Resistance Interlocked with Countertransference—R. N. and Ferenczi, and American Interpersonal Relations1

TO SET THE FOCUS OF MY CONSIDERATION of Ferenczi and the American school of interpersonal relations, I am not so much concerned with retrieving Ferenczi's historical reputation from the neglect, abuse, and misdirected criticism he aroused, though I do have considerable interest in understanding why these things happened to him. I am far more interested, however, in the clinical core of his original contribution, and I shall discuss it from the standpoint of his continuing influence.

In the present situation of pluralistic psychoanalysis, there are, of course, the three major perspectives: Austrian ego, British object, and American interpersonal relations. They all, in some measure, directly reflect the enduring value of Ferenczi's experimental approach to the empirics of psychoanalytic inquiry. There are, moreover, numerous subsidiary points of view that express the uniqueness of the diverse individual psychoanalysts aligned with those perspectives. Ferenczi's therapy was nothing if not a uniquely individual therapy for each of his patients: witness the creative outcome of his psychoanalytic therapy with R.N.; they