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.
This article is part of the annual of Italian analytical psychologists reviewed in this Journal in vol. 23/4. The annual was published in English to mark the holding of the last International Congress in Rome and represents the desire of the Italian groups to come in from the cold. The preface speaks of a need for dialogue between Anglo-Saxon and Latin practitioners and the collection as a whole demonstrates what Italian Jungians can achieve.
Pignatelli wonders how it is possible to write about analysis at all because the process is so different from everyday reality. He claims the right to reject a systematic and homogeneous approach in this account of work with a borderline female patient. He feels that the observer must do his own selecting and conceptualising.
The author has observed, and is concerned with, a paradox: analysis is the opposite of acting or action. And yet the process of growth and cure must manifest itself in something real—internal or external. What others call ‘working through’ he refers to as the ‘transformation mechanism’. For this to operate, for