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.
Psychoanalytic discourse, writes Judith Guss Teicholz in her introduction, “seems to be accelerating. There is a proliferation of journals, symposia, and viewpoints, some establishing dramatic differences from mainstream theory, others suggesting only subtle shadings of difference. The loss of a singular authority in psychoanalysis opens the possibility for many authoritative voices” (p. xxvi). With this book, Teicholz realizes an ambition to be one of those voices, even if “authoritative” for her will occur at the level of “compare and contrast” commentary. Her writing is lively and readable, and her scholarship is energetic, thorough, and even erudite in the precise areas of her interest.
The book grew out of Teicholz's effort to understand how it was that “theories [specifically Kohut's and Loewald's] that were considered heretical or revolutionary as recently as 1977 gradually shifted position such that they have now come to be seen … as outdated” (p. xvi).
Teicholz uses her first chapter “to argue that there have been two partial and overlapping psychoanalytic revolutions in late 20th century theory and practice, with Kohut and Loewald spearheading the one and my selected group of postmoderns (Lewis Aron, Jessica Benjamin, Irwin Z. Hoffman, Stephen A. Mitchell, and Owen Renik) spearheading the other. In the second chapter, I present an overview of how the term