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 articles in this issue of The Psychoanalytic Quarterly are not grouped by theme as they have been in recent issues, but if they were, it would be tempting to title the issue “Analysts Thinking,” or perhaps “Analysts Rethinking.” Each author thinks out loud about his or her experience with theory and with clinical work in so detailed a way that they cannot help but question received wisdom; they must challenge old ideas by virtue of their personal involvement with the material at hand. In that sense, to paraphrase Freud's comment about finding an object, every true thinking is a rethinking, and in the process we inevitably learn more than the author set out to teach us. This applies to all the papers in this issue.
Nowhere is it more evident, however, than in the first article, André Green's controversial “Sources and Vicissitudes of Being in D. W. Winnicott's Work.” This paper is the latest in Green's careful study of Winnicott, and as he tells us, Winnicott's writing “may be disquieting even today if we examine at close scrutiny its mixture of contradictions, shortcomings, and intuitions of genius” (p. 34). Due partly to Green's “close scrutiny,” partly to his passionate engagement with Winnicott, partly to the clarity of his discourse—in which he seems to hone everything to its essence—but primarily due to Green's personal way of thinking things through, we understand some aspects of psychoanalysis that it seems we never quite understood before.