Well...there was plenty of it in Shakespeare if you read it so he didn't invent the wheel. It just got more firmly embedded in our cultural lexicon with Freud maybe .
I guess that's the point I was trying to wrap my head around earlier. Is Freud really responsible for everything Dr. Dufresne is attributing to him below? It seems to me film and especially literature have a deeper foundation where it comes to sexual metaphor that is not so exclusively dependent on Freud. Maybe he was just painting with some super duper broad strokes in his statement. But it's awfully aloof. It's also curious that he feels today's film is "absolutely awful". I know this amounts to very little in the dialog here, and I have no interest in derailing or muddying the waters. I'd like to know more about Freud's influence on film and literary culture, so maybe I'll dig into it on on my own.
If you don’t understand psychoanalysis you can’t understand major works of literature in the 20th Century. You can’t even understand movies. You can’t even understand, at the very bottom of the pile, insider jokes about trains traveling through mountains, right? Everybody has a little chuckle when that happens in a movie. That’s a code for sexual intercourse. In order to understand the world that we live in in the 20th Century you have to understand Freud because the world has adjusted itself to Freudian ideas. I mean at the level of its culture.