Commentary 2

It is difficult to respond to an analyst's work through their written report, however, the account of Amanda is lively and honest and does make it possible to have analytic thoughts about the work.

In order to keep things fairly lively, I will present a running commentary.

The analyst tells us that Amanda is 32 and has been in analysis for about six months. This prepares us for the fact that it is early days in the work and that both analyst and patient are still struggling to find a way of communicating with one another. We are told that Amanda is compliant but also a complainer. Indeed, this whole of issue of complaints and compliance becomes focused around the issue of tissues and whether or not they are easily available. The patient complains about the absence of tissues and what the analyst cannot provide. The setting becomes one in which absence and deprivation prevail. The tissues are available but not within easy reach. One could first think that there is a simple solution, for example, that a small table could be put at the head of the couch on which the tissues could be placed, although this may in fact introduce a slight barrier between the patient and the analyst. Nonetheless, the issue is not so much one of the tissues themselves as what they represent. The patient is in the early stages of analysis and is still coming to terms with the setting. It is humiliating for her to be reminded of her neediness. The availability or non- availability of the tissues seems to represent or reflect the amount of contact between analyst and patient that is bearable.

We are told, however, that the situation has recently changed. The patient makes a connection between the sessions and her behaviour with her brother around her difficulty in communicating. This is clearly an important step towards her beginning to understand her inner world and of connecting the analysis with her daily life. Nonetheless, the analyst still feels he is walking on eggshells. There is s