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.
Rather than attempt a comprehensive critique of the rich data and commentaries, I propose to organize my remarks on the single issue of the analyst as a participant in an interaction. I do so because that is a special interest of mine, because I believe it is the principal key to understanding what has gone wrong with this therapy, and because it is either neglected or referred to only allusively by most of the discussants.
My thesis can be simply stated: the primary manifest theme in the patient's content is one that she experiences as also being enacted with the analyst. The patient portrays herself as misunderstood, unappreciated, and imposed upon by others, and she experiences the analyst as misunderstanding, failing to appreciate her, and imposing himself upon her. This theme manifests itself between them in many ways, ranging from his imposing his ideas on her to his assaulting her sexually in a sadomasochistic relationship — metaphorically of course.
It is particularly interesting that the analyst explicitly considers the possibility of his being drawn into a sadomasochistic interaction and warns himself to guard against it. But what he considers to be the danger is what I believe is in fact taking place, namely that he is involved in such an interaction. He worries that he may avoid hurting the patient out of fear of his sadism that she may be masochistically inviting, and that should he do so he would be implicitly