The other day I put up a page on the blog describing MY PSYCHOLOGY PRACTICE, an edited and shortened version of an earlier post. (The link to this page appears at the top of the blog, just under the “Ktismatics” banner.) Soon Parodycenter put up a comment. “dear Dr Doyle,” it begins: “I read your advertisement with great interest. I have a big problem…” The comment then outlines the nature of the problem. “Can you help me?” the comment concludes. I must confess to a certain degree of ambivalence upon reading this comment, as evidenced by my two responses. In light of Parodycenter’s subsequent reply I think perhaps the right course of action is to engage in a public psychoanalysis of his problem.
Background. Parodycenter is a blog name for Dejan, the creator and writer of the blog Cultural Parody Center. I first became aware of this blog in April, when Dejan wrote a post extolling the virtues of Ktismatics. Since then I have been a regular reader and occasional commenter at the Parody Center. Less consistently I read some of the other blogs on the Parody Center’s blogroll, affording me the opportunity to read Dejan’s comments elsewhere. And of course he contributes his observations here at Ktismatics as well.
While Dejan seems well-versed and expresses strong opinions on a wide array of subjects, he seems repeatedly drawn to a few. Jacques Lacan and Lacanian psychoanalysis. Film, especially David Lynch’s Inland Empire (thumbs up) and Zack Snyder’s 300 (thumbs down). Sex, especially in its more transgressive manifestations. Serbia and the former Yugoslavia (tragic). Slavoj Zizek (contemptible). Perhaps most notable has been Dejan’s frequent discussions with Le Colonel Chabert — on his own blog, on the Colonel’s blog, seemingly on any blog where Chabert makes a comment. These protracted exchanges almost invariably turn caustic and end in Chabert’s refusal to continue.
The Initial Conversation, as transferred from the “My Psychology Practice” comments (comment feature now disabled on that page):
So, let’s get started with the analysis, shall we? I’ll pose a few preliminary observations based on the analysand’s original description of his problem, then wait for him to respond. If anyone else would like to interject as we proceed, please feel free to do so.
* * * *
Hello Dejan, please sit down. Is it alright if I call you Dejan? Comfortable?
On the page describing My Psychology Practice I listed an email address for curious parties to contact me. Yet you posed your problem as a comment on the blog, thus exposing your problem to public scrutiny…
On your comment you logged in as Parodycenter, your blogging persona with a link to your blog, yet you signed the comment personally as Dejan…
In your comment you refer to me as Doctor Doyle…
You say you “can’t stop” offending people, and then in the next sentence you say you “enjoy” it…
You say you enjoy hurting the sensibilities of “just about ANYONE” on the internet, yet I’m the only one you mention by name…
Ktismatics 
August 18th, 2007 at 10:26 am dear Dr Doyle,I read your advertisement with great interest. I have a big problem which I haven’t been able to share so far, but when I read how open-minded and balanced you seem to be in your approach, I decided to take that crucial step. I hope my confidence will not be gambled with. This is my problem: I can’t seem to stop offending people on the internet. I enjoy hurting the sensibilities of social scientists, theologists, artists, doctor Doyle, just about ANYONE on the internet. I am so completely obsessed with this shameful activity, all my other social contacts are lacking or broken. Can you help me?Sincerely,Dejan
August 18th, 2007 at 11:31 am Aren’t you ashamed? You’re hurting others’ feelings, yet you don’t seem to care. All you care about is your precious hit rate (as if through these campy, kitschy and vulgar antics you deserve more hits than I do — I, who write serious prose about deep subjects and engage in highfalutin’ psychotheophilosophical dialogue). I think you actually ENJOY torturing the poor unwitting souls who wander into your blog space. Not only that, you seek out other bloggers on their own territory, subjecting them to your vile and frankly perverse attentions. Wait ’til I tell your parents about this.
August 18th, 2007 at 10:11 pm On the other hand, I do find myself moved to sorrow by your self-destructive encounters with Chabert. That you repeatedly woo her only to revile and repel her does bespeak a compulsion that might need to disguise itself as parody in order to preserve at least some dignity. If one were to regard this as an authentic pattern of approach-avoidance behavior, what might the analyst infer? Would the analyst recognize the temptation to protect himself counter-transferentially against becoming the object of this sort of compulsive seduction-and-abuse cycle? Does a sense of unworthiness oscillate with superiority, tormenting this person’s sensibilities and relationships, a sensitivity that must protect itself in callow crudity in order not to be annihilated in unrequited love? Which reality is the more true, and can it be relied upon? Or is a polyvalent portal holding this person in thrall to the sort of destructive cycle that characterizes practically everyone’s engagements with those to whom Fate destines them to be attracted?
August 19th, 2007 at 3:38 am Doctor Doyle, yes I think I am fatally enthralled by the cobra’s malevolent charms, it might have something to do with the fact that I think whatever content she produces, and I am truly not impressed by her content, she’s not afraid to speak her mind, and I admire that a lot in wimmin; she makes the drollest things sound fantastic; on the other hand, due to some Oedipal dynamic I am surely dragging from my family I am repelled by wimmin with balls, and so some anal ambivalence resurfaces from all this. Strangely I think Arpege has some similar mental pattern (but then the other way round) and also reacts ambivalently to my own malevolent charms. This endless bitch-slave-master-bitch game belongs to the gay subgenre, which attracts Jonquille and this is how we always end up in a trio. But what I am learning and is surely an observation you can spend the next week spinning philosophies out of, is that this strange new interactive medium allows one to vent out these conflicts in a relatively safe way, which I find wonderful.