Infantile sexuality and Freud's legacy

The topic of sexuality and infantile sexuality, though less frequently discussed by psychoanalysis in recent decades, has received renewed attention for some years. The intention of this paper is to share some reflections around the role of infantile sexuality in our thinking, how we encounter it in our work with patients and in clinical material. Through reference to questions put forward by Freud (1905) in Three Essays, this paper takes into consideration some areas of the debate that has developed on the subject of infantile sexuality, starting from Freud's original intuition, including various hypotheses on the genesis of the sexual drive. The author will concentrate on two specific points. Firstly, how infantile sexuality – as a permanent dimension of the subject's existence – unfolds in the relationship and is deeply influenced by it. And that is how in childhood and adolescence, infantile sexuality ushers in parental sexuality – just as, in the case of our patients, infantile sexuality ushers in the analyst's sexuality. The second point pertains to the temporal dimension within which infantile sexuality is inscribed. The hypothesis that the author proposes is that infantile sexuality may be understood in the specific time of psychoanalysis [Nachträglichkeit], distinct and different with respect to the linear, evolutionary dimension.     

The transference neurosis in Freud's writings

This paper reviews the evolution of the concept of transference neurosis in Freud's writings. It suggests that the language in which the concept of the transference neurosis is originally expressed by Freud includes an idea of the analyst as aggressively pursuing the analytic cure by waging a solitary battle against the patient's disease. With the representation of the death drive and the larger role accorded to sadism as its external manifestation in Freud's revised drive theory of 1920, the patient becomes the ally; resistance, in the sense of the conservative forces, not disease, in the sense of libidinal conflict, becomes the enemy. It is thus difficult to speak of a transference neurosis in the circumscribed way Freud originally meant it, and he ceased to use the term after 1926 rather than redefine it to fit his broader perspective. In this broader perspective, relative resolution of conflict replaced radical liberation of the patient from disease. That Freud did not redefine the term does not imply that he discarded it, or that we necessarily should. This paper suggests that Freud implied a functional distinction between transference as transforming agent and transference neurosis as result of that transformation. That distinction defines psychoanalytic cure in terms of the understanding of a symbolic transformation which is, through the transference neurosis, reexperienced as part of the psychoanalytic process.     

Freud's atonement

The authors explore Freud's preoccupations with death and dying. In particular, they focus on the day of Freud's death, which was the Jewish Day of Atonement and the Jewish Sabbath. The significance of this event, which the authors think was “planned,” was not just in order to obliterate years of pain and suffering from cancer, but also to overcome a lifelong burden of conflict and guilt about his relations with his family and colleagues as well as his Jewish cultural/religious upbringing. The authors consider whether the timing of Freud's death represented a premeditated return to his cultural and religious roots.     

The dual impact of Freud's death and Freud's death instinct theory on the history of psychoanalysis

Since I have ranged over a rather large territory in this presentation I will summarize my main points. I claim that the very way Freud created psychoanalysis made it impossible for it to continue to grow and develop as a unified movement after his death. Unlike other sciences, psychoanalysis had no way of differentiating its basic findings from what is yet to be discovered. I then reintroduced my differentiation between heretics, modifiers, and extenders, claiming that after Freud’s death there was less opportunity for heretics and more space for modifiers. I assigned a crucial role to the fact that Anna Freud did not succeed in expelling the Kleinians. In the second part of the paper I presented the view of those who made use of Freud’s death instinct theory and those who opposed it. Many analysts preferred to ignore dealing with it rather than state their opposition. My presentation was biased in favor of those who chose to work with the death instinct as a clinical reality,highlighting Ferenczi’s construction. I made the claim, so far as I know never made before, that Freud’s death instinct theory had a traumatic impact on the psychoanalytic movement because it greatly limited the belief in the curative power of our therapeutic work. After his announcement of the dual-instinct theory Freud withdrew his interest in psychoanalysis as a method of cure. By doing so he inflicted a narcissistic wound on psychoanalysis. I believe that the creativity of psychoanalysis will improve if we face this difficult chapter in our history.     

The legacy is loss

Psychotherapy with the second generation of Holocaust Survivors involves understanding that the Survivors and their offsprings are not a homogeneous group. Numerous variables, such as the age of the Survivor during the Holocaust period, the nature of the experiences, and the length of time the Survivor was imprisoned, all affect the Survivor's adaptive or maladaptive reactions. Recommendations for treating the second generation of Survivors include ascertaining the extent of loss experienced by the parents and their preoccupation with depression and mourning. It is also important to elicit whether the parents were overinvested in their children, affectively impoverished, excessively anxious and overprotective, or able to separate from the Holocaust and invest anew in their new life and family. Further suggestions for treatment are the therapist's need to be aware of countertransference reactions that may duplicate Survivor reactions to their offspring. Flexibility in treating the second generation is also indicated and may call for playing the role of auxiliary ego or, at times, even parent surrogate.     

毛泽东的遗产

很少有人给他的时代留下的烙印能与毛泽东相提并论,也没有谁的命运比他更为模糊不清了。毛泽东诞辰一百年周年纪念为我们思考他在历史上的地位提供了一个恰当的时机,当然它并不是什么神奇的试金石,可以让我们从中得出一个权威的论断。从毛泽东经历的实际情况来看,今天我们所了解的比1976年多得多(那一年在《中国季刊》的支持下很快出版了一部探讨毛泽东在各个领域的贡献的书),也比1982年多得多(该年我斗胆提出了自己的评价),但还有很多地方依然是模糊的,他一生的事业所产生的最终影响更是难以确定的。毛泽东的个性既是多面的,又充满了矛盾。他在他的时代扮演了很多角色。一篇简短的论文无法涉及这样一个人物的方方面面。我这里所关注的不是毛泽东这个人,而是他对中国所做的事情,这样,对于他的优点和缺点,无论属于公共领域还是私人品质,只有在它们影响到毛泽东所能成就的事情时,才予以讨论。