9. The Wolf Man I: Constructing the Primal Scene

2020 ◽  
pp. 220-247
Keyword(s):  
2017 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard M. Gottlieb

The psychoanalytic process of reconstruction has yet to be examined from the perspective of today’s two-person psychologies. Earlier writers on the subject have implicated the analyst and his emotional involvement as influences that may distort the valid recovery of memories, while others have written that the transference and the reconstructed past are interdependent. By contrast with both views, it is suggested here that the reconstructed product itself may reflect the transference-countertransference engagement of the dyad: in some instances, and to some extent in all instances, the scene or story of the presumed past will be a version of the current analytic relationship. In certain cases consideration of the conscious and unconscious emotional entanglements of the dyad will reveal that the reconstruction says more about the analytic present than about the past. Freud’s Wolf Man case provides a good illustration of this point. While a broad consensus exists that its famous primal scene reconstruction cannot be veridical, it has most often been dismissed as distorted by Freud’s theoretical commitments. A closer examination of the relationship between Freud and Pankejeff reveals that the reconstruction is an accurate rendering of warded-off aspects of the dyad’s way of being together. The potential clinical utility of adopting this perspective is that it encourages the analyst to reflect on his clinical reconstructions, interrogating them for clues to otherwise elusive aspects of the current clinical relationship.


PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 56 (32) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian M. Evans ◽  
Ruth A. Gammon
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 789-814
Author(s):  
Anat Tzur Mahalel

A comparative reading of Freud’s canonical case study “From the History of an Infantile Neurosis” (1918) and the memoir written by the protagonist of that study, Sergei Pankejeff, known as the Wolf Man (1971a), centers on the complex matrix of meanings embodied in the act of lifting the veil. The neurotic symptom of a veil seemingly in front of the analysand’s eyes is interpreted by Freud as a repetition of his birth in a Glückshaube (German for “caul,” literally a “lucky hood”). The veil is represented as an ambivalent object both for Freud and for Pankejeff, who are enticed by the sense of a final truth behind the veil yet constantly doubt the possibility of grasping it. For Freud, psychoanalysis is the very process of lifting the veil, yet his analysand remained for him an unsolved riddle. Pankejeff, in a volume dedicated to his identity as the Wolf Man (Gardiner 1971a), created an autobiographical text that deliberately avoids telling the story of the analysand, thus drawing a veil over his story. The paradox embodied in lifting the veil is discussed in relation to Walter Benjamin’s distinction between materiality and truth and his notion of the inherent unity of the veil and the veiled (1925).


1949 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geraldine Pederson-Krag

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document