Symptoms of Neurosis in Popular Culture

Philosophical Framework

Considering neuroses through the lens of popular culture inevitably refers us to the psychoanalytic tradition established by Sigmund Freud, who first systematized the understanding of neurotic states as conflicts between different levels of the psyche [Freud et al., 2009]. However, unlike classical psychoanalysis, which focuses on individual dynamics, our analysis expands to the sociocultural dimension. We explore how the collective unconscious, shaped by media and art, both reflects and simultaneously constructs societal representations of mental illness. This allows us to go beyond a purely clinical approach and consider neurosis as a cultural phenomenon whose perception and manifestation are closely linked to historical and social contexts.

Introduction

The study of neurotic symptoms in popular culture is an interdisciplinary task combining psychology, cultural studies, and media research. Contemporary studies show that media play a significant role in shaping public opinion about mental health, influencing both stigmatization and destigmatization of various conditions [Sartorius et al., 2010]. For example, films and TV series often become the primary source of information about mental disorders for a broad audience, which can lead both to the spread of stereotypes and to increased awareness.

Popular culture, essentially, is a set of practices, beliefs, and objects embodying the most widely shared meanings of a social system, including media objects, entertainment, fashion, and linguistic conventions [Kidd, 2017]. In this context, the depiction of neuroses can be either caricatured or realistic, significantly affecting society’s perception of these conditions. The goal of this lecture is to examine how the main symptoms of neurosis, such as anxiety, phobias, obsessive-compulsive manifestations, and hysterical reactions, find their reflection in works of popular culture, and how these representations shape our understanding of mental health.

Literature Review

The Influence of Popular Culture on the Manifestation and Perception of Neurotic Symptoms

Can popular culture not only reflect but actively shape our neurotic manifestations? This question lies at the heart of the discussion about the relationship between media and mental health. On one hand, popular culture, according to Dustin Kidd’s definition, is a set of practices, beliefs, and objects that embody the most widely shared meanings of a social system [Kidd, 2017]. It serves as a mirror in which society sees itself, its fears, and its neuroses. On the other hand, this mirror is not passive: it actively distorts, amplifies, or even creates new forms of mental suffering, influencing how we perceive and experience our internal conflicts.

It is precisely this active role of culture in shaping neurotic manifestations that attracts the most interest. Researchers Tasca, Rapetti, Carta, and Fadda [Tasca et al., 2012] argue that the evolution of certain diseases, particularly nervous anorexia, is closely linked to the “westernization” of society. They note that several studies on mental illnesses seem to validate this hypothesis (The evolution of this disease seems to be a factor of the social “westernization”. Several studies on mental diseases seem to validate this hypothesis) [Tasca et al., 2012]. This suggests that cultural trends disseminated through popular media may not only influence the perception of existing disorders but also contribute to the emergence of new ones or the alteration of the phenomenology of old ones.

In this context, the digital age, with its ubiquitous “screens,” has ceased to be merely a source of entertainment; it has become a hybrid reality where digital spaces are inextricably linked with offline contexts [Granic et al., 2020]. Young people, in particular, live in this new ecosystem, and the influence of digital media on their mental health has become the subject of intense debate. Isabela Granic and colleagues [Granic et al., 2020] emphasize that the traditional focus on “screen time” as the sole factor is overly simplistic and does not account for the deeper mechanisms through which digital content shapes identity and, consequently, adolescents’ mental states.

Popular culture not only reflects neurotic tendencies but actively participates in their construction by offering ready-made narratives and behavioral models. For example, memes, which, according to Umaira Akram and Jennifer Drabble, visually depict elements of culture or behavioral systems in a humorous form [Akram et al., 2022], can both normalize and distort the perception of mental disorders. Although some psychiatrists and media outlets view mental health memes as potentially harmful, empirical data do not always support this view, suggesting that for some they may serve as a coping mechanism [Akram et al., 2022].

The influence of popular culture on the manifestation of neurotic symptoms can be examined through the lens of psychoanalysis, which, as Elizabeth Lunbeck notes, despite ongoing debates, remains extremely influential and enduring both as a theoretical corpus and as a set of practices [Lunbeck, 2018]. Freud believed that unconscious conflicts expressed in neuroses are shaped by early experiences and cultural norms. Popular culture, in turn, can act as a powerful agent of socialization, offering scenarios for these conflicts and ways to express them.

Mark Solms and Jaak Panksepp, developing the neuropsychoanalytic approach, point out that consciousness, at its core, is affective and interoceptive, expressed by the formula “I feel like this about that” [Solms et al., 2012]. The cortex, in their view, stabilizes and refines objects of perception, turning fleeting states of consciousness into “mental solids,” i.e., ideas and representations [Solms et al., 2012]. If popular culture constantly offers certain “objects” for experience—be they idealized body images, stressful success scenarios, or romanticized notions of mental suffering—this inevitably affects how the individual “feels about it,” shaping their affective reactions and, consequently, neurotic symptoms.

For example, in the case of functional tic-like disorders observed in young women during the COVID-19 pandemic, Tamara Pringsheim and colleagues [Pringsheim et al., 2021] note that these manifestations had “striking commonalities in the phenomenology,” which may indicate cultural spread of certain behavioral patterns. Although the authors do not directly link this to popular culture, it can be assumed that media content covering such phenomena could have contributed to their dissemination by offering ready-made forms for expressing stress and anxiety. Popular culture not only reflects but actively participates in forming “objects of desire” and “objects of fear,” which then become the basis for neurotic manifestations. It offers ready narratives for experiencing anxiety, depression, or obsessive-compulsive states, influencing how individuals interpret their internal sensations. If culture constantly broadcasts images of the ideal body, this may contribute to the development of nervous anorexia, as noted by Tasca and colleagues [Tasca et al., 2012]. If it romanticizes certain forms of suffering, this may lead to their imitation or intensification.

The influence of popular culture on the perception and manifestation of neurotic symptoms also appears in how it shapes “mental health literacy.” John Goodwin and colleagues’ study [Goodwin et al., 2023] showed that film interventions can increase adolescents’ awareness of mental health and improve their well-being. This indicates that media have enormous potential not only to shape but also to correct perceptions of mental disorders. However, if content is unbalanced or distorts reality, it can exacerbate the problem.

Popular culture acts not merely as a backdrop against which neurotic dramas unfold but as an active co-author of these dramas. It offers scenarios, characters, and even language for expressing internal conflicts. The question is how consciously and responsibly this role is realized. After all, if media can shape neurotic manifestations, they can also contribute to their destigmatization and healthier perception, which leads us to the next question about the role of media in the stigmatization and destigmatization of mental disorders.

The Role of Media in the Stigmatization and Destigmatization of Mental Disorders

If in the previous section we discussed how popular culture shapes the manifestation and perception of neurotic symptoms, now it is worth considering how media, as a key channel of this culture, influence public attitudes toward mental disorders. Media possess a dual power: they can both reinforce stigmatization and promote destigmatization, i.e., reducing negative attitudes and discrimination. This duality is especially noticeable in the context of mental health, where public opinion is often shaped less by scientific data than by emotionally charged images.

Unfortunately, media often become tools for reinforcing negative stereotypes about people with mental disorders. For example, news reports about crimes frequently unjustifiably emphasize the perpetrator’s mental health problems, creating a false association between mental illness and violence [Mellifont et al., 2015]. Such narratives not only distort reality but also foster fear and alienation in society. When mental disorders are portrayed as dangerous or uncontrollable, this intensifies stigma and hinders those in need from seeking help.

However, media can also play a constructive role in destigmatization. For example, studies show that creative multimedia interventions reflecting adolescent culture can significantly improve mental health literacy and well-being [Goodwin et al., 2023]. When celebrities openly discuss their mental health issues, it breaks down barriers of silence and shame, showing that mental disorders are not a sign of weakness but part of the human experience. Such stories, broadcast through media, can become a powerful tool for normalizing discourse about mental health.

Modern digital media, such as social networks and video games, create a new dynamic in this process. Isabela Granic and co-authors note that these platforms have become an integral part of young people’s lives, shaping their identity and social interactions [Granic et al., 2020]. Whereas media were once a one-way information channel, they now provide opportunities for dialogue, experience exchange, and support communities. However, as the authors emphasize, research on the impact of these new digital spaces on mental health still lags behind their spread, and we lack a theoretical framework for adequately understanding these processes.

One key aspect often overlooked in media representations is the deep nature of consciousness and affects. Mark Solms and Jaak Panksepp, in their work The Id Knows More than the Ego Admits, argue that consciousness is generated not in the cerebral cortex but in deeper subcortical structures, and its nature is fundamentally affective [Solms et al., 2012]. They cite examples of patients with hydroanencephaly, who lack most of the cerebral cortex but retain emotional responses and even learning ability [Solms et al., 2012]. This means that basic affective experiences such as joy, fear, or anger do not depend on higher cognitive functions often associated with the cortex.

When media depict mental disorders, they often focus on cognitive or behavioral manifestations, ignoring this deep affective foundation. For example, anxiety may be shown as a set of irrational thoughts or panic attacks but rarely touches on its root endogenous nature arising from subcortical structures. Solms and Panksepp criticize the “corticocentric” viewpoint that consciousness and emotions arise exclusively in the cortex [Solms et al., 2012]. They argue that consciousness as a whole is generated in the upper brainstem and that all cortical varieties of consciousness depend on the integrity of these subcortical structures, not vice versa [Solms et al., 2012].

This neuropsychoanalytic understanding is important for media representations. If media continue to depict mental disorders solely as cognitive or behavioral problems, this may lead to a simplified and incomplete understanding of their nature. For example, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is often reduced to eccentric habits, whereas its true nature is linked to deeply rooted affective conflicts and attempts at their control. If media can convey this deep affective component, it may foster deeper empathy and understanding.

On the other hand, media can promote mental health literacy by providing accurate and scientifically grounded information. Studies show that educational programs and campaigns disseminated through media can significantly improve public knowledge about mental disorders and reduce prejudice [Latha et al., 2020]. When people better understand symptoms, causes, and treatments, they are more likely to seek help and support those who suffer. Media are at the forefront of the fight to destigmatize mental disorders. Their ability to shape public opinion is enormous, and how they use this power determines whether people with mental problems are perceived as dangerous outsiders or as members of society in need of support and understanding. The question of how to make content related to mental disorders not only informative but also appealing, so that it can effectively convey these complex ideas to a wide audience, remains open.

Reasons for the Appeal and Impact of Content Related to Mental Disorders

In the previous section, we discussed how media shape public perception of mental disorders by stigmatizing or, conversely, destigmatizing them. But why is content related to mental disorders so attractive to audiences? What makes us repeatedly turn to stories about anxiety, phobias, or obsessive-compulsive states? The answer lies not only in superficial curiosity but also in deep psychological mechanisms underlying our perception and emotional response.

One fundamental reason for such appeal is, paradoxically, the desire for self-knowledge and understanding of human nature. When we see on screen or read in a book about a character suffering from panic attacks, we may either recognize ourselves or gain insight into experiences unfamiliar to us. This expands our emotional and cognitive horizon. Mark Solms and Jaak Panksepp, in their work The Id Knows More than the Ego Admits [Solms et al., 2012], emphasize that affective consciousness, unlike cognitive, represents not discrete external objects but diffuse internal reactions. It is these internal states, these “feelings of pleasure-displeasure,” that form the basis of our emotional experience and, accordingly, our interest in others’ experiences.

The appeal of such content may also be related to catharsis. By living through others’ suffering, we may experience relief, realizing we are not alone in our problems, or, conversely, feel better against the backdrop of others’ misfortunes. This is a kind of emotional training that allows us to safely explore the dark sides of the human psyche. Solms and Panksepp note that “affectivity is a unique modality of experience” that internally promotes survival and reproductive success [Solms et al., 2012]. That is, even negative emotions experienced through art can serve an adaptive function, helping us better navigate the world.

We should not forget the so-called “roller coaster effect.” Just as people enjoy thrills from amusement rides, they may derive pleasure from content that evokes fear or anxiety while remaining safe. Research shows that low empathy and high fearlessness may be associated with greater enjoyment of horror films [Martin, 2019]. This suggests that for some viewers, mental disorders in popular culture become a source of controlled stress perceived as entertainment.

However, beyond pure entertainment, content about mental disorders can play a deeper, therapeutic role. Mental health memes, for example, may serve as a coping mechanism for people experiencing psychiatric difficulties [Akram et al., 2022]. Humor and self-irony regarding one’s problems help reduce tension, feel part of a community, and destigmatize one’s experiences. This supports the idea that instinctual motivations are genetically embedded in cross-mammalian brain foundations [Solms et al., 2012], and the search for coping strategies is an integral part of our nature.

Identification also plays an important role. When a character on screen or in a book exhibits symptoms familiar to the viewer or reader from personal experience, a strong emotional connection arises. This can be especially relevant for those suffering from mental disorders but feeling isolated or misunderstood. Seeing their experiences reflected in culture provides validation of their reality and possibly a stimulus to seek help. Freud, as cited by Solms and Panksepp, defined “instinct” (Trieb) as a concept at the boundary between the psychic and the somatic, as a psychic representative of stimuli originating inside the organism and reaching the mind [Solms et al., 2012]. This internal movement, this measure of demand placed on the mind’s work, resonates in cultural representations.

Moreover, popular culture often simplifies and romanticizes mental disorders, making them more “attractive” or “understandable” to a broad audience. For example, the image of the “mad genius” or “suffering artist” can create a false impression that mental problems are a sign of special giftedness or depth. This, of course, can be dangerous as it distorts reality and hinders adequate perception of illness. However, on the other hand, such romanticization may draw attention to the topic and make people think about mental health.

Finally, the purely aesthetic component cannot be ignored. Stories about internal conflicts, struggles with oneself, overcoming difficulties have always been and remain a powerful source of drama. Mental disorders provide rich material for creating complex, multifaceted characters and captivating plots. As Solms and Panksepp note, instinctual emotional brain networks embody action tools necessary for ambulatory organisms to satisfy their affective needs in the external world [Solms et al., 2012]. These “survival tools,” such as seeking resources (SEEKING), fear (FEAR), or grief (PANIC/GRIEF), become the basis for creating deep and resonant works of art. The appeal of content about mental disorders is due to a complex intertwining of psychological, social, and cultural factors. From the desire for self-knowledge and catharsis to the search for entertainment and aesthetic pleasure—all these motives drive us to stories that reflect the fragility and complexity of the human psyche. However, in this constant turning to the inner world, to the “id” that “knows more than the ego admits” [Solms et al., 2012], there is also another tendency—a tendency toward self-absorption, focusing on one’s own “I,” which leads us to the question of the development of narcissism in modern society and its connection to popular culture.

The Development of Narcissism in Modern Society and Its Connection to Popular Culture

If in the previous section we discussed how content related to mental disorders attracts attention, now it is worth asking: is this appeal part of a broader cultural shift that fosters the development of narcissism? Modern popular culture seems to create a perfect environment for the flourishing of narcissistic traits, offering endless opportunities for self-presentation and obtaining external validation.

Narcissism, as we know, is not reduced to simple self-love. It is a complex personality formation characterized by grandiosity, a need for admiration, and lack of empathy. Researchers such as Grapsas, Brammelmann, Beck, and Denissen [Grapsas et al., 2019] point out that narcissism appears to be cultivated, in part, by parental overvaluation, which is defined as parents seeing their child as more special and more entitled than others (“Narcissism seems to be cultivated, in part, by parental overvaluation, which is defined as parents seeing their child as more special and more entitled than others”). But what happens when this “overvaluation” extends beyond the family circle and becomes a widespread cultural phenomenon?

Popular culture, especially through social media, creates a constant demand for showcasing a “special” life, achievements, and appearance. This forms a kind of “social reinforcement of status,” where likes and followers become measures of value. Jacques Lacan, for example, might say that this is an endless search for recognition in society’s “mirror stage,” where everyone strives to see themselves reflected in admiring eyes.

Slavoj Žižek, in turn, often criticizes contemporary consumer society for producing subjects constantly seeking satisfaction of their desires but never truly achieving it. In this context, narcissism becomes not just a character trait but a kind of cultural imperative: be unique, be the best, be visible. If you are not represented in the media space, do you even exist?

Christopher Lasch, in his work The Culture of Narcissism [Lasch], already in the late 1970s foresaw many of these trends, describing a society obsessed with self-preservation, self-improvement, and superficial achievements. He argued that the modern person, facing loss of meaning and historical continuity, turns inward—not for deep self-knowledge but for endless reflection of their “I” in social mirrors.

Eva Illouz [Illouz], in her studies of emotional capitalism, also shows how emotions, including self-esteem and the desire for recognition, become commodities and driving forces of consumption. Narcissism here is not just a vice but an engine of the economy, where every product promises to make us “better,” “more successful,” “more special.”

Interestingly, even in the psychoanalytic tradition, as noted by Mark Solms and Jaak Panksepp [Solms et al., 2012], Freud in his later models of the psyche linked the “ego” with the external world and perception, and the “id” with internal, instinctual needs. They write that “By the end of Freud’s scientific life, therefore, the notion that ‘the brain knows more than it admits’ revolved around the theory that bottom-up interoceptive pressures on the mind produced a set of primitive, compulsive drives (in the ‘id’) which aimed at immediate instinctual satisfaction, on the basis of affective-homeostatic imperatives regardless of the variable dictates of reality.” In this context, modern culture may amplify external “ego influences” which, instead of restraining primitive drives, begin to serve them, creating an illusion of satisfaction through external recognition.

Tasca, Rapetti, Carta, and Fadda [Tasca et al., 2012], in their study of hysteria, note how manifestations of discomfort changed depending on cultural context. Whereas previously it was “hysteria,” now it may be “narcissism,” manifested in a constant need for affirmation of one’s significance. They show that even in modern conditions, for example in Sardinia, cultural changes such as women moving to more independent professions can cause new forms of psychological discomfort, including depression and self-esteem problems. This underscores how social changes affect mental states, and narcissism may be one such response to contemporary challenges.

Byung-Chul Han [Han], in his works on the “society of fatigue” and “achievement society,” argues that modern individuals are constantly under pressure for self-optimization and self-exploitation. This pressure, aimed at achieving success and demonstrating it outwardly, inevitably leads to the strengthening of narcissistic traits, as self-esteem becomes directly dependent on external indicators.

Popular culture not only reflects narcissism but actively shapes it by offering behavioral templates, values, and mechanisms for its manifestation. From endless selfies to reality shows, from influencers to personalized news feeds—all this creates an ecosystem where self-presentation and the search for external approval become central elements of existence. The open question remains how this constant striving for external validation affects the inner world of a person and their capacity for genuine relationships, which in turn leads us to a critical reflection on these phenomena.

Criticism and Limitations

Simplification and Caricaturization of Neurotic States

The main limitation of analyzing neuroses through the lens of popular culture lies in the inevitable simplification and caricaturization of complex mental states. Cinema, literature, and media often sacrifice accuracy for dramatic effect or comedic potential, resulting in a distorted representation of neuroses. For example, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in pop culture is often reduced to eccentric habits such as excessive cleanliness or love of order, ignoring the depth of suffering, intrusive thoughts, and exhausting rituals that accompany this disorder in real life. If popular culture depicted OCD more realistically, it could promote better understanding and empathy, but instead, it often creates an image that may even be attractive or amusing, which only reinforces stigma and prevents people with real OCD from being taken seriously.

Such simplification not only distorts the clinical picture but can also affect the self-perception of people suffering from neuroses. When media present mental disorders as something easily overcome by willpower or as a source of unique abilities, this creates false expectations and may lead to disappointment or guilt in those who do not meet these idealized images. Studies show that media can both reinforce stigmatization and promote destigmatization [Sartorius et al., 2010], but simplified portrayals tend to lean toward the former, as they do not provide an adequate representation of the complexity and seriousness of the problem.

Lack of Depth in Psychoanalytic Understanding

Another significant limitation is the superficial use of psychoanalytic concepts, which are often reduced to clichés or oversimplified explanations. Although psychoanalysis has had a huge influence on popular culture, its deep understanding of unconscious conflicts, defense mechanisms, and the symbolic meaning of symptoms rarely finds adequate reflection. Instead, neurotic manifestations are often explained by straightforward traumas or superficial motives, ignoring the complex dynamics of the psyche described by Freud and his followers. For example, hysteria, which in psychoanalysis was considered a conversion of psychic conflict into a bodily symptom, is often portrayed in popular culture as a manifestation of weakness or manipulation, completely missing its unconscious nature.

This lack of depth leads to the viewer or reader not receiving a full understanding of how neuroses are formed and function. If popular culture more accurately conveyed psychoanalytic ideas, it could promote deeper self-analysis and understanding of internal processes rather than mere external observation of symptoms. Elizabeth Lunbeck notes that psychoanalysis, despite its controversy, remains extremely influential and enduring both as a theoretical corpus and as a set of practices [Lunbeck, 2018], but its influence in popular culture is often limited to superficial references that do not touch on its methodological and conceptual complexity.