Tonight & every night · the theatre of the mind
is proudly presented
or, Does Letting It Out Let It Go?
A Drama in Five Acts, with an Intermission at the Valve
Almost everyone believes some version of it: feelings build up like steam, and a good cry, a shout, or a swing at a pillow lets the pressure out. The word for that belief is catharsis. It has had a long and strange career, and tonight's bill follows it from a Greek stage to a modern laboratory, where it ran into trouble.
Act the First
Athens, the 4th century BC. A theatre of stone.
Aristotle's Poetics defines tragedy as an imitation of a serious action that, through pity and fear, brings about the katharsis of such emotions. That is very nearly the whole of what he says about it there. He promised to explain the word and, in the text that survives, never did.
In ordinary Greek, katharsis meant cleansing, and it lived in two worlds: the doctor's (purging the body) and the priest's (ritual purification). Readers have argued over which one he meant for well over two thousand years.
The purgation reading was made famous in 1857 by the philologist Jacob Bernays. Keep his surname in mind for Act the Third.
Act the Second
Any sickroom, for centuries.
Long before it meant anything about feelings, a "cathartic" was a laxative, and the word still means that in pharmacology. The medical picture behind it is simple and powerful: something harmful has accumulated, and health returns when it is expelled. Carry that picture over to emotion and you get the idea that grief or rage is a kind of build-up that has to be drained.
Act the Third
Vienna, the 1880s and '90s. A consulting room.
Breuer and Freud reported that symptoms eased when a patient recalled a buried memory and expressed the feeling that went with it. They named this after Aristotle's word. The link was close to home: Jacob Bernays, the scholar of purgation, was the uncle of Freud's wife, Martha Bernays.
Freud himself soon moved away from the cathartic method. But the image stuck, and the 20th century spread it everywhere: emotions as fluid under pressure, which must find an outlet or burst out somewhere worse. Psychologists call it the hydraulic model.
Act the Fourth
A university laboratory. A bag hangs from the ceiling.
If the hydraulic model is right, venting anger should leave people less angry and less aggressive. Social psychologists set out to test that directly, and the results kept coming back the wrong way round.
In a well-known 2002 study, Brad Bushman had people who had just been insulted hit a punching bag while thinking about the person who insulted them. Afterwards they were angrier and more aggressive toward that person than people who simply sat quietly for a couple of minutes. An earlier study by Bushman, Baumeister and Stack (1999) found that just reading an article praising catharsis made people more eager to hit the bag, and no less aggressive after doing it.
A 2024 review by Kjærvik and Bushman pooled more than 150 studies of anger-management activities. Activities that calmed the body (slow breathing, relaxation, mindfulness) reduced anger. Activities that revved it up did not reliably reduce it.
Choose a way of "letting it out." The left gauge shows what the steam-pressure picture predicts for the feeling afterwards; the right shows what the research found.
Act the Fifth
The present day. Anywhere a person has just had a good cry.
None of this means the feeling of relief is imaginary. People do often feel better after crying, and writing about a hard experience seems to help some people a little. What the evidence argues against is the mechanism: that a fixed tank of feeling is emptied by expressing it, so that more expression means more relief.
A better-supported picture looks something like this:
Which brings us back to Aristotle.
Of the three readings in Act the First, the plumbing one, purgation, is the one the 20th century ran with and the lab undercut. The quieter reading, clarification, fits the modern evidence rather well: tragedy does not drain your pity and fear, it gives them a shape. Whether that is what he meant, no one can say. He never came back to explain.