Login
Good, M. (1992). Meetings of the Psychoanalytic Institute and Society of New England, East. Psychoanal Q., 61:689.

Welcome to PEP Web!

Viewing the full text of this document requires a subscription to PEP Web.

If you are coming in from a university from a registered IP address or secure referral page you should not need to log in. Contact your university librarian in the event of problems.

If you have a personal subscription on your own account or through a Society or Institute please put your username and password in the box below. Any difficulties should be reported to your group administrator.

Username:
Password:

Can't remember your username and/or password? If you have forgotten your username and/or password please click here and log in to the PaDS database. Once there you need to fill in your email address (this must be the email address that PEP has on record for you) and click "Send." Your username and password will be sent to this email address within a few minutes. If this does not work for you please contact your group organizer.

Athens or federation user? Login here.

Not already a subscriber? Order a subscription today.

(1992). Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 61:689

Meetings of the Psychoanalytic Institute and Society of New England, East

Michael Good

DISCUSSION: Dr. Goldsmith himself elaborated on the role of secrecy in Freud's life, his preoccupation with death (which he shared with Michelangelo), and the psychology of fascination. He also commented on problems in making inferences or interpretations of a psychoanalytic nature outside of the consulting room and without free association, transference, and resistance. This problem was discussed as well by Dr. Henry Smith, who commented on ways in which biographers may or may not corroborate information about the subjects in whose lives they immerse themselves. Dr. Goldsmith noted that his presentation was an applied psychoanalytic study about an applied psychoanalytic study, and he shared his feelings about the process of his study and writing. Dr. Alfred Margulies observed that the paper opened up a new perspective and enlivened its subject in a way similar to that of a new focus in a dramatic production, such as a Shakespeare play. Dr. Sheldon Roth wondered whether the voyeuristic aspects of Freud's essay, including the failure to refer to the horns on the sculpture, could also have to do with the nursemaid. Dr. Herbert Goldings noted that the paper offers a fresh view of Freud, one which is not always welcome, and addresses the issue of fascination with the work of a genius.

- 689 -

[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 © 2014, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing. Help | About | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Problem

WARNING! This text is printed for the personal use of the subscriber to PEP Web and is copyright to the Journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to copy, distribute or circulate it in any form whatsoever.