Discussion

I feel privileged to have been asked to comment on Jean-Claude Rolland's fascinating presentation of his work with a severely ill patient. In this paper, Dr Rolland gives us an insight into both his theoretical position and his style of interpretation. This provides us with a welcome opportunity to attempt to understand, not only Dr Rolland's conceptual framework, but also how our French colleagues work; an analytic style which sometimes seems so different from ours.

It is quite apparent that Dr Rolland's style of interpretation, both in content and timing, is quite different from my own and, I would imagine, most of my British colleagues. The silence in the sessions is quite striking and, when Dr Rolland does make an interpretation, it is constructed by linking elements of the material, but with little explanation to the patient. Nevertheless, I think we would all be familiar with the material and the way in which it evolves in the session. I find it so interesting that such a different way of interpreting can elicit such familiar material. Dr Rolland's emphasis on maintaining the setting and not interrupting the flow of the free association is rooted in his belief about what he is doing as an analyst. In his view, if he can foster the bringing into consciousness of repressed thoughts and wishes, this will fundamentally force internal reorganisation of the psychic apparatus, very much following the thoughts of Freud pre-1923. Clearly, Dr Rolland's theoretical understanding of the patient underpins his interpretations, as is true for all of us, but because he says so little it sometimes seems, on reading the progression of the sessions, that there are some aspects of the material that might seem fundamental to me, that he chooses not to interpret. It is difficult to know if he does not see something in a particular way, or if he feels that an interpretation would be counter to what he is trying to achieve. For example, in the first, silent consultation, it is clear t