ABSTRACT
Analysts have, until recently, been far more interested in theory than in technique, perhaps following the example of Freud, whose technical papers are a small portion of his corpus. In recent years, significant efforts have been made to repair this gap, on the one hand by actual recording of analytic sessions, as Horowitz (1991) and Dahl et al. (1988) have urged, and on the other by detailed reporting of the events of the session, as Jacobs (1991),Schwaber (1992) and others have done now for a number of years. Since Freud’s experience with Dora (1905a) we have known of the danger inherent in our being excessively devoted to our own theoretical formulations, while giving shorter shrift to the patient’s communications to us.As long ago as 1923,Ferenczi and Rank, in their monograph The Development of Psycho-Analysis, complained that analysts were so caught up in their theory that they neglected basic technique and knowledge of the transference, and thought it sufficient to have demonstrated that the patient had an Oedipus complex and to explain this to the patient, even though this highly intellectualized process had little therapeutic efficacy.
