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.
Publishing a dialogue about a paper you have written feels a bit like going quail hunting with Dick Cheney. The discussants set their sights on the manuscript (the quail) and the author sits tight, aware of the risk of becoming a sitting duck. Well, happily in this instance, unlike others in which I have participated, there will be no casualties. I would like to respond in a manner that advances my original thesis, but first I would like to note that the three of us (Irwin Hirsch, Paul Wachtel, and I) seem to be in fundamental agreement on most consequential matters. As Wachtel himself once observed, for many years he and I have “fished in similar waters.” I have always had a keen appreciation of Wachtel's vast body of original work, seeing it as visionary (not unlike that of Alexander, whose contribution Wachtel supports in his discussion). Therefore, I take his appreciation of my work as a strong compliment. I am also delighted to discover that Irwin Hirsch, whose widely published ideas I have respected for years, is a kindred spirit in this exchange. He suggests that simple agreement does not lend itself to spirited dialogue. That said, in the direction of this issue of Psychoanalytic Perspectives, which contains a section on “difference,” I will, in addition to noting similarities, discuss some minor differences.
Both commentators agree with my basic assertion—that the concept of the personal relationship is superior to that of the real relationship. As Hirsch noted, “The term, ‘personal’ is better than ‘real,’ because the latter implies that the analyst can distinguish objectively which is which.” He added, “When one speaks of the analytic dyad as personal, I see no need to even begin to identify which elements are personal and which are technical—we just know that each analyst engages in both dimensions, whether or not he/she even sets out to do this.” Likewise, we all agree that the decline of the real-versus-transference dichotomy and the emergence of the per