February 9, 1993

It was disconcerting to read, in John Munder Ross's account of the panel on "The Clinical Relevance of the Contribution of Winnicott" (J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 41:219–235) that I had spoken of Winnicott's "dilution of psychoanalysis." My views on Winnicott are diametrically opposed, and I called this to Ross's attention when he sent me the manuscript of his account prior to publication. In my introduction to The Spontaneous Gesture: Selected Letters of D. W. Winnicott (Harvard, 1987), and a couple of other places, I have made it plain that I think of Winnicott as among a small number of our very greatest analysts. The words "dilution of psychoanalysis" defame his contribution. The full sentence is "Rodman noted that 'Winnicott's ever-present individuality' and, with this, his 'dilution of psychoanalysis' (the combination of internal and external developmental factors) have either excited or alienated analysts in the U.S.A. and Britain." It fell to Winnicott,