The Significance of Ferenczi's clinical contributions for working with psychotic patients

Abstract

This paper tries to show that Ferenczi's contributions in “The Development of Psychoanalysis” (with Otto Rank) and in his “Clinical Diary” are pivotal for the development of modern psychotherapy with severely disturbed patients. In addition, the question of whether a psychotherapeutic technique should or could be communicated to others is discussed.

Keywords:

• History of technique
• mutual analysis
• Sándor Ferenczi
• Otto Rank

Notes

Not only was “technique” something secretive among psychoanalysts themselves, Freud also gave Ferenczi the advice “not to let the patients gather anything as far as technique is concerned” (4 August 1932 [1]).

It is also conceivable that the informant was Oskar Pfister.

“More than anybody else, Ferenczi had always done precisely this” ([7:171]; my translation).

Drafted by Ferenczi, then “then jointly revised” (Translator's Preface [8]).

“[T]he setting of a date and the analytic situation, which is always to be considered without exception, comes from Rank, and not from me” (Ferenczi to Freud, 30 January 1924 [1:121]; italics in original).

All following quotes, if not mentioned otherwise, from Ferenczi & Rank (8:28ff.).

A view Ferenczi had taken over from Groddeck.

It seems that these were not just notes for personal use, but that Ferenczi wanted to make use of them in a future publication. He already rendered the patients' names anonymous, he inserted cross‐references, and we know that some of the material and thoughts found their way into his last congress paper.

And not Ferenczi's “third puberty,” as Freud would have it (Freud to Ferenczi, 18 September 1931 [1:418]).

We can only speculate why Ferenczi did not realize this plan. Did Freud warn him against it? In any case, the topic occupied Ferenczi from early on. Already in 1910, he had written to Freud: “Already before the establishment of your requirement of ‘suppression of countertransference,’ we all did this instinctively, and this continual suppression has to add up to something” (5 April 1910 [12:158]).