ABSTRACT
This chapter reviews the major trends and developments in the evolution of the concept of countertransference. S. Freud’s recognition of the enduring nature of countertransference and of the fact that it exists as an ever-present force in analytic work has taken on fresh significance. In 1951, Little published a paper in which she explored the complex nature of the transference-countertransference relationship and pointed out that, inevitably, it contains a mixture of normal and pathological elements derived from the psychologies of both patient and analyst. In the US, it has been O. Kernberg, perhaps more than any contributor, who, in his writings on countertransference, has sought to integrate competing points of view. The general silence and embarrassment that surrounded the entire question of countertransference at that time extended to the literature. D. Boesky has shown convincingly that countertransference enactments are not only inevitable in analytic work, but that they contribute in important ways to the therapeutic action of analysis.
