Training Analysis: a Historical View Marco Innamorati & Diego Sarracino

RIVISTA INTERNAZIONALE DI FILOSOFIA E PSICOLOGIA ISSN 2039-4667, E-ISSN 2239-2629 DOI: 10.4453/rifp.2012.0005 Vol. 3 (2012), n. 1, pp. 36-48

Ricerche

Training Analysis: A Historical View Marco Innamorati & Diego Sarracino

Articolo ricevuto il 9 aprile 2012, accettato il 30 giugno 2012

█ Riassunto L’analisi didattica: una prospettiva storica - Il carattere obbligatorio dell’analisi didattica, ossia l’analisi personale cui ogni candidato a diventare psicoanalista deve sottoporsi, era una pratica vigente presso tutte le istituzioni psicoanalitiche già al tempo di Freud. E tuttavia, quel che all’inizio si era configurato come un’aggiunta non particolarmente gravosa all’addestramento analitico, si è poi trasformato in qualcosa di molto diverso. Le scuole psicoanalitiche hanno mostrato scarso impegno nello stabilire l’efficacia dell’analisi personale, mediante la promozione di studi empirici o semplicemente tramite un più dettagliato esame della sua legittimità teorica (questione che esula dalla necessità della sua completezza, costantemente rimarcata), nonostante si tratti di una pratica che richiede centinaia di ore di analisi e un ingente esborso di danaro per il candidato analista. La grande resistenza verso la messa in questione di questa pratica va di pari passo con la persistente circolazione di una serie di leggende sulle sue origini. Una dettagliata disamina storica offrirà del materiale interessante per proporre alcune considerazioni che mostrano come il costume di chiedere l’analisi didattica sia sostenuta da motivazioni di natura istituzionale piuttosto che da necessità teoriche o da eviden- ze empiriche. PAROLE CHIAVE: Analisi didattica; Storia della psicoanalisi; Sigmund Freud; Carl Gustav Jung; Sandor Fe- renczi.

█ Abstract The obligatory nature of training analysis, i.e. the personal analysis of every candidate analyst, was adopted by all psychoanalytic institutes during Freud’s lifetime. But what had initially been a not particularly burdensome addition to training was subsequently transformed into something quite different. Psychoanalytic schools have shown little concern to establish the efficacy of personal analysis either by un- dertaking empirical studies or simply examining its theoretical justifications more closely (apart from the constantly reasserted need for completeness), despite the fact it requires hundreds of hours of analysis at vast expense to the candidate. The considerable resistance to questioning this practice goes hand in hand with the persistent circulation of a series of legends about its origin. An accurate historical review will offer inter- esting material for consideration, showing how the custom of requiring training analysis is underpinned by reasons of an institutional nature rather than by theoretical necessity or empirical findings. KEYWORDS: Training Analysis; History of Psychoanalysis; Sigmund Freud; Carl Gustav Jung; Sandor Ferenczi.

M. Innamorati - Dipartimento di Psicologia e Scienze Pedagogiche e Didattiche - Università degli Studi di Bari “Aldo Moro” () E-mail: [email protected] D. Sarracino - Dipartimento di Psicologia - Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca. E-mail: [email protected]

Attribution - Noncommercial - No Derivative Works 3.0

Training Analysis: A Historical View 37

█ Freud and Jung appear to be no cause to doubt that it was to Jung that Freud alluded in the text quoted THE VARIOUS CURRENTS OF PSYCHOANA- above, nor does there seem to be any identifi- LYTIC THOUGHT have never disguised or at- able reason whatever to question the historic tempted to underestimate their respective accuracy of that assertion.4 theoretical and therapeutic differences of ap- When relations with Jung deteriorated, proach, often to the point of making it seem Freud created a sort of screen memory in aid of quite hopeless to attempt to find so much as a the psychoanalytic movement, attributing to patch of hypothetical common ground.1 One Hermann Nunberg the paternity of the idea of of the few points of contact between the training analysis, supposedly first aired at the schools of psychoanalytic training is the abso- International Congress of Psychoanalysis in lute requirement that the candidate analysts Budapest. This version of events is often cited undergo at least one training analysis. The in psychoanalytic circles as quite reliable.5 theoretical basis for this practice, which was Even Peter Gay, in his celebrated biography of introduced in the first decade of the 20th cen- Freud, confidently states that the necessity of tury, was not propounded by the founding fa- a training analysis emerged only in the years ther, Sigmund Freud, but by Carl Gustav Jung, subsequent to the First World War.6 But let us at a time when he was still Freud’s heir appar- return to Freud’s original attribution. It is well ent. The historic evidence of Jung’s being the known how ungenerous Freud could be in originator is a statement by Freud himself, to recognizing the merits of others, even to the be found in Recommendations to Physicians extent of occasionally claiming to be the origi- Practicing Psycho-analysis: nator of ideas that were not really his, and this despite his in fact extraordinary creativity.7 It I count it as one of the many merits of the could be that such a clear attribution to others Zurich school of analysis that they have of something that is still considered a corner- laid increased emphasis on [the fact that] stone of psychoanalytic training reveals a cer- everyone who wishes to carry out analyses tain ambivalence about this practice on on other people shall first himself undergo Freud’s part. We have, after all, seen that an analysis by someone with expert when he retracted his original identification of knowledge. Anyone who takes up the work this specific merit of the Zurich School, Freud seriously should choose this course, which did not attribute the idea to himself, but offers more than one advantage; the sacri- drafted Nunberg for the purpose. And when it fice involved in laying oneself open to an- came to the formal requirement, Freud deput- other person without being driven to it by ed someone else (although indeed a faithful illness is amply rewarded.2 disciple, Max Eitingon) to draw up the practical regulations. There is no passage in the works of Jung in There was, however, one occasion when which he seems to introduce the idea of the Freud seemed tempted to appropriate the au- necessity for a training analysis, but in the thorship of the idea of a required training anal- published text (from 1912) of his American ysis, but, in the case in point, it was a question lectures, which he gave in 1910, he does men- of a training analysis for each of his closest as- tion the need for an analyst to be analyzed. sociates, to be carried out by him. Evidence can This mention, however, seems paradoxically be found in his correspondence with Ernest to refer to something already established. Jones during a delicate moment in the history Jung’s claims to have chronological prece- of the psychoanalytic movement, just when dence in this regard are found in later texts,3 Jung had definitively broken away from Freud. which seems logical, given the recognition he Jones was very much in favor of forming a se- had had from Freud. In any case, there would lect group of associates who would be analyzed

38 Innamorati & Sarracino in depth by Freud, and recalled that this idea it was largely in terms of policy that it was op- had first been launched by Ferenczi.8 Freud re- portune to require a training analysis. From plied positively, adding the unambiguous what we know of the way Freud dealt with words «You say it was Ferenczi who expressed other cases of ethically questionable relation- this idea, yet it may be mine own».9 ships, moreover, we can conclude that Freud When Freud finally returned to the subject was not so much shocked by the possibility of the function of training analysis in Analysis that followers of his might have had sexual re- terminable and interminable, one of his very lations with patients, as he was worried about last essays, he showed much less conviction the possibly resultant tarnishing of the image than in the work from 1912. After stating that of the psychoanalytic movement.13 Jung «It cannot be disputed that analysts in their would seem to have been prompted by an at- own personalities have not invariably come up tempt to prevent – at least for others – the to the standard of psychical normality to repetition of an experience which – quite which they wish to educate their patients»10 apart from the extent to which it may have and while upholding the need for training distracted him from the necessary analytic analysis, he went so far as to maintain Freud neutrality – was certainly destabilizing. in 1937: «For practical reasons this analysis The history of the use of training analysis can only be short and incomplete. Its main ob- in psychoanalytic institutes is in fact marked ject is to enable his teacher to make a judge- by the conflict between educational motives ment as to whether the candidate can be ac- and reasons of State: between freedom and cepted for further training».11 control. In a sense it is also a replay of the hu- If, however, – politically inspired retrac- man and professional relationship between tions apart – it was actually Jung who first had Freud and Jung. It should, meanwhile, be the idea of analyzing the analyst, one can legit- mentioned that neither of the two actually ev- imately wonder in what circumstances he er managed to have a real training analysis shared it with Freud. We can assume, since himself. The attempt they made to analyze there is no written evidence even in their cor- each other soon ran aground.14 respondence (which was preserved and pub- In any case, there is no direct evidence re- lished almost in its entirety), that the commu- garding the time or mode of Jung’s communi- nication must have taken place informally. In cation to Freud about his idea of making all probability, Jung realized that insufficient training analysis compulsory. A series of his- familiarity with his or her own unconscious torical indications does, however, seem to lim- could lead an analyst into excessive involve- it the likely time to the period between 1910 ment in the analytic relationship, opening the and 1912. The terminus ante quem of March door to a relationship of a very different na- 1912 is, of course, dictated by the date of pub- ture. This conjecture is justified by the papers lication of Freud’s above-cited work in which of Sabina Spielrein, one of Jung’s first patients. that requirement is mentioned for the first Although there is no proof of any physical re- time. The first conceivable terminus post quem lationship between them, there was, at a cer- would have to be in 1907, the year of the first tain point, at the very least a definite danger of meeting between Jung and Freud (since we such a relationship.12 Thus it would be alto- have concluded that the vehicle was an infor- gether comprehensible for Jung not to seem mal discussion rather than a letter). Also, eager, at any rate initially, to present his idea, 1907, according to Ernest Jones, was the year original though it might be, as a great break- of the start of the first experiment in training through. analysis. In his biography of Freud, in fact, Yet again, however, we find Freud and Jones writes that the first training analysis Jung taking diametrically opposed positions: took place, in an absolutely informal manner, the former would seem to have concluded that between 1907 and 1909, with Max Eitingon as

Training Analysis: A Historical View 39 the analysand. Having consulted Freud for analysis considered by the analytic couple in help with a difficult case, Eitingon found he question to be a training analysis was the one was being analyzed himself in the course of undergone by Ferenczi with Jung.22 occasional strolls around Vienna with the Paradoxically, in the Freud-Ferenczi corre- great man.15 Since it was Eitingon who subse- spondence (which, from 1908 on, was vast quently drew up the first official regulations and constant), Ferenczi appears to make no about training analysis in particular, and the explicit mention of this experience. Only indi- preparation of analysts in general, we can be rectly can one infer Ferenczi’s precocious con- astonished at the curious fate that led the first viction of the importance of analysis for the analyst who was analyzed by Freud to present analyst, e.g. when one considers the amaze- the rules; or else we can suppose that the first ment he expresses at Sachs’s profound under- training analysis is a legend created after the standing, despite his not having been analyzed fact, a rather widespread practice within the by anyone.23 psychoanalytic movement.16 It may be reasona- Also in 1910, however, Freud suggested the ble to conclude that the reconstruction is leg- need for self-analysis – not for training analy- endary in part: that there was no intention at sis – in two writings which could be described the time to “teach” Eitingon by means of this as political in nature, in which the question curious form of analysis, but that his rambles takes on a particular importance. This means with Freud, when reinterpreted later, could that he had not yet had Jung’s suggestion that have taken on a historic significance that nei- training analysis was necessary, or he was at ther of the two men would ever have foreseen. least not yet entirely convinced by it (and It is, on the other hand, most unlikely that hence any such suggestion would have been there is any connection between these rambles quite recent). In The future prospects of psycho- and Jung’s idea. Apart from anything else, two analytic therapy,24 Freud stresses the need to letters from Freud to Ferenczi would appear continue with self-analysis during one’s prac- to limit Eitingon’s experience with Freud to a tice as a therapist, because the patient cannot few weeks in 1909: the first letter mentions carry on with his process of self-knowledge the recently introduced walks with Eitingon as beyond the level the analyst himself has something new17 and the second mentions reached, and also because the analyst must Eitingon’s imminent departure, which would keep his counter-transference under control (it mark the end of this pleasant pastime.18 In any was in this work, it should be mentioned, that case, we know that before 1912 Freud had, in this term first appeared publicly). In the se- an equally informal way, analyzed other peo- cond text, “Wild” psychoanalysis,25 Freud ple in his circle (such as Emma Ekstein, Felix states that the right to call oneself a psychoan- Gattel, Wilhelm Stekel), but without consider- alyst should be reserved for those who have ing these analyses part of a training program, learned the method within his circle, and who indeed even feeling uneasy about having per- have progressed with their own self-analysis. formed them.19 And already in 1908, Ferenczi On the basis of the publication date of an- wrote to Freud that he had proposed analysis other writing by Jung, however, one might to two neurologists as a means of converting consider a further adjustment in the terminus them to the psychoanalytic cause, but not, in- post quem, which would now be 1911. Jung, in deed, as a method of training.20 fact, writes, in a critical review of an essay by Jung, in his turn, practiced an informal sort Morton Prince, that «practical and theoretical of psychoanalysis on people he thought might understanding of psychoanalysis is a function of become adherents: a letter from 190921 pro- analytical self-knowledge».26 This passage, vides evidence of Jung’s having analyzed a Dr. however vague in its wording, would seem to Seif of Munich for three days for that purpose. refer not to training analysis, but rather to It has instead been suggested that the first self-analysis, which was originally meant to be

40 Innamorati & Sarracino part of the preparation of every analyst, ac- ever more numerous candidates – including cording to Freud. On this basis – which, it many foreigners – were fascinated not only by must be admitted, is highly conjectural – the the general atmosphere of enthusiasm and origin of training analysis would have to be commitment they found there, but also by the assigned to 1911-1912 (or perhaps just to informal structure.28 1911, given that the texts Jung and Freud pub- A not inconsiderable number of analysts, lished the following year seem to imply the in truth, regarded even a minimal level of passage of just that little bit of time – with the formality about the training analysis require- attendant detachment – which is necessary for ment with skepticism. Amongst them we can metabolizing what was already considered an certainly include Hanns Sachs, who in addi- acquired idea). tion to being one of Freud’s closest associates, was also one of the very first full-time training █ Regulation and institutionalization analysts, first in Berlin and then in the United of training analysis States. Sachs’s statement already sounds rather disillusioned: Eitingon’s proposal about the regulation of training analysis was issued, as we have seen, Religions have always demanded a trial pe- much later. He outlined it publicly in 1925 at riod, a novitiate, of those among their devo- the congress in Bad Homburg, in the context tees who desired to give their entire life into of a tripartite training model which would be- the service of the supermundane and the su- come the prototype of the rules adopted by pernatural, those, in other words, who were the various institutes that were being set up to become monks or priests… It can be seen within the International Psychoanalytic Asso- that analysis needs something corresponding ciation, the international body founded by to the novitiate of the Church.29 Freud together with a committee of his most loyal associates. The model included, in addi- Thus Sachs compares training analysis to a tion to the analysis of the candidate analyst, sort of initiation, a way of taking one’s place in a attendance at required theoretical instruction circle of psychoanalysts. His attitude, it would seminars and also a period of clinical practice seem, remained rather detached, both during his under the supervision of an experienced ana- training practice in Berlin, where he was sent lyst, called in fact a teaching analyst. The edu- specifically for that purpose by Freud, and in cational structure thus organized was adopted Chicago, to which he was invited to move and at first only by the Berlin Institute; if we are to where, despite being received with full honors, believe what Eitingon himself declares, how- he had some trouble fitting into a system which ever, in 1927 aspiring analysts in Vienna and was rapidly becoming quite bureaucratic. London as well were already undergoing an Sandor Ferenczi appeared to take a very apprenticeship of this sort.27 The Berlin Psy- different position when, in 1927, he called for choanalytic Institute had, however, achieved a the establishment of a more thorough training kind of worldwide leadership in the training analysis than what was evidently being proof analysts, at least until the advent of Nazism, posed by a part of the psychoanalytic world: when aspiring German psychotherapists – and only the non-Jews – were induced to ap- To stand firm against this general assault ply to the more “Aryan” Göring Institute. Ac- by the patient the analyst requires to have cording to Peter Gay’s reconstruction, never- been fully and completely analysed himself. theless, the Berlin Institute, in its heyday, ab- I mention this because it is often held to be solutely did not take on those bureaucratic sufficient if a candidate spends, say, a year qualities which later came to characterize psy- gaining acquaintance with the principal choanalytic institutes: it would seem that the mechanisms in his so-called training analy-

Training Analysis: A Historical View 41

sis. His further development is left to what or even three years in one of the above he learns in the course of his own experi- mentioned cities [London, Berlin, Vienna], ence. […] The analysis himself, on whom and during the first half of this period, the fate of so many other people depends, commit himself [or herself] to a personal must know and be in control of even the analysis one hour a day.34 most recondite weakness of his own char- acter; and this is impossible without a fully Thus, given the longest period of residence competed analysis.30 Ferenczi envisaged, that is three years, we can conclude that if he considered one year to be too The psychoanalytic mainstream has, in brief for a training analysis, his notion of “long general, never been particularly generous in its enough” does not in any case exceed a year and a evaluation of Ferenczi’s undeniable merits.31 half. And this would seem to make sense in a his- In this case, however, it has been willing to toric context in which a standard analysis recognize his contribution, as is confirmed by might last between six and twelve months, so a Laplanche and Pontalis’ Vocabulaire (1973) – training analysis that went on for 18 months or even to assign him a quasi-heroic role.32 could be twice or even thrice as long. Com- It can be seen that the psychoanalytic pared with the year that might be, as he sug- movement has no trouble disowning Freud gested in the 1927 essay, insufficient, the pro- when it comes to complicating the initiation of posed 50% increase to achieve an acceptable candidates. Another case in which Freud’s length does not, in any case, seem inconsidera- word was not gospel was when they introduced ble. One should also note that, some 15 years the rule in the United States that practitioners earlier, Ferenczi had regarded with disdain the of psychoanalysis had to be medical doctors. fact that anyone could accuse him of conduct- Freud had opposed that position but was ing an analysis lasting two to three years.35 obliged to accept it by Brill’s unequivocal threat After Freud’s death the position attributed that American psychoanalysts would desert the to Ferenczi came gradually to be accepted by IPA in a body unless he gave it his approval.33 the notables of the International Psychoana- Etchegoyen, meanwhile, with explicit ref- lytic Association, as we can see from the fol- erence to Ferenczi’s 1927 essay, seems to con- lowing statement by one of the leading lights trast it with Analysis terminable and intermi- of Ego psychology in the United States: nable, which was, however, not written until ten years later and could hence not be the tar- I believe that the didactic analysis [sic] get of this supposed attack. Yet Etchegoyen should not be less thorough or “complete” himself – together with everyone else who than the therapeutic analysis, but definitely views Ferenczi as a supporter of a training more so. It should give the analysand an analysis of indeterminate length – fails to con- insight into the dynamics of his behavior sider a lecture given in Madrid the following and personal conflicts and, inosofar as pos- year, which indirectly sheds light on quite dif- sible, into their origin. It should enable him ferent intentions. In 1928, Ferenczi spoke of to use this insight under the changing cir- the training of an analyst to an audience of po- cumstances of life in the continuous pro- tential candidates, defending the need to carry cess of adjustment, which includes his re- out a course of regular training in one of the action to the pathological material to places where there already existed a regular which he will be exposed.36 training institute. Specifically, he said: Kris’s position, which he subsequently con- The sacrifices, which analytic training urg- firmed,37 was echoed on the other side of the es to a candidate, are considerable. After Atlantic by Michael Balint, a proponent of ob- the diploma, he [or she] has to live for two ject relations theory who warned of the risk

42 Innamorati & Sarracino that an insufficiently thorough training analy- so been some in the psychoanalytic world who sis might oblige a psychoanalyst to repeat the expressed their awareness of the risk that the process subsequently but with greater en- schools would ultimately be stultified by ex- gagement; Balint also found it absurd that a treme formalism and that training analysis candidate could be considered «healthy (i.e. would at last be no more than a long rite of trained) enough for starting to analyse pa- passage. An alarm was clearly sounded, not tients on his own…, but as yet not necessarily much after Kris’s and Balint’s contributions, healthy enough to deal with his own neurotic by Edward Glover’s severe criticism: unconscious problems».38 Ideas like those of Balint and Kris gained ground in psychoana- It is scarcely to be expected that a student lytic institutes, making the training process who has spent some years under the artifi- ever longer and more burdensome for the cial and sometimes hothouse conditions of candidate analyst, who was thus implicitly a training analysis and whose professional equated with extreme neurotics. More than career depends on overcoming “resistance” one teaching analyst, during this same period, to the satisfaction of his training analyst, expressed perplexity at having to accept as can be in a favourable position to defend candidate analysts people whom they consid- his scientific integrity against his analyst’s ered too “normal”,39 and at times there theories and practice. And the longer he seemed to be a possibility that a candidate’s remains in training analysis, the less likely apparent normality actually concealed a de- he is to do so. For according to his analyst fensive attitude which in its turn masked a the candidate’s objections to interpreta- deeply hidden neurosis.40 tions rate as “resistances”. In short there is If, however, there had come to be a con- a tendency inherent in the training situa- sensus about the need for a thorough analytic tion to perpetuate error.44 process and about the establishment of selec- tion criteria, recording the nature of these cri- Actually, Anna Freud had already ex- teria was left, essentially, to the oral tradition pressed serious doubts about the purpose of of the institutes. A documented review from training analysis in an essay from 1938. Para- the ‘60s reveals the general absence in the liter- doxically, however, this essay, which was writ- ature of attempts to describe either the profile ten in German, had quite limited circulation of a good candidate or the level of thorough- until its publication in English 30 years later – ness required of a training analysis.41 in a considerably milder version: it seems ob- The fact that an observation of this kind vious that this all came about for IPA political should have been made nearly 40 years after reasons. Eitingon’s regulations came into force would So Glover’s comments must have seemed appear to be an essential confirmation of the at the time like a first warning signal. Not long sectarian tendencies of psychoanalytic insti- after his contribution was published, in fact, tutes. Nor does David Kayris’s observation there was an attempt to explore a series of seem to have lost its validity 40 years later, contradictions characteristic of training analy- given that Marylou Lyonnels42 has discovered sis. Indeed it had not escaped the notice of that “remarkably little” has been written on theoreticians that one of the basic elements of the subject and David Tuckett43 has found analytic transference – the neutrality of the that it is still necessary to make the case for therapist – is violated in the course of training greater transparency about it. analysis, in which context it is not appropriate to consider the patient paranoid because he █ Criticism and controversy feels he is being judged by the therapist: the blank screen is greatly contaminated by ele- In actual fact, for a long time there had al- ments of reality;45 dependence on the analyst

Training Analysis: A Historical View 43 is not the result of regression but reflects the solved.53 The price one pays is the muzzling of professional relationship between teacher and the creative impulse, as Kernberg charges, candidate.46 making use of his devastating sense of humor, Despite the doubts that are periodically in Thirty Methods to Destroy the Creativity of expressed about the legitimacy of an analysis Psychoanalytic Candidates.54 carried out by a person who is in some way called upon, whether directly or indirectly, to █ Recent developments and conclusion judge the candidate, the methods that have been proposed from time to time to obviate Kayris’ original proposal55 – subsequently the problems have often been singularly in- reintroduced by McLaughlin56 – based on substantial. Someone has proposed that there having training analysis carried out by a ther- be an in-depth analysis of resistance typical of apist unconnected with the candidate’s train- training analysis;47 someone else has suggested ing institute, fell for a long time essentially on quite simply that the interpretations be sub- deaf ears. For all that a certain number of tler:48 we could go on at some length, but most training Institutes no longer require a direct of the proposals seem to reflect – in the best of report from the teaching analyst on the “pro- cases – a conviction that the system, however gress” of the candidate, the influence of the imperfect, is the only one possible.49 The fact former on the career of the latter cannot help that a large number of candidates chose to re- being decisive, as long as the analyst is an in- sort to a second analysis “for themselves” after fluential member of the same Institute (and finishing the one “for the Institute”50 does not often this influence is confirmed by the right seem to have shaken the serene conviction of to veto the progress of the candidate’s career). the teaching analysts. Nor does anyone appear Of the training institutes associated with the to have paid particular attention to the histor- IPA, only those in France and Uruguay have ical errors that have been committed: one established – and only fairly recently – that need but think of the case of Margaret Mah- training analysis, although required, may be ler, who was failed as an analyst by Helene carried out by any analyst and, in any case, Deutsch, her teaching analyst.51 without any control or evaluation from the Thus it came in the end to speaking of institute.57 training analysis as a “nihilation process” of A recent attempt to summarize what has the candidate.52 Only quite recently there have appeared in the literature about the purposes again been some authoritative figures who of training analysis58 lists five fundamental have openly stated what has really been clear points advanced by its supporters: training to everyone for some time, i.e. that the preva- analysis, they maintain, serves to (a) make the lent training system is no more than a power candidate a better analyst; (b) instruct him in system, by means of which the experienced the psychoanalytic technique; (c) support his teaching analysts achieve three basic results: technical learning from a different point of first of all, they reap considerable financial view (e.g. through understanding the interplay benefits, particularly since training analyses of transference and counter-transference); (d) are among the limited number left for which provide him with an experience of analysis the “patients” are still willing to respect the that will strengthen his capacity for introspec- classic setting of four to five sessions a week; tion and empathy; e) reinforce his conviction secondly, they can select a generation of heirs of the efficacy of psychoanalysis. It should be who have been formed to respect orthodoxy; remembered that some of these points make and lastly, they can have the narcissistic satis- effective sense from a historical point of view. faction of seeing themselves idealized by their Before Freud’s Recommendations (1912), in own students through the operation of a fact, there was no text that described psycho- transference than can never be truly re- analytic technique and, to tell the truth, the

44 Innamorati & Sarracino psychoanalytic movement was for a long time ing cannot be considered to qualify as genu- rather stingy with actual technical writings. So inely scientific, since the possible distortions it remained the case for quite a while that to are only too obvious. Nor does gathering qual- have an idea of how analysis worked, experi- itative data from the analytic couple – so as to encing it yourself might be the most practical learn what each of them thinks has taken answer. Having said this, we must point out place in the course of training analysis – count that, in the light of the current situation (but as a scientific method. In any case, since the we could also say “of the last 60 years”), points literature does not appear to offer definite (b), (c) and (d) should apply not so much to help in identifying the real objectives of train- training analysis as to supervision, in conjunc- ing analysis, it becomes even more problemat- tion with the study of the copious technical ic to transform the objectives into measurable literature. Point (e) is in itself tenuous, since in variables. This, in its turn, would seem to give a scientific community, proofs of efficacy rise to the paradoxical result of rejecting the should be based on empirical studies (or in the empirical evidence of the need for change. case in point at least on clinical studies) and The problem could, nevertheless, be got round not on personal experience, which normally by using empirical evidence drawn from other serves as proof in partisan circles. Point (a) ac- kinds of research. Some examples follow. tually begs the question: it offers as proof Since it has been shown that the frequency what should instead be demonstrated. But of sessions has a positive effect on the out- even supposing that the points listed above come of therapy up to (and not above) the provide sufficient evidence in favor of training number of two a week,63 one fails to under- analysis as such, not one of them even ap- stand the sense of requiring the candidate ana- proaches the question of the intensity (how lyst, of all people, to undergo more than two many hours per week) or the length (how weekly sessions. One should bear in mind many total hours). The reasoning frequently that, even as we write, there are still Institutes seems to be: given that we know (?) that train- where the standard training analysis consists ing analysis is useful, and the current system of five 50-minute sessions a week. In most demands it, the current system should be left cases the regulation is three or four weekly as it is – a clearly sophistical argument. The sessions of at least 45 minutes; in the early need for a general reform of training analysis, ‘80s, it was still true that the Institutes that with regard to its length and frequency and to approved of a training analysis of only, so to making it inaccessible to evaluation that speak, three hours per week were an exception might affect the career prospects of the candi- to the rule. dates involved, is, nevertheless, now increas- A further problem involves the possibility ingly recognized.59 that even well-trained analysts may fall vic- In response to the long-standing concerns tims to temptation and break the rules, as has on the scientific status of the psychoanalysis, 60 been shown, for example, by the extensive re- in recent years, much empirical research has search of Gabbard and Lester64 about analysts been done on psychoanalytic ideas, especially who have had sexual relations with their pa- in the framework of the attachment theory tients. Even though it is inappropriate to offer and Infant Research.61 Unfortunately, there an a posteriori judgment on the success or fail- seems to have been no serious attempts, even ure of a training analysis based on subsequent in recent times, to undertake empirical re- violations of the psychotherapeutic setting, it search on the effects of training analysis, e.g. is legitimate at least to harbor the suspicion in the perspective of the “outcome” and/or that the training analysis did not, in these cas- “process” research.62 Certainly studies of the es, lead to desirable results. Furthermore, subjective satisfaction of analysts who have analyses and surveillance on the part of psy- completed or are just completing their train- choanalytic societies do not make it impossi-

Training Analysis: A Historical View 45

ble for predatory, narcissistic or even partly C.G. JUNG, The Therapeutic Value of Abreaction psychotic personalities to become analysts – (1935), in: C.G. JUNG, Collected Works, vol. XVI, although this happens in relatively isolated cas- cit., pp. 129-138; C.G. JUNG, Fundamental Ques- es. One might hypothesize that the training tions of Psychotherapy (1951), in: C.G. JUNG, Col- lected Works, vol. XVI, cit., pp. 111-125. analysis in these cases was insufficient, but one 4 could, on the contrary, also suppose that the H. ELLENBERGER, The Discovery of Psychoanaly- sis, Basic Books, New York 1970; E. FALZEDER, analysis helped the candidate to acquire a The Threads of Psychoanalysis Filiations or Psy- greater capacity for dissimulation rather than choanalysis Taking Effect, in: A. HAYNAL, E. more control over his unconscious. The picture FAZELDER (eds.), 100 Years of Psychoanalysis: Con- is further complicated by the fact that there is, tributions to the History of Psychoanalysis, Chaiers at present, no empirical proof that therapists Psychiatriques Genevois, Geneva 1994, pp. 196- who have not undergone analysis break the 194; J. KERR, “The Goody-goods are no Good”: rules more often than orthodox analysts. Notes on Power and Authority in the Early History In conclusion, one could maintain that of Psychoanalysis, with Special Reference to Train- considering training analysis from a historical ing, in: «Psychoanalytic Inquiry», vol. XXIV, n. 1, point of view can make it clearer that the sys- 2004, pp. 7-30. 5 See H. DESMOND, Training Analysis: Oxymoron tem is not immutable and has not been exactly or Viable Compromise? Training Analysis Power, as it now is since the beginning, as the psycho- and the Therapeutic Alliance, in: «Psychoanalytic analytic institutes might lead one to believe. If Inquiry», vol. XXIV, n. 1, 2004, pp. 31-50; S. in the first 25 years of psychoanalytic history GIFFORD, Psychoanalysis in North America from no one thought of making training analysis 1895 to the Present, in: E.S. PERSON, A.M. obligatory, in the following 20 years no one COOPER, G.O. GABBARD (eds.), The American imagined it as a super-analysis of infinite du- Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Psychoanalysis, ration. And in the 50-plus subsequent years, American Psychoanalytic Press, Washington (DC) 2005, pp. 387-406. the subjective and objective motivations for 6 requiring training analysis have never really See P. GAY, Freud, a Life for Our Time, Norton, New York 1988. been clarified, at least as regards its duration. 7 One need but recall, in this connection, the dis- Without a real clarification, the only apparent tressing end of his friendship with Wilhelm Fliess, motivations we are left with are those of an from whom he had rather gracelessly lifted the 65 institutional and authoritarian nature, which idea of universal bisexuality. See J. KERR, A Most bear little relation either to science or to the Dangerous Method: The Story of Jung, Freud, and desirable end of becoming a better therapist. Sabina Spielrein, Knopf, New York 1995. 8 See Ernest Jones’ letter to Freud of July 30, 1913, █ Notes in: S. FREUD, E. JONES, The Complete Correspond-

ence of Sigmund Freud and Ernest Jones: 1908- 1 See R.S. WALLERSTEIN, Psychoanalysis and Psy- 1939, edited by A. PASKAUSKAS, Harvard Univer- chotherapy: An Historical Perspective, in: «Inter- sity Press, Cambridge (MA) 1993. 9 national Journal of Psychoanalysis», vol. LXX, n. See Sigmund Freud’s letter to Jones of August 1, 4, 1989, pp. 563-591. 1913, in: S. FREUD, E. JONES, The Complete Corre- 2 S. FREUD, Recommendation to Physicians Practic- spondence of Sigmund Freud and Ernest Jones: ing Psychoanalysis (1912), in: S. FREUD, The 1908-1939, edited by A. PASKAUSKAS, Harvard Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological University Press, Cambridge (MA) 1993, italics Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. XII, edited by J. added. 10 STRACHEY, A. FREUD, A. STRACHEY, A. TYSON, S. FREUD, Analysis Terminable and Interminable Hogarth, London 1958, pp. 111-116, here p. 116. (1937), in: S. FREUD, The Standard Edition of the 3 See C.G. JUNG, Problems of Modern Psychothera- Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, py (1931), in: C.G. JUNG, Collected Works, vol. vol. XXIII, edited by J. STRACHEY, A. FREUD, A. XVI, edited by G. ADLER, R.F.C. HULL, Princeton STRACHEY, A. TYSON, Hogarth, London 1964, pp. University Press, Princeton (NJ) 1966, pp. 53-75; 211-253, here 248.

46 Innamorati & Sarracino

11 Ibidem. University Press, Cambridge (MA) 1993. 12 See A. CAROTENUTO, Diario di una segreta 24 See S. FREUD, The Future Prospects of Psychoan- simmetria. Sabina Spielrein tra Jung e Freud, Ast- alytic Therapy (1910), in: S. FREUD, The Standard rolabio, Roma 1980 (en. trans. A Secret Symmetry: Edition of the Compete Psychological Works of Sig- Sabina Spielrein Between Jung and Freud, transla- mund Freud, vol. XI, edited by J. STRACHEY, A. tion by A. POMERANS, J. SHEPLEY, K. Winston, FREUD, A. STRACHEY, A. TYSON, A. RICHARDS, Pantheon Books, New York 1982). Hogarth, London 1957, pp. 139-151. 13 See G.O. GABBARD, E.P. LESTER, Boundaries 25 See ibidem. and Boundary Violations in Psychoanalysis, Amer- 26 C.G. JUNG, Morton Prince, The Mechanism and ican Psychiatric Press, Washington (DC) 1995. Interpretation of Dreams (1911), in: C.G. JUNG, 14 See H. ELLENBERGER, The Discovery of Psychoa- Collected Works, vol. IV, edited by G. ADLER, nalysis, cit.; J. KERR, A Most Dangerous Method: R.F.C. HULL, Princeton University Press, Prince- The Story of Jung, Freud, and Sabina Spielrein, cit. ton (NJ) 1966, pp. 56-73, here p. 58. 15 See E. JONES, The Life and Work of Sigmund 27 See P. KING, The Evolution of Controversial Is- Freud, vol. II: Years of Maturity, 1901-1919, Basic sues, in: «International Journal of Psychoanaly- Books, New York 1955. sis», vol. LXXV, n. 2, 1994, pp. 335-342. 16 See F. SULLOWAY, Freud, Biologist of the Mind, 28 See P. GAY, Freud, a Life for Our Time, cit. Basic Books, New York 1979. 29 H. Sachs’ statement, as quoted in P. ROAZEN, Freud 17 See Sigmund Freud’s letter to Ferenczi of Octo- and his Followers, Knopf, New York 1975, p. 323. ber 22, 1909, in: S. FREUD, S. FERENCZI, The Cor- 30 S. FERENCZI, The Problem of Termination of the respondence of Sigmund Freud and Sandor Analysis (1927), in: M. BALINT (ed.), The Selected Ferenczi, vol. I: 1908-1914, edited by E. BRABANT, Papers of Sandor Ferenczi, vol. III: Final Contribu- E. FALZEDER, P. GIAMPIERI-DEUTSCH, Harvard tions to the Problems and Methods of Psychoanalysis, University Press, Cambridge (MA) 1993. Basic Books, New York 1955, pp. 83-84. 18 See Sigmund Freud’s letter to Ferenczi of No- 31 See L. ARON, A. HARRIS, The Legacy of Sandor vember 10, 1909, in: S. FREUD, S. FERENCZI, The Ferenczi, The Analytic Press, Hillsdale (NJ) 1993. Correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Sandor 32 See, e.g., R.H. ETCHEGOYEN, The Fundamentals Ferenczi, vol. I: 1908-1914, edited by E. BRABANT, of Psychoanalytic Technique (1986), translation by E. FALZEDER, P. GIAMPIERI-DEUTSCH, Harvard P. Pitchon, Karnac Books, London 1991. University Press, Cambridge (MA) 1993. 33 See E. JONES, The Life and Work of Sigmund 19 See E. FALZEDER, Dreaming of Freud: Ferenczi, Freud, vol. III: The Last Phase 1919-1939, Basic Freud, and an Analysis Without End, in: «Psychoan- Books, New York 1957. alytic Inquiry», vol. XVII, n. 4, 1997, pp. 416-427. 34 S. FERENCZI, Über den Lehrgang des Psychoana- 20 See Sandor Ferenczi’s letter to Freud of March lytikers (1928), in: Bausteine der Psychoanalyse, 28, 1908, in: S. FREUD, S. FERENCZI, The Corre- Bd. III, Huber, Bern-Stuttgart 1964, pp. 422-431, spondence of Sigmund Freud and Sandor Ferenczi, here p. 430. vol. I: 1908-1914, edited by E. BRABANT, E. 35 See Sandor Ferenczi’s letter to Freud of April FALZEDER, P. GIAMPIERI-DEUTSCH, Harvard 24, 1911, in: S. FREUD, S. FERENCZI, The Corre- University Press, Cambridge (MA) 1993. spondence of Sigmund Freud and Sandor Ferenczi, 21 See Carl Gustav Jung’s letter to Freud of Decem- vol. I: 1908-1914, edited by E. BRABANT, E. ber 25, 1909, in: S. FREUD, C.G. JUNG, The FALZEDER, P. GIAMPIERI-DEUTSCH, Harvard Freud/Jung Letters: The Correspondence Between University Press, Cambridge (MA) 1993. Sigmund Freud and C.G. Jung, edited by W. 36 E. KRIS, Training in Psychoanalysis and the De- MCGUIRE, translated by R. MANHEIM, R.F.C. HULL, velopment of Theoretical Concepts of Clinical Psy- Princeton University Press, Princeton (NJ) 1974. chology (1947), in: L.M. NEWMAN (ed.), The Se- 22 E. FALZEDER, Dreaming of Freud: Ferenczi, lected Papers of Ernst Kris, Yale University Press, Freud, and an Analysis Without End, cit. New Haven-London 1975, pp. 31-35, here p. 31. 23 See Sandor Ferenczi’s letter to Freud of March 37 See E. KRIS, The Recovery of Childhood Memo- 15, 1910, in: S. FREUD, S. FERENCZI, The Corre- ries in Psychoanalysis (1956), in: L.M. NEWMAN spondence of Sigmund Freud and Sandor Ferenczi, (ed.), The Selected Papers of Ernst Kris, Yale Uni- vol. I: 1908-1914, edited by E. BRABANT, E. versity Press, New Haven-London 1975, pp. 301- ALZEDER IAMPIERI EUTSCH 340, here p. 31 F , P. G -D , Harvard

Training Analysis: A Historical View 47

38 M. BALINT, On the Termination of Analysis, in: or Viable Compromise?, cit.; D. SACHS, What «International Journal of Psychoanalysis», vol. Makes Training Analysis “Good Enough”?: Freud’s XXXI, 1950, pp. 196-199, here 198. Science and the Syncretistic Dylemma, in: «Inter- 39 See K.R. EISSLER, The Effect of the Structure of the national Review of Psycho-analysis», vol. XIX, Ego on Psychoanalytic Technique, in: «Journal of the 1992, pp. 147-158; E. TORRAS DE BEÀ, Towards a American Psychoanalytic Association», vol. I, n. 1, “Good Enough” Training Analysis, in: «Interna- 1953, pp. 104-143; R.P. KNIGHT, The Present Status tional Review of Psycho-analysis», vol. XIX, 1992, of Organized Psychoanalysis in United States, in: pp. 159-167. «Journal of American Psychoanalytic Association», 50 See J. LAMPL-DE GROOT, Problems of Psychoan- vol. I, n. 2, 1953, pp. 197-221; H. SACHS, Observa- alytic Training, in: «International Journal of Psy- tions of a Training Analyst, in: «Psychoanalytic choanalysis», vol. XXXV, 1954, pp. 184-187; D. Quarterly», vol. XVI, n. 2, 1947, pp. 157-168. KAYRIS, The Training Analysis. A Critical Review 40 M. GITELSON, Problems of Psychoanalytic Train- of the Literature and a Controversial Proposal, cit.; ing, in: «Psychoanalytic Quarterly», vol. XVII, n. S. NACHT, The Difficulties of Didactic Psychoanal- 2, 1948, pp. 198-211; M. GITELSON, Therapeutic ysis in Relation to Therapeutic Psychoanalysis, cit.; Problems in the Analysis of the “Normal” Candi- E. TORRAS DE BEÀ, Towards a “Good Enough” date, in: «International Journal of Psychoanaly- Training Analysis, cit. sis», vol. XXXV, n. 2, 1954, pp. 174-183. 51 A.H. BOND, Margaret Mahler: A Biography of 41 See D. KAYRIS, The Training Analysis. A Critical the Psychoanalyst, McFarland, Jefferson (NC) Review of the Literature and a Controversial Pro- 2008. The biographies of psychoanalytic pioneers posal, in: «Psychoanalytic Quarterly», vol. XXXIII, and contemporary psychoanalysts are full of simi- n. 3, 1964, pp. 485-512. lar experiences. See, e.g., A. DE CORO, D. SARRA- 42 M. LYONNELS, Thanatos is Alive and Well and CINO, David Rapaport e la sua scuola: dalla siste- Living in Psychoanalysis, in: R.M. PRINCE (ed.), matizzazione alla crisi della meta psicologia, in: A The Death of Psychoanalysis: Murder? Suicide? Or DE CORO, F. ORTU (a cura di), Psicologia Dinami- Rumor Greatly Exaggerated?, Aronson, Northvale ca: i modelli teorici a confronto, Laterza, Roma- (NJ) 1999, pp. 1-24, here p. 12. Bari 2010, pp. 256-267; D. SARRACINO, Joseph 43 See D. TUCKETT, Does Anything Go? Towards a Lichtenberg e i sistemi motivazionali: una nuova Framework for More Transparent Assessment of teoria psicoanalitica della motivazione, in: A. DE Psychoanalytic Competence, in: «International CORO, F. ORTU (a cura di), Psicologia Dinamica: i Journal of Psychoanalysis», vol. LXXXVI, n. 1, modelli teorici a confronto, cit., pp. 335-351. 2005, pp. 31-49. 52 F. SULLOWAY, Freud, Biologist of the Mind, cit. p. 44 E. GLOVER, Research Methods in Psycho-analysis, 486. in: «International Journal of Psychoanalysis», 53 See J. CREMERIUS, Training Analysis and Power, in: vol. XXXIII, 1952, pp. 403-409, here p. 403, italics «Free Associations», vol. XX, 1990, pp. 114-138; O. added. KERNBERG, Institutional Problems of Psychoanalytic 45 M. GROTJAHN, About the Relations Between Education, in: «Journal of the American Psychoana- Psychoanalytic Training and Psychoanalytic Ther- lytic Association», vol. IV, 1986, pp. 799-834. apy, in: «International Journal of Psychoanaly- 54 See O. KERNBERG, Thirty Methods to Destroy the sis», vol. XXXV, 1954, pp. 254-262. Creativity of Psychoanalytic Candidates, in: «In- 46 S. NACHT, The Difficulties of Didactic Psychoa- ternational Journal of Psychoanalysis», vol. nalysis in Relation to Therapeutic Psychoanalysis, LXXVII, 1996, pp. 1031-1040. in: «International Journal of Psychoanalysis», 55 D. KAYRIS, The Training Analysis. A Critical Re- vol. XXXV, 1954, pp. 250-253. view of the Literature and a Controversial Pro- 47 P. HEINMAN, Problems of Training Analysis, in: posal, cit. «International Journal of Psychoanalysis», vol. 56 F. MCLAUGHLIN, Addendum to a Controversial XXXV, 1954, pp. 163-168. Proposal: Some Observations on the Training Anal- 48 S. NACHT, The Difficulties of Didactic Psychoa- ysis, in: «Psychoanalytic Quarterly», vol. XXXVI, nalysis in Relation to Therapeutic Psychoanalysis, 1967, pp. 230-247. in: «International Journal of Psychoanalysis», 57 Z. LOTHANE, Ethical Flaws in Training Analysis, vol. XXXV, 1954, pp. 250-253. in: «Psychoanalytic Psychology», vol. XXIV, 2007, 49 ESMOND See H. D , Training Analysis: Oxymoron pp. 688-696.

48 Innamorati & Sarracino

58 D.L. CABANISS, H. BOSWORTH, The Aim of the 396; M. INNAMORATI, D. SARRACINO, A BOSCO, La Training Analysis, in: «Journal of the American costellazione materna in gravidanza: sviluppo del Psychoanalytic Association», vol. LIV, n. 1, 2006, Motherhood Constellation Inventory (MCI), in: «In- pp. 203-229. fanzia & Adolescenza», vol. X, n. 3, 2011, pp. 181- 59 Z. LOTHANE, Ethical Flaws in Training Analysis, 195; D. SARRACINO, F. PRESAGHI, S. DEGNI, M. IN- in: «Psychoanalytic Psychology», vol. XXIV, 2007, NAMORATI, Sex-specific Relationships Among At- pp. 688-696; H. THOMÄ, Training Analysis and Psy- tachment Security, Social Values, and Sensation seek- choanalytic Education: Proposals for Reform, in: ing in Early Adolescence: Implications for Adolescents’ «Annual of Psychoanalysis», vol. XXI, 1993, pp. 3- Externalizing Problem Behavior, in: «Journal of 75; H. THOMÄ, Memorandum About a Reform of the Adolescence», vol. XXXIV, n. 3, 2011, pp. 541-554; Psychoanalytic Education, in: «IPA Newsletter», vol. D. SARRACINO, M. INNAMORATI, Attachment, Social VIII, 1999, pp. 33-35; H. THOMÄ, Psychoanalysis Value Orientation and at-risk Behaviour in Early Ad- Without a Specific Professional Identity: A Utopian olescence, in: C. BASSANI (ed.), Adolescent Behavior, Dream?, in: «International Forum of Psychoanaly- Nova, New York 2012, pp. 99-118. sis», vol. XIII, n. 4, 2004, pp. 213-236. 62 For an introduction, see D.E. ORLINSKY, K. 60 See M. INNAMORATI, D. SARRACINO, La Psico- GRAWE, B.K. PARKS, Process and Outcome in Psycho- analisi e il criterio di demarcazione: una diversa therapy – noch einmal, in: A. BERGIN, S. GARFIELD, prospettiva sul rapporto tra epistemologia e psicolo- Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change, gia dinamica, in: «Teorie e Modelli», vol. XIV, Wiley, New York 1994, 4th edition, pp. 270-376. For 2009, pp. 69-86; M. INNAMORATI, D. SARRACINO, an example of process/outcome research, see D. Lo specchio dell’ambivalenza. Wittgenstein e la psi- SARRACINO, N. DAZZI, Motivational Areas Rating coanalisi, in: «Rivista Internazionale di Filosofia e Scale: Developing a New Tool for Studying Psycho- Psicologia», vol. II, n. 1, 2011, pp. 41-55; M. IN- therapy Process and Outcome, in: «Psychotherapy NAMORATI, Psicoanalisi e filosofia della scienza, Research», vol. XVII, n. 6, 2007, pp. 99-118. Franco Angeli, Milano 2000. 63 See H. DAHL, H. KÄCHELE, H. THOMÄ (eds.), 61 See e.g. M. INNAMORATI, D. SARRACINO, N. DAZ- Psychoanalytic Process Research Strategies, Spring- ZI, L’intervista microanalitica nell’esplorazione della er, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York 1988. costellazione materna, in: «Infanzia e Adolescenza», 64 See G.O. GABBARD, E.P. LESTER, Boundaries vol. VII, n. 3, 2008, pp. 149-158; M. INNAMORATI, D. and Boundary Violations in Psychoanalysis, cit. SARRACINO, N. DAZZI, Motherhood Constellation 65 See E. BERMAN, Impossible Training: A Rela- and Representational Change in Pregnancy, in: «In- tional View of Psychoanalytic Education, The Ana- fant Mental Health», vol. XXXI, n. 4, 2010, pp. 379- lytic Press, Hillsdale (NJ) 2004.