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.
Lachmann's paper is reviewed as an essential statement of the implications of empirical infant research for psychoanalytic theory and technique, oriented by his intersubjectivist self-psychological perspective. His essay reflects the extent to which this application has come to maturity. This commentary elaborates several of his points: that infancy, basic psychopathology, and primitivity are not analogous; the emphasis on continuity in development; and the importance of social reciprocity and adaptation in early relationship and development. I note theoretical resonances to other psychoanalytic orientations, including developmental ego psychology, British object relations theory, contemporary Kleinian thinking, and, especially, the contemporary American relational movement.
Lachmann's clinical approach is then discussed as fitting into the overall relational emphasis on reciprocity and direct engagement in psychoanalysis. Within a framework of broad agreement, I wonder if Lachmann overemphasizes affirmative and idealizing selfobject relations at the expense of other transferences and mutual influence patterns. Finally, the theory of motivational systems is reviewed as an important innovation that does not go far enough in integrating dynamic systems theory.