Sacred Psychoanalysis - etheses Repository - University of ...

Winnicott is arguably the most influential British psychoanalyst of the twentieth century:
idolized (Jacobs 1995); mercurial and paradoxical (Gomez 1996); flawed (Willoughby
2004; Hopkins 2006); creative (Eigen 1981); inventive (Ulanov 2001); innovative and
poetic (Greenberg and Mitchell 1983; Hughes 1989); 138 ‘enormously endearing’ (Sayers
2003: 197); 139 and visionary (Rodman 2003). 140 His highly original ideas have been
adopted across the psychoanalytic world particularly in the UK, Europe and Israel, 141
though not without question. 142 Winnicott’s reception in America was initially hostile, 143
but gained acceptance in contemporary and relational psychoanalytic circles. 144 Winnicott’s
contribution, viewed analytically, is outlined by Green, ‘Freud discovered the unconscious
mental functioning in the primary process – but in my opinion it was Winnicott who has
recreated the language of the unconscious: paradoxes and ambiguities: neither beliefs nor
dogmas’ (Green 1975: 364). Winnicott’s contribution viewed outside analytic terms
138
Winnicott ‘has been accused by many within psychoanalysis of being too poetic’ (Grolnick 1985: 655).
139
Sayers adds ‘Too endearing, some might say … he seems to have found it hard to address the
destructiveness of his patients’ (Sayers 2003: 197f.).
140
Some argue that Jones was more influential in terms of psychoanalytic politics (Maddox 2006). Jones did
have an important role in psychoanalytic politics, especially in Britain, and through his irreplaceable if
hagiographic three-volume biography of Freud. Jones also orchestrated Freud’s move from Vienna to London,
however he left little of ongoing clinical value. By contrast Fairbairn’s contribution was purely theoretical and
his contribution to object relations theory is often under-acknowledged. His work was promoted initially by
Guntrip and latterly by the Scharffs and Grotstein. Fairbairn is now seen as a precursor to relational, selfpsychology
and intersubjective schools of psychoanalysis (Hoffman 2004; Scharff and Scharff 2005; Grotstein
2005). Bion’s contribution is dealt with in the main text (Grotstein 2007). Bion has been enormously
influential for some but divides opinions and his later work regarded as overly-complex. Winnicott’s work is
also complex but the germ of his ideas is often found in popular form as he spoke to many non-psychoanalytic
audiences.
141
‘Some time ago I was asked who is the most influential theoretician in the psychoanalytic committee in my
country, Israel. It occurred to me that a simple way to find out would be to check the references in the case
studies submitted by all the graduates of the Israel Psychoanalytic Institute. I went over the case reports of the
last dozen years; D.W. Winnicott was quoted much more than Freud or any other author’ (Berman 1996: 158).
142
‘Everybody agreed his stories were fascinating, but quite a few colleagues whispered that “it was not really
analysis”’ (Brafman 1997: 773).
143
Although Anna Freud wrote, ‘I think that your “transitional object” has conquered the analytic world’
(Quoted in Rodman 2003: 323) Winnicott received a hostile reception at the New York Psychoanalytic
Institute described as ‘the bastion of ego psychology … rigid, doctrinaire, and insufficiently open to new
ideas’ (Rodman 2003: 323).
144
Winnicott’s ideas have become more influential through promotion by Grolnick, Grotstein, Rodman,
Ulanov, Bollas (Jacobs 1995) and others. Winnicott’s ideas have also been adopted by such American
feminist social theorists and psychoanalysts as Chodorow and Benjamin (Alford 1990; Burack 1993).
61