Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To refine your search with the author’s first initial…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

If you get a large number of results after searching for an article by a specific author, you can refine your search by adding the author’s first initial. For example, try writing “Freud, S.” in the Author box of the Search Tool.

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

Pappenheim, H. Papiasvili, E.D. (2010). PROLOGUE. Psychoanal. Inq., 30(6):477.

(2010). Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 30(6):477


Harriet Pappenheim and Eva Dubska Papiasvili

Seven of the nine articles in this issue of Psychoanalytic Inquiry are enlarged versions of papers presented at a conference in New York City in March 2010, entitled “Contemporary Perspectives on the Oedipus Complex.” The other two articles were written subsequently.

The conference was sponsored by the Postgraduate Psychoanalytic Society and Institute of New York City, which has been mounting annual conferences for more than two decades. Not long before, at a Society meeting, Harriet Pappenheim had raised the questions: “Whatever happened to Oedipus? Where is it in our work today?” Recent psychoanalytic effort had been largely dedicated to understanding and integrating new developments in psychoanalytic and related work: attachment theory, infant research, studies of pre-Oedipal and latency developments, trauma, neuroscience, intersubjective and relational thinking, sibling and family systems, the psychology of the self, nonlinear systems theory, and so forth. With all of that, had Oedipus been shown to be redundant or had he simply been overshadowed, although without loss of potency? The conference was intended to generate discussion concerning such questions.

The evolution of psychoanalytic theory and practice in the United States has been extraordinary in the past few decades. Years ago, when the editors of this issue of Psychoanalytic Inquiry were in training, the teaching of psychoanalytic theory and practice was often limited to the writings of Sigmund Freud and a few other exponents of so-called orthodox psychoanalysis.

[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 © 2021, 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.