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.
Although this book can be read on its own, clearly its intention was to link the work of Bion, particularly in its clinical application, to the line of development in psycho-analysis leading from Freud through Abraham to Melanie Klein and on to Wilfred Bion. In the two earlier volumes a selective attention was given first to the clinical writings of Freud, with emphasis on the evolution of his methods of observation, the clinical data thrown up and finally the formulations that were reached, treating them not so much as scientific theories as metaphoric devices for organizing description of phenomena. Next the ‘Narrative’ was examined in detail, week by week, as the clinical reference point for describing the evolution of Melanie Klein's formulations of mental development and psychopathology, highlighting along the way the evidences of her clinical methods of observation, thought and communication.
The first two volumes therefore followed different methods of exposition: the first chronological, the second focussed, looking both backward and forward on the history of Mrs Klein's thought. In the present volume the chronological method is taken up again, with respect to the date of the clinical work if not always the date of publication. Thus, for instance, the papers republished in ‘Second Thoughts’ will be dealt with earlier than the second thoughts themselves. The emphasis of the book will be on Bion's methods of observation and thought, again, as with Freud and Melanie Klein, rather neglecting the theories as an explanatory system. This should not be taken as value judgment, dismissive of the theoretical aspects, but rather as a manifestation of the method of exposition being followed and the underlying purpose. The intention in these three volumes has been to trace the continuity of clinical method and thought from Freud to Bion in order to establish on firm ground the conception of the ‘Kleinian Development’. This view is not tenable in the realm of theory, where