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.
Alessandra Cavalli was an inspirational analyst, teacher and writer who worked out of a deeply intuitive capacity that was especially tuned in to early states of mind. Her papers always arose out of her clinical work and the theoretical intuitions that guided her in that work. She used theory in a very creative, imaginative and sometimes idiosyncratic way so that when she came to write about her work, the clinical material was always remarkably vivid and clear while the theoretical discussion usually needed some ‘polishing’ as she put it herself. I think this was probably because she wrote the theory in the same form it occurred to her while working with her patients, thus remaining true to the fleeting, impressionistic, metaphorical way in which experienced therapists draw on their theoretical heritage in a way that rarely becomes focused within the consulting room (Colman 2009). Parsons (1992) has described something similar in his paper on refinding theory in clinical practice. In the consulting room, our primary concern is that our clinical interventions are well attuned to the needs of the patient at a particular time; the theoretical models that influence our thinking, speaking and acting usually remain an implicit element in the overall skills (techně) required for the immediate task at hand (Colman 2020). It is only when we come to write about our work that we consult our theoretical models and tidy up our impressionistic ‘rules of thumb’ into something more coherent and organized.
Alessandra's ‘Noah's Ark’ paper was initially written in this way and, as I had edited some of her papers in the past, Alessandra asked if I would have a look at this one before she submitted it for publication. She incorporated a few of the suggestions I made but decided to submit it in its unfinished state and add the remaining polish in the light of additional suggestions made by the peer review process. Unfortunately, she died before she could undertake this work. Rather than a