19 British Object Relations Theory and Self Psychology

The period of 1930-1965 was marked by the emergence in Great Britain of the first sustained attempts to reexamine the fundamental precepts upon which psychoanalysis had been based. It was motivated by disquiet on the part of a large number of respected and dedicated analysts with the limitations in therapeutic results that were so clearly and frankly acknowledged by Freud (1937) in his final summation, Analysis Terminable and Interminable. The turbulence led to a flowering of creative genius within psychoanalysis. That it occurred when and where it did is undoubtedly due in large part to particular characteristics of British intellectual life with its long tradition of open-mindedness, restless curiosity, and tolerance for diversity. Some of the more impressive results of this reappraisal, agonizing in many ways for its supporters and its opponents alike, are to be found in the diverse body of work come to be identified as object relations theory.

In the United States psychoanalysis was generally spared the bitterness and ferment that occurred in Britain as “certain of Freud's discoveries, and the particular manner in which psychoanalysis transmits them, become the legacy of his pupils and collaborators” (Steiner, 1985, p. 78). The training institutes of the American Psychoanalytic Association, as a result of whatever complex, historical, cultural, and personal factors, embodied a different attitude than that widely held in Britain and exemplified by Marjorie Brierly. “The aim and task of analysis is to be eclectic and flexible,” she wrote. “I approach every patient with a full quota of implicit rather than explicit theoretical and technical preconceptions…. But I am more inclined to alter my preconceived notions to fit the patient's new pattern than to cut the pattern to fit my notions.” She concluded, … “we cannot crystallize psycho-analysis: we cannot