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.
The faults of hypnosis as practised by an earlier generation lay not only in certain dangers and limitations inherent in the procedure, but in the generally inadequate knowledge of psychodynamics which prevailed at the time. The revival of hypnotism in recent years has shown promise only when combined with a sound orientation in psychopathology. LeCron and Bordeaux, two psychologists, who present an excellent exposition of the technique and phenomena of hypnosis, find themselves in difficulties when they undertake to elaborate upon the therapeutic aspects of this medium. They conscientiously report and endeavor to utilize modern methods of evoking past memories, suggesting dreams and employing other devices which have become familiar in hypnotherapy. In essence, however, their procedure goes little beyond the time-honored resort to symptomatic therapy based upon the authoritative suggestions of the hypnotist.
The fundamental limitations of this work emerge clearly from the case reports and the discussions. The authors concede that they have no satisfactory conception of the nature of 'rapport', and feel they can dismiss Ferenczi's belief that the hypnotist is a parent substitute with MacDougall's old argument that if such were the case, men could be hypnotized only by males and women by females. Such ludicrous assumptions show not only lack of understanding of psychoanalytic theory but deprive the hypnotist of the recognition and use of transference. The failure to appreciate the dynamic relationship of transference and resistance often makes the exploration of past memories a sterile search for the origin of symptoms whereby the meaning of screen memories, the function of the symptoms, and the complexities of personality are