Important differences are emerging regarding the place where analysts believe the most meaningful analytic work takes place. One area that highlights these distinct ways of working is the analyst's view of deep interpretations. Models underlying the differing perspectives on this issue are presented, along with an extended clinical example that illustrates the importance of considering, in formulating analytic interventions, the concept of a structured mind. A view of the analytic process that accords the patient's perspective greater privilege is introduced.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boesky, D. (1982). Acting out: A reconsideration of the concept. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis63:39—55.
2.
Brenner, C. (1994). The mind as conflict and compromise formation . Journal of Clinical Psychoanalysis3:473—488.
3.
Busch, F. (1992). Recurring thoughts on unconscious ego resistances . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association40:1089—1115.
4.
——— (1993). In the neighborhood: Aspects of a good interpretation and a “developmental lag” in ego psychology. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association41:151—177.
5.
( 1995a). Beginning a psychoanalytic treatment: Establishing an analytic frame. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association43:449—468.
6.
( 1995b). Do actions speak louder than words: A query into an enigma in analytic theory and technique. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association43:61—82.
7.
——— (1995c). The Ego at the Center of Clinical Technique. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
8.
——— (1996). The ego and its significance in analytic interventions . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association44:1073—1099.
9.
——— (1997). Understanding the patient's use of the method of free association: An ego psychological approach. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association45:407—424.
Davison, W., Bristol, C., & Pray, M. (1990). Mutative interpretation and close process monitoring . Psychoanalytic Quarterly55:273—295.
12.
Gray, P. (1992). Memory as resistance and the telling of a dream . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association40:307—326.
13.
——— (1994). The Ego and Analysis of Defense. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
14.
Josephs, L. (1997). The view from the tip of the iceberg. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association45:425—464.
15.
Loewald, H. (1975). Psychoanalysis as an art and the fantasy character of the psychoanalytic situation. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association23:277—299.
16.
Malin, A. (1993). A self psychological approach to the analysis of resistances: A case report. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis74:505—518.
17.
Paniagua, C. (1991). Patient's surface, clinical surface, and workable surface. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association39:669—685.
18.
Pine, F. (1988). Four psychologies of psychoanalysis and their place in clinical work. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association36:571—596.
19.
Pray, M. (1994). Analyzing defenses: Two different models. Journal of Clinical Psychoanalysis3:87—126.
20.
Raphling, D. (1992). Some vicissitudes of aggression in the interpretive process. Psychoanalytic Quarterly61:352—369.
21.
Renik, O. (1995). The role of the analyst's expectation in clinical technique: Reflections on the concept of resistance. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association43:83—94.
22.
Spezzano, C. (1993). Affect in Psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
23.
Steiner, J. (1996). The aim of psychoanalysis in theory and practice . International Journal of Psycho-Analysis77:1073—1084.
