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.
Hinshelwood's Dictionary, like all dictionaries, attempts to circumscribe and define a particular domain of interest and then specify and individualise the principal component entities in that domain. A dictionary succeeds when the reader can consult it without disappointment as to the entry he/she wishes to look up and when he/she leaves with an unexpected expansion of his/her knowledge. By this and other criteria the Dictionary succeeds admirably.
The work is organised into two main sections, the first, ‘Main Entries’, explicating the thirteen most important and most basic Kleinian ideas and the second, ‘General Entries’, detailing 143 random entries about important but less critical items. Each entry is organised in turn into the item or thought itself, a complete chronology and history of the development of the specific thought, the varied individual components which comprise the thought, a plethora of invaluable cross-references to related concepts detailed in other parts of the work, a comparison, when possible, with equivalent thoughts from other schools and, finally, the relevant bibliography for the item. Finally, he ends the book with an extensive and virtually complete bibliography of the works of Klein and of Kleinian authors in general. One most interesting result of this method of explication is the emergence of a gratifyingly holographic view of Kleinian thought. It is as if each entry is a recapitulation of the whole but from a different perspective each time. What is missing is an index but that lack has been partially compensated for by the dictionary format itself.
The work is characterised by an eminently readable style. Most Kleinian authors, and I include myself among them, seem to write in a recondite jargonistic manner which too often excludes, alienates and/or inspires envy and contempt, let alone evokes non-credibility. This work is a notable exception. Further, the author clearly delineates the differences between concepts which are held in