An illustration of the Irreducible Subjectivity in Interpreting Data—Clinical or Written: A Reply to Philip Bromberg

In most replies to commentaries that are characterized by “the worst of words,” the author of the original article claims that he/she has been misunderstood. Clearly, the two parties have very different readings of the same data. For the first time I am in this position, and am loath to say what all the criticized others seem to say. Indeed, I do feel most misunderstood, and was shocked by the intensity of Philip Bromberg's response. However, I do know Bromberg to be a very astute observer of both clinical and theoretical matters, and his comments are not to be waved away. In rereading my article I can see that I was quite unclear in a number of important ways. Yet, maybe I was clear to Bromberg and he is accurately interpreting my unconscious sentiments. I hope that this is not so, and I do not believe it is so. I take heart in two respects in what otherwise has been a very disturbing dialogue: stimulated and provoked by my article and independent of it, Bromberg has written a valuable piece that stands alone as a worthy contribution to our literature; I have a chance in this brief response to express more clearly and elaborate upon some of what I was trying to convey in my original article.

To frame my response, in summary Bromberg basically understood me to be saying the following: relational psychoanalysis has added nothing beyond traditional interpersonal contributions; relational analysts, again in contrast to classical interpersonalists, tend to be inauthentic, affectively dishonest, and inclined toward embracing technique; relational analysts lack discipline and tend to indulge in mindless, intrusive displays of affective spontaneity. Given this interpretation of my main points, I can well understand Bromberg's wrath toward what felt like a betrayal of my relational identity—“Hirsch too” (italics mine). In what follows I will try to convey a clearer picture of my understanding of what was the point of my article. I will also try to show that those above “wors