Turn of Fortune in Psychoanalysis: The 1924 Rank Debates and the Origins of Hermeneutic Psychoanalysis

The history of psychoanalysis can be characterized by conflicts that besides their personal content meant a closure and an opening in the development of the theorecial and practical (self )understanding of the discipline. The 1923-24 conflict that resulted in the separation of Rank from the movement and showed the first signs of uneasiness against the mainstream of psychoanalysis in Ferenczi's approach is relatively less known. However, its theoretical, or more general: discoursive impact on psychoanalysis was enormous.The debate took place among the top leaders of the movement, Rank and Ferenczi on one side, Jones, Abraham, Sachs on the other. In the center of the discussion there were two books, The Trauma of Birth by Rank and the The Development of Psychoanalysis by Ferenczi and Rank. With the help of documents I try to show that Freud first supported his Vienna-Budapest friends, later changed over to the other camp. As a general effect, I suggest that this debate resulted in the withdrawal from the earlier more hermeneutic-dialogical, therapy centered psychoanalysis toward a medical, objective, systematic and metapsychology oriented discipline. Besides the general theoretical change the power centers of psychoanalysis shifted toward West, Vienna and Budapest was substituted first by Berlin, later by London and New York.     

Interpretations of Freud's Jewishness, 1924–1974

During the first fifty years of historical and biographical commentary on Freud and the origins of psychoanalysis there were there periods of interpretation of Freud's Jewishness. During the first period, extending from the mid-1920s until the 1950, it was widely assumed, following the works of Wittels, that Freud was essentially Viennese, that his Jewishness was at most incidental. During the second period, extending until the late 1960s, Freud was believed by some, following Bakan, to be essentially Jewish, and to have concealed that important aspect of his life intentionally. During the most recent period, and especially in the early 1970s, psychoanalysis was interpreted as a compromise wrought by Freud to meet the conflicting demands of secular German and scientific modernity and Jewish and othe traditions.     

MAX EITINGON AND THE STRUGGLE TO ESTABLISH AN INTERNATIONAL STANDARD FOR PSYCHOANALYTIC TRAINING (1925‐1929)2

This paper deals with the first years of the IPA's International Training Commission (ITC). The author begins by outlining the Berlin model of training, including some less familiar aspects, and he describes how the foundation of the ITC in 1925 was designed for promoting the general establishment of institutionalised training according to this pioneer model. In relation to lay analysis, he highlights the issue of central power versus local autonomy with regard to admission policy. The latter part of the narrative is devoted to an ITC subcommittee (‘Eitingon Committee’), appointed in 1927, which tried to formulate training guidelines for the whole IPA, again with a clear Berlin profile. The discussion of the draft of these guidelines among all branch societies (with Freud himself participating) revealed some interesting disagreements, while the ‘closed’ nature of the system, as opposed to what later came to be called an ‘open system’, was hardly challenged. The initiative failed, apparently through American opposition, but essentially because of the developmental gap between local societies as to the institution of specialised psychoanalytic training. The paper is based largely on unpublished material and also provides some information about Max Eitingon, the least well known of the early leaders of psychoanalysis.     

The reception of Freud by the British press: general interest and literary magazines, 1920-1925

A survey of forty-three general interest magazines shows that popularizing materials about psychoanalysis greatly increased in 1920, peaked in 1921, and declined thereafter. The press was more favorable to Freud than has been assumed, for a number of writers accepted his theory of the unconscious and readily acknowledged the curative powers of psychoanalysis. But there was also much hostility to Freud, particularly to his sexual theories. The press was therefore more favorable to Jung and Adler, but especially to the British depth psychologists, who deemphasized sexuality while accepting the theory of a dynamic unconscious.     

OHTSUKI KENJI AND THE BEGINNINGS OF LAY ANALYSIS IN JAPAN

The authors outline the major role played by Ohtsuki Kenji in the formation of the Japanese Psychoanalytic Society. Unlike the other pioneers of psychoanalysis in Japan, Ohtsuki never went abroad or met Freud. He was a literature graduate who taught himself the fundamentals of psychoanalysis. He organised the translation of Freud's complete works, formed a psychoanalytic training institute and started a journal that carried English-language editorials. These became the major means whereby foreign analysts came to know and understand the Japanese psychoanalytic scene. A number of rival groups amalgamated to form the Japanese Psychoanalytical Association in the mid-fifties, excluding Ohtsuki's group despite its pre-war prominence. The authors reconsider Ohtsuki's role in the light of his many articles, his autobiography, new information uncovered in interviews conducted with current analysts and with Ohtsuki's widow and son. They describe his championing of lay analysis, and his criticisms of medicalisation of the discipline and of the view from abroad that questioned the suitability of Japanese culture for psychoanalytic therapy, as well as his efforts to modify some of the basic tenets of psychoanalysis to accord with his own views in his later work.     

On Trygve Braatøy’s concept of analytic love. An assumption on the actuality of one of the pioneers in Norwegian psychoanalysis

Is analysis still a cure of love? And is the analyst’s love and warm feelings for his patient a prerequisite for doing psychoanalysis? Trygve Braatøy addresses these complex matters in his book from 1954. The concept of love and its relation to sexuality is discussed, and how to understand love in the analytic setting. His points of view are compared with Freud’s and those of some second-generation analysts, his Norwegian colleagues and contemporary analysts, as well as modern writers. Braatøy defines himself as a true Freudian, but his clinical theory regarding love and countertransference has strong resemblances to Rank and Ferenczi and his followers, both in Europe and USA. Braatøy sums up that the therapist’s capacity to love and have a surplus of warmth ought to be the most prominent factor when selecting candidates for psychoanalytic training. Braatøy is a modern writer, with his ideas founded on clinical experience and intuition.     

Otto Rank's art

Abstract

Otto Rank's work has had an indirect influence on much of existential‐humanistic psychology, yet his contribution has been unevenly acknowledged. Seeing Rank as a developing artist helps to put his creative contributions to psychoanalysis, post‐psychoanalytic critique, and existential‐humanistic psychotherapy, in perspective. After his separation from Freud, Rank's innovative thought blossomed; his later works have deep and lingering humanistic import. A look at convergences and divergences between Freud and Rank shows that Rank's art (of living, of theorizing, and of practicing therapy) is an uncannily familiar and inspiring model of humanistic practice in the world. The continuing relevance of Rank's ideas about art and artists is explored, and Rank is re‐introduced to humanistic psychologists who may recognize aspects of his work as consonant with their own.     

THE BIRTH OF PSYCHOANALYSIS FROM THE SPIRIT OF TECHNIQUE1

The author aims to demonstrate, through a textual analysis of Freud's work, how the creation of psychoanalysis as a plausible set of understandings of the human mind has a methodological origin that has sometimes been overlooked: in the Greek concept of techne. Freud, an acknowledged pupil of Brentano, was well versed in Aristotelian rhetoric, and selected this instrument of investigation, dependent on language, from the outset of his efforts to describe, understand and treat the world of the unconscious mind. Working in the tradition of techne Freud actually rehabilitated ‘guessing’ (zu erraten) ‐ although it became a largely overlooked concept in Freud's work ‐ and so sought to place conjectural reason as the definitive form of knowledge for the investigation and treatment of the mind. This explains why the 1895 ‘Project’ could not succeed and why technique became irreplaceable as the via regia in ‘The Interpretation of Dreams’. Its model is founded in Aristotelian rhetoric, whose conception of language was first rediscovered by Nietzsche and was used therapeutically by Freud. Freud's view is apparent in his 1923 definition of psychoanalysis which is compared to the current IPA definition, a definition which, the author suggests, gives a misleading prominence to ‘theory’ and which shows how far a questionable rationality has removed conjectural reason from the field, to its detriment. From this point of view it is argued that the ‘precious conjunction’ (Freud) between investigation and treatment has been abandoned, and the concept of historical truth and its significance for psychoanalysis obscured.     

Sigmund Freud and Otto Rank: debates and confrontations about anxiety and birth

The publication of Otto Rank's The Trauma of Birth (1924) gave rise to an intense debate within the secret Committee and confronted Freud with one of his most beloved disciples. After analyzing the letters that the Professor exchanged with his closest collaborators and reviewing the works he published during this period, it is clear that anxiety was a crucial element among the topics in dispute. His reflections linked to the signal anxiety concept allowed Freud to refute Rank's thesis that defined birth trauma as the paradigmatic key to understanding neurosis, and, in turn, was a way of confirming the validity of the concepts of Oedipus complex, repression and castration in the conceptualization of anxiety. The reasons for the modifications of anxiety theory in the mid-1920s cannot be reduced, as Freud would affirm officially in his work of 1926, to the detection of internal contradictions in his theory or to the desire to establish a metapsychological version of the problem, for they gain their essential impulse from the debate with Rank.     

Mysticism,Reality, Illusion,and the Freudian Critique of Religion

Freud's critique of religion cannot be fully understood if his ontogenetic perspective is explored outside of his phylogenetic perspective. The former allows for illusionistic thought processes that are orthogonal to reality claims. The latter requires consideration of empirical claims to truth within a social psychological perspective. It is only the phylogenetic perspective that allows Freud to maintain that religion is delusional, whether or not it is also illusional. Freud's rejection of "as if" philosophies as exemplified by Vaihinger is based upon his refusal to allow religious truth claims to escape their empirical, social foundations. Recent efforts to revive psychological theories of religion rooted only in illusionistic thought, as exemplified in the use of Winnicott's conceptualization, must confront social psychological issues similar to those articulated within Freud's phylogenetic view. A mystical reading of Freud is suggested in which claims to truth within psychoanalysis, science, and religion can be confronted in an empirical and inherently social manner.     

Women on the Couch: Genital Stimulation and the Birth of Psychoanalysis

Following Freud's emphasis on his rejection of hypnosis as leading up to the development of psychoanalysis, there has been little mention in the psychoanalytic literature of the larger context of the somatic medical treatment of hysteria within which Freud treated his hysterical patients, and which Freud himself practiced. We contend that Freud's emphasis obscured his association with massage, electrotherapy, and the procedure of genital stimulation practiced by his medical colleagues in the treatment of hysteria. We show that the history of genital stimulation—including its obfuscation, desexualization, medicalization, and co-option from traditional women healers by an exclusively male medical establishment—provides us with the background for a more sophisticated understanding of the context in which Freud developed his theories. Specifically, we examine the contribution of this understanding to Freud's theoretical emphases on autonomy and individuality, abstinence and the renunciation of gratification, penis envy, clitoral versus vaginal orgasm, mature genital sexuality, and the “repudiation of femininity” as the “bedrock” of psychoanalysis. We demonstrate that Freud's position as a Jew in an anti-Semitic milieu fueled his efforts to distance his psychoanalytic method from the more prurient practices of his day, including one his society associated with Jewish doctors and patients.     

The Controversial Discussions: Edward Glover and the Origins of "Double-Barrelled Training"

I attempt to rehabilitate Edward Glover's historical reputation, based on unpublished interviews as well as recently found documentary material. This should make one of the defining moments in the history of British psychoanalysis more plausible. Glover was an eloquent heresy-hunter - against Jung, Rank, Klein, Alexander, and others - yet the polemical side of him represents only one aspect of his career. During the Controversial Discussions Glover was taking some of the burden for the way his leader Jones had run the British Society. In moving against Klein, Glover felt he was fulfilling Freud's own wishes, and that he was allied with the recently arrived Viennese contingent. After Glover's resignation in 1944, Jones split the opposition by appointing Anna Freud as Glover's successor as IPA Secretary. Subsequently Adrian Stephen and Donald Winnicott opposed Glover's even being allowed to speak at a psychoanalytic conference in Amsterdam; Anna Freud defended Glover's presence then. Glover's long struggle to be accepted as a member of the Swiss Society only went through in 1949, when Jones ceased being President of the IPA. Glover and Anna Freud regularly corresponded about setting up of the distinction between the "B" and "A" groups within the British Society. Meanwhile Glover, who had since the early 1930s been the de facto founder of the Institute for the Study and Treatment of Delinquency, used his administrative talents there. He successfully founded The British Journal of Delinquency with Miller and Mannheim. Unlike what happened at the British Society, Glover cooperated without problem at the ISTD and the Portman Clinic. Glover was not only an important and successful clinical analyst but also a pioneer in forensic psychiatry. In 1947 he was unofficially approached and asked to take over the Directorship of the New York Psychoanalytic Training Institute. When the proceedings of the Controversial Discussions were published in 1991, various myths had been established about what had happened. That Glover found himself caught in the middle was not only a personal tragedy but also a part of a much larger story.     

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.     

Ferenczi and Groddeck: Simpatico

Sigmund Freud introduced Sandor Ferenczi to Georg Groddeck in 1917. The warm personal friendship that these two men shared for the rest of their lives was a breeding ground for many of their respective theoretical and clinical contributions. 1923 was a schismatic year in the history of psychoanalysis. Freud's appropriation of Groddeck's Das Es and its adaptation to Heinroth's tri-partite model (Freud, 1923; Poster, 1997) marked the beginning of Ego psychology. Almost simultaneously there appeared Groddeck's Book of the It (Groddeck, 1923), together with Rank and Ferenczi's The Development of Psychoanalysis (Rank and Ferenczi, 1924), and Ferenczi's Thalassa (Ferenczi, 1924). These three seminal publications set the stage for a paradigm shift (Hoffer, 2008; Rudnytsky, 2002). They were the forerunner of later developments in object relations, self-psychology, interpersonal and relational psychoanalysis. Taken together, the contributions of Groddeck and Ferenczi and Rank reinvigorated psychoanalysis, Freud's baby, with “the constructive aspect” that Groddeck told Freud had been lost in Freud's re-definition of Das Es (Groddeck, 1977, p. 13). Each of these pioneers stimulated the thinking of the others. Always an independent thinker, Groddeck was welcomed into the psychoanalytic circle by both Freud and Ferenczi. Suffering under the “crushing paternal(ism)” of Freud, Ferenczi was supported by Groddeck to carry out his own clinical experiments. Preoccupied with his own legacy and intolerant of dissent, Freud was able to maintain cordial contact with these two creative spirits and allow them to modify his own ideas.     

Corrective Emotional Experience Remembered

The paper examines on the one hand the influence of the Berlin Institute in the 1920s on Franz Alexander's training and on his later work, as it was a workshop aiming to test the possibilities of a large utilization of psychoanalytic therapy in an institutional framework. On the other hand, the spirit of experimentation of Sándor Ferenczi and the endeavor to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of psychoanalysis by the use of countertransference and emotional exchange also became important for Alexander. A glimpse of recent researches on Freud's timetable gives background information with possible comparisons between Freud's technique and that of Alexander.     

'This is not psychoanalysis': On the stony way of the Danish Psychoanalytical Society

When Freud founded the International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA), he wanted a network of local groups responsible for psychoanalytic training. The groups would function as ‘headquarters whose business it would be to declare: All this nonsense is nothing to do with analysis; this is not psychoanalysis. Today, with psychoanalytic pluralism, Tuckett (in press) has asked ‘Does anything go? He has pointed out that the psychoanalytic community has been increasingly willing to accept within its ranks apparently very varied approaches to theory and practice, and that this increasing diversity has many negative consequences for psychoanalytic institutions and especially for training schemas. The aim of this paper is to give an example of psychoanalysis that ‘did not go’, and how that led to a shaky start for the new Danish Psychoanalytical Society, with confusing boundary relations between psychoanalysis and psychotherapy and no training institute. Beginning with the written psychoanalytical contribution of the three founders of the Danish Society, the paper will try to identify factors that contributed to the ‘shaky start’. The paper will also examine how stones were removed from the path, thus paving the way for the members of the Society to discover ‘competent psychoanalysis’.     

Psychoanalysis in the Netherlands during World War II

To understand what happened in the psychoanalytic world in Holland during the German occupation (1940-1945) we must have knowledge of the conflicts within the Dutch Society of Psychoanalysis in the nineteen-thirties. Those conflicts mainly deal with the subject of lay analysis, the compulsory training analysis and in general if compliance with foreign, with IPA rules was advisable. These differences of opinion reached their peak when four Jewish psychoanalysts arrived from Germany in 1933. The Dutch Society broke up in two parts, but was reunited in 1938. During the German occupation the training was finally regulated according to the IPA rules. This lead to a new splitting in the world of Dutch psychoanalysis that has not been healed to date.     

Off the beaten track: Freud,sound and music.Statement of a problem and some historico‐critical notes1

The authors note that the element of sound and music has no place in the model of mental functioning bequeathed to us by Freud, which is dominated by the visual and the representational. They consider the reasons for this exclusion and its consequences, and ask whether the simple biographical explanation offered by Freud himself is acceptable. This contribution reconstructs the historical and cultural background to that exclusion, cites some relevant emblematic passages, and discusses Freud’s position on music and on the aesthetic experience in general. Particular attention is devoted to the relationship between Freud and Lipps, which is important both for the originality of Lipps’s thinking in the turn‐of‐the‐century debate and for his ideas on the musical aspects of the foundations of psychic life, at which Freud ‘stopped’, as he himself wrote. Moreover, the shade of Lipps accompanied Freud throughout his scientific career from 1898 to 1938. Like all foundations, that of psychoanalysis was shaped by a system of inclusions and exclusions. The exclusion of the element of sound and music is understandable in view of the cultural background to the development of the concepts of the representational unconscious and infantile sexuality. While the consequences have been far reaching, the knowledge accumulated since that exclusion enables us to resume, albeit on a different basis, the composition of the ‘unfinished symphony’ of the relationship between psychoanalysis and music.     

Winnicott's rejection of the basic concepts of Freud's metapsychology1

In this paper, the author attempts to show how Winnicott rejected the basic concepts of Freud's metapsychology, namely the concepts of Trieb(instinct/drive), psychical apparatus and libido. To that purpose, he first elucidates what metapsychology is, according to Freud. Freud describes metapsychology as a speculative superstructure of psychoanalysis in which the aforementioned concepts correspond to the dynamic, topographical and economic viewpoints. The author then presents an explanation of what metapsychology means in Winnicott's view, and examines his criticism of this kind of speculative theorization in psychoanalysis, as well as his suggested substitute for each of those basic concepts. Subsequent analysis shows that Winnicott replaced the main concepts of the metapsychological theory, which have no correlation whatsoever in the phenomenal world, with a set of other, non‐speculative concepts, thereby favouring a factual theorization.     

The psychogenesis of the ego: notes on Freud's 'case of homosexuality in a woman'

This paper examines Freud's (1920) case study 'The psychogenesis of homosexuality in a woman' in the light of the second topography that was being elaborated in his theoretical writing at that time. The analysis of the ego and its defence mechanisms, which was to become such an important part of clinical technique in Anglo-American psychoanalysis, psychoanalytic psychotherapy and psychodynamic counselling, is not set out explicitly in any of Freud's case studies. However, in this last case study presented by Freud, it is possible to see how an attention to family dynamics, Oedipal structures and patterns of identification set the stage for the new notion of the ego to emerge. This 'turning point' in theory and clinical technique is also, in this case, intimately related to theories of sexuality, and Freud's own assumptions about homosexuality and heterosexuality are considered here in relation to his account of the ego.