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.
In his introduction the author points out that it is not easy to write a book on psychoanalytic technique. I agree with his opinion, but I might add that it is much more difficult to write a good book on such a complex and transcendental subject. According to my point of view, Etchegoyen has successfully achieved his goal, because I believe that this is one of the best and most up to date books related to this subject. First, he has enriched his work with abundant data and bibliographic references in accordance with his aim 'to follow an historical methodology … in order to see the origin and development of these concepts'. However, it is not merely the number of references that counts, but it is also the objectivity of his commentaries and the critical spirit with which he has analysed each one of them, adding, in most cases, his own observations and personal criteria. Furthermore, his prose is clear, lucid and pleasant.
It is also difficult to write a review of this book, given its length and wealth of data, subjects and subtopics, which necessarily oblige one to make a compact synthesis of such a dense and complete work at the risk of not reflecting its contents accurately or not doing justice to its undeniable merits.
To begin with, the author shares the criterion, that many of us hold, of the indissolubility of theory and technique in our discipline. But he certainly leans toward the idea that technique takes precedence and that starting from technique it is possible to approach theoretical problems more readily. On the one hand, he cautions us on the need to recognize the limits of the theories we are defending and, on the other, to be wary of criticizing other people's theories. His overall position opposes controversy and eclecticism. I think that these positions are correct, since it is essential to avoid the dogmatic attitudes with which some analysts attempt to protect theories, because these attitudes tend to turn into pernicious factors that unde