Technique and Procedure in Analytic Practice with Special Reference to Schizoid States

I have given my paper this title because it will deal with some aspects of the activities of analysts to which we give little attention, perhaps because they are considered too elementary or are taken for granted. Despite this I think they are important, and although what I shall have to say may not be new I hope it will bear repeating.

I must first say something about my own orientation in so far as it concerns the nature of Jungian theory and its relation to clinical practice. I regard Jung's work essentially as a contribution to a general theory of the psyche, and as such a highly original one. It offers an invaluable framework, a meaning for mental life, and points the way for future research. It seems to me mainly the study of normal processes of growth and repair, a study of vast scope and originality. This implies that it is not primarily a psychopathology, and cannot lead in itself to a psychotherapy adequate to all areas of clinical practice. I say this despite the widely held view that there is such an entity as Jungian psychotherapy, and that there is much in analytical psychology that passes for psychopathology. I say “passes for” psychopathology because I think that concepts such as those of the complex and the psychological types, for instance, are of limited usefulness with many types of case.

We are thus placed in the position of having to develop our individual views on psychopathology from our own clinical experience and from whatever theoretical material is available to and interests us. The increasing interest shown in the ideas of Mrs Klein in the London group over the last few years supports this contention (see Klein, 1960). Such a situation has considerable drawbacks, but it also has great advantages in that it lessens the chance of our imposing theoretical preconceptions on our patients. A constantly developing theory of psychopathology is unlikely to become rigid.