<p> The purpose of this research is to better understand the birth of psychoanalytic theories in the context of collaborative and adversarial relationships. From the 1920s, there were seminal papers revealing theoretical variances which impacted collegial relationships and vice versa. Melanie Klein’s theoretical identity attracted attention as she transformed her observations of child play into a theory of the internal world. This study explores how in a milieu, where theoretical identities shifted, collaborators turned into adversaries and agreements became disagreements. </p><p> In taking up the inception of Kleinian theory, this study examines three relationships: the relationship between Melanie Klein and Anna Freud, Mrs. Klein, Edward Glover, and Melitta Schmideberg, her daughter, and finally, the relationships between Melanie Klein, Donald Winnicott, and Wilfred Bion. Using hermeneutic textual analysis, this study is a critical examination of how historically, one theory’s limitation became another theorist’s opportunity and the implications this reality entailed. This research examines the analytic <i>lineage</i> that raised Kleinian analysis. The aggregated collection of Kleinian critiques review Kleinian theories from various analytic perspectives. </p><p> The research enquiry investigates how theoretical disagreements, in the history of the British Psycho-Analytical Society, impacted the development of new theories. The unreconciled collegial partnerships influenced reorganization of disciplinary cohorts and theoretical subgroups, and impacted the institutional revolution of the British Psycho-Analytical Society, expressed by the institutionalization of three different theoretical groups. The British Psycho-Analytical Society’s transformation—from mono-theoretical to multi-theoretical training structure—became a unique construct of confluence where the members’ and the subgroups’ identities continued to evolve. The result of this study supports the notion that institutional reparation is an idea of an analytic milieu where not only the relationship between analyst and patient, but also collegial relationships, can negotiate love, hate, and theoretical differences. </p><p> The implication of this study involves limited artifacts of direct correspondence between some of the protagonists, namely, Klein and her daughter Schmideberg, Glover and Schmideberg, and between Bion and Winnicott. To bypass this challenge, this hermeneutic exploration scrutinizes protagonists’ citations, usage of analytic terminology, and footnotes. Further research is needed to develop plans and procedures contributing to a well-organized model for institutional reparation.</p>
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:PROQUEST/oai:pqdtoai.proquest.com:3701781 |
| Date | 16 May 2015 |
| Creators | Regeczkey, Agnes M. |
| Publisher | Pacifica Graduate Institute |
| Source Sets | ProQuest.com |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | thesis |
Page generated in 0.0015 seconds