Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
THE
ELASTICITY
OF
PSYCHO-ANALYTIC
TECHNIQUE
(1928)
Society, 1927
deal about his fellows which was previously beyond the range
sa
( 9 8)
!
88
VIII
I928
89
90
VIII
I928
91
92
VIII
of toil, time, and money; and you must decide for yourself
whether or not the amount of suffering which your difficulties
are causing you is sufficient to make the experiment worth
while i n spite of ail that. I n any case, think it over carefully
before beginning, because without the earnest intention to per
sist, even in spite of inevitable aggravations of your condition,
the only result will be to add one more to the disappointments
you have already suffered.'
I believe this preparation, which certainly errs on the side of
pessimism, is certainly the better; in any case it is in accordance
with the requirements of the 'empathy rule*. For, behind the
prospective patient's often all-too-excessive display of faith in
us, there is nearly always concealed a strong dose of distrust,
which he is trying to shout down by his passionate demands on
us for promises of a cure.'A characteristic question that is often
put to us by a prospective patient, after we have spent perhaps
an hour trying to explain to him that we regard his case as suit
able for analysis, is: 'But, doctor, do you really think that analy
sis would help me?' I t would be a mistake to reply by simply
saying yes. It is better to say that we do not believe in offering
further assurances. Even if the prospective patient professes the
most glowing opinion of analysis, this does not eliminate his con
cealed suspicion that the physician is, after all, a business man
with something to sell. T h e patient's concealed incredulity is
even more manifest in the question: 'But, doctor, don't you
think that your methods might make me worse?' I generally
reply to this with a counter-question. 'What is your occupation?'
I ask. Suppose the answer is: ' I ' m an architect.' 'Well, what
would you say,' I reply, 'if you laid the plan for a new building
before a client, and he asked you whether it wouldn't collapse?'
T h i s generally puts an end to further demands for assurances,
because it dawns on the patient that the practitioner of any
craft is entitled to a certain amount of confidence on his own
speciality, though that does not, of course, exclude disappoint
ments.
Psycho-analysis is often reproached with being remarkably
concerned with money matters. My own opinion is that it is far
too little concerned with them. Even the most prosperous i n
I928
93
94
VIII
I928
95
analyst must wait patiently until the patient makes up his own
mind; any impatience on the physician's part costs the patient
time and money and the physician a great deal of work which
he could very well spare.
A patient of mine once spoke of the 'elasticity of analytic tech
nique', a phrase which I fully accept. T h e analyst, like an
elastic band, must yield to the patient's pull, but without ceas
ing to pull in his own direction, so long as one position or the
other has not been conclusively demonstrated to be unten
able.
One must never be ashamed unreservedly to confess one's
own mistakes. I t must never be forgotten that analysis is no
suggestive process, primarily dependent on the physician's repu
tation and infallibility. A l l that it calls for is confidence in the
physician's frankness and honesty, which does not suffer from
the frank confession of mistakes.
Analysis demands of the physician, not only a firm control of
his own narcissism, but also a sharp watch on his emotional
reactions of every kind. I t used to be held that an excessive
degree of'antipathy' was an indication against undertaking an
analysis, but deeper insight into the relationship has caused us
to regard such a thing as unacceptable in principle, and to
expect the analysed analyst's self-knowledge and self-control to
be too strong for him to yield to such idiosyncrasies. Such 'anti
pathetic features' are in most cases only fore-structures, behind
which quite different characteristics are concealed; dropping
the patient in such cases would be merely leaving him in the
lurch, because the unconscious aim of intolerable behaviour is
often to be sent away. Knowledge of these things gives us the
advantage of being able coolly to regard even the most un
pleasant and repulsive person as a patient in need of help, and
even enables us not to withhold our sympathy from him. T h e
acquisition of this more than Christian humility is one of the
hardest tasks of psycho-analytic practice, and striving to achieve
it may incidentally lead us into the most terrible traps. I must
once more emphasize that here too only real empathy helps;
the patient's sharp wits will easily detect any pose.
One gradually becomes aware how immensely complicated
96
VIII
the mental work demanded from the analyst is. He has to let
the patient's free associations play upon him; simultaneously he
lets his own fantasy get to work with the association material;
from time to time he compares the new connexions that arise
with earlier results of the analysis; and not for one moment must
he relax the vigilance and criticism made necessary by his own
subjective trends.
One might say that his mind swings continuously between
empathy, self-observation, and making judgements. T h e latter
emerge spontaneously from time to time as mental signals,
which at first, of course, have to be assessed only as such; only
after the accumulation of further evidence is one entitled to
make an interpretation.
Above all, one must be sparing with interpretations, for one
of the most important rules of analysis is to do no unnecessary
talking; over-keenness in making interpretations is one of the
infantile diseases of the analyst. When the patient's resistance
has been analytically resolved, stages in the analysis are reached
every now and then in which the patient does the w6rk of inter
pretation practically unaided, or with only slight prompting
from the analyst.
A n d now let us return for a moment to the subject of my
much-praised and much-blamed 'activity'. I believe I am at
last in a position to give the details on timing for which I was
rightly asked. Y o u know, perhaps, that I was originally inclined
to lay down certain rules of behaviour, in addition to free
association, so soon as the resistance permitted such a burden.
Experience later taught me that one should never order or for
bid any changes of behaviour, but at most advise them, and that
one should always be ready to withdraw one's advice if it turned
out to be obstructive to the analysis or provocative of resistance.
M y original conviction that it was always the patient and never
the physician who must be 'active' finally led me to the con
clusion that we must content ourselves with interpreting the
patient's concealed tendencies to action and supporting his
feeble attempts to overcome the neurotic inhibitions to which
he had hitherto been subject, without pressing or even advising
1
1928
97
98
VIII
IV.
I928
99
100
VIII
I928
101