Schools of modern psychoanalysis

What is modern psychoanalysis?

“The psychoanalyst should not express a desire to be English, French, American or German before the desire to be a psychoanalytic. He is obliged to put the general interests of psychoanalysis ahead of the national interests. "

Z. Freud, March 1932, letter to the presidents of various psychoanalytic associations.

Despite the fact that, according to Freud, psychoanalysis was to acquire an international character, the history of the psychoanalytic movement clearly demonstrated that depending on countries and cultures, psychoanalysis was able to follow a wide variety of directions. The creation by Freud in 1910 of the International Psychoanalytic Association (IPA) aimed to unite first of all doctors and specialists not related to medicine, who gathered to study a new discipline, and then to unite national psychoanalytic societies. At the dawn of the history of psychoanalysis, Vienna, Berlin and Moscow were the great capitals representing this international psychoanalytic movement. The history of the twentieth century, which survived two world wars, showed that this foundation can be shaken, but nevertheless, Freud's discovery of the unconscious and child sexuality remained unshakable.

Today, three psychoanalytic schools are more vividly represented in the world: the British School of Psychoanalysis, the American School of Psychoanalysis and the French School of Psychoanalysis.

British School of Psychoanalysis.

The founder and leader of the Psychoanalytic Society in Great Britain was Ernst Jones (1878-1958). In 1901-1905, he completed his education as a psychiatrist and got acquainted with the work of Freud "Essays on Hysteria" (1895), this work of Freud so captivated him that he independently studied the German language and met in 1908 with Z. Freud: 1913 founded the London Psychoanalytic Society. Very soon the society turned into a serious scientific organization with considerable scientific ambitions. This was manifested primarily in the opening in 1924 in London of the Institute of Psychoanalysis, and in 1926 the London Psychoanalytic Clinic.

In 1922-1926, research carried out in Berlin by Melanie Klein became known in London, and she herself received an invitation to read a course of lectures in London. In 1926, Jones persuades Klein to stay in London, where she settles for the rest of her life. It took a little time and her theories in British society became dominant. As a result, theories and ideas began to form that were not shared by many members of society. Suffice it to say here that during this period the idea of ​​the role of libido changed in British society. It no longer served to understand and describe the sources of drives - the emphasis was on its determining function within the framework of object orientation. This meant that in clinical work, much more emphasis was placed on the object relationships observed within the transference. This characteristic emphasis in libido theory is a specific feature of British psychoanalysis.

During this period, under the influence of Klein, special attention began to be paid to aggressive and sadistic manifestations of child development, this was the same difference between British society and other psychoanalytic associations. In the Klein group itself, the concentration of theoretical formulations and clinical developments increasingly became the role of kindergarten and the developing neutralization of defense mechanisms for it. This orientation had a definite impact on the further development of the British Psychoanalytic Society.

In the late 1930s, Britain was flooded with psychoanalysts fleeing the continent. This culminated in the herd prepared by Jones and other members of society (primarily Marie Bonaparte) Freud's move. In 1938 he moved to England with his family and closest friends. Initially, this event did not have a direct impact on the British Psychoanalytic Society, as everything was overshadowed by the outbreak of World War II.

The main conflict boiled down to the fact that even before the Vienna Group moved to England, many members of British society supported the views of Melanie Klein. Remaining in London, members of the Vienna Group, among them Freud's daughter, Anna Freud, did not agree with Melanie Klein's ideas. However, they found it possible to combine the ideas defended by Melanie Klein about child development and the role of sadism, already manifested in infancy, directed at the object with the classical theory of psychoanalysis. Other psychoanalysts who considered the newcomers, for example Mikael Balint, did not fully accept the position of the Viennese school, but could not join the Melanie Klein school either.

Ultimately, this confrontation resulted in a series of discussions. The confrontation was extremely acute, while both sides tried to find arguments and justifications in favor of their views in the works of Freud. First of all, sport was about the age of the onset of the Oedipus complex, about the origin of the Super-I and about the role of the death instinct. In part, these problems cause discussions to this day. Nevertheless, the society did not disintegrate, since it was possible to come to an agreement that every young psychoanalyst, in order to continue his education, had to belong to one or another group. Since then, the British Psychoanalytic Society has been divided into three subgroups. The first is usually called the Klein group, or group A. It includes psychoanalysts who have been trained and analyzed by Klein supporters.

The Vienna group that formed around Anna Freud and was the last to appear on the British scene was called "Group B", sometimes it is simply called the "Freudian group".

Each of the groups has developed specific forms of training. The Klein group extended its influence primarily to South America and especially to Argentina. Group B with Anna Freud made the most significant contribution to the further development of psychoanalytic theory.

Another line of development goes back to the independent group, one of the most famous representatives of which was D.V. Winnicott. He developed his own productive concepts regarding the early relationship between mother and child, as well as the theory of regressive transference.

(The article uses material from the work: Christopher Deir "Psychoanalysis in Great Britain". In the book. Encyclopedia of Depth Psychology. T.2. M., 2001. S. 550-557).

American School of Psychoanalysis

In no other country has psychoanalysis been adopted so early and so favorably, and nowhere has it gained such popularity as in the United States. Already in the period before the First World War, psychoanalysis within the framework of the so-called "psychotherapeutic movement" was recognized and promoted by physicians. Freud's psychoanalysis, or rather its Americanized version, was studied in medical schools and found practical application in clinics.

After the First World War, in the “Roaring Twenties,” psychoanalytic terms such as “resistance”, “fixation” and “Oedipus complex” were often heard in conversations. Psychoanalysis became fashionable, in large cities dozens of "wild" psychoanalysts opened private practice.

At the same time, American doctors, who were seriously interested in psychoanalysis, established their first contacts with representatives of the European psychoanalytic movement. They traveled to Vienna and Berlin to undergo an educational analysis and get an education in the already established institutes. The obvious threat of the transfer of psychoanalytic activity into the hands of analysts who did not have a medical education, prompted American psychoanalysts to deny access to psychoanalytic education for non-physicians. On the question of whether non-physicians have the right to conduct psychoanalysis, there were heated discussions with European psychoanalysts.

In the early 1930s, the first psychoanalytic training institutes were founded in the United States. Psychoanalytic associations created a federation in 1932 called the American Psychoanalytic Association (APA). In 1933, the emigration of German-speaking psychoanalysts began. The emigration of Jewish psychoanalysts persecuted in Austria, Germany, Hungary strengthened American psychoanalysis, but gave rise to many internal problems. In the late 1930s, the center of the psychoanalytic movement moved from Vienna and Berlin to the United States. In 1938, American psychoanalysts proclaimed the "Declaration of Independence." This meant that they were no longer willing to officially submit to European psychoanalysis and its body, the International Psychoanalytic Association.

In 1942, American psychoanalysis first encountered the first dissident movements in its midst, and in 1946 it finally took the form of an autonomous national psychoanalytic association.

After World War II, the International Psychoanalytic Association came to terms with the autonomy of the American Psychoanalytic Association. APA has become the largest of the national psychoanalytic associations. The number of its members increased steadily until 1960. After that, the growth of the APA stalled, and American psychoanalysis faced serious difficulties. He was criticized from different sides, his popularity declined sharply. This crisis, it seems, has not been prolonged to this day.

I would like to briefly review the most interesting moments in the history of the formation of American psychoanalysis.

The American version of Freud's psychoanalysis, which dominated until 1920 and caused a lot of surprise among Europeans, should be understood against the background of the so-called "progressive movement" that arose at the turn of the century and lasted until the First World War.

The American version of Freudian psychoanalysis, which dominated until the 1920s and caused a lot of bewilderment among European psychoanalysts, should be understood against the background of the so-called "progressive movement" that arose at the turn of the century and lasted until World War I.

The "Progressive Movement" was created by the joint efforts of many politicians, journalists, writers, sociologists, doctors, etc. During a period of rapid industrialization and economic boom, "progressives" spoke of the decline of American morality. They fought against corruption and abuse of power in big business and politics, informed the public about the "true image" of America, about poverty in large cities and industrial areas, they appealed to legislation, democratic consciousness and a sense of responsibility of every citizen, hoping to return lost ethical values through "self-improvement" and social and economic transformation.

In medicine, since about 1904, the "progressive movement" took the form of the "social hygiene movement" and the "psychotherapeutic movement".

The Social Hygiene Movement emerged when it became clear that sexually transmitted diseases were widespread in the United States. Society hoped to deal with them by sexually educating children and calling for morality in everyday life.

The "psychotherapeutic movement", on the one hand, emerged as a reaction to classical neurology and psychiatry, on the other hand, it was seen as part of a progressive movement. Psychotherapists rebelled against dogmas of heredity and degeneration and against Kraepelin's "classification of manias." The main attention was paid to the adaptive abilities of the individual, and from the beginning of the century - at first without the influence of Freud - specialists began to look for the causes of psychotic and neurotic disorders in life itself, in its events, environment, upbringing and to develop appropriate methods of psychotherapy.

Building on the work of the French psychiatrist Bernheim, Boris Sidis developed suggestive therapy; Adolf Meyer, one of the founders of "dynamic psychiatry", created "psychobiology"; Morton Prince talked about "re-education". The "persuasion therapy" of the Swiss psychiatrist Dubois was also very popular. Hypnosis aroused less interest in the United States, primarily because many patients, as it soon became clear, did not lend themselves to hypnosis.

Leading psychotherapists such as Putnam, Prince, Meyer, Hoch, and White opted for Freud and psychoanalysis in 1905. Psychoanalysis was included in "progressive medicine" and was presented as a means of moral sobering and re-education. Everyone hoped that psychoanalysis, like other forms of psychotherapy, would overcome the growing asociality, immorality and dehumanization of society and would provide starting points for reforms in education, social work, criminal law, etc.

Likewise, “psychoanalysts,” or rather physicians affiliated with psychoanalytic associations, contributed to a specifically American interpretation of psychoanalysis. In their popular scientific publications, pursuing didactic goals, they emphasized the socio-political and ethical significance of psychoanalysis, which Freud did not have in mind and with which he could hardly agree.

Psychoanalysis has been simplified and rendered harmless. Pragmatically oriented physicians did not have much interest in psychoanalytic theory, which Freud also constantly revised. Inspired by the optimism of "progressive medicine", many believed that the essence of psychoanalytic theory and therapy was to transform infantile, immoral and selfish impulses (the latter were especially prevalent in the United States) into socially valuable, sublime, moral and altruistic tendencies through sublimation and condemnation. ... Attractions must be tamed with the help of psychoanalysis, and the result must be decent and democratic behavior, which makes it unnecessary to regulate people's life together by authoritarian measures.

The socializing function of the Oedipus complex was stressed everywhere. Recognizing Freud's concept of the "reality principle", it was understood in terms of social conformism and social utility. All case histories had a happy ending with an awakened and welcoming capacity for sublimation and adaptation. In popular expositions, the topic of sexuality was either not touched upon at all, or not sharpened.

And only disillusioned with the "progressive movement" after the First World War, when American doctors began to study in Berlin and Vienna, psychoanalysts of the Freudian and American versions of the analysis began to converge.

At the turn of the century, Freud was known in the United States primarily as a neurologist. Those of his works, which laid the foundation for psychoanalysis, did not attract attention until 1905, the Native Americans, who saw no reason to be loyal to Freud, did not understand the European "clannishness", reverence for the Master and, on the contrary, were proud of the fact that that they did not feel connected with any school or with any authority. This position, inherent in most of the early American psychoanalysts, later led to disagreements among American analysts, as well as between American and European psychoanalytic associations.

The years 1911-1917 were the period when psychoanalysis was consolidated in medicine. Left-wing psychoanalysts in the American Medical Association who felt they belonged to the "progressive movement" began to develop a specifically American version of Freud's psychoanalysis. The “harmless” and “optimistic” aspects of psychoanalysis, coinciding with the tasks of the progressive movement, came to the fore. Conversely, the possibility of “repetition compulsion” underlying the transference, the idea of ​​“paricide” (from Totem and Taboo) was denied and Freud's statements about sadism and the transformation of love into hate were ignored.

Freud's "pessimistic" view of culture was also tweaked: social reforms or the change of individuals through psychoanalytic therapy will lead to the individual's desires coinciding with the norms of society.

In popular narratives, which all psychoanalysts have dealt with, the topic of sexuality is either completely dropped or lost its sharpness.

Psychoanalysts were not "mocked" either in professional circles or in public opinion. There was considerable controversy, but psychoanalysts were able to work without hindrance under the direction of supervisors who were not supporters of psychoanalysis and to treat patients who were referred to them by their non-psychoanalytic colleagues.

Psychoanalytic therapy was really unorthodox. American doctors did not accept the basic conditions of the analytical situation, which were already known in 1915: the couch, the daily paid hours, the "analytical position." American psychoanalysts have been much more active in their therapy, encouraging modified forms of treatment. This is also due to the fact that, while working in clinics, they dealt with patients other than their European colleagues, that is, mainly with psychotic patients.

Therefore, Freud's therapeutic pessimism with regard to psychoses also overwhelmed them, especially in the form in which Freud formulated it in his Introduction to Narcissism (1914). American psychoanalysts also found it difficult to keep track of the major changes and improvements in psychoanalytic theory and practice, which were discussed by Freud in his article on narcissism and in the metapsychological writings of 1915. The reports of activity published by American psychoanalysts in European journals made it clear that they were not keeping pace with changes in theory and methodology.

Since the United States did not have any of Freud's own students, much hopes were pinned on correspondence, periodic visits, and international psychoanalytic congresses that were held every two years.

American psychoanalysts also experienced particular difficulties because they did not see the opportunity to undergo educational analysis.

Disagreements within American psychoanalysis also arose because of the "defection" of Adler and Jung.

Thus, psychoanalysis established itself in the United States, but at the same time significantly moved away from the European psychoanalysis of Freud. Since 1915, contacts between Europe and America have become less frequent and ceased completely in 1917, when the United States entered the First World War.

While in Europe after World War I psychoanalysis continued to face clear hostility, in the 1920s and 1930s it enjoyed a popularity in the United States that it has never been able to achieve since. Psychoanalysis has become fashionable.

Before the First World War, psychoanalysis was promoted mainly by the "progressive movement." The First World War put an end to the "progressive movement", and with it the psychotherapeutic movement. Everyone was tired of high-flown, idealistic, moralizing appeals, felt disappointment and annoyance. Intellectuals in the big cities, representatives of the "Roaring Twenties", looked back on the "progressive movement" as the last attempt of the conservatives. They spoke cynically about his tasks, since for them politics and history had become "swindle", empty chatter. Conversely, traditionalist restorers associated with the Americas of villages and small towns considered the "progressive movement" too "advanced." After the First World War, psychoanalysis took on new functions. Before the war, it served "self-improvement" and "social improvement", but now, in the hands of a new generation of intellectual bohemians, it has become an instrument of "self-justification", "a toy for the rich and intellectuals, a subject of constant discussion in cafes and salons" (Hoffmann 1959, 59).

Psychoanalysis was perceived as the promise of individual liberation from the constraints and taboos of society. Anti-Puritanism flourished, appealing to Freud. The concepts of "hidden self" and "creativity" were spreading everywhere: the core of the personality consists, de, of narcissistic, egoistic, power-hungry, immoral and irrational tendencies. Responding and getting rid of them was considered the path to happiness and health.

Everyone rushed into psychoanalysis. And psychoanalysts became regulars at the famous Mabel Dodge Stern salon, where the best minds of society gathered. The general public eagerly listened to the news of bohemians, and its reaction to psychoanalysis would have seemed to Freud extremely unexpected - it was delight! Only traditionalists rejected psychoanalysis, because "in the name of science" it refers to immorality, hostility towards religion and culture.

The newspapers printed detailed conversations with psychoanalysts (Adler, Brill, Wittels, Ferenczi, Freud, etc.), as well as patient reports on their therapy. Reporters rushed to Vienna, begging the "genius" to say a few words to them. A new type of magazine has emerged, such as True Story Magazines, designed to publish intimate anonymous confessions. Hollywood twice approached Freud with a proposal to make a film about psychoanalysis, “edited by Professor Freud and setting out the foundations of his teaching” (Hoffman 1959, 68). The telegram with Freud's refusal to accept the Goldwin firm's offer became a "sensation." The Chicago Tribune in 1924 offered Freud any fee, plus the cost of a specially chartered ship, to travel to Chicago, analyzed and proved innocent two young men accused of murder.

The book market was flooded with secondary literature on psychoanalysis. In one store in New York, we managed to count over two hundred books on this topic. In 1920-1921, almost 12,000 copies of Freud's Lectures on an Introduction to Psychoanalysis (1916/1917) were sold.

Freud himself, in view of the difficult economic situation after the war, planned to write a public article for an American magazine in 1920. He turned to his nephew, Edward Bernays, who lived in America, and suggested the headline: "Do not use psychoanalysis in polemics." Bernays entered into negotiations with Cosmopolitan Magazine. The magazine offered Freud a thousand dollars for some interesting topic for the readership like: "The psychological situation of a woman in the house", "The psychological state of the spouse in the house", etc. Freud took either this specific proposal, or the very fact that he could be given a topic as an insult and flatly refused.

The popularization of psychoanalysis extended to psychoanalytic therapy. By 1920, New York City had about five hundred uneducated "psychoanalysts" and two unofficial institutes.

In the 1930s, the general public's interest in psychoanalysis began to wane. The global economic crisis, which began with the stock market crash of 1929, no longer left room for individualistic soul searches.

The period before World War II passed under the slogan of "social control". The unprecedented economic and structural crisis was met with comprehensive legislative and reform efforts. Psychoanalysis could do nothing to help solve urgent problems. At first, they tried to associate it with Marxism in the hope that it would help reveal and eliminate the problems of capitalist society (see the article by E. Federn). At the same time, behaviorism has already appeared on the scene, more suitable for performing the tasks of social control.

Gradually psychoanalysis disappeared from the public eye. However, before World War II, he managed to enter psychology (clinical psychology, personality psychology, psychology of motivation, developmental psychology, social psychology, etc.), as well as sociology and anthropology (Cooley, Mead, Benedict, Kardiner, Parsons, etc.) etc.). Freud, for example, was ranked by the leading historian of psychology by Boring (1950) as one of the four "greatest figures" in American psychology. However, the recognition of psychoanalysis by the social sciences did not have a decisive influence on the further development of psychoanalysis itself, since in the USA psychoanalytic education remained inaccessible to persons without medical training.

Between 1919 and 1932, American psychoanalysts led by Brill, Oberndorf, White, Jelliff, and Coriath argued with their European counterparts. On the one hand, American psychoanalysts were looking for rapprochement, thoroughly studied the theory and technique of Freud, trying to overcome their scientific lag, moreover, the new works of Freud ("Beyond the Pleasure Principle", 1920; "I and It", 1923; fear ”, 1926, etc.) caused fierce controversy. On the other hand, Americans have distanced themselves from European psychoanalysis in matters of professional organization. American psychoanalysts rejected non-medical psychoanalysis, believing that only doctors have the right and are able to carry out psychoanalytic therapy. Another source of controversy was the notable and long-standing tendencies of American psychoanalysis towards independence. American psychoanalysts did not want to see their association as a "satellite" of European science and perceived the Freudian clan with mixed feelings.

By about 1930, American psychoanalysts began to find common ground with European psychoanalysis. However, even in 1930, Freud was still unhappy with his American colleagues. He wrote a surprisingly unfriendly companion to the psychoanalytic consolidated volume of the Medical Review of Reviews. His reasoning concerned not only American psychiatry, but also American psychoanalysis: “I often hear that psychoanalysis is very popular in the USA and that there it does not encounter such stubborn resistance as in Europe. However, my joy on this occasion is overshadowed by many circumstances ... Although America has many skilled analysts and at least one authority in the person of Dr. A. A. Brill, the contribution of this distant country to our science remains meager and contains little new. Psychiatrists and neurologists often resort to psychoanalysis as a therapeutic method, but generally show little interest in the scientific issues and cultural significance of psychoanalysis. American authors and doctors often find themselves unsatisfactory with psychoanalysis. Sometimes it turns out that they only know names and some concepts, but this, however, does not at all prevent them from expressing their opinion with confidence ... in fact only indicates a lack of common sense. "

The lack of education felt in the circles of American psychoanalysts prompted some of them in 1920 to ask Freud to come to New York for six months in order to read a course and conduct several sessions of psychoanalysis. He was guaranteed a $ 10,000 fee. Freud telegraphed in response: "Not satisfied." Then (from 1919-1920) American doctors began to come to Berlin and Vienna. They took part in lectures and seminars intended for "candidates". In 1920, the first educational institute, a polyclinic under the direction of Eitingon, was opened in Berlin. An outpatient clinic was established in Vienna in 1922, headed by Hichmann. Meanwhile, Freud was analyzing ten American candidates (including Oberndorf, A. Stern, Frink, M. Meyer, Bloomgart, Polon, Kardiner).

The psychoanalysis practiced in Vienna made a great impression on the Americans. Many of them had been engaged in "psychoanalysis" for many years and could not accept Freud's authoritarianism. On the other hand, they became convinced of the value of systematic education. According to Oberndorf, the obvious result of the training analysis was that upon their return to the United States, all doctors acquired couches.

The first step towards the standardization and improvement of education was taken in 1923 in New York. The appearance of Freud's book I and It (1923) nearly led to a split among American psychoanalysts. Young members of the New York Society, educated in Europe, reproached their elders for not being able to follow the development of Freud's theory. From now on, it was no longer possible to confine oneself to the "old" libido theory, it was necessary to master the new concept of the I and the structural theory, and thus the resulting changes in psychoanalytic technique.

In 1938, the International Psychoanalytic Association was discouraged by the declaration of independence of American psychoanalysts. At the first post-war congress in Zurich (1949), the International Psychoanalytic Association (now the International Psychoanalytic Association (MPI)) came to terms with the changed situation and autonomy APA .

The common name of post-Freudian American psychoanalysis is "psychology of the self," which after World War II gradually became identified with the "mainstream" of psychoanalysis developed in APA ... Psychology of the Self is a general designation of various directions: the psychology of the Self, on the one hand, includes the supporters of Hartmann and Rapaport - representatives of the "theory-oriented" psychology of the Self, on the other hand, "clinicians".

Erickson occupies a special position in relation to the psychology of the I. He does not present his ideas in terms of the general theory of psychoanalysis and metapsychology and does not connect them with the concepts of clinical psychology J. Erickson dissociated himself from the biological conceptualization of the functions of the I, the concepts of reality and adaptation of Hartmann's psychology of the I and, according to other classical analysts, is almost " dissident ".

The psychology of the I, developed by Hartmann and Rapaport, differed from the psychology of It and the psychology of drives in that it attached the I and reality more importance in mental development and determination of behavior. It considered the determinants of behavior, distant or free from drives, and emphasized that mental processes, along with the function of protection, can also have functions of control or adaptation. Thus, the psychology of the I resisted reductionism, which reduced everything to drives, as well as a one-sided interpretation of behavior in terms of defense.

New clinical approaches to the development of self, identity, identifications, self-ideal, etc., which arose largely under the influence of Hartmann's ideas, changed the concept of classical neuroses (hysteria, obsessive compulsive disorder, phobias, depression), female sexuality, 26 latent and adolescence, and the concepts of acting out, regression, transference, countertransference and resistance. In numerous publications, the pictures of the disease, the phases of development, etc., previously described from the standpoint of the psychology of drives, are now being considered in the aspect of the psychology of the I.

Clinical theory with the advent of psychology I began to rely on new sources of information - on observation of children and child therapy. They served as a means of correcting reconstructively formulated hypotheses about mental development.

(The article uses material from the work: Ulrike May "Psychoanalysis in the USA". In the book. Encyclopedia of Depth Psychology. T.2. M., 2001. S. 491-535).

French School of Psychoanalysis .

In France, psychoanalysis began in 1926 at the same time as the establishment of the Paris Psychoanalytic Society, followed by its formation in 1927.Revue francaise de psychanalyse"-" French Psychoanalytic Journal ", which today represents one of the most significant psychoanalytic publications. In those days, despite the fact that the Parisian Psychoanalytic Society included only individual psychiatrists, and a very narrow circle of persons not directly related to medicine, for example, the famous princess, wife of George the Greek: nee Marie Bonaparte, society developed rapidly thanks to fruitful activities psychoanalysts, whose names became known immediately after the Second World War, namely, Jacques Lacan (1901-1981), Sasha Knight (1901-1977), Daniel Lagash (1903-1972). Very soon, Jacques Lacan forced to reckon with his by no means conformist personality, which intrigued, seduced and worried his then colleagues. Although at certain points Jacques Lacan's widespread popularity led many to associate psychoanalysis in France with his theories, it would be completely wrong to identify French psychoanalysis with the work of this researcher.

In 1953, the departure of Jean Lacan and Daniel Lagache from members of the Paris Psychoanalytic Society prompted many colleagues to follow their example and had a strong influence on the further development of psychoanalytic thought. The psychoanalysts who left the Parisian Psychoanalytic Society first unite in the French Psychoanalytic Society, in which the two currents (Lacan and Lagache) subsequently began to confront each other. In particular, they held different opinions regarding the training of psychoanalysts and the conditions for recognition of the French Psychoanalytic Association, which later became part of the International Psychoanalytic Association (IPA). Jean Lacan decided to create his own society - the Freudian school, which was never recognized by the IPA because of the conditions for training specialists that existed in it.

French psychoanalysts have introduced into the world psychoanalysis many original ideas that help to better understand the patient's condition. One such idea is the idea « Child of the day and Child of the night». This concept, developed by Denise Braunschweig and Michel Phan (1975), brought significant insight into the concept of understanding mother and child. In their book "Night, Day" they argue that for the full development of a child, a wife-husband couple in which there is a full-fledged love relationship with each other is important. If this does not happen and there are no full-fledged love relationships between the parents, but on the contrary they are very conflicts, then the mother runs the risk of unconsciously using the child as a sexual and narcissistic object for herself. Then the child becomes the "child of the night."

If a mother wants the child to develop fully, she must follow his desires, and not he must satisfy her sexual needs. In order to do this, she must love and be loved, that is, be in a sufficiently satisfying sexual relationship with the child's father. The presence of a father-husband makes it possible to be a mother to your child, investing in him as a “child of the day”.

Michelle Feng sees the alternation of day and night as the rhythm of the mother's presence and absence for the child. During the day - with him, and at night - with the child's father. The repetition of day and night occurs with the simultaneous gradual formation of the oedipal structure. He introduces the concept of "mistress censorship" - the mother's disinvestment of her child: she puts him to bed and again becomes a sexual woman for her husband, which supports the child's real or imagined construction of a parental erotic couple, which, according to Feng, serves as the main stage in the infant's individualization.

"Censorship of a mistress" allows you to discover autoeroticism (safe and not destructive if it follows the primary narcissistic phase in which the mother is sufficiently satisfying) and can serve as an introduction to any fantasy life.

For a mother investing in the "child of the night", the boy or girl becomes an unconscious substitute for the man - the father as an object of sexual desire.

Another interesting concept used in the French psychoanalytic school is the mirror metaphor, which was proposed by Sigmund Freud. The mirror - the position of the psychoanalyst in relation to the patient - should not be cold and distant. The patient-analyst pair is somewhat reminiscent of the conflict between Medusa and Perseus. Perseus was able to avoid turning to stone due to the fact that he did not look at her directly, but only at her reflection in his shield, which was a mirror. Looking, as it were, at her psychic representation, he was able to win. This reveals the important meaning of the psychoanalytic metaphor of the mirror for the analyst's position - taking into account the world of representation. These are not direct and indirect perceptions that can be intrusive and painful to both sides. The psychoanalyst must be able to use the "Perseus shield", accept the patient's affective projections without feeling a narcissistic wound, and be able to continue the relationship in order to facilitate the transformation of the patient's affects, linking them through their own psychological representations and transmitting the latter to the patient in the form of interpretations.

And the last thing I would like to consider in the review of the French psychoanalytic school is Michel de M's psychological chimera concept’ Yuzan.

The chimera is a mixture of both participants, the patient and the psychoanalyst, a product that does not belong entirely to either one or the other. The chimera is created by the psychoanalyst during the session by means of a "paradoxical mode of functioning" when it becomes the periphery of the patient's consciousness. As Gerard Belle aptly put it, “the chimera is created in areas of shadow where identity is jealously not guarded. This is a sticking point. "

Psychoanalyst Bernard Scherve describes how the patient's past experience is renewed in the analytic situation if both the analysand and his analyst begin to feel oscillations of their selves - oscillations of identity accompanied by strange uneasiness; more or less light depersonalization; sometimes experience even more primitive states when the child could feel like part of the Other. During the sessions, the analyst strives to explore aspects of the patient's psychic reality: sexual, narcissistic, self-identity. However, according to de M’ It becomes possible for the analyst to meet them, recognize and interact with them, provided that he allows himself to enter a symmetrical oscillation of identity, up to a state of infantile confusion, close to a traumatic situation, and therefore to danger.

The exact place for the analyst in this case is the place of the listener at the “mouth of the unconscious”. Psychoanalysis is then carried out from what was said to what was heard in an identification combination, confusion. As Michel Nero wittily observed, the analyst is kicked back for giving up his thoughts and accepting the other person's associations.

De M ’ Yuzan describes how two psychic apparatuses (patient and analyst), striving to create something integral, create a kind of neorealism, a monster of a chimera, animated by special processes taking place in a paradoxical system. Their voices and speech gradually merge and turn into something unified, understandable only from within this chimera - one head and two different bodies.

(The article uses material from the work: A. Gibot A. Rossokhin Psychoanalysis in France, or how to learn to live with uncertainty. In the book: French psychoanalytic school / Ed. A. Zibo, A. V. Rossokhina. SPb. 2005.S. 13-42).

The founder psychoanalytic school became Sigmund Freud(1856-1939), Austrian psychiatrist and psychologist.

● Most famous works: "On Psychoanalysis" (1911), "Interpretation of Dreams" (1913), "Psychology of Everyday Life"(1926) and others.

◘ Main idea - hypothesis of the existence of the unconscious as a special level of the human psyche. The driving force in the development of mankind is spontaneous drives, the main of which is the instinct of procreation, i.e. « libido ». Switching libido energy (sublimation ) Freud viewed creativity as the only healthy and constructive strategy to curb unwanted impulses. It was the sublimation of sexual instincts, in his opinion, that served as the main premise for great achievements in science and culture.

Thus, strong and unconsciously aggressive drives can be sublimated in a socially useful direction. From the point of view of classical psychoanalysis, the transformation of libido into creative inspiration is most clearly manifested in art. The great and well-known "I remember a wonderful moment ..." A.S. Pushkin dedicated A. Kern because she turned out to be inaccessible to him. Three months of forced isolation, which he spent in Boldino, yielded 50 inspirational works, and a happy "honeymoon" - only five small poems.

Freud's concept contains the assertion that it is precisely the conflicts of the individual's psyche that have a biological basis that act as an incentive for the development of culture and its content, which includes moral norms, art, state, law, etc. Religion, according to his views, is a fantastic projection into the external world of unsatisfied drives. In the most cultured people, Z. Freud noted, the natural principle is suppressed with special force, which makes them especially susceptible to mental illness, sexual disorders, and heart attacks. Suicide, which is a characteristic feature of advanced civilizations, is practically absent among primitive peoples. Thus, Freud, examining human culture from the standpoint of psychoanalysis, in his work "Dissatisfaction with culture" (1930) warns society against unnecessary restrictions and prohibitions, considering them a threat to the psychophysical well-being of mankind.

Modern researchers see significant shortcomings in the concept of Z. Freud. Nevertheless, they also note the undoubted advantages that consist in highlighting the significant role of the unconscious in human life and the functioning of culture, the study of the psychotherapeutic function of culture, the formation of scientific interest aimed at studying the relationship between norm and pathology in various cultures, etc.

10. The concept of the collective unconscious

Swiss psychologist and philosopher Carl Gustav Jung(1875-1961) was strongly influenced by Freud and, at one time, supported his theory. However, in 1913 there was a break in their relationship due to K. Jung's rejection of the completely original statement of Z. Freud that the brain is "an attachment to the sex glands." K. Jung built his own research on the basis of the analysis of dreams, delirium, schizophrenic disorders, as well as a deep study of mythology, the works of ancient, late antique and medieval philosophers.

● Main works: "Psychological Types" (1921), "Analytical Psychology and Education" (1936), "Psychology and Alchemy" (1952), "Archetype and Symbol" and etc.

◘ The main idea is to the concept of the collective unconscious, i.e. simultaneously with the existence of the unconscious in the individual, recognizes the existence of the unconscious in the collective.

● Jung introduced the concept of "archetype" into cultural studies.

From the fact of the existence of the unconscious in the collective, Jung concludes that the monotonous is a property inherent in all of humanity, the structural elements of which are represented by "archetypes." Each individual spirituality subsequently developed from them. “All the basic forms and basic stimuli of thinking are collective. Everything that people unanimously regard as universal, collectively, as well as that which is understood by everyone, is inherent in everyone, is said and done by everyone. "

According to Jung, the collective unconscious exists in the human soul in the form of archetype 1 already at birth. Archetypes accompany a person throughout his life and manifest themselves through symbols. Hence, mythology is an expression of the collective psyche. Jung assigned a special place among archetypes in his studies to the person, shadow, anime, animus and self.

A person(from Lat. mask) represents the public face of a person, i.e. how he behaves in the company of other people. It is necessary in everyday life, but at the same time it is also, to a certain extent, a source of danger, because can lead to personality degradation, constantly replacing individuality.

Shadow represents the unconscious opposite of what the individual seeks to establish in his consciousness. She is a source of unacceptable aggressive impulses, immoral thoughts, passions, etc. However, at the same time, the shadow also represents the source of vitality and creativity, because by curbing his own negative impulses, a person forms a personality in himself.

In addition, Jung believed that the unconscious has features inherent in the opposite sex, and a person in his entirety is a bisexual being. Thus, anima acts as the unconscious feminine side of the male personality, which is expressed in symbols such as mother, woman, soul, Virgin Mary. Hence, animus represents the inner image of a man in a woman, which is associated with the symbols of the father, man, hero, Jesus Christ. Over the centuries of interaction between the sexes, these archetypes have evolved in the collective unconscious.

Self Jung singled out as the most important archetype and called the core of the personality, around which other elements are united. The individual experiences a sense of harmony and integrity of his own personality in those cases when the integration of all aspects of the soul is achieved. Thus, the development of the self is the main goal of human life. Its symbol is the mandala and its many interpretations: an abstract circle, a saint's halo, etc. According to Jung, these symbols are found in dreams, fantasies, myths, religious and mystical experiences. Moreover, he considers religion to be a unique force that helps a person in his striving for integrity 1.

K. Jung is credited with creating a theory of psychological types (extrovert-introvert), which became the starting point in his comparative analysis of various types of cultures. According to his point of view, thinking is represented by two types: logical, i.e. extroverted and intuitive, i.e. introverted. He identifies the development of Western culture with extraverted thinking, traditional, including the countries of the East, with introverted. In cultures with introverted thinking, dreams, hallucinations, rituals, etc. are of particular value, since they allow one to come into contact with the collective unconscious and create a kind of balance between the conscious and the unconscious.

Unlike Freud, Jung's concept libido identified with creative energy. In the process of researching and analyzing the development of Western culture, he came to the conclusion that the era of the Enlightenment, which brought a new look at long-familiar things, led humanity to atheism. The realization that the gods do not exist, nevertheless, did not lead to the disappearance of their inherent functions, they only went into the sphere of the unconscious. This contributed to an overabundance of libido, which previously found expression in the cult of idols. As a result, the reverse flow of libido greatly strengthened the unconscious. It exerted a powerful pressure on consciousness and led to the French Revolution, which resulted in massacres. Thus, Jung associated socio-political crises and upheavals in Western European countries with the invasion of archetypes into the life of society.

He saw the most important task of culture in the liberation of man from the state of obsession and unconsciousness. Proceeding from this, man himself, Jung believed, should penetrate the unconscious and make it the property of consciousness, but not remain in it and not identify with it.

Jung's concepts have provoked lively debate and criticism. But it is quite obvious that the initial development of culture is intimately connected with a rather strong influence of the unconscious, and this influence has left its traces in many areas.

The American psychoanalyst Erich Fromm believed that a woman would have to accomplish two feats in her life. The first is to bear and give birth to a child, the second is to let him go on an independent journey. Is any mother capable of fulfilling such a destiny? Does she always remain an ideal for a daughter or son? Loving, sacrificial, virtuous ... Many of my patients complain about their parents. They tell how strange they are, how they hurt their children when they were growing up. One patient constantly wrote to me in her diary: "No-na-vie-zhu!" It's about the mother.

It is not difficult to collect grudges against your parents. Both mother and father are, alas, not angels. They are ordinary mortals who have their own passions, desires, inclinations. In addition, childhood traumas, as psychoanalysis shows, largely determine the fate of life. The mother of actress Natalia Gundareva did not want to recognize her daughter's first love: "This is not the person you need!" The actress later had other husbands, but she was never happily married. It turns out that the mother herself broke the female fate of her daughter.

Any person combines the past, present and future. Your parents, yourself and your children. New life is born in the womb of an ordinary earthly woman. The Lord God has no other opportunity to prolong the connection between generations. The Christian religion has learned this trinity (that is, the integrity of the three terms) from this essence of man. And she made it sacred so that we can understand the only law of life. There is no present without the past. Because there is no Son. The future is impossible without the present, because there will be no one to transfer the Covenant to. In religious literature, the covenant is a covenant between a person and God. A covenant is a good agreement. A. B. Karlin writes in the Literaturnaya Gazeta: “If the river is wide, then the bridge cannot be thrown from bank to bank just like that, it is necessary to put supports in the water -“ bulls. ”Each generation has such a“ bull ”supporting the spans that connect it with the previous generation and with the future. There is such a technology when a new span is built on the previous support and moves on to the next. From our parents we received an exceptionally strong "span". We stand on the shoulders of giants. "

And if it does not exist, this Covenant? If the parents failed to show this live connection between generations, the closeness of children and parents? If the children were unable to realize their deep, holy kinship with their parents? Then the Covenant is replaced in the human soul by a momentary order. By order. Then the future generation is not given the Covenant how to live, but the rules of how to survive. And then the continuity of life disappears. There remain people who do not need to take risks in order to defend the Covenant for future generations, but just need to seize the moment to sell something and buy something ... "You are a loser!" Shouts the son of his mother angrily. secure my life! " The freeloader, by the way, is of a heroic build, well-fed and well-groomed.

"I cannot forgive my mother. I saw her cuddling with a stranger. It was not my father, and I was shocked. I still cannot forgive her." But this patient was just telling me about how she secretly cheated on her husband, how happy she was in this sin ...

The Christian religion is trying to drive into our consciousness the simple truth of natural human existence - there is past, present and future. They are related. Simple truth: love for parents is due to the fact that they gave their children life. Before this obvious fact, all other details of existence fade away - children's grievances, oddities and even vices of parents, difficulties of life itself. My patient is 25 years old. She cries, talking about how her mother has betrayed her. When the girl was 15 years old, her mother took it and died. She left the poor crumb alone, doomed to tears and grief. As if my mother passed away of her own accord. She was ill and herself, apparently, suffered painfully from the fact that she would never see her daughter as an adult, with her grandchildren. The Russian philosopher V. S. Soloviev in his book "Justification of Good" writes a lot about reverence for parents. Why, this is one of the universal commandments of mankind. You read and think: well, that is so thorough, so meticulous. And so it is clear: Sunday will happen, I will put flowers on my mother's grave. But without a moral relay race, there is no connection between generations. There is no covenant either.

The child is never a mere mold of parenting. He very early and quite independently begins to choose the shrines of life. If a girl appreciates kindness, love, sacrifice, she can carry these covenants throughout her life, sometimes even contrary to parental instructions. Natalia Gundareva obeyed her mother, but betrayed her love. But should mom be blamed. No, not worth it - she had her reasons. Each person is responsible for his own actions. And this is the connection of times.