Jan 202012
 

Un certain Freud
Au sujet de Les patients de Freud : destins
de Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen
Sciences Humaines Éditions, 2011

J’ai lu ce livre de Borch-Jacobsen avec beaucoup d’intérêt, ayant moi-même étudié ce sujet aussi bien par intérêt personnel que par intérêt professionnel. Je fais des cours pour des étudiants universitaires et je viens d’écrire un livre, Ferenczi, la psychanalyse autrement, où j’ai approché de près le matériel qui sert aussi à Borch-Jacobsen. J’ai trouvé son livre d’autant plus passionnant qu’il n’y a pas beaucoup de livres en français à ce sujet. Faut-il dire que la France présente un paysage assez désolant en termes d’éditions psychanalytiques. Malgré toutes les apparences en sens contraire, la France devient de plus en plus paroissiale dans le paysage mondial des publications. Celui qui n’y lit pas l’anglais, reste un chercheur aveugle. Il n’y a aucun espoir que soient traduits en français des livres comme Unorthodox Freud : the View from the Couch, de Beate Lohser et Peter M. Newton, publié à New York et Londres, qui présente un vaste panorama des patients de Freud et de leur destin, ou Unfree Associations : inside psychoanalytic institutes, de Douglas Kirsner, publié à Londres, qui présente un vaste panorama de comment sont conduites les discussions dans les milieux psychanalytiques. Il est donc d’autant plus précieux que des chercheurs internationaux comme Borch-Jacobsen publient d’abord en français avant de publier en anglais.

Je dois avouer que je n’ai pas lu Le livre noir de la psychanalyse, car j’ai trouvé au bout de quelques pages que c’était très mal écrit. Je fuis systématiquement tous les livres mal écrits, y compris la malheureuse édition des Œuvres complètes de Freud en français, qui prétend présenter comme méthode et rigueur ce qui au fond n’est qu’incompétence traductive. Il faut avoir présent à l’esprit que Laplanche s’était donné le français de Chateaubriand comme modèle à respecter pour ces Œuvres complètes. Le résultat final en est l’opposé.
Continue reading »

Jan 182012
 

I found the film very interesting. It is a pity Cronenberg didn’t show Jung 20cms taller than Freud, which he actually was, neither Jung picking Freud from the ground in his arms.

The only way a think the question of Jung’s reasons for him to “fall for Sabina Spielrein” is pertinent is that the actress is not a tenth as beautiful as Sabina was, neither does she look slightly as intelligent as Sabina was. I tried to find Sabina’s photo on the cloud, but I couldn’t. A pity. It is very difficult to resist a beautiful and intelligent woman and seductive woman who decides to seduce. And Jung was not a fortress. On the contrary ! He needed two women in his life. Emma Jung was not only a rich bourgeois. Some letters of hers to Freud really show an intelligent woman, really caring for Jung. Neither Jung has a “nervous breakdown”. He went fully through an schizophrenic crises. Try to read his Red Book! Its worst than Schreber’s.

There is another sad thing : it seems that Cronenberg needs strong scenes to try to suggest Sabina was a masochist. When we read her hospital files, we see that her masochism was quite different than what Cronenberg suggests. To have her hands gently squeezed would be perceived by her as an intense pain. She would have delusions of being forced to something she hated. But I don’t think she would have needed to be spanked. If she could ask for being spanked, she would not have been a psychotic.

I agree that Sabina was the motor in their history. Carotenutto and other have written a beautiful book, a documentary about this affair. There is no hint of Freud ever thinking about a death drive before Sabina’s paper on “Destruction as Cause…” But this was Freud’s style : “You have a very good idea, I have had it before, thank you for developping it.” Or “You had a very good idea, but you missed the core of the problem. Here it is.”

Just a last word: the final discussion about Amenophis in fact was an argument between Freud and Abraham.

But all in all, it seems to me it is a very good film. The supposed erotic scenes are useless. Of course Sabina was masochist. If she had not been a masochist, she would never get attached to Jung. But nothing proves she could make her masochism erogenous.

Jan 142012
 

Mon expérience de l’autisme
Garance, autour d’Écouter Haendel de Scarlett et Philippe Reliquet, Gallimard, 2011

Écouter Haendel est une jubilation de Garance, enfant autiste. C’est aussi le titre d’un livre où ses parents racontent leur découverte lente et douloureuse de l’autisme de leur fille. Lente et douloureuse, mais aussi riche de compréhension, de sagesse et d’ouverture aux possibilités offertes à l’exploration de mondes autres que les nôtres, dits « normaux ».

Une clinique du sujet est forcément une clinique de la subjectivité, différente par exemple d’une clinique des corps. Une clinique de la subjectivité est forcément une clinique du transfert et implique le contre-transfert. Je ne peux aborder ce que je comprends qu’en exposant ma manière de comprendre. Écouter Haendel est un livre précieux, délicat, sensible, émouvant, habité par Garance, cette petite fille, jeune fille, préadolescente, adolescente, que ses parents découvrent progressivement autiste, nous guidant dans leur découverte, nous faisant à notre tour découvrir l’autisme comme si c’était la première fois que nous en entendions parler.
Continue reading »

Jan 072012
 

True to historic facts, Cronenberg’s A Dangerous Method holds some interesting surprises – naturally, considering the director and the actors’ work on the subtlest staging details. (See the Cronenberg interview).
Some of those details lie on the more comical side, such as Freud’s character.
So far I had imagined Freud in different ways, but the idea of a Viennese cigar-munching Godfather had not occurred to me. Cronenberg’s Freud comes across as a slow talking, sometimes cynical, sometimes despicable plotter of institutional schemes. A hard-nosed professional subversive who seems impressed only by the ever-growing anti-semitism that besieges him and his new science. And when Jung finally falls out of favour, the only sense that comes to Freud’s mind is his designated successor’s “Aryanism”.
With Spielrein and Jung’s respective characters, things immediately seem to run deeper. The first time we see Spielrein, she’s literally howling mad. But she seems to get better with an astonishing speed, each and every time Jung addresses her like a normal human being. One can only imagine what it must have been like in the asylums of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. But Bleuler and Jung’s Burghölzli looks very much like the Anti-Psychiatrist‘s dream. Patients, not inmates, are being cared for, offered interesting humane work and most of all are treated like fully responsible grown-ups. In this utopian castle, Spielrein not only turns out to be the gifted psychologist that Jung suspected right away, but she also learns how to accept and enjoy her sexual fantasies. Although, with some practical help of her therapist, who does not show the same ease towards his own fantasies.
Continue reading »
Jan 052012
 

After The Worst Ennemies of Psychoanalysis and The Best Friends of Psychoanalysis Prado de Oliveira turns to the Hungarian psychoanalyst Sándor Ferenczi (1873-1933). Prado considers Ferenczi to be the most paradoxical disciple of Freud for being both close and critical, loyal and original (originality often being considered as a flaw in psychoanalytic institutions), methodical and ebullient. Not only in theory. Ferenczi is maybe best known for his experimental practice, described in his clinical diaries.


Prado’s book retraces the theoretical and personal evolution of Ferenczi, closely following his writings and his correspondence with Freud. Amongst others, Ferenczi was one of the true founders of analytic training and a constant inspiration for analysts like Melanie Klein, Michael Balint, Lacan and Winnicott: “Ferenczi was the psychoanalyst who taught us to question all our certainties.”

Jan 052012
 
In 2008, Falk Leichsenring, DSc, and Sven Rabung, PhD, published a meta-analysis on the “Effectiveness of Long-term Psychodynamic Psychotherapy” in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA, 2008; 300(13): 1551-1565, doi:10.1001/jama.300.13.1551).
The authors start their enquiry by questioning the controversial status of psychoanalysis and psychodynamic treatment in mainstream psychiatry. Although proof for efficiency of short-term psychodynamic therapy has already been acquired for specific disorders, long-term therapy seemed unable to provide anything better than disputed proof.
Leichsenring and Rabung claim to provide this lacking evidence for outcome effectiveness of long term psychodynamic psychotherapy. Their meta-anlaysis of outcome studies published between January 1960 and May 2008 shows that “comparative analyses of controlled trials, LTPP showed significantly higher outcomes in overall effectiveness, target problems, and personality functioning than shorter forms of psychotherapy. With regard to overall effectiveness, a between-group effect size of 1.8 […] indicated that after treatment with LTPP patients with complex mental disorders on average were better off than 96% of the patients in the comparison groups (P=.002). According to subgroup analyses, LTPP yielded significant, large, and stable within-group effect sizes across various and particularly complex mental disorders (range, 0.78-1.98).”

Free access to the paper can be found here: http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/300/13/1551.full
Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com