Prologue

In 1954, Leo Stone articulated the long-standing agenda of expanding the scope of psychoanalysis beyond the neurosis to which Freud had dedicated his efforts. Psychoanalysts had begun to recognize that if nonneurotic patients were to be served, Freud's model had to be extended beyond his cautious delimitations. Misapplications led to justifiable criticisms of fitting patients into procrustean beds conceptually and procrustean couches technically.

Since the consolidation of ego psychology there has been a proliferation of models of psychoanalysis. Some of these models are constructed out of classical theory, modifying little and expanding the threads already present in Freud's thinking. Other models change core concepts of classical theory to accommodate new theories of mind, development, pathogenesis, and technique. There are theorists for whom each model has its strengths as well as its limitations. For them, the problem of widening the scope of psychoanalysis involves finding ways to integrate disjunctive, or even contradictory, models into a cohesive multimodel system.

Central questions about such integrations, in the context of the problem of widening the scope of psychoanalysis, inspired this issue of Psychoanalytic Inquiry. Do we need multiple models because there is a real deficit in what Freudian theory can explain, or is the classical model comprehensive and flexible enough to explain the expanding range of our clinical observations? Is