85 Slices
Medium 9781782200079

Chapter Twenty-Six - Unintegrated States and the Process of Integration: A New Formulation

Margaret Boyle Spelman Karnac Books ePub

Christopher Reeves

Introduction

In his novel The Go-Between, the author L. P. Hartley (1953) says that the past is a foreign country and that they do things differently there. This paper is based on work spanning more than a decade to define and direct the therapeutic task of a residential unit for severely disturbed children between the ages of five and twelve. The treatment approach and concepts were greatly influenced by the ideas of Winnicott, particularly by the concepts of unintegration, integration, and disintegration, and their bearing on the understanding of the developing child. However, the context of this work is different from Winnicott's own. He derived his ideas primarily from observation of infants, toddlers, and the analytic treatment of adult psychotics. The world of the Mulberry Bush School, on the other hand, is peopled by post-toddlers who still display many of the characteristics of feeling, thought, expectation, and reaction, that Winnicott identified as indicators that integration had not been reliably achieved in the infant. In this context, his original concepts took on a new and developed perspective. The struggle of disadvantaged nine- to twelve-year-olds to attain a secure sense of self, to distinguish inward pain from outward projections, and to acquire belief over time in the expectable return of figures out of sight, helped in the reappraisal of the time-scale of the integration process. This is because it occurs in the child with a favourable environment to support it.

See All Chapters
Medium 9781782200079

CHAPTER NINETEEN Mind the gap: dysynchrony in the writings of Winnicott and associated clinical thoughts

Margaret Boyle Spelman Karnac Books PDF

CHAPTER NINETEEN

Mind the gap: dysynchrony in the writings of Winnicott and associated clinical thoughts

Alexandra M. Harrison

Introduction

Recently, a colleague in a joint writing project inserted a phrase that I called into question.

“Don’t you agree with Winnicott?” he asked. “Which Winnicott?” I responded. The combination of ingenious conceptualisations, occasional formulaic theory, and a superficial lack of coherence in Winnicott’s writing makes reading Winnicott exhilarating, confusing, and finally, liberating.

In this chapter, I will describe how my reading of Winnicott has guided me in some clinical discoveries that I might not have found without his intellectual mentorship. I organise the chapter around the concept of “gaps” in clinical experience, which, as I discuss below, can represent initial disconnections or mismatches that are ultimately productive in furthering growth.

I will introduce this notion by referring to other authors who have described something similar. Theodor Reik (1937) described the analyst’s experience of being caught off guard in an analytic session and then following his own private reflections towards a greater understanding of his patient. Freud also, in his writing about humour, talked about the funniness of a joke depending on the unanticipated ending (Freud, 1905). Meyer Shapiro’s “Romanesque aesthetic” places surprise at the centre of the aesthetic experience, as the observer’s expectation of a particular symmetry is subtly contradicted by the composition of the sculpture, leading the observer on a journey towards a new, more complex organisation (Schapiro, 1977, pp. 1–28).

See All Chapters
Medium 9781782200079

CHAPTER EIGHT A measure of agreement: an exploration of the relationship of Winnicott and Phyllis Greenacre

Margaret Boyle Spelman Karnac Books PDF

CHAPTER EIGHT

A measure of agreement: an exploration of the relationship of Winnicott and Phyllis Greenacre*

Nellie L. Thompson

T

his paper investigates hitherto unexplored connections between Winnicott and Phyllis

Greenacre (1894–1989). I first became aware of their relationship while reading Winnicott’s paper “The use of an object and relating through identifications” published after his death in Playing and Reality (Winnicott, 1971). The earliest version of this paper, simply titled “The use of an object”, was presented to a scientific meeting of the New York Psychoanalytic Society on

12 November 1968, the proceedings of which have become mired in myth and controversy. The paper evoked respectful but deeply perplexed reactions from the three discussants: Samuel

Ritvo, a prominent child and adolescent analyst, Bernard Fine, a training analyst, and Edith

Jacobson, author of The Self, the Object and the Outside World (1964).

A report by David Milrod admirably conveys how the evening’s participants understood

See All Chapters
Medium 9781782200079

CHAPTER THIRTY-ONE Anna Freud and Winnicott: developmental stages, aggression, and infantile sexuality

Margaret Boyle Spelman Karnac Books PDF

CHAPTER THIRTY-ONE

Anna Freud and Winnicott: developmental stages, aggression, and infantile sexuality

Elisabeth Young-Bruehl

O

ur topic at this Anna Freud Colloquium is infantile sexuality, and my title tells you that my contribution will compare Anna Freud’s and Winnicott’s evolving views of infantile sexuality. But I am going to approach Anna Freud’s and Winnicott’s views of infantile sexuality by considering their views of aggression as they articulated them just after the Second World War. I will note the historical and theoretical context. At that time, neither of them had departed very far from the libido theory that Freud developed and reaffirmed in his last, unfinished work, the Outline of Psychoanalysis; neither of them had questioned that there are two fundamental instinctual drives, erotic and aggressive, and that in health and healthy maturity these drives are fused or not in conflict with each other. But they differed in their understanding of aggression; and, although they both disagreed strenuously with Melanie Klein, they disagreed differently with her. Their understandings of aggression, of course, influenced their understandings of the relationship between sex and aggression over time.

See All Chapters
Medium 9781782200079

Chapter Eight - A Measure of Agreement: An Exploration of the Relationship of Winnicott and Phyllis Greenacre

Margaret Boyle Spelman Karnac Books ePub

Nellie L. Thompson

This paper investigates hitherto unexplored connections between Winnicott and Phyllis Greenacre (1894–1989). I first became aware of their relationship while reading Winnicott's paper “The use of an object and relating through identifications” published after his death in Playing and Reality (Winnicott, 1971). The earliest version of this paper, simply titled “The use of an object”, was presented to a scientific meeting of the New York Psychoanalytic Society on 12 November 1968, the proceedings of which have become mired in myth and controversy. The paper evoked respectful but deeply perplexed reactions from the three discussants: Samuel Ritvo, a prominent child and adolescent analyst, Bernard Fine, a training analyst, and Edith Jacobson, author of The Self, the Object and the Outside World (1964).

A report by David Milrod admirably conveys how the evening's participants understood Winnicott's paper.

The central thesis of Dr Winnicott's paper is the proposition that the use of an object constitutes a more advanced and sophisticated stage of development than does relating to an object…At first there is object-relating…in the end there is object use. In between lies the area of most change, whereby the subject finally accepts the object's position outside the sphere of his omnipotent control as a separate, external entity, and not as a projected one. (Milrod, 1968, p. 1)

See All Chapters

See All Slices