holocaust, survivors often reported feeling
guilty for living when so many others had died, and in the 1960s
psychoanalysts and psychiatrists in the United States helped make
survivor guilt a defining feature of the "survivor syndrome." Yet the
idea of survivor guilt has always caused trouble, largely because it
appears to imply that, by unconsciously identifying with the
perpetrator, victims psychically collude with power.
In From Guilt to Shame, Ruth Leys has written the first
genealogical-critical study of the vicissitudes of the concept of
survivor guilt and the momentous but largely unrecognized significance
of guilt's replacement by shame. Ultimately, Leys challenges the
theoretical and empirical validity of the shame theory proposed by
figures such as Silvan Tomkins, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, and Giorgio
Agamben, demonstrating that while the notion of survivor guilt has
depended on an intentionalist framework, shame theorists share a
problematic commitment to interpreting the emotions, including shame, in
antiintentionalist and materialist terms.