The author argues that Freud's leadership of the Viennese reveals continual tension between Freud... more The author argues that Freud's leadership of the Viennese reveals continual tension between Freud's need to use the group to develop and promote his own ideas and the need of the group to promote the professional aspirations of its members while maintaining Freud's allegiance. Freud's 'valency' for the role of 'fight leader', in Bion's terms, made him vulnerable to a solution to this dilemma, which both he and his Viennese followers constructed: an unconscious pact in which they sought and rooted out the "enemies' within the movement, that is, those followers of Freud who by questioning his basic concept of childhood sexuality would lend support to the external 'enemies' of psychoanalysis. What was accomplished by this solution was the Society's continuing dependence upon Freud, who felt forced to assume the role of President, against his own wishes, in order to maintain continual vigilance against the internal 'enemies' of psychoanalysis. In this way the Society captured Freud. For his part, Freud gained the continued loyalty of the group through this arrangement. What was lost with this solution, however, was a certain vitality in the Society as it was forced to give up some of the challenging new ideas of its members in order to hold on to Freud as well as avoid the risk of producing a new 'enemy'.
The splitting apart of the New York Psychoanalytic Society, which began in 1941 with the expulsio... more The splitting apart of the New York Psychoanalytic Society, which began in 1941 with the expulsion of Karen Horney, is seen in the context of a concerted effort to establish the professional authority of psychoanalysis on unimpeachable foundations. On the one hand, a core group of young psychiatrists trained abroad, led by Kubie, sought to establish strict standards of training along orthodox lines; following in the footsteps of medical reformers who had established the professional authority of medicine with strict standards for training and credentialling, they opposed their more 'lax' elders as well as revisionists such as Horney and Rado. On the other hand, the refugee analysts fleeing Hitler sought to establish the security and conditions of orthodoxy they had enjoyed abroad, though they were forced to compromise on the issue of lay analysis. Together they expelled the deviants and sought to establish the professional authority of psychoanalysis on the twin foundations of medical standards and Freudian orthodoxy. Anxieties following the death of Freud contributed to this dynamic process. But contradictions between the conflicting demands of these two sources of authority undermined the stability of this alliance and, eventually, contributed to its collapse.
Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 2003
... Panel held at the Spring Meeting of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Philadelphia, Ma... more ... Panel held at the Spring Meeting of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Philadelphia, May l9, 2002. Panelists: Daniel Jacobs (chair), Thomas A. Bartlett, Helen C. Meyers, Dolan Power, Mary San Martino, and Alan Skolnikoff. WARNING! ...
T HIS is a difficult topic for psychoanalysts. For one thing, most of us are not trained to think... more T HIS is a difficult topic for psychoanalysts. For one thing, most of us are not trained to think about larger social systems, such as organizations, much less professions. As Marylou Lionells notes, it is easy to feel unsure of our intellectual footing in this area. For another, we are in the midst of the topic we are trying to think about. This is always difficult, as we know from our clinical work; but it is doubly difficult in this case because there has been so much mystification in the discussions we have had on the topic of our professional identity-and so much anxiety. The discussants of my paper make it clear that they are by no means complacent defenders of the status quo. I am deeply heartened by their thoughtful responses, not only to my paper, but also to the many troubling issues we face collectively as psychoanalysts. I have the sense that more and more individuals are engaging this urgent task of probing our professional shortcomings and failures. All the more, then, do I appreciate this opportunity to try again to clarify the issue of professionalization. The comments here have helped me to understand the difficulty of communicating my point about psychoanalysis as a profession. Like Marylou Lionells, I do not believe that psychoanalysis is dead or dying-but she and I both understand that this "psychoanalysis" is not a set of procedures that involve three, four, or five times weekly visits to a couch. If one thinks of "psychoanalysis" more broadly as an overlapping set of ideas, assumptions, and procedures-what Auden in his elegy for Freud called "a climate of opinion"-it is still lively and still growing. But to look at psychoanalysis this way is to look, for the most part, outside our professional training institutes and associations. Inside those institutions, psychoanalysis is besieged and constricting. The marketing survey commissioned by the American Psychoanalytic Association, to which both Lionells and Meyers refer, is a vivid demonstration of that, as is the dilemma of the shrinking pool of talented applicants for training that Newirth refers to in his comments. It is that discrepancy-between our organization as a profession and the Vitalityof psychoanalysis as a set of ideas and practices-that has animated me to pursue this issue.
The author argues that Freud's leadership of the Viennese reveals continual tension between Freud... more The author argues that Freud's leadership of the Viennese reveals continual tension between Freud's need to use the group to develop and promote his own ideas and the need of the group to promote the professional aspirations of its members while maintaining Freud's allegiance. Freud's 'valency' for the role of 'fight leader', in Bion's terms, made him vulnerable to a solution to this dilemma, which both he and his Viennese followers constructed: an unconscious pact in which they sought and rooted out the "enemies' within the movement, that is, those followers of Freud who by questioning his basic concept of childhood sexuality would lend support to the external 'enemies' of psychoanalysis. What was accomplished by this solution was the Society's continuing dependence upon Freud, who felt forced to assume the role of President, against his own wishes, in order to maintain continual vigilance against the internal 'enemies' of psychoanalysis. In this way the Society captured Freud. For his part, Freud gained the continued loyalty of the group through this arrangement. What was lost with this solution, however, was a certain vitality in the Society as it was forced to give up some of the challenging new ideas of its members in order to hold on to Freud as well as avoid the risk of producing a new 'enemy'.
The splitting apart of the New York Psychoanalytic Society, which began in 1941 with the expulsio... more The splitting apart of the New York Psychoanalytic Society, which began in 1941 with the expulsion of Karen Horney, is seen in the context of a concerted effort to establish the professional authority of psychoanalysis on unimpeachable foundations. On the one hand, a core group of young psychiatrists trained abroad, led by Kubie, sought to establish strict standards of training along orthodox lines; following in the footsteps of medical reformers who had established the professional authority of medicine with strict standards for training and credentialling, they opposed their more 'lax' elders as well as revisionists such as Horney and Rado. On the other hand, the refugee analysts fleeing Hitler sought to establish the security and conditions of orthodoxy they had enjoyed abroad, though they were forced to compromise on the issue of lay analysis. Together they expelled the deviants and sought to establish the professional authority of psychoanalysis on the twin foundations of medical standards and Freudian orthodoxy. Anxieties following the death of Freud contributed to this dynamic process. But contradictions between the conflicting demands of these two sources of authority undermined the stability of this alliance and, eventually, contributed to its collapse.
Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 2003
... Panel held at the Spring Meeting of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Philadelphia, Ma... more ... Panel held at the Spring Meeting of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Philadelphia, May l9, 2002. Panelists: Daniel Jacobs (chair), Thomas A. Bartlett, Helen C. Meyers, Dolan Power, Mary San Martino, and Alan Skolnikoff. WARNING! ...
T HIS is a difficult topic for psychoanalysts. For one thing, most of us are not trained to think... more T HIS is a difficult topic for psychoanalysts. For one thing, most of us are not trained to think about larger social systems, such as organizations, much less professions. As Marylou Lionells notes, it is easy to feel unsure of our intellectual footing in this area. For another, we are in the midst of the topic we are trying to think about. This is always difficult, as we know from our clinical work; but it is doubly difficult in this case because there has been so much mystification in the discussions we have had on the topic of our professional identity-and so much anxiety. The discussants of my paper make it clear that they are by no means complacent defenders of the status quo. I am deeply heartened by their thoughtful responses, not only to my paper, but also to the many troubling issues we face collectively as psychoanalysts. I have the sense that more and more individuals are engaging this urgent task of probing our professional shortcomings and failures. All the more, then, do I appreciate this opportunity to try again to clarify the issue of professionalization. The comments here have helped me to understand the difficulty of communicating my point about psychoanalysis as a profession. Like Marylou Lionells, I do not believe that psychoanalysis is dead or dying-but she and I both understand that this "psychoanalysis" is not a set of procedures that involve three, four, or five times weekly visits to a couch. If one thinks of "psychoanalysis" more broadly as an overlapping set of ideas, assumptions, and procedures-what Auden in his elegy for Freud called "a climate of opinion"-it is still lively and still growing. But to look at psychoanalysis this way is to look, for the most part, outside our professional training institutes and associations. Inside those institutions, psychoanalysis is besieged and constricting. The marketing survey commissioned by the American Psychoanalytic Association, to which both Lionells and Meyers refer, is a vivid demonstration of that, as is the dilemma of the shrinking pool of talented applicants for training that Newirth refers to in his comments. It is that discrepancy-between our organization as a profession and the Vitalityof psychoanalysis as a set of ideas and practices-that has animated me to pursue this issue.
Uploads
Papers by Kenneth Eisold