Analytical practice: do the new technologies have an impact?

Through commentary on four clinical vignettes, this article focuses on the anthropological transformations taking place in contemporary society, underlining their differences from the anthropologies of reference of the founding fathers of psychoanalysis. Hybridization between man and machine and the speeding up and alteration of communications which the new technologies promote are now crucial issues facing psychoanalysis. Social media and a 24/7 internet connection have produced deep changes in the way people live and perceive relationships. Analytical practice is not exempt from such issues, which can be particularly insidious, often subtle and difficult to recognize, or even underestimated or ignored by psychoanalysts outright, in order to preserve the illusion of a complete understanding of what unfolds in the analytical space. The authors suggest that such transformations, by (partially) rendering inadequate the theoretical and technical corpus on which the various depth psychologies are founded, require personal engagement on the part of psychoanalysts in the search for new strategies to treat their patients, with the consequent abandonment of the ‘certainties’ offered by sclerotic models of clinical procedure.     

Bureaucracy and creativity: do they make companionable bedfellows?

This essay will look at the benefits and weaknesses of the increasingly bureaucratic nature of training structures and processes in the training of Jungian psychotherapists and analysts. The author will draw on her experiences during two different periods of time as Director of Training at the Society of Analytical Psychology in London with observations on and discussion about some of the changes that have evolved. By way of contrast, she will offer some comparisons with developments in the training of Jungian analysts in countries with little or no legacy of an analytic culture. Here, there is a need to professionalize training in Jungian analysis but the attendant growth of bureaucracy can easily come to echo the politics of non‐democratic regimes.