Reply to Commentaries by Crastnopol,Goldman, and Mitchell

In replying to the commentaries by Margaret Crastnopol (2001), Dodi Goldman (2001), and Stephen A. Mitchell (2001), I address the relationship of modernism to postmodernism, with emphasis on the possible conflicts between therapeutic effectiveness and the postmodern view of experience in general, and core affect in particular, as culturally constructed. I elaborate on the claim I made in “Analyzing Multiplicity” (Fairfield, 2001) that developmental schemas, however central to psychoanalysis at the present time, are vulnerable theoretically. Difficulties in bringing terms such as agency and authenticity into a postmodern paradigm are considered. In discussing some common misunderstandings of the critical approach known as deconstruction, I emphasize its ethical import and its kinship to psychoanalytic theory and practice. Special attention is paid to deconstructing the binary categorization American/not-American and to exploring the distinctively American origins of some current models of subjectivity.