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.
EDITORS OF INTERNATIONAL PSYCHOANALYTIC journals which are, in effect, ambassadors of training institutes and/or analytic societies, face problems of manuscript selection and production that are homologously, remarkably similar to those conflicts being confronted by colleagues elsewhere. That is, many of us in various functions in our profession, struggle constantly with issues relevant to admissions to training institutes, standards of excellence, courses, appointments to faculty, awards of merit, and ultimately anything pertaining to acceptability. Our choices and actions are especially painful, when we come to believe that clinging to hopefulness forces us to dilute our standards. It is probably the same in our society at large particularly in other professions and especially in academe. It seems evident that choices must be informed in such a way that whatever we do does not make us rage against ourselves, or despair against our disappointment and natural, creeping cynicism.
The end product must reflect positively on itself, obviously, its sponsoring institution, its authors, and our profession. I will not discuss here the necessity that editors give some thought to aesthetics, which would include the size of their journals, their typographical design and the quality of the paper used. Nor will i consider philosophy or ideology which surely gives any journal its