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 short paper, the authors discuss long analyses, defined as those with the same analyst lasting ten or more years at a minimum frequency of three times per week. They differentiate long analyses from interminable analyses, about which more has been written.
The authors describe several common dynamics seen in long analyses. These include the development of an omnipotent idealization of the analyst in some borderline cases, where the defensive idealization is maintained in order to avoid an ending that is equated with death, destruction, and non-existence. The analyst is maintained (and maintains him- or herself) as a real external object, thus interfering with the internalization of the analyst as containing object, and lengthening the analysis.
Another common dynamic described occurs in obsessional cases in which the analysand longs for intimacy but does not believe it is available. He or she then concludes that it should not be wished for. This belief can slow the development of the analytic process. Fear of dependence on a less than perfect object can also keep such analysands from engaging in the analytic process, thereby leading to a long analysis.
The authors also outline a problem seen in some narcissistic analysands. In these cases, primitive vulnerabilities and fears of destructiveness are defended against by the maintenance of the analyst as an idealized object. The authors report some typical countertransference responses to these dynamics, including withdrawal into defensive, “analytic” detachment; compensation for the analysand's deprivation via “support”; angry reactions; and reactions based on the analyst's excitement.
In closing, the authors briefly note the possible role of the “analyst as narrator” in prolonged analyses. They propose that