Difference between revisions of "Kleinian psychoanalysis"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | ==School of Psychoanalysis== | ||
[[Kleinian psychoanalysis]] is the name given to the [[school]] of [[psychoanalytic theory]] that has grown up around the pioneering work of the Austrian [[psychoanalyst]] [[Melanie Klein]] (1882-1960). | [[Kleinian psychoanalysis]] is the name given to the [[school]] of [[psychoanalytic theory]] that has grown up around the pioneering work of the Austrian [[psychoanalyst]] [[Melanie Klein]] (1882-1960). | ||
| Line 8: | Line 9: | ||
However, it was not until after the war that other [[analyst]]s began to become known as "[[Kleinian]]s" and to develop a substantial body of [[Klein]]ian [[thought]]. | However, it was not until after the war that other [[analyst]]s began to become known as "[[Kleinian]]s" and to develop a substantial body of [[Klein]]ian [[thought]]. | ||
| − | + | These [[analysts]] included Hannal Segal, Herbet Rosenfeld, Wilfred Bion and (later) Donald Meltzer. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| + | ==Jacques Lacan== | ||
Along with the two other major non-[[Lacanian]] [[school]]s of [[psychoanalytic theory]] ([[ego-psychology]] and [[object-relations theory]]) [[Kleinian psychoanalysis]] forms a major point of reference for [[Lacan]] against which he puts forward his own particular reading of [[Freud]]. | Along with the two other major non-[[Lacanian]] [[school]]s of [[psychoanalytic theory]] ([[ego-psychology]] and [[object-relations theory]]) [[Kleinian psychoanalysis]] forms a major point of reference for [[Lacan]] against which he puts forward his own particular reading of [[Freud]]. | ||
[[Lacan]]'s criticisms of [[Klein]] are therefore important to understanding the originality of his position. | [[Lacan]]'s criticisms of [[Klein]] are therefore important to understanding the originality of his position. | ||
| − | While it is impossible to mention all of these criticisms here, some of the | + | ==Criticism== |
| + | While it is impossible to mention all of these criticisms here, some of the most important of them may be summarized as follows. | ||
| − | + | * [[Lacan]] criticizes [[Klein]] for placing too much emphasis on the [[mother]] and neglecting the role of the [[father]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 728-9</ref> | |
| − | + | * [[Lacan]] criticizes [[Klein]] for theorizing [[fantasy]] entirely in the [[imaginary] [[order]]. | |
| + | : Such an approach is a misconception, argues [[Lacan]], since it fails to take into account the [[symbolic]] [[structure]] that underpins all [[imaginary]] [[formation]]s. | ||
| − | + | * [[Lacan]] disagrees with [[Klein]]'s views on the early development of the [[Oedipus complex]]. | |
| + | : For [[Lacan]], all debate on the precise dating of the [[Oedipus complex]] is futile, since it is not primarily a [[stage]] of [[development]] but a permanent [[structure]] of [[subject]]ivity. | ||
| + | : (Insofar as the [[Oedipus complex]] can be located in time, [[Lacan]] would not locate it as early as [[Klein]] does. | ||
| + | : Thus while [[Klein]] seems almost to deny the [[existence]] of a [[Preoedipal_stage|preoedipal phase]], [[Lacan]] argues that there is one.) | ||
| − | + | * Closely connected to the preceding point are [[Lacan]]'s differences with respect to "Melanie Klein's encroachments into the pre-verbal areas of the unconscious."<ref>{{L}} "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Some Reflections on the Ego]]", ''Int. J. Psycho-Anal''., vol. 34, 1953: p. 11</ref> | |
| + | : For [[Lacan]], there are no [[pre-oedipal phase|pre-verbal]] areas of the [[unconscious]], since the [[unconscious]] is a [[linguistic]] [[structure]]. | ||
| − | + | * [[Lacan]] criticizes [[Klein]]'s interpretive style as being particularly brutal. | |
| − | In reference to the young [[patient]] ('Dick') whom [[Klein]] discusses in her paper on symbol formation, [[Lacan]] remarks that "she slams the symbolism on him with complete brutality."<ref>{{S1}} p.68</ref> | + | : In reference to the young [[patient]] ('Dick') whom [[Klein]] discusses in her paper on symbol formation, [[Lacan]] remarks that "she slams the symbolism on him with complete brutality."<ref>{{S1}} p. 68</ref> |
| + | ==Other Schools== | ||
However, to portray [[Lacan]] as entirely critical of [[Klein]] would be to oversimplify the matter. | However, to portray [[Lacan]] as entirely critical of [[Klein]] would be to oversimplify the matter. | ||
| Line 37: | Line 42: | ||
He certainly regards it as superior to [[ego-psychology]]. | He certainly regards it as superior to [[ego-psychology]]. | ||
| − | He also states that [[Melanie Klein]] is certainly more faithful to [[Freud]] than [[Anna Freud]] regarding the theory of [[transference]].<ref>{{S8}} p.369</ref> | + | He also states that [[Melanie Klein]] is certainly more faithful to [[Freud]] than [[Anna Freud]] regarding the theory of [[transference]].<ref>{{S8}} p. 369</ref> |
In his pre-1950s writings, there are many allusions to [[Klein]]'s work on the [[mother]]-[[child]] [[dual relation|relationship]] and the various [[imago]]s that operate in [[fantasy]]. | In his pre-1950s writings, there are many allusions to [[Klein]]'s work on the [[mother]]-[[child]] [[dual relation|relationship]] and the various [[imago]]s that operate in [[fantasy]]. | ||
| Line 44: | Line 49: | ||
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
| + | {{Also}} | ||
| + | * [[Death drive]] | ||
* [[Development]] | * [[Development]] | ||
| + | || | ||
* [[Ego-psychology]] | * [[Ego-psychology]] | ||
* [[Imaginary]] | * [[Imaginary]] | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | * [[Linguistics]] | ||
* [[Object-relations theory]] | * [[Object-relations theory]] | ||
| + | || | ||
* [[Oedipus complex]] | * [[Oedipus complex]] | ||
* [[Part-object]] | * [[Part-object]] | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | * [[Pre-Oedipal]] | ||
* [[Symbolic]] | * [[Symbolic]] | ||
| − | + | {{Also}} | |
==References== | ==References== | ||
| Line 62: | Line 75: | ||
[[Category:Terms]] | [[Category:Terms]] | ||
[[Category:Concepts]] | [[Category:Concepts]] | ||
| + | {{OK}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | __NOTOC__ | ||
Revision as of 19:45, 24 August 2006
School of Psychoanalysis
Kleinian psychoanalysis is the name given to the school of psychoanalytic theory that has grown up around the pioneering work of the Austrian psychoanalyst Melanie Klein (1882-1960).
Melanie Klein
Born in Vienna, Klein settled in England in 1926 and remained there for the rest of her life.
Kleinian psychoanalysis first began to emerge as a distinctive school of psychoanalytic theory during the 1940s in opposition to the group which gathered around Anna Freud after the latter's move to London.
However, it was not until after the war that other analysts began to become known as "Kleinians" and to develop a substantial body of Kleinian thought.
These analysts included Hannal Segal, Herbet Rosenfeld, Wilfred Bion and (later) Donald Meltzer.
Jacques Lacan
Along with the two other major non-Lacanian schools of psychoanalytic theory (ego-psychology and object-relations theory) Kleinian psychoanalysis forms a major point of reference for Lacan against which he puts forward his own particular reading of Freud.
Lacan's criticisms of Klein are therefore important to understanding the originality of his position.
Criticism
While it is impossible to mention all of these criticisms here, some of the most important of them may be summarized as follows.
- Lacan criticizes Klein for placing too much emphasis on the mother and neglecting the role of the father.[1]
- Such an approach is a misconception, argues Lacan, since it fails to take into account the symbolic structure that underpins all imaginary formations.
- Lacan disagrees with Klein's views on the early development of the Oedipus complex.
- For Lacan, all debate on the precise dating of the Oedipus complex is futile, since it is not primarily a stage of development but a permanent structure of subjectivity.
- (Insofar as the Oedipus complex can be located in time, Lacan would not locate it as early as Klein does.
- Thus while Klein seems almost to deny the existence of a preoedipal phase, Lacan argues that there is one.)
- Closely connected to the preceding point are Lacan's differences with respect to "Melanie Klein's encroachments into the pre-verbal areas of the unconscious."[2]
- For Lacan, there are no pre-verbal areas of the unconscious, since the unconscious is a linguistic structure.
- In reference to the young patient ('Dick') whom Klein discusses in her paper on symbol formation, Lacan remarks that "she slams the symbolism on him with complete brutality."[3]
Other Schools
However, to portray Lacan as entirely critical of Klein would be to oversimplify the matter.
For while Lacan's disagreements with Kleinian psychoanalysis are at least as great as his disagreement with ego-psychology and object-relations theory, his comments on Klein are not characterized by the same dismissive tone which is evident in his acerbic criticisms of analysts from these other two schools.
He certainly regards it as superior to ego-psychology.
He also states that Melanie Klein is certainly more faithful to Freud than Anna Freud regarding the theory of transference.[4]
In his pre-1950s writings, there are many allusions to Klein's work on the mother-child relationship and the various imagos that operate in fantasy.
After 1950, Lacan praises Klein for emphasizing te importance of the death drive in psychoanalytic theory and for developing the concept of the part-object (though Lacan's formulations on this concept different greatly from Klein's).
See Also
|}
||
||
||
||
|}
References
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 728-9
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. "Some Reflections on the Ego", Int. J. Psycho-Anal., vol. 34, 1953: p. 11
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book I. Freud's Papers on Technique, 1953-54. Trans. John Forrester. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. p. 68
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre VIII. Le transfert, 1960-61. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 369
