Sources of the trend to question not just the analyst's authority to interpret, but the analyst's use of authority in general, are explored. Out of a wish to circumvent the potentially detrimental effects an analyst's interpretations can have on patients, certain psychoanalysts have modified their analytic techniques with an eye to downplaying the role of their authority. When taken to extremes, this has led analysts to act as if they have little to offer patients in the way of an alternative point of view, and to privilege patients' accounts and interpretations by treating them as if they were objectively true. It is argued that one need not go so far in order to protect patients from the analyst's less than careful use of authority. It is argued further that the judicious use of authority remains an indispensable tool in helping to ready the patient's mind for a consideration of constructs different from those on which the patient has always relied. Finally, becoming comfortable with the aggressive aspect of the use of one's authority may determine the extent to which one is willing to employ one's authority with patients.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bacal, H. (1995). The essence of Kohut's work and the progress of self psychology. Psychoanalytic Dialogues5:353—366.
2.
Britton, R. (1998). Belief and Imagination: Explorations in Psychoanalysis . London: Routledge.
3.
Cavell, M. (1988). Interpretation, psychoanalysis, and the philosophy of mind. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association36:859—879.
4.
Coburn, W. (2000). Subjectivity, emotional resonance, and the sense of the real. Presented at the Spring Meeting of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Chicago.
5.
Edelman, G. (1987). Neural Darwinism. New York : Basic Books.
6.
Elliott, A., & Spezzano, C. (1996). Psychoanalysis at its limits: Navigating the postmodern turn. Psychoanalytic Quarterly65:52—83.
7.
Fine, S., & Fine, E. (1990). Four psychoanalytic perspectives: A study of differences in interpretive interventions. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association38:1017—1048.
8.
Freud, S. (1916). Some character-types met with in psycho-analytic work: Those wrecked by success. Standard Edition14:311—331.
9.
——— (1937). Constructions in analysis. Standard Edition23:257—269.
10.
Friedman, H. (2000). A discussion of the presented paper: “Challenges to the analyst's authority to interpret,” by Richard Tuch. Presented at the Spring Meeting of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Chicago.
11.
Friedman, L. (1997). Ferrum, ignis, and medicina: Return to the crucible . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association45:21—40.
12.
——— (1999). Why reality is a troubling concept. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association47:401—425.
13.
Gabbard, G. (1997). A reconsideration of objectivity in the analyst . International Journal of Psycho-Analysis78:15—26.
14.
Gill, M. (1979). The analysis of the transference. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association27:263—288.
15.
Hoffman, I. (1983). The patient as interpreter of the analyst's experience . Contemporary Psychoanalysis19:389—422.
16.
——— (1992). Some practical implications of a social constructivist view of the psychoanalytic situation. Psychoanalytic Dialogues2:287—304.
17.
——— (1994). Dialectical thinking and therapeutic action in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Quarterly63:187—218.
18.
——— (1996). The intricate and ironic authority of the psychoanalyst's presence. Psychoanalytic Quarterly65:102—136.
19.
Kernberg, O. (1996). The analyst's authority in the psychoanalytic situation. Psychoanalytic Quarterly65:137—157.
20.
Kohut, H. (1984). How Does Analysis Cure?Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
21.
Lacan J. (1975). Discourse on analysis and ego analysis: Anna Freud or Melanie Klein? In The Seminars of Jacques Lacan: Freud's Writings on Technique, ed. J.A. Miller , transl. J. Forrester. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988, pp. 63—70.
22.
Levy, S., & Inderbitzin, L. (1997). Safety, danger, and the analyst's authority. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association45:377—394.
23.
Mayer, E. (1996). Changes in science and changing ideas about knowledge and authority in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Quarterly65:158—200.
24.
Modell, A. (1991). A confusion of tongues, or whose reality is it?Psychoanalytic Quarterly60:227—244.
25.
Poland, W. (1984). On the analyst's neutrality. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association32:283—299.
26.
Raphling, D. (1992). Some vicissitudes of aggression in the interpretive process. Psychoanalytic Quarterly61:352—369.
27.
——— (1995). Interpretation and expectation: The anxiety of influence. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association43:95—111.
28.
——— (1997). Interpretation as comparison. Psychoanalytic Quarterly66:242—258.
29.
Renik, O. (1993). Analytic interaction: Conceptualizing technique in light of the analyst's irreducible subjectivity. Psychoanalytic Quarterly62:553—571.
30.
——— (1995). The ideal of the anonymous analyst and the problem of self-disclosure. Psychoanalytic Quarterly64:466—495.
31.
——— (1998a). The analyst's subjectivity and the analyst's objectivity. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis79:487—497.
32.
——— (1998b). Getting real in analysis. Psychoanalytic Quarterly67:566—591.
33.
Roughton, R. (1994). Repetition and interaction in the analytic process: Enactment, acting out, and collusion. Annual of Psychoanalysis22:271—286.
34.
Schafer, R. (1996). Authority, evidence, and knowledge in the psychoanalytic relationship. Psychoanalytic Quarterly65:236—253.
35.
Schwaber, E. (1983). A particular perspective on analytic listening . Psychoanalytic Study of the Child38:519—546.
36.
——— (1992a). Countertransferences: The analyst's retreat from the patient's vantage point. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis73:349—361.
37.
——— (1992b). Psychoanalytic theory and its relation to clinical work. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association40:1039—1057.
38.
——— (1997). Reflections on the concept “the patient's psychic reality.”Psychoanalytic Study of the Child52:42—53.
39.
Shane, M., Shane, E., & Gales, M. (1997). Intimate Attachment: Toward a New Self Psychology . New York: Guilford Press.
40.
Stolorow, R. (1988). Intersubjectivity, psychoanalytic knowing, and reality. Contemporary Psychoanalysis24:331—337.
41.
——— Brandchaft, B., & Atwood, G. (1987). Psychoanalytic Treatment. An Intersubjective Approach . Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press .
42.
Wheelis, A. (1973). How People Change. New York : Harper & Row.
