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.
In his important “The Two Analyses of Mr. Z,” Kohut (1979) sought to demonstrate the clinical usefulness of psychoanalytic self psychology. It is the purpose of this paper to determine whether or not he succeeded, and in what areas his success or failure lies. A number of significant corollary questions suggest themselves. Are new meanings obtained via self psychology? Are beneficial inroads made that cannot be made with the classical model? I will begin by reviewing Kohut's presentation for those unfamiliar with it and then discuss vital criticisms of Kohut's therapy. I will finally conclude with my own attempt to assess the psychodynamic material in terms of crucial countertransferential material.
Mr. Z was a graduate student in his mid-20s when he began analysis with Kohut. There were two distinct phases. Each was conducted five times a week for four years. They were separated by a hiatus of around five and a half years. The first phase was classical in its conception and procedure, while the second was more influenced by Kohut's vocabulary of self psychology.
The patient was an only child. His father was a successful business