You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The problems of the writer utilizing psychoanalytic techniques and theories in obtaining greater understanding of a cultural phenomenon are, in a number of ways, quite similar to those of the analyst in that portion of his therapeutic task which involves the development of his own understanding of the patient. In both instances the investigator begins with the gathering and appraisal of material which is quite overt, and then, using his cultivated sensitivity, he strives to discern and evaluate material which is covert, not consciously recognized by the individual or by society, as the case may be.
Quite often the analyst will be able, fairly early in the analysis, to make (to himself) a tentative formulation of the patient's more significant psychodynamics. In fact, the analyst's own motivation to understand makes it almost inevitable that he do so, however, informally. Provided that he retains an open mind with regard to such a formulation, retains flexibility as to its revision, modification, and/or substitution, this natural process often makes possible a greater effectiveness in the therapy, for it tends to heighten the analyst's intellectual interest in his work.
In a similar fashion the analytic investigator of a cultural phenomenon may very legitimately formulate an hypothesis as to unconscious determinants and significances in his subject, the proving or disproving of which adds interest to the investigation.
In a psychoanalysis the principal difficulties which attend the development of a thoroughly valid and useful formulation