In analisi con Freud nel 1921: diario di una paziente

2009 ◽  
pp. 151-166
Author(s):  
Anna Koellreuter

- The author, who is a psychoanalyst, recounts how she discovered the diary in which her grandmother, who was a psychiatrist, described her four-month analysis with Sigmund Freud in Vienna in 1921. Some biographical data about the patient are presented, and five extracts of the diary are reported. This diary, although at irregular intervals, reports the detailed interventions made by Freud and the patient in the course of the analysis. Finally, conclusions on how Freud worked with patients at that period, particularly insofar as transference is concerned, are drawn. (The complete diary, with comments by various authors, is published in German in the book edited by Anna Koellreuter "Wie benimmt sich der Prof. Freud eigentlich?": Ein neu entdecktes Tagebuch von 1921 historisch und analytisch kommentiert. Giessen: Psychosozial, 2009).KEY WORDS: Sigmund Freud's technique, transference, interpretation, history of psychoanalysis, diary of a psychoanalysis

2009 ◽  
pp. 313-342
Author(s):  
Giorgio Meneguz

- This article discusses some aspects of the nodal problem of the intertwining of psychoanalytic training and clinical aspects of the relationship among colleagues, namely: What lessons can we learn from the history of psychoanalysis about the distortions of the relationships within training process and its fallout on how an analyst will behave with his/her colleagues? "Clinical aspects of the relationship among colleagues" refer to some form of impropriety or markedly pathological behaviors that appear both among groups (e.g., phenomena such as sectarianism and conflict), and within the affiliation group (e.g., jealousy and Oedipal rivalry, dominance and submission, conspiracy of silence and the related lack of loyalty, behaviors above or outside the rules, suspiciousness, devaluation of personal relationships and friendships or, worse, through publications, and so on).KEY WORDS: psychoanalytic training, psychoanalytic institutions, transmission/filiations, clinical aspects of the relationship among colleagues, history of psychoanalysis


2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Mayer

The Freud Museum in Vienna is certainly one of the best-known tourist attractions of Europe, drawing crowds of visitors every year. Over the past 15 years, it has also acquired a reputation for being the site of some of the most inventive intellectual work in the history of psychoanalysis. A set of highly original exhibitions, film and lecture series, and conferences all set a new tone that was unheard of in Vienna, a city where Sigmund Freud had been turned, as had so many other of the great figures of Austria's glorious past, into a piece of merchandise. It took the scholarly world and the larger public some time to realize that this fresh and courageous approach was the work of a young historian who was not even Viennese, but had arrived from the Eastern part of the Tyrol.


2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-134
Author(s):  
ALBRECHT HIRSCHMULLER

‘Anna O.’, Breuer's patient in the Studies in Hysteria, the ‘primal work of psychoanalysis’ (Grubrich-Simitis), features to this day in every history of psychoanalysis and every introductory seminar to medical psychology. This case history revealed for the first time how hysterical symptoms in speech could be traced back to their source and eliminated by bringing their unconscious affective content to consciousness and ‘abreacting’ it. Since Jones it has been known that the published case history left out the fact that the patient was not completely cured by Breuer's treatment and was treated for several more years in sanatoria, and that nevertheless in later years she led a full and productive life as a Jewish social worker. In 1972 Ellenberger revealed details of her life after Breuer's treatment and of a stay in Binswanger's clinic, and her case history for 1882 in Kreuzlingen was published in my dissertation in 1978.


2021 ◽  
pp. 369-390
Author(s):  
Oriana Walker ◽  
Arthur Rose

AbstractThis essay traces the role of breathing in the literature and history of psychoanalysis from Josef Breuer and Sigmund Freud through Otto Fenichel and Wilhelm Reich. It uncovers interesting discontinuities in the significance granted to breathing as the psychoanalytic tradition develops. These observations of the breath shed new light on major theoretical divisions of psychoanalysis from its founding through its arrival in the US with the émigré analysts. This history offers views both into the changing imagination of the breath itself and into the role of the body in an evolving psychoanalytic practice more generally.


SURG Journal ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 18-23
Author(s):  
Adam Ruebsaat Trott

On the surface, Anatole Livak’s The Snake Pit (1974) contains little more than a socially conservative overuse of pseudo-Freudianism. The film has been rightfully criticized for its departure from the novel on which it was based, specifically in its more traditional approach to Virginia, its female protagonist. To simply dismiss The Snake Pit for these reasons, however, would not do justice to the film’s importance within the history of cinema and psychiatry. This article will analyze the historical and cinematic factors that influenced Litvak’s The Snake Pit, a film worthy of both praise for its social impact and blame for its failure to go far enough. Keywords: Anatole Livak; cinema; history of psychoanalysis; Sigmund Freud; Hollywood


2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvana Vetö ◽  
Marcelo Sánchez

This article deals with the relationship between the creator of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, and the Latvian-born Chilean professor of physiology – and endocrinologist and anthropologist – Alejandro (or Alexander) Lipschütz. Up till now, the historiography of psychoanalysis in Chile has ignored the existence of this relationship, that is to say, the fact that there exists an interesting exchange of correspondence as well as references to Lipschütz in some important works published by Freud and in Freud’s correspondence with the Hungarian psychoanalyst Sándor Ferenczi. There are also references to works on psychoanalysis carried out by Lipschütz in Chile. The Freud–Lipschütz relationship allows us to examine two interesting topics in contemporary historiographical approaches to psychoanalysis. First, it permits us to reflect on the connections that Freud and Ferenczi sought to establish between psychoanalysis and biology (endocrinology in particular) as a strategy to address criticism of the scientific foundations of psychoanalysis and, therefore, to help legitimize psychoanalysis in the field of science. Second, the relationship between Freud, working in a culturally influential city such as Vienna, and Lipschütz, working in a ‘peripheral’ country such as Chile, paves the way to reflect on the consequences of a history of psychoanalysis written from the perspective of the ‘margins’. This is a history that focuses not on regions where early industrialization and modernization processes, along with an important academic and scientific tradition, help explain the interest in and reception of psychoanalysis, but on regions where different sets of conditions have to be examined to explain appropriation and dissemination processes.


AJS Review ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maya Balakirsky Katz

In consultation with Sigmund Freud, the Viennese psychoanalyst Wilhelm Stekel (1868–1940) treated the first Jewish cleric known to undergo analysis, in 1903. According to the case history, published in 1908, a forty-two-year-old rabbi suffered from aBerufsneurose, an occupational neurosis associated with the pressures of his career. Stekel's case history forms an indelible portrait of a religious patient who submitted himself to the highly experimental treatment of psychoanalysis in the early years of the discipline. However, scholars never integrated the rabbi's case into the social history of psychoanalysis, more as a consequence of Freud's professional disparagement of Stekel than of the case history's original reception. Psychoanalytic historiography has largely dismissed Stekel's legacy, resulting in a lack of serious scholarly consideration of his prodigious publications compared to the attention paid to the work of some of Freud's other disciples. Stekel's most recent biographers, however, credit him as the “unsung populariser of psychoanalysis,” and claim that he is due for reconsideration. But in his published case history of the rabbi, Stekel also warrants introduction to the field of Jewish studies, not only because of the literary treatment of the rabbinical profession by a secular Jewish psychoanalyst, but also because the rabbi incorporated aspects of that experience into his own intellectual framework after treatment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-231
Author(s):  
MICHAL SHAPIRA

By 1939, W. H. Auden was able to publish a poem in memory of Sigmund Freud saying, “if often he was wrong and, at times, absurd, to us he is no more a person now but a whole climate of opinion.” Indeed, despite the opposition to Freud's new discipline from the medical establishment and some members of the public, psychoanalysis in its various proliferations had become popular in Europe as early as before World War II, and its terminology had become part of everyday language. More importantly, it propounded new possibilities for diagnosing personal problems and understanding sociopolitical issues. When Freud was asked in 1923 whether he would like to “psycho-analyze Europe in the hope of finding a cure for her ills,” he replied, “I never take a patient to whom I can offer no hope.” But as the twentieth century progressed, Freud and his followers developed ideas that engaged directly and indirectly with the personal and political questions of the age of catastrophes.


2000 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Cameron ◽  
John Forrester

The paper traces the psychoanalytic networks of the English botanist, A.G. Tansley, a patient of Freud's (1922-1924), whose detour from ecology to psychoanalysis staked out a path which became emblematic for his generation. Tansley acted as the hinge between two networks of men dedicated to the study of psychoanalysis: a Cambridge psychoanalytic discussion group consisting of Tansley, John Rickman, Lionel Penrose, Frank Ramsey, Harold Jeffreys and James Strachey; and a network of field scientists which included Harry Godwin, E. Pickworth Farrow and C.C. Fagg. Drawing on unpublished letters written by Freud and on unpublished manuscripts, the authors detail the varied life paths of these psychoanalytic allies, focusing primarily on the 1920s when psychoanalysis in England was open to committed scientific enthusiasts, before the development of training requirements narrowed down what counted as a psychoanalytic community.


2006 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaap Bos

This paper is an invited response to Peter Rudnytsky's ‘Guardians of truth’ article. Taking issue with what are presented as fundamental theoretical and methodological caveats, this article discusses the question of when and how differing discourses on the history of psychoanalysis may or may not be compatible. In particular the author questions the validity of a concept of truth as defined from within a field of knowledge, to arrive at definitions of discourse and dialogue that can be useful to acquire new forms of knowledge.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document