ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses the question described in the title. The merits of the former way of working are extensively argued. Concrete clinical evidence supporting this understanding is discussed. At the core of this discussion seems to lie the key question of the concreteness of unconscious phantasies. This question was the nub of the Controversies 1941–1945 (cf. King & Steiner, 1991). Experiencing the course of an analysis outside the transference is believed to severely impoverish both the analysand’s and the analyst’s emotional experiences of the analytic process, and therefore also, of the truth of the emotional conflicts implied in every analysis. Interpreting outside the transference is thought to deceive the patient at a deep emotional level and to immediately discourage further development of the transference. Keeping things outside the transference is seen to draw a frontier between psychoanalysis and psychotherapy.
NB: The first session presented here immediately follows the last one discussed in the previous chapter.
