Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To contact support with questions…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

You can always contact us directly by sending an email to support@p-e-p.org.

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

Kalsched, D.E. (1998). Reply to Reid Anderson. J. Anal. Psychol., 43(4):597-599.

(1998). Journal of Analytical Psychology, 43(4):597-599

Reply to Reid Anderson Related Papers

Donald E. Kalsched, Ph.D.

I suppose I asked for this. Instead of following the rules at last summer's Sebasco Conference where this paper was first delivered, and limiting myself to one or two analytic moments, I presumed to present evocative ‘flash-pictures’ of a whole 4-year analysis, in order to illustrate my pet theory about archetypal defences. I suspect the resulting picture was both too little and too much for some readers and listeners. Having thus ‘sown with the wind’ as proscribed by the old prophet Hosea (8: 7) I now reap the ‘whirlwind’ of misunderstanding in the form of Reid Anderson's overwrought response, masquerading as a ‘hope for further dialogue’.

I am afraid that dialogue is unlikely in this instance because Dr Anderson's hypothetical ‘case’ is not the case of Sue, my analysand, as I have known her. Rather it is a constructed caricature of a woman whose life is ‘progressively falling apart’, finally ‘in shambles’, with dreams ‘permeated by deranged and murderous figures’, in analysis with someone who has - because of inattention to transference/countertransference issues and an obsession with his own theory - colluded with the patient's compliant self while unconsciously retraumatizing her through a ruthless, insensitive pursuit of her unbearable affects, thus perpetrating a violent ‘anal penetration’ equivalent to her mother's traumatizing childhood enemas!

In this characterization, the victim/perpetrator defensive complex which I had hoped to illustrate as part of the patient's self-traumatizing inner world, is split asunder with the ‘bad’ perpetrator now once again ejected from the patient's psyche, in the form of someone ‘outside’ to blame - in this case the analyst himself.

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2019, 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.