Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To access PEP-Web support…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

If you click on the banner at the top of the website, you will be brought to the page for PEP-Web support.

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Poland, W.S. (2009). On: On Becoming a Psychoanalyst. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 90(5):1155-1156.

(2009). International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 90(5):1155-1156

Letters to the Editors

On: On Becoming a Psychoanalyst Related Papers Language Translation

Warren S. Poland

Dear Editors,

With the understanding and poetic evocative expression one has come to expect from them, Gabbard and Ogden portray the journey of becoming a psychoanalyst and movingly illuminate the growing pains of anyone's maturing to open-mindedness. Attentive to the difficulties in one's becoming an analyst and developing one's own unique identity and voice, they close by saying: “It has been our experience that, when the analyst is off balance, he does his best analytic work” (Gabbard and Ogden, 2009, p. 325).

Appreciating the wisdom in their observation, I first thought that it held true so long as another unspoken underlying principle also held true, that is, that the analyst works in the service of the patient and the patient's analysis, that the analyst's clinical associations, feelings, and introspection are to be subsumed to the service of the clinical task. I doubt they would differ.

However, further reflection clarified a back-of-the-mind discomfort I felt while reading their very valuable contribution. What they say seems importantly valid provided that their presentation of the analytic process is not taken to exclude contrasting points of view.

The authors succeed in making clear what they impart, and they are not obligated to write all other possible views at the same time. Nonetheless, emphasis on the clinical partners’ developing an analytic third, that experience and language co-constructed by the dyad, risks a reading or misreading that minimizes or obscures what is uniquely one-person in each of the clinical pair as well as what is intersubjective as experienced by the two separate people in the analytic office.

[This is a summary excerpt from the full text of the journal article. The full text of the document is available to journal subscribers on the publisher's website here.]

Copyright © 2020, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.