Comment

These papers on the problems arising in analytical training are stimulating and helpful. It is surely our duty to maintain a constant scrutiny of the psychological factors that are activated by and may interfere with the training process.

The New York group is just beginning to establish a well-structured training programme. Our experience is thus limited but we are keenly interested in the questions raised by these papers. As Dr. Plaut indicates, the trainee is in a different situation from other analytical patients because of his hope to be accepted as an analyst by the professional society. To achieve this goal, the all-important consideration is the recommendation of the candidate's personal analyst. The need for this recommendation may alter significantly the course of the trainee's analysis. Expression of unadapted attitudes and negative transference are likely to be avoided because the trainee, to a much greater extent than other patients, has objective reason to fear the disapproval of his analyst. This state of affairs is inherent in the training process and is apparently unavoidable. We can perhaps limit its effects by recognizing its existence.

I concur with the observations made by Kathleen Newton. The masochistic attitude of the candidate's ego towards the ideal of a “mature analyst” is something we see often. It can be considered as an identification with the shadow or inferior man and a failure to give suffering and inferiority feelings their proper, objective value as “the stone that the builders rejected”. The analyst can be helpful in this situation by revealing at the suitable time some of his own conflicts and weaknesses. This begins the resolution of the transference and encourages an accepting rather than a masochistic attitude towards one's sense of inadequacy.

Mrs. Newton's remarks about the group interactions in seminars are very interesting. Some of us in New York are currently concerned with the possibility of making a group therapy experienc