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.
is one of the most interesting figures in the history of British psychoanalysis. She was one of the pioneers of the British Psychoanalytical Society who worked closely with both Freud and Melanie Klein and was the author of some original works. Less well-known are her translations of many of Freud's works, which were taken up and revised by Strachey in the Standard Edition - not invariably to the benefit of the texts. Riviere was Freud's favourite translator. This aspect of her activity will be described here.
Riviere was discreet throughout her life and revealed little about herself. She was regarded as a grande dame and was perceived in various ways - in facets that combine to form a portrait:
Freud was impressed by her resolve and her acumen, and described her to Jones as an ‘implacable woman’ (Freud & Jones 1993, p. 491). Although he had made a point of being ‘as kind to her as I can’, he conceded: ‘To be sure she is a concentrated acid’ (p. 475).
Paula Heimann, who knew her well, sought carefully and respectfully in her obituary to convey an aspect of her character that was partly explained by her ‘aloofness’ (Heimann 1963, p. 230): ‘Joan Riviere was not ambitious. She was proud, but she was also humble and shy’ (p. 231). Instead of writing herself, ‘she chose to spend her time
This article is based on a lecture at the Freud Institute in Zürich (18 March 2005) and first appeared under the title ‘Wem dient die Frau? Joan Riviere zwischen Freud und Jones’ in Luzifer-Amor, Zeitschrift zur Geschichte der Psychoanalyse 37: 98-114, 2006. ‘She can be put to work’ (Freud to Jones, 11 May 1922). The article has been translated by Sophie Leighton.
and energy much more in helping others to write … While she had unlimited patience with people who wanted help with their ideas, she could be very brusque and harsh on other occasions, and she laid herself open to misunderstanding and disappointment’ (p. 231).
James Strachey had an ambivalent relat