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.
In this sometimes amusing and cynical paper Barande discusses analytic innovations from the standpoint of memory, or, more exactly, the failure to recall what has gone before. Analysts are subject to lapses of memory concerning Freud and what
they owe him. The analysts' memory within the analytic session is deceptive, for the speaker, as analyst, is talking about his own memory, with no control or way of validation, while subject to secondary process elaboration. It might be better to examine the analyst's memory in writings about theory. What the analyst writes can be compared with the corpus of Freudian theory as a reference point to examine the analyst's memory. He considers the writings of Roazen on Tausk, and of Masson on the supposed abandonment of the seduction theory, as examples of the way that writers now tend to calumniate Freud. There is much of this in the lay press, but that would not matter as much if it did not reappear in internal attacks within the psychoanalytic community. The appearance of the Freud correspondence is eagerly awaited for possible gossip. There are accusations against older analysts concerning the war years. For Barande, numerous contemporary efforts at theorizing suffer, just like hysterics, from disturbances of memory. Freud is forgotten; his theories are reinvented or turned against him. Masson, Viderman, Torok and N. Abraham are among the writers Barande criticizes as proponents of what he regards as fashionable modes of contemporary theorizing.