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.
Freud's case studies are of more than merely historical interest. The detail and clarity of Freud's reconstruction of his cases provides not only a model of psychoanalytic investigation, but also an important testing ground against which the development of later psychoanalytic insights and understanding can be compared with the formulations of the founder of psychoanalysis. The result may be greater appreciation for the congruence and continuity of analytic insights, or it may be conversely a sharpening and focusing of the differentiation of such insights as a factor in scientific progress.
The case of the Wolf-Man stands in the first rank of Freud's clinical studies and has been the object of continuing analytic interest since its original publication in 1918.3,5 The Wolf-Man had originally been in treatment with Freud from February 1910 until June 1914, the treatment terminating almost simultaneously with the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand. The Wolf-Man returned again for several months of treatment in 1919. However, when he again decompensated and returned to Freud for consultation in 1926, Freud referred him to Ruth Mack Brunswick, who conducted a brief second analysis lasting five months. Freud originally recounted the case in the context of the debate with Adler and Jung; where his focus was on the reconstruction of the infantile neurosis and the patient's adult illness.
More significant for our present concerns, however, is the fact that at the time of his treatment by Brunswick the patient developed a delusional paranoid psychosis with hypochondriacal features.2 I would like to re-examine some of the elements of the case to delineate the operation of the paranoid process.* By the “paranoid process” I