Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to J Astor.
This paper examines through the detailed explication of analytic material the author's experience of a psychoanalytic and a Jungian way of understanding the interactions between him and his patient. This comparative approach considers where the differences lie with respect to timing and content of interpretations and where the differences are essentially tactical rather than theoretical.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Reciprocity refers in its general meaning to a mutual give and take. It is a background feature of all productive supervisory relationships. In this essay I want to bring it into the foreground. I will describe it by contrasting supervision and analysis. For, in my view, that is exactly what reciprocity is in the supervisory relationship: it is an attitude of mind in which the supervisor performs the task of differentiating internally the supervisory from the analytic vertex, in the context of the asymmetry of the supervisory relationship.
The authors traces some of the differences and similarities between those psychoanalysts and analytical psychologists who met in London to discuss contemporary attitudes to the oedipal situation. The conference provided an opportunity to consider briefly whether the characterisation of Jung as an apostate was correct or whether this was a consequence of the political need, following the separation of Jung and Freud, to protect psychoanalysis from professional criticism until it had become sufficiently well-established to be able to tolerate dissenting opinion. The author considers the misjudgements of history, why psychoanalysts do not read Jung, and some of the differences between the conceptual foundations of psychoanalysis and those of analytical psychology. After setting out some of the directions in which Jungian thought has been moving, particularly in respect of the work of Fordham, Klein and Bion, the author compares current clinical approaches as exemplified by established practitioners and includes parts of the discussion between members of the two associations. A brief indication of what the papers contained is also included.
In bringing together some points from more than fifty years of Michael Fordham's work, I have endeavoured to show how there has emerged a consistent and original contribution to analytical psychology. In particular his ideas of the primary psychosomatic self and of whole objects preceding part objects are original to him. This contribution, with its implications for practice and theory, has in part reflected the capacity Fordham has for combining abstractions and the powerful evidence of clinical practice and observational material. This capacity has resulted in radical modifications of what I have called his emerging model of the mind (contrast Fordham, 13, with 19) and is in the best tradition of Jung's spirit and bequest to us in his body of published work.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.