The Dream After A Century: Symposium 2000 on Dreams

8/10/2019 The Dream After A Century: Symposium 2000 on Dreams

1/4

The Dream After A Century: Symposium 2000 on Dreams, edited by MelvinLansky. Madison, CN: International Universities Press, 2008; 292pp., $39.95.Beth I. Kalish, PhD, FIPA

What has happened to dream analysis in contemporary clinical work? What has changed

and what has remained? Is it still considered ` the royal road to understanding theunconscious mind? Given the plurality of views in psychoanalysis today, are their majordifferences to the status of dreams among analysts? This book, beautifully elaboratedand edited by Melvin Lansky, attempts to analyze some of these provocative issues. Thebook is a compilation of papers and discussions stemming from a historic event.Symposium 2000 was held in celebration of the hundredth anniversary of the publicationof The Interpretation of Dreams. The book The Dream after a Century takes a widerange of stands towards the current status of the dream in psychoanalysis. Each of theclinical papers demonstrates the authors use of and technical thinking about dreammaterial in the context of his/her own clinical practice experience. The choices in thehandling of the dream made by each clinician, reveal, implicitly or explicitly, the position

that clinician takes toward theory and its relation to clinical work. The format [of thebook] allows the reader access to what distinguished practitioners of differentpsychoanalytic persuasions actually do, and also allows for interchange between theauthors themselves and the audience at the Symposium about the implications of theirpresentations. (Lansky, 2008).

In his Introduction, Lansky presents a comprehensive review for the reader, of what hecalls a selective overview of the legacy of the Interpretation of Dreams. I found thissection a refreshing and clarifying re-orientation to Freuds original writing and thinking.It could serve any analytic candidate well, as an important way to begin the task oftackling primary source material found, for example, in the Standard Edition. Followinghis excellent Freudian review, Lansky launches into current controversial topics in whathe calls, Pluralism and the Forking of the Royal Road. In this section he draws fromSolms (1995) and Rangells (2004) concerns that we have a crisis in psychoanalysisposed by a multiplicity of theories that must be resolved. Lansky states his agreementwith Rangell (1997) regarding the convincing argument for atotal composite theorywhich . synthesizes disparate contributions into a unitary model. (p.19). Lanskybeautifully elaborates the thesis that pluralism and the excitement it engenders with so-called new discoveries in psychoanalysis can pose an enormous risk of furtherfragmentation in the profession. A kind of new radicalism exists, apars pro toto thinking,in which there is an overemphasis of one aspect of psychoanalysis over another. Suchthinking leads to the loss of a balanced view so basic to psychoanalysis.

The introductory section concludes with the important question of, What is the status ofthe psychoanalytic study of the dream today? Lansky uses this provocative question tointroduce the reader to the detailed papers to follow. The book format and specificcontent is divided into three topical sections, each with a different chairperson followedby several sub-chapters representing papers by individual presenters. and followed byquestions from the audience and discussion For example, Part I:Psychoanalytic Theoriesof Dreams and Dreaming, was chaired by Morton Reiser. There were two individual


2/4

papers: 1)Proposals for the Next Century of Psychoanalytic Dream Studies by Mark J.Blechner; 2) Dreaming, Endogenous Stimulation and Developmentby Steven Ellman.Ellmans paper is the only one in the text, which focused in depth, on the neuroscience ofdreaming. His interest in REM states began as early as the 1970s and he continued hislaboratory research for some 20 years. He was attempting to find ways to operationalize

Freuds concepts of dreaming and drive theory, calling his work endogenous (internal) generated stimulation. (p.48) While the early experiments werewith animal subjects, he continues his formulations drawing largely from clinicalexamples from his patients. I found his paper fascinating and particularly important, inthat once again we are reminded of the value of retaining (as opposed to discarding) drivetheory within a unitary conceptual model of psychoanalysis.

During the discussion of Part I, Mark Solms joined in to support Blechners ideas thatFreud used dream phenomena as evidence for the function and structure of the mind. Heused this to underscore the basic importance of what distinguishes psychoanalysis fromthe numerous forms of psychotherapy that have developed in this century. Freuds was

the first serious attempt to make a scientific theory of What makes us tick, of whatmakes us who we are. But like any other scientific method, this method has bothstrengths and limitations. It is our job as analysts to grasp the problem, identifyweaknesses in our method and find solutions that do not fragment theory, as we know it.Solms was strong on this point saying You cant have a whole lot of different theoriesabout the same thing and each of them correct. The psychoanalytic method, for all itsstrengths, doesnt seem to enable analysts to decide between these different theoreticalpoints of viewI think that the way we all privately solve it is that we know that ourtheory is right and the others are all completely wrong. (p.73).

Part II:Dreams in Clinical Workwas chaired by Ellen Rees (Panel I); Ernest Kafka(Panel II) and Ruth Imber (Panel III).This section is a series of clinical papers with focus on case material to illustrate howeach analyst works with dream material in his/her practice. The authors come fromdiverse theoretical views with a commonality of interest as well as commitment to dreamwork. The choices made by each clinician reveal his/her position toward a particulartheoretical perspective. In this brief review it is not possible to discuss each paper,however I found this section most interesting as representing the heart of the book. Thereader can easily tie each clinicians theory to his unique way of working with dreammaterial vis--vis the case illustrations. Dream process notes always have a profound wayof speaking to analyst(s)!

In the group discussion that followed Clinical Panel I, the Chair, Ellen Rees, stressedseveral central questions that could be useful to all clinicians in their practices. Questionssuch as, 1) How do we understand and use manifest content of the dream? 2) What is therole of defensive process in the formation of dreams? 3) What is the relationship of thedream to unconscious fantasy and to memory? 4) How do we understand and usereferences to the analyst in the dream? 5) Are dreams always about transference? 6) Howdo we come to understand the meaning of a dream within a session? 7) What is the roleof the past in dream formation-the genetic past and- the past during analysis? 8) Can the


3/4

dream promote psychological organization? Then she asked the panel to comment on theproductions of the other panelists. How they understood and used the dreams theypresented. A lively discussion arose with comments from the audience, revealingsimilarities and differences between them. Unfortunately, the panel never directlyaddressed the questions the Chair asked originally to be their central focus. It occurred

to me as I read; such questions could easily be the basis of another book, yet to bewritten.

Chapters 6-11 contain a rich variety of papers read and discussed by Elsa First, Robert D.Gillman, Paul Lipmann, Philip M.Bromberg, Marianne Goldberger and Mervyn Peskinfollowed by the comments they received from their audiences.

Part III:Commentary and Rejoinderwas chaired by Owen Renik with Commentaryby Sydney Pulver and Howard Shevrin.Pulver began his commentary, saying that most of the papers in this book represent avariety of viewpoints, including the relationists the researchers, Mahlerians, Kleinians,

evolutionary theorists, Anna Freudians, classical analysts and conflict theorists. (p. 247).Yet, he found they all work with dreams [clinically] in much the same way. The basicapproach utilized by the panelists included: 1) Getting associations, 2) Emphasizing theimportance of the dream experience, 3) Exploring the transference and 4) Exploringdefenses. Of course, it is clear that three out of the four points refer to all aspects ofanalytic work, not just limited to working with dream material. To that degree, dreamwork needs to take its rightful place in the overall context of thetotal analyticexperience. Dreams are a part rather than the whole of the analysis in any clinicalendeavor. While most of the presenters material reflects work stemming from conflicttheory, that of James Fosshages theory illustrated a deficit model or that ofdevelopmental arrest. His and Philip Brombergs approach were farther from that ofFreudian methodology than were the other presenters different from each other.

The final chapter of the book, appropriately titled Rejoinder, consists of a longdialogue with all the commentators, presenters and the audience responders. How thisdetailed a discussion was ever clarified and organized for publication, speaks to the subtleskills of the books editor. The beauty of this section is that it gives the reader themoment to moment opportunity of `being there. We hear from each speaker by nameand exactly what they are responding to from the previous speaker. Clearlyimprovisational. While in some respects the dialogue between the speakers tends towander far from dreams as a topic and goes more toward where people differ from eachother, I found it meaningful as a way to summarize a highly charged interchange amongdistinguished presenters. Owen Renik, who served as chair for this part of the program,ended by commenting on the astonishing amount of energy generated by the speakers andthe audience. He acknowledged the work of Arnold Richards in creating this event andsuggested that Richards energetic style was contagious throughout the Symposium.

In concluding this review, I would like to add the value of the book itself as a veryimportant contribution to the utilization of dream work in the Twenty First Century. This


4/4

Documents

The Dream After A Century: Symposium 2000 on Dreams