Bion's Notes on memory and desire – its initial clinical reception in the united states: A note on archival material

Abstract

While Bion's 1967 memory and desire paper reflected a crucial episode in his clinical thinking during his epistemological period, it was also central to his evolution as a Kleinian psychoanalyst who worked with seriously disturbed adult patients. The author explicates and contextualizes these claims with a new archival document, the Los Angeles Seminars delivered by Bion in April 1967, and the full‐length version of Notes on memory and desire. Bion here instigated a radical departure from years of theory‐laden work when he made his clinical work and ideas accessible to a new audience of American Freudian analysts. While this new group was keenly interested to hear about Bion's clinical technique with both borderline and psychotic patients, there were varied reactions to Bion's ideas on the technical implications of the analyst's abandonment of memory and desire. Both the Los Angeles Seminars and Notes elicited responses ranging from bewilderment, admiration to skepticism amongst his audience of listeners and readers.

These materials also however allow for a more complete and systematic presentation of important ideas about analytic technique – and while his ideas in this domain have been long valued and known by many psychoanalysts, this contribution stresses the crucial aspect of the reception of his ideas about technique in a particular American context. American analysts gained a much more explicit idea of how Bion worked analytically, how he listened, formulated interpretations and factored in the analyst's listening receptivity in the here‐and‐now. The author concludes with a consideration of the importance of Bion's American reception in 1967.

Translation of summary

Bions ‘Anmerkungen zu Erinnerung und Wunsch’ — ihre erste klinische Rezeption in den Vereinigten Staaten: Eine Anmerkung zu Archivmaterialien”

Bions Arbeit über Erinnerung und Wunsch markierte eine entscheidende Etappe in der Entwicklung seiner Theorie des Denkens, war aber auch für seine klinische Arbeit mit schwergestörten Erwachsenen und für seine Behandlungstechnik von zentraler Bedeutung. Der Autor untersucht die ungekürzte Fassung von Bions „Anmerkungen” sowie ein neues Archivdokument, nämlich die von Bion 1967 gehaltenen Los Angeles Seminars, in ihren Zusammenhängen. Bion wich kurz, aber entschieden von seiner jahrelangen theorielastigen Arbeit ab, als er seine behandlungstechnischen Überlegungen zu Erinnerung und Wunsch einem neuen Publikum, den in freudianischer Tradition ausgebildeten amerikanischen Analytikern in Los Angeles, vortrug. Diese reagierten auf seine Arbeit erstaunt, bewundernd und skeptisch.

Bion erläuterte die Hindernisse, die es dem Analytiker erschweren, diszipliniert zuzuhören, zumal in der Arbeit mit psychotischen und beinahe psychotischen Patienten, denen es besonders gut gelingt, seine therapeutischen Ziele und Wünsche zu untergraben. Außergewöhnlich an den Los Angeles Seminars ist die detaillierte klinische Darlegung seiner neuen technischen Überlegungen, die er seinen Zuhörern in klarem, unkompliziertem Englisch präsentierte.

‘Notas sobre memoria y deseo’ de Bion y su recepción clínica inicial en los Estados Unidos. Un comentario sobre el material de archivo

El trabajo de Bion sobre memoria y deseo representó una instancia crucial en la evolución de su teoría del pensamiento, pero fue también esencial para su trabajo clínico y su técnica con pacientes adultos gravemente perturbados. El autor contextualiza la versión completa de las “Notas” de Bion y un nuevo documento de archivo: los seminarios que el analista inglés dictó en Los Ángeles en 1967. Bion se alejó momentánea pero radicalmente de años de trabajo altamente teórico cuando presentó sus ideas técnicas sobre memoria y deseo a un nuevo público: analistas estadounidenses formados en el psicoanálisis freudiano en Los Ángeles. El texto despertó perplejidad, admiración y escepticismo en sus colegas estadounidenses.

Bion explicó las obstrucciones a la receptividad de la escucha disciplinada del analista, especialmente con pacientes psicóticos y cercanos a la psicosis, adeptos a confundir los objetivos y deseos terapéuticos de aquel. El aporte de los seminarios de Los Ángeles consiste en una exposición clínica detallada que muestra cómo Bion explicó sus nuevas ideas técnicas a su nuevo público en un inglés claro y directo.

« Notes sur la mémoire et le désir » de Bion – l'accueil clinique initial réservé à cet article aux États‐Unis. Note sur un matériel d'archive

L'article de Bion sur la mémoire et le désir a représenté un moment crucial dans l'évolution de sa théorie de la pensée, mais a également marqué un tournant essentiel dans son travail clinique et sa technique avec des patients adultes très perturbés. L'auteur de cet article contextualise la version intégrale de ces « Notes » de Bion ainsi qu'un nouveau document d'archive, Les séminaires de Los Angeles, que Bion a animés en 1967. Bion a changé radicalement d'orientation – même si cela n'a été que temporaire – après des années de travail théorique acharné, lorsqu'il a présenté à Los Angeles ses idées techniques sur le mémoire et le désir devant un nouvel auditoire composé d'analystes américains freudiens. Le travail de Bion devait susciter un mélange de perplexité, d'admiration et de scepticisme parmi ses collègues américains.

Bion a élucidé les freins à la réceptivité de l'écoute disciplinée de l'analyste, particulièrement en ce qui concerne les patients psychotiques et d'allure psychotique, experts en le fait de contrecarrer et démasquer les visées et désirs thérapeutiques de l'analyste. Les Séminaires de Los Angeles ont permis de fournir une présentation clinique détaillée de la façon dont Bion expliquait ses nouvelles idées techniques dans un idiome – l'anglais – aussi clair que direct, à ce nouveau public d'auditeurs.

‘Note su memoria e desiderio’ di Bion‐ La sua iniziale accoglienza clinica negli Stati Uniti: una nota su materiale d'archivio

Il lavoro di Bion su memoria e desiderio ha rappresentato un episodio cruciale nello sviluppo della sua teoria del pensiero, ma è stato anche centrale nel suo lavoro clinico con i pazienti gravi. L'autore esamina la versione integrale delle ‘Note’ e lo contestualizza con un nuovo documento d'archivio, i Seminari di Los Angeles tenuti da Bion nel 1967. Bion si era temporaneamente ma radicalmente allontanato da anni di lavoro ad alto contenuto teorico quando presentò le sue formulazioni tecniche su memoria e desiderio a un nuovo pubblico di ascoltatori, vale a dire gli analisti americani di Los Angeles, formatisi nella tradizione freudiana. Il lavoro di Bion sollecitò perplessità, ammirazione e scetticismo da parte dei suoi colleghi americani. Bion chiarì quali fossero gli impedimenti all'ascolto disciplinato e alla ricettività dell'analista, soprattutto con pazienti psicotici e quasi psicotici, abili a contrastare i suoi obbiettivi e desideri terapeutici. Il fattore aggiuntivo dei Seminari di Los Angeles consiste nel fornire una descrizione clinica dettagliata di come Bion spiegò il suo innovativo pensiero sulla tecnica in un inglese chiaro e diretto a quel nuovo pubblico di ascoltatori.

Key words:

• Wilfred Bion
• Kleinian clinical technique
• history of psychoanalysis
• borderline and psychotic patients

Acknowledgements

This paper is dedicated to Robert Hinshelwood, James Grotstein and Sira Dermen, colleagues whose research and clinical trajectories have been so helpful in years of discussions and gracious exchanges about the Kleinian/Bionian development. I also acknowledge the anonymous peer reviewers of the IJP, who have helped considerably with the current paper. Of course, any shortcomings of this paper are strictly the author's own. I also acknowledge the past support of the IPA Research Advisory Board, whose fellowships in previous years have made possible archival research as well as lecture presentations abroad. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the IPA Prague Congress, 2 August 2013 at a panel presentation, ‘Tension and Conflict in Late Bion’ (Tobias, 2013).

Notes

1. It would of course be of interest to see what relationship exists between this earlier 1965 lecture and the texts subsequently published by Bion. Robert Hinshelwood graciously alerted the author of the possible existence of this lecture – and subsequent inquiry with Joann Halford, the British Psychoanalytical Society's Archivist (personal communication, 30 August 2013) led to its eventual discovery in the form of an audiotape.

2. Bion (II, pp. 107–31) also did an extensive psychoanalytic case supervision with a small private study group on 13 April 1967. This small group of Los Angeles analysts heard Bion's clinical explication of a difficult‐to‐treat narcissistic analysand, so that, again, they could come to understand Kleinian conceptualizations of these types of patients. In addition, Bion also gave another evening seminar that contained still another long clinical example on ‘Reverence and Awe’ on 20 April 1967 at a joint meeting of the Los Angeles and Southern California Psychoanalytic Societies. This seminar appeared in Bion (IV, pp. 284–92).

3. Regarding the 1967 timeline of texts (I), (II) and (III), the ascertainable statement that can be made is that Bion's ‘Commentary’ in Second Thoughts preceded the Los Angeles Seminars; after that, Bion's Notes on memory and desire was published in The Psychoanalytic Forum. We know that Notes was specifically requested by John Lindon (1994, p. 621), the editor of the Forum, some months before; Lindon in turn would have mailed Bion's paper to the five IPA discussants, and received their responses; and in turn mailed these remarks back to London for Bion's own comment. This process of airmail delivery of this international correspondence in addition to the pre‐publication editorial work would have taken some months.

4. This paper appeared in a 1966 issue of the Bulletin of the British Psychoanalytical Society 5: 12–25, a periodical restricted to the members of the British Society, and was significantly revised by Bion (1970) as ‘Container and Contained Transformed,’ chapter 12 of Attention and Interpretation.

5. In a later paper in which Lindon (1994, p. 621) defended his clinical theoretical approach, he wrote in praise of Bion's ideas on technique: “I totally concur with Grotstein that ‘perhaps the most important provision that the analyst can proffer his or her own patient is his or her discipline, forebearance and capacity to suspend his or her ‘memory and desires’ (Bion, 1967a) In fact, in the 60s, when Hanna Segal was in Los Angeles giving seminars and supervision to a group of us who were interested in Melanie Klein, she mentioned Bion's ideas. They immediately struck me as being of great importance. I promptly wrote him to ask for a copy of his paper, only to be informed by him that there was no such paper, it had been just an idea off the top of his head at a scientific meeting in London. I urged him to write the paper, ‘Notes on memory and desire,’ which I published in The Psychoanalytic Forum. Subsequently, when Bion moved to Los Angeles, where he was to live and practice for about a decade, I told him that word for word it was the most influential psychoanalytic paper I had ever read. It remains so to this day. Only a page and a half long, highly condensed, and with an aphoristic style, it changed the way I practice analysis.”

6. In Recommendations to physicians practicing psychoanalysis, Freud (1912, p. 115) had discussed the analyst's state of mind as he listened to his patient: “Just as the patient must relate everything that his self‐observation can detect, and keep back all the logical and affective objections that seek to induce him to make a selection from among them, so the doctor must put himself in a position to make use of everything he is told for the purposes of interpretation and of recognizing the concealed unconscious material without substituting a censorship of his own for the selection that the patient has foregone. To put it in a formula: he must turn his own unconscious like a receptive organ towards the transmitting unconscious of the patient.”

7. Brierley here conveyed an apparent ease with Bion's propositions, one that may have been born of previous familiarity with his papers and books while she was an assistant editor (1954–1978) of the International Journal of Psychoanalysis (Hayman, 1986). As a ‘British Freudian,’ to use Robinson's (2011) term, who subsequently became an ‘Independent’ after the Controversial Discussions ended in 1944, Brierley had extensive familiarity with the work of both Freud and Klein.

In terms of Bion's own ideas about remembering, he (1966, p. 14) had earlier made the distinction between an ‘evolution’ and regurgitated memory in his Catastrophic change paper of 1966. Bion (1966, p. 14) referred to the obtrusive nature of memory in the analyst's work: “The analyst who comes to a session with an active memory is therefore in no position to make ‘observations’ of mental phenomena because these are unknown and cannot be sensuously apprehended & I want to make a distinction between (1) remembering a dream or having memory of a dream and (2) the experience of the dream in which it seems to float into the mind as if it were a whole which at one moment were absent and at the next present. This experience, which I consider to be essential to an evolution of the emotional reality of the session, is often called memory, but it is to be distinguished from the experience of remembering.”

8. Those familiar with Bion's early days in Los Angeles recall some initially worrisome months when very few came along to consult Bion (James Grotstein, personal communication).

9. A synopsis of some of Bion's (II) brief clinical vignettes: (1) In response to a query regarding overly‐agreeable patients, Bion briefly discussed a kind of patient who seemed to be in constant agreement with the analyst, but in “&terms which were extremely ambiguous.” One particular patient exercised a masterly use of English and managed to get across a number of ambiguous meanings (II, p. 17); (2) After a session of good contact, when a male analysand complained about how his father had “favoritized” his sister; the analyst interpreted the patient's envy of what he himself had said the day before – in that session, the patient saw himself as “father's favorite” (II, pp. 9–10); (3) A male analysand made a slip of the tongue, saying “selectual,” when he meant “sexual.” This led the analyst to describe the sexual relationship between words as between the parents in intercourse, something to be attacked and split up into particles (II, pp. 38–9); (4) A psychotic patient who confused omnipotent thoughts with actions: he realized that he had missed his train stop and at the next one, merely thought he could disembark while the train was still moving, all of which led to severe contusions and other injuries (II, p. 57); (5) A hyper‐sensitive psychotic male who could not listen to the London Philharmonia because he could hear that one clarinet was sharp, which ruined the entire performance for him. The analyst regarded this as a “&very good hyper‐sensitive contact with reality&”, all of which led to intense pain and suffering on the patient's part (II, pp. 70–1).