Passion and Gratitude in Psychoanalysis

To paraphrase one of Samuel Clemens' admittedly ragged quips, rumors of the balkanization, marginalization, and impending demise of psychoanalysis may have been somewhat exaggerated. Perhaps psychoanalysis doesn't need a life coach after all. If the contents of this journal since its inception six years ago, along with those of other lively, contemporary publications such as Psychoanalytic Dialogues, Contemporary Psychoanalysis, and Psychoanalytic Psychology, are any indication, the diagnosis of fractionation given to psychoanalysis (which insurance wouldn't have covered anyway) turns out to be a serious case of cross-fertilization of inspiring, evocative, and creative ideas—ideas birthed both from psychoanalytic pioneers and the contemporary midwives who still value originality, invention, context, passion, and an appreciation for the irreducibility of the person. The cry for evidence-based treatments seems not to be deterring psychoanalysts and their respective patients from enjoying the discovery of their own personal odysseys; they continue to expand their sense of emotional meaning and deepen their connections and engagements with others, while still getting around to reducing troublesome symptoms from time to time as well.

If contemporary psychoanalysis has diverged from traditional scientism, or even challenged it at times, it bodes well for patients and clinicians who favor respecting the integrity of the unique emotional lives of persons, many of whom struggle daily to wrest themselves from the encumbrances of the one-size-fits-all, empirical-data based prejudices of normativity. And indeed, the question of who determines what constitutes “evidence” remains underexplored. And the voices of our patients often go unheard. Doubtless psychoanalysis, given its intense diversification of theories and sensibilities, could have Dodo-like perished in its tracks by now. But its

continuing success strangely may lie in psychoanalysis' recognition that, indeed, each a