There are always third elements intersecting the analytic pair. One such element is the analytic community. The analyst is therefore never in a dyadic relationship with the patient, but always in a triangle. In relation to the patient, the analyst will be concerned with useful practices. In relation to the analytic community, the analyst will be concerned with consensually approved principles. This tension is constant in analytic work and in the analytic literature.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bernardi, R. (1989). The role of paradigmatic determination in psychoanalytic understanding. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis70:341—358.
2.
Bernstein, R.J. (1991). The New Constellation. Cambridge : MIT Press.
3.
Bion, W.R. (1962). Learning from Experience. London: Heinemann.
4.
Britton, R. (1989). The missing link. In The Oedipus Complex Today, ed. R. Britton, M. Feldman, & E. O'Shaughnessy.London: Karnac.
5.
Busch, F. (1992). Recurring thoughts on unconscious ego resistances . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association40:1089—1115.
6.
Elliott, A., & Spezzano, C. (1996). Psychoanalysis at its limits: Navigating the postmodern turn. Psychoanalytic Quarterly65:52—83.
7.
Faimberg, H. (1995). Misunderstanding and psychic truths. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis76:9—13.
8.
Fenichel, O. (1941). Problems of Psychoanalytic Technique. New York: Psychoanalytic Quarterly.
9.
Friedman, L. (1991). On the therapeutic action of Loewald's theory . In The Work of Hans Loewald, ed. G. FogelNorthvale, NJ: Aronson , pp. 91—104.
10.
Gabbard, G. (1995). Countertransference: The emerging common ground . International Journal of Psycho-Analysis76:475—486.
11.
Gray, P. (1994). The Ego and Analysis of Defense. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
12.
Greenberg, J., & Mitchell, S. (1983). Object Relations in Psychoanalysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
13.
Greenson, R.R. (1967). The Technique and Practice of Psychoanalysis. Vol. 1. New York: International Universities Press.
14.
Hamilton, V. (1996). The Analyst's Preconscious. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
15.
Heaney, S. (1990). Selected Poems. New York: Noonday Press.
16.
Jacobson, J.G. (1994). Signal affects and our psychoanalytic confusion . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association42:15—42.
17.
Joseph, B. (1975). The patient who is difficult to reach. In Tactics and Techniques in Psychoanalytic Therapy: Vol. II. Countertransference, ed. P. Giovacchini.New York: Aronson, pp. 205— 216.
18.
Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19.
——— (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20.
Levenson, E. (1995). A monopedal presentation of interpersonal psychoanalysis . Review of Interpersonal Psychoanalysis1:1—4.
21.
Lipton, S.D. (1977). The advantages of Freud's technique as shown in his analysis of the Rat Man. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis , 58:255—273.
22.
Loewald, H. (1980). Papers on Psychoanalysis. New Haven: Yale University Press.
23.
Mayer, E.L. (1996). Changes in science and changing ideas about knowledge and authority in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Quarterly65:158—200.
24.
Menninger, K.A. (1958). Theory of Psychoanalytic Technique. New York: Basic Books.
25.
Michels, R. (1996). Book review essay: Gill, Gray, Mitchell and Reed on psychoanalytic technique. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis77:615—623.
26.
Mitchell, S.A. (1988). Relational Concepts in Psychoanalysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
27.
Pulver, S. (1993). The eclectic analyst. Journal of theAmerican Psychoanalytic Association41:330—357.
28.
Rosbrow, T. (1996). Gail Bates' interview with Thomas Rosbrow. Newsletter of the Psychoanalytic Institute of Northern California1:4—5.
29.
Sandler, J. (1988). Psychoanalytic technique and “analysis terminable .” International Journal of Psycho-Analysis69:335—346.
30.
Schafer, R. (1985). Wild analysis. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 33:275—300.
31.
——— (1996). Authority, evidence, and knowledge in the psychoanalytic relationship. Psychoanalytic Quarterly65:236—253.
32.
Shapiro, A. (1993). In Praise of the Impure. Evanston : Northwestern University Press.
33.
Spezzano, C. (1995). “Classical” versus “contemporary” psychoanalysis. Contemporary Psychoanalysis35:20—46.
34.
——— (1996a). The three faces of two-person psychology. Psychoanalytic Dialogues6:599—622.
Steiner, J. (1996). The aim of psychoanalysis in theory and practice . International Journal of Psychoanalysis77:1073—1083.
37.
Sugarman, A., & Wilson, A. (1995). Introduction to the section: Contemporary structural analysts critique relational theories. Psychoanalytic Psychology12:1—8.
38.
Sullivan, H.S. (1940). Conceptions of Modern Psychiatry. New York: Norton.
39.
White, M.J. (1952). Sullivan and treatment. In The Contributions of Harry Stack Sullivan, ed. P. Mullahy.New York: Science House, pp. 117—150.
40.
Wilson, A. (1995). Mapping the mind in relational psychoanalysis . Psychoanalytic Psychology12:9—30.
