Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To see translations of Freud SE or GW…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

When you hover your mouse over a paragraph of the Standard Edition (SE) long enough, the corresponding text from Gesammelte Werke slides from the bottom of the PEP-Web window, and vice versa.

If the slide up window bothers you, you can turn it off by checking the box “Turn off Translations” in the slide-up. But if you’ve turned it off, how do you turn it back on? The option to turn off the translations only is effective for the current session (it uses a stored cookie in your browser). So the easiest way to turn it back on again is to close your browser (all open windows), and reopen it.

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

Rudnytsky, P.L. (2005). Psychoanalysis and (Auto)Biography: Masud Khan: The Myth and the Reality. By Roger Willoughby. Foreword by Pearl King. London: Free Association Books, 2005, xxxii + 320 pp., $55.00.. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 53(4):1365-1371.

(2005). Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 53(4):1365-1371

Psychoanalysis and (Auto)Biography: Masud Khan: The Myth and the Reality. By Roger Willoughby. Foreword by Pearl King. London: Free Association Books, 2005, xxxii + 320 pp., $55.00.

Review by:
Peter L. Rudnytsky

Masud Khan might be called the third rail of psychoanalysis. Whereas most other instances of boundary violations in the history of our discipline are by now either too remote to be threatening or too obscure to be notorious, the case of Khan is both comparatively recent and, thanks to the furor aroused by the anti-Semitic outbursts in his last book, When Spring Comes (1988), compounded by Wynne Godley's exposé (2001) of his experiences as Khan's patient, a matter of public record. That Khan was conjoined with the widely revered figure of Winnicott as both his analysand and intellectual collaborator further raises the stakes of his Icarus-like catastrophe. Few would dispute the judgment of F. Robert Rodman (2003) that Khan has come to be “regarded as the most disgraceful individual ever associated with the British Society,” or that his worst actions are “reprehensible to such a degree as to prompt questions about Winnicott's own ethical standing” (p. 205).

[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 © 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.