Course Description and Goals: This course is designed as a participatory seminar in which students will explore contemporary issues and dilemmas in psychodynamic theories and practice through the careful study, presentation and discussion of published cases and discussions.
The goals for each student are:
- To become familiar with the major concepts in contemporary psychoanalytic theory
- To recognize the ideas, controversies and innovations that comprise the contemporary psychoanalytic discourse
- To critically examine contemporary psychoanalytic ideas and their application to clinical practice
Required Texts: All readings are on the PEP archive.
Attendance and Late Policy: Prompt and regular attendance is expected and will be considered as part of the requirement of student participation in the class. Students who miss more than two classes will have to withdraw from the class.
Course Plan and Assignments:
Grading Criteria: Your grade for this class will be based on your class participation, oral presentation, oral presentation paper, and final project as follows:
- Class Participation 20%
- Oral Presentations 40%
- Oral Presentation Papers and Reflection Papers 40%
Class Participation: Class participation will be graded on attendance, level of preparedness for each class, quality and degree of contributions to class discussion. Through class discussions students are expected to demonstrate that they are attempting to grasp and compare and contrast the major concepts from the readings.
Oral Presentations and Reflection Papers:
Each student will give at least four oral presentations throughout the course. If you are presenting a paper as the key speaker or a panelist, you are required to turn in a 2-3 page (double-spaced) paper with written responses for the following 4 points for each presentation. If you are an audience member (not a key presenter or panelist), you are required to write a 2-3 page (double-spaced) reflection paper based on the class presentations.
Outline for oral presentations and papers:
- Author’s Biography
Who is the author?
For the oral presentation, you are expected to present in the character of the author, so you will want to do some research about the professional (and personal if possible) biography of the author that you are representing.
- Key Concepts
What are the key or important concepts and ideas in the article?
For the oral presentation, be prepared to summarize the main points of the article and answer questions from the point of view of the author. You should do your best to explain the concepts and ideas to the audience as if you were teaching them.
- Clinical Position
What is the clinical issue in the paper? What is the author’s clinical position or personal perspective on the topic in the paper?
For the oral presentation, be prepared to focus on the clinical issue of the article from the perspective of the author.
- Clinical Application (for written response only)
How can you relate the key concepts of the paper and/or the author’s clinical perspective to your own personal, clinical and consultation experiences?
Outline for audience reflection paper:
- Key Concepts
What were the key concepts discussed by the main presenter and panelists (be specific about which paper you are referring to)?
- Contrast & Comparison
How do the different authors’ theoretical concepts and perspectives relate to each other? Are the panelists aligned or in conflict with the key presenter and each other? How? In what ways?
- Clinical Application
How can you relate the key concepts of the paper and/or the author’s clinical perspective to your own personal, clinical and consultation experiences?
Class #1: Introduction to Contemporary Theory: Intersubjectivity and the Relational Turn
Mills, J. (2005). A Critique of Relational Psychoanalysis. Psychoanal. Psychol., 22:155-188.
Stolorow, R.D. (1995). An Intersubjective View of Self Psychology. Psychoanal. Dial., 5:393-399.
Class # 2: Theoretical Introduction to the Ornstein Case
Ornstein, A. (1998). The Fate of Narcissistic Rage in Psychotherapy. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 18, pp. 55-70.
Mitchell, S. A. (1998). Aggression and the Endangered Self. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 18, pp. 21-30.
Harris, A. (1998). Aggression: Pleasures and Dangers. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 18, pp. 31-44.
Fosshage, J. (1998). On Aggression: Its Forms and Functions. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 18, pp. 45-54.
Class # 3: Ornstein Case: Clinical Discussion
Ornstein, A. (1998). “The Fate of Narcissistic Rage in Psychotherapy.” Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 18, pp. 55-70.
Fosshage, J. (1998). Discussion of Anna Ornstein’s: The Fate of Narcissistic Rage in Psychotherapy. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 18, pp. 71-81
Harris, A. (1998). Discussion of Anna Ornstein’s: The Fate of Narcissistic Rage in Psychotherapy. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 18, pp. 82-88.
Mitchell, S. A. (1998). Commentary on Case. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 18, pp. 89-99.
Ornstein, A. (1998). Response to Discussants. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 18, pp. 107-119.
Class # 4: When Histories Collide in the Therapeutic Dyad
Murphy, M. (2006). Foreclosed futures: working in clinical gray zones. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 16 (5): 519-526.
Silverman, S. (2006). Where we both have lived. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 16 (5): 527-542.
Harris, A. (2006). Ghosts, unhealable wounds, and resilience: Commentary on papers by Sandra Silverman and Maureen Murphy. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 16(5): 543–552.
Silverman, S. (2006). Our histories are with us: Reply to commentary. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 16(5): 553-555.
Mitchell, S. A. (1998). The emergence of features of the analyst’s life. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 8 (2): 187-195.
Class # 5: Theoretical Introductions to the Davies Case
Davies, J. M. (2004). “Whose Bad Objects are we Anyways? Repetition and Our Elusive Love Affair with Evil.” Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 14, pp. 711-732.
Benjamin, J. (1990). An Outline of Intersubjectivity. Psychoanal. Psychol., 7S:33-46.
Davies, J.M. and Frawley, M.G. (1992). Dissociative Processes and Transference-Countertransference Paradigms in the Psychoanalytically Oriented Treatment of Adult Survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse. Psychoanal. Dial., 2:5-36.
Fonagy, P. & Target, M. (2007). Playing with Reality: IV. A Theory of External Reality Rooted in Intersubjectivity. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 88,917-937.
Class # 6: Davies Case: Clinical Discussion
Davies, J. M. (2004). Whose Bad Objects are we Anyways? Repetition and Our Elusive Love Affair with Evil. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 14, pp. 711-732.
Fonagy, P. and Target, M. (2004). Playing with the Reality of Analytic Love. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 14, 503-516.
Benjamin, J. (2004). Escape from the Hall of Mirrors. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 14, pp 743-754.
Class # 7: Levenkron Case: Theoretical Background
Bromberg, P. (1993). Shadow and Substance. Psychoanal. Psychol., 10:147-168
Slavin, M. O. and Kriegman, D. (1998). Why The Analyst Needs to Change: Toward A Theory of Conflict, Negotiation And Mutual Influence In the Therapeutic Process. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 8(2), pp. 247-284.
Pizer, S. (2004). Impasse Recollected in Tranquility: Love, Dissociation and Discipline in the Analytic Process. Psychoanalytic Dialogues. Vol. 14, pp. 289-312.
Stern, D.B. (1983). Unformulated Experience, —From Familiar Chaos to Creative Disorder. Contemp. Psychoanal., 19:71-99