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.
Whenever we make presentations in public as analysts, there is fair reason to assume that some portion of our material is autobiographical. The day-to-day work with analysands involves our subjectivity and affects our very own being. The same applies to those aspects of our experience which induce us to conceptualize at the theoretical level and, because of their very fascination, force us to clarify them so as to fit them, whenever possible, into the broader context of our world view. In this respect we follow the example of our predecessors, the alchemists: from the laboratory of the daily consulting room we proceed to the oratorium of theoria for a more spiritual view so as to retrieve our bearings, placed at risk time and again by the chaos of the prima materia.
To a considerable extent this applies to what is to follow. I intend to present my reflections on the reactions I had to certain events in my life which were of tremendous importance for me; understanding them, therefore, became more than a mere need. It goes without saying that I can justify imposing on you to read about my personal calamities only to the extent that I manage to draw the kind of conclusions from my experience that are of general significance and - if all goes well-provide you with some new food for thought, a new perspective. In other words, I will have to tread the narrow borderline between what is relatively unproductive, so-called ‘scientific objectivity’ in our professional field, and exhibitionism.
A rather odd theme runs right through the history of depth psychology. It crops up in every generation of male analysts, irrespective of whether they were great pioneers or average members of the profession. I am speaking only of male analysts, because up to now the phenomenon I shall describe here has occurred only between men, as far as I know. At the same time, it would seem more natural to leave discussion of the corresponding female genealogies to female colleagues.
What these men have