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.
Our psychoanalytic field has changed radically these past 50 years. This reviewer grew up in times of schisms, of ideological power struggles by fighting schools of thought, which created an atmosphere hostile to new or, as they would be called, deviant ideas. But gradually ideological boundaries lost their animosity. Schools of thought became approaches with many variations. We are, though with great ambivalence, navigating in a sea of theoretical pluralism. This ambivalence is suddenly lifted off our shoulders. Arnold Cooper welcomes this change with open arms. Positive phrases abound: “The flowering of ideas: our willingness to embrace new ideas and new research efforts”; “the magnitude of innovation and experimentation that is now acceptable”; “have released great bursts of creativity”; “ideas and practices that were considered heretical just a few years ago are today accepted or at least seriously considered within the mainstream” (p. xiii). But how can one adequately present such a rich pluralism of ideas and approaches? Cooper meets this daunting task by asking 30 established leaders in the field to contribute the paper they each thought best represented his or her current thinking or his or her major contribution. The editor wisely refrains from grouping them according to any kind of classification, and instead lists them alphabetically by author. Each chapter is preceded by a short biographical sketch, as well as an explanation by the author indicating why he or she chose this particular paper. These invariably interesting explanations help to immediately orient the reader.
A brilliant detailed introduction by Peter Fonagy helps to guide the reader to areas of interest. Half of the papers aim at the systematization of theory, making distinctions and identifying convergences either in general theoretical abstractions or by focusing on specific developmental, cultural, or clinical concerns. The other half relate to clinical practice, subdivided by Fonagy by hi