To a spectator, therefore—though, in
fact, there can be none—an analytic treatment would seem completely
obscure.
Another advantage of the method is that it need never break down. It
must theoretically always be possible to have an association, provided
that no conditions are made as to its character. Yet there is one case
in which, in fact, a break down occurs with absolute regularity; from
its very uniqueness, however, this case, too can be interpreted.
I now come to the description of a factor which adds an essential
feature to my picture of analysis and which can claim alike technically
and theoretically, to be regarded as of the first importance. In every
analytic treatment, there arises, without the physician’s agency, an
intense emotional relationship between the patient and the analyst which
is not to be accounted for by the actual situation. It can be of a
positive or of a negative character, and can vary between the extremes
of a passionate, completely sensual love and the unbridled expression of
an embittered defiance and hatred. This _transference_—to give it its
shortened name—soon replaces, in the patient’s mind, the desire to be
cured, and, so long as it is affectionate and moderate becomes the agent
of the physician’s influence and neither more nor less than the
main-spring of the joint work of analysis. Later on, when it has become
passionate or has been converted into hostility, it becomes the
principal tool of the resistance. It may then happen that it will
paralyse the patient’s powers of associating and endanger the success of
the treatment. Yet it would be senseless to try to evade it; for an
analysis without transference is an impossibility. It must not be
supposed, however, that the transference is created by analysis and does
not occur apart from it. The transference is merely uncovered and
isolated by analysis. It is a universal phenomenon of the human mind, it
decides the success of all medical influence and, in fact, dominates the
whole of each person’s relations to his human environment. We can easily
recognize it as the same dynamic factor that the hypnotists have named
“suggestibility,” which is the agent of hypnotic _rapport_ and the
incalculable behavior of which led to such difficulties with the
cathartic method. When there is no inclination to a transference of
emotion such as this, or when it has become entirely negative, as
happens in dementia præcox or paranoia, then there is also no
possibility of influencing the patient by psychological means.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account