Discussion

Sceptre and crown must tumble down and in the dust be equal made with the poor crooked scythe and spade …

The Contention of Ajax and Ulysses, James Shirley

I hope the sense in which I am invoking this quotation will become clearer as I proceed.

If, as Dr. Brenner argues, every psychological product, be it dream, parapraxis, or even structure, should be viewed as conflict triggered, compromise formation rather than isolated autonomous entity, it would seem to follow that this discussion, despite the purity of heart of its author, cannot be free of unwitting and even willful compromises. I hope I have not compromised the spirit of my remarks by endorsing this conflicted, guilt-ridden Brennerian point of view from the outset. In my defense, or is it offense, I invoke and distort J. F. K.'s celebrated remark in Berlin, “Ich bin ein Brenner-liner,” albeit with some reservations, as will be seen. But of course if a discussion like the mind itself is only an aesthetic compromise it is not the end point, the compromise itself alone, that is so impressive, so much as the struggle to reach it. If all things that are, are with more pleasure chased than enjoyed (to paraphrase Shakespeare a little), the developmental forepleasures of psychic turmoil and struggle are as important if not more important than the eventual compromises (endpleasures) they reach toward and attain.

I will return to this piece of existential sophistry later, but first a closer look at Dr. Brenner's text: Dr. Brenner's proposals are respectfully argued. He suggests, he does not dictate or command. He speaks of possibilities and revisions, not manifestos or faits accomplis. But