Abstract
The author traces the history of free association, the “fundamental rule,“ through the Freud–Ferenczi relationship and controversy. The use of “activity,” first proposed by Freud in 1910 with phobic and compulsive patients, was then championed by Ferenczi in the early twenties. The goal of activity was to enhance—or, more accurately, “to force”— the associations into the analysis.
Subsequently, Ferenczi reversed himself, concluding that his analysis was recreating the traumatic parental environment which originally caused the patient’s neurosis. The far-reaching results of Ferenczi’s change of heart included a redefinition of countertransference and added the techniques of “indulgence” and “relaxation” to soften Freud’s emphasis on “abstinence” and “frustration. A vignette from the analysis of a dangerously self-destuctive bulimic patient illustrates the value of free association in helping a patient feel understood by the analyst without pressure to give up her symptoms. Constantly monitoring his therapeutic ambition, the analyst demonstrates the value of free association in enhancing the patient’s understanding of herself and of the survival value of her symptoms. This vignette highlights the fact that the analyst’s therapeutic ambition makes freedom to associate even more difficult for the patient and inevitably intrudes on the analyst’s evenly hovering attention. Of course for the analyst to have a therapeutic wish is necessary and desirable but for the analyst to demand change promotes compliance and hidden rebellion which limits the analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brabant, E., Falzeder, E., et al. (1993). The correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Sándor Ferenczi, Vol. I. Trans., P. T. Hoffer. Introduction by A. Haynal. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Dupont, J. [1932] (1988). The clinical diary of Sándor Ferenczi. Trans., M. Balint & N. Zarday. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Falzeder, E., & Brabant, E. (1996). The correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Sándor Ferenczi, Vol. II. Trans., P. T. Hoffer. Introduction by A. Hoffer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ferenczi, S. [1909] (1980). Introjection and transference. In M. Balint (Ed.), First contributions to the problems and methods of psycho-analysis (pp. 35-93). Trans., E. Mosbacher et al. London: Karnac.
Ferenczi, S. [1919] (1980). On the technique of psycho-analysis. In J. Rickman (Ed.), Further contributions to the problems and methods of psychoanalysis (pp. 177–189). Trans., J. Suttie. London: Karnac.
Ferenczi, S. [1919] (1980). Technical difficulties in the analysis of a case of hysteria. In J. Rickman (Ed.), Further contributions to the problems and methods of psychoanalysis (pp. 189-197). Trans., J. Suttie. London: Karnac.
Ferenczi, S. [1920] (1980). The further development of an active therapy in psychoanalysis. In J. Rickman (Ed.), Further contributions to the problems and methods of psychoanalysis (pp. 198-217). Trans., J. Suttie. London: Karnac.
Ferenczi, S. [1924](1980). On forced phantasies. Ibid. In J. Rickman (Ed.), Further contributions to the problems and methods of psychoanalysis (pp. 68–77). Trans., J. Suttie. London: Karnac.
Ferenczi, S. [1925] (1980). Psycho-analysis of sexual habits. In J. Rickman (Ed.), Further contributions to the problems and methods of psychoanalysis (pp. 259–297). Trans., J. Suttie. London: Karnac.
Ferenczi, S. [1926] (1980). Contraindications to the active psychoanalytical technique. In J. Rickman (Ed.), Further contributions to the problems and methods of psychoanalysis (pp. 217-230). Trans., J. Suttie. London: Karnac.
Ferenczi, S. [1928] (1955). The elasticity of psychoanalytic technique. In M. Balint (Ed.), Final contributions (pp. 87-101). Trans., E. Mosbacher et al. London: Hogarth.
Ferenczi, S. [1933] (1955). Confusion of tongues between adults and the child: the language of tenderness and passion. In M. Balint (Ed.), Final contributions (pp. 156-167). Trans., E. Mosbacher et al. London: Hogarth.
Freud S. (1894). The neuropsychoses of defence. S.E., 3: 45–61
Freud S. (1910). The future prospects of psycho-analytic therapy. S.E., 11: 139–151
Freud S. (1918). From the history of an infantile neurosis. S.E., 17: 11
Freud S. (1919). Lines of advance in psychoanalytic therapy. S.E., 17: 157–168
Freud S. (1927). Future of an illusion. S.E., 21: 53
Hoffer A. (1999). Neutrality and the therapeutic alliance: What does the analyst want?. In: Levy S. T. (eds) The therapeutic alliance current concepts. International Universities Press, Madison, WI
Hoffer P. T., Hoffer A. (1999). Ferenczi’s fatal illness in historical context. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 47(4): 1257–1268
Kris A. O. (1982). Free association method and process. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT
Rizzuto A.M. (1998). Why did Freud reject God. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Axel Hoffer M.D., is Training and Supervising Analyst, The Psychoanalytic Institute of New England, East (PINE) and Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hoffer, A. What does the analyst want? Free association in relation to the analyst’s activity, ambition, and technical innovation. Am J Psychoanal 66, 1–23 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11231-005-9000-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11231-005-9000-4