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.
Ferenczi's deviation was different from that of Reich, Adler, or Horney, for he did not invoke sociological factors, and it was different from that of Jung, for he made no special appeal to a collective unconscious. Rather, he pointed to real sexual traumata from one or both parents, a notion that Freud had worked hard to repudiate after his own early adherence to this etiological position. Freud's response to Ferenczi was immediately disapproving. Now that time has passed, Ferenczi has perhaps come to seem more lucid with respect to the problems he was dealing with. He was convinced that primary repression could be lifted through his technique. In the course of severe regressions many patients repeat their original battle with reality, involving real difficulties and conflicts with the external world. To deal with this repetition, Ferenczi had to rethink and place in question the analytic framework itself. It is well known that the most difficult patients were often referred to him. Confronted with the depth of their regressions in a universe in which words and acts simply are and do not represent, Ferenczi reached those regions where the symbolic no longer applied, where saying and doing were telescoped into one and the same mode of expression. The patient became "really" a child. The only thing to do was to accompany her or him into this universe and "play the game," while attempting to repair the real damage that the patient had received or committed. Some of the issues concerning the framework of psychoanalysis were explored further in Winnicott's work. The framework is seen as the depository of the necessary