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.
It is always a difficult task to discuss a paper with which one agrees in principle. This is the case at present because I must begin by admitting that, by and large, I share Wood's conception of acting out and the part played by this expression in the therapeutic situation. Thus, apart from an isolated objection on principle, I must limit myself in the discussion to consideration of certain questions of detail.
As far as I can see, Wood's paper is subdivided into four sections: In the first, the author attempts to define the expression "acting out". In the second, he gives a historical review of how the expression has been employed through the years. In the third, he propounds a series of hypotheses concerning the metapsychology of acting out and, finally, in the fourth section, he attempts to show how clear understanding of the expression acting out and behaviour in a psychotherapeutic hospital can contribute to a more rational therapeutic approach, not only for the psychotherapist concerned but also for all the staff involved in treatment.
As regards the definition of acting out, it is satisfying to observe that Wood has returned to Freud's original conception of this expression as he emphasized it in 1905, in 1914, and on several other occasions: acting out is the opposite of remembering and it is extremely undesirable for the patient to act out in a transference situation because it spoils his ability to remember.
Wood maintains this definition in his paper although on an isolated occasion he does succumb to the influence of those who have since extended the meaning of the expression acting out. For example, when he says that acting out