ABSTRACT
This chapter investigates the extent to which psychoanalysts have received S. Freud's D. Schreber text aetiology of paranoia. It shows that influential psychoanalysts have tended to concentrate—positively and negatively—on the accessory component to the neglect of the specific one, the fixation at narcism. The chapter examines the positions of those who claim to stand with Freud, Maurits Katan and William Niederland, and then turn to those who have questioned Freud's Schreber text aetiology, Ida Macalpine and Richard Hunter, Zvi Lothane, Melanie Klein, and Ronald Fairbairn. It shows that those who have taken account of it, have tended to move beyond it to interpretations based on Freud's later drive theory and second topology. Ronald Fairbairn does address Freud's aetiology more completely, although he contends that his object-relations approach overcomes the limitations in Freud's libidinal interpretation of Schreber.
