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.
TWO YEARS HAVE PASSED SINCE THE DEATH OF MARIANNE Kris in London, at the home of Anna Freud, on November 23, 1980. Since then, we have had to learn to do without her unique talents of quiet leadership, sensitive understanding, and spirit of helpfulness. The passage of time has, if anything, made us all the more aware of her value to us. Her contributions to analysis, and in particular to the area of her own special interest, child analysis, were manifold, and endure in the scientific and educational legacy that she has left for us. Her legacy is a very special one: her meaning to our science was particularly hers, in that it depended so much on her personal qualities. She was a supreme teacher by example: her method and manner imparted not only knowledge to supervisees, students, and seekers of advice, but also an attitude and an approach to analysis that always took into account first of all the needs of patients. If ever she perceived that there was any chance that a conflict might arise between the aims of, for example, research and the interests of a patient, she would always choose the patient without a moment's hesitation—even if the chance of harm to the patient was remote. This attitude was a part of her view of psychoanalysis, and the requirements that she set for herself and imparted to all around her: as gentle and kind as she was, as tactful and patient with her students and others who consulted her, she always conveyed in a straightforward way her insistence on adherence to the basic principles of candor and