Our New Name

Our New Name

Please note our new name. The Sphinx is an enigmatic character: sometimes woman sometimes man, part human part beast, neither silent nor discursive. The Sphinx poses a question. Like the psychoanalyst the Sphinx is not the one who knows but the one who may provide the condition for new knowledge. This is the spirit of The Sphinx as a site of inquiry on the web, a site where psychoanalytic inquiry takes place. We invite you to engage The Sphinx. Post your inquiries. Submit your hypotheses, half formed queries, and open questions. This site is open to all to read and to respond. All members of Division 39 may join: click 'register' and you are then free to enter into discussions and post replies.

Please note: Your user name and password will be sent to you automatically when you register. If you don't see it in your email inbox check to see if it went into your spam folder. If you have any questions or problems registering, please contact us directly.
[permanent link] [0 comments]

A More Natural Conversational Style?

In his pursuit of the laudable goals of more passion, risk-taking, and activity in psychoanalysis Irwin Hoffman, in his keynote address to the Division 39 Spring Meeting in Toronto, made the error of throwing out the baby with the bath water. He dismissed free association and analytic listening in favor of a more natural conversational style of interaction. In doing so Hoffman recommends giving up what is in truth the richest source of the very things he says he is after.

Freud quoted Schiller and his advice to young poets when he described the open attention to what comes to mind. Freud's recognition that he was introducing into therapeutic service a tool of thought used by poets and artists should remind us that rather than a dry and formal routine, the method of free association is rooted in an appreciation of surprise and risk-taking.

'Natural' conversation on the other hand, while apparently more relaxed and informal is heir to all the checks and limits that socialization supplies. Regard for the other's turn in a conversation, indeed for the other's comprehension and general feeling of well-being, place reasonable constraints on what we say in 'natural' conversations. Relaxing these constraints and opening up the possibilities of speech, i.e. the possibilities of what one can say and how one can say it, is a way to let more not less passion enter the discourse.

Hoffman is right that analysis can drag on in a long and lifeless manner. He is also right that it is the analyst's proper responsibility to seek and suggest ways to enliven the work and its effects. However, this is best done by a greater appreciation and attention to the often subtle passion of free association not replacing it with the more obvious expressions of feeling in 'natural' conversations.


--David Lichtenstein

[permanent link] [8 comments]