• Galina HristevaEmail author


Ferenczi’s deviations from Freudian thinking have caused enormous controversy. This paper re-examines Ferenczi’s theoretical and technical innovations through the lens of Orpha—one of his most characteristic and valuable contributions, the culmination point of his thought, and the leitmotif of his work. So far research on Ferenczi’s Orpha concept has been relatively sparse and there is still much obscurity about this term that he adopted from or co-created with his “evil genius” Elizabeth Severn. The following paper will attempt to shed more light on the origin, evolution, functions, and the philosophical foundations of the Orpha concept. Along with the theoretical, therapeutic and philosophical aspects, this point of view will enable a better understanding of the poetic value and the lyricism of Ferenczi’s work. Orphic harmony—the fusion of Dionysian ecstasy and Apollonian clarity into the “principal instinct of tranquility” proclaimed by Ferenczi in 1930 and into the “primordial chant of cosmic unity” (Herder), emerges as the essence of the Ferenczian work and worldview.


Orpha trauma fragmentation cosmogony Ferenczi’s poetics Orphic harmony 



  1. Aulich, J. (1990). Die orphische Weltanschauung der Antike und ihr Erbe bei den Dichtern Nietzsche, Hölderlin, Novalis und Rilke. [The Orphic worldview of antiquity and its legacy in the works of the poets Nietzsche, Hölderlin, Novalis, and Rilke] Diss. Simon Frazer University Burnaby, Canada. Retrieved from:
  2. Ferenczi, S. (1909a). Introjection and transference. In First contributions to psycho-analysis (pp. 35–93). New York: Brunner/Mazel. (1980).Google Scholar
  3. Ferenczi, S. (1909b). The psychological analysis of dreams. In First contributions to psycho-analysis (pp. 94–131). New York: Brunner/Mazel. (1980).Google Scholar
  4. Ferenczi, S. (1911). On obscene words. In First contributions to psycho-analysis (pp. 132–153). New York: Brunner/Mazel. (1980).Google Scholar
  5. Ferenczi, S. (1912a). Transitory symptom-constructions during analysis. In First contributions to psycho-analysis (pp. 193–212). New York: Brunner/Mazel. (1980).Google Scholar
  6. Ferenczi, S. (1912b). Exploring the unconscious. In Final contributions to the problems & methods of psycho-analysis (pp. 308–312). London: Karnac Books. (1994).Google Scholar
  7. Ferenczi, S. (1913a). Stages in the development of the sense of reality. In First contributions to psycho-analysis (pp. 213–239). New York: Brunner/Mazel. (1980).Google Scholar
  8. Ferenczi, S. (1913b). Taming of a wild horse. In Final contributions to the problems & methods of psycho-analysis (pp. 336–340). London: Karnac Books. (1994).Google Scholar
  9. Ferenczi, S. (1919a). The phenomena of hysterical materialization. In Further contributions to the theory and technique of psycho-analysis (pp. 89–104). London: Karnac Books. (1994).Google Scholar
  10. Ferenczi, S. (1919b). An attempted explanation of some hysterical stigmata. In Further contributions to the theory and technique of psycho-analysis (pp. 110–118). London: Karnac Books. (1994).Google Scholar
  11. Ferenczi, S. (1920–1932). Notes and fragments. In Final contributions to the problems & methods of psycho-analysis (pp. 216–279). London: Karnac Books. (1994).Google Scholar
  12. Ferenczi, S. (1924). Thalassa: A theory of genitality (H.A. Bunker, Trans.). Albany, NY: The Psychoanalytic Quarterly. (1938). Republished London: Karnac. (1989).Google Scholar
  13. Ferenczi, S. (1931). Child analysis in the analysis of adults. In Final contributions to the problems & methods of psycho-analysis (pp. 126–142). London: Karnac Books. (1994).Google Scholar
  14. Ferenczi, S. (1932). In J. Dupont (Ed.), The Clinical Diary of Sándor Ferenczi (M. Balint & N. Z. Jackson, Trans.). Cambridge, Mass. & London: Harvard University Press. (1988).Google Scholar
  15. Ferenczi, S. (1933). Confusion of tongues between adults and the child. The language of tenderness and of passion. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 30, 225–230, Published in 1949. Also in Final contribution to the problems and methods of psychoanalysis (pp. 156–167). London: Karnac Books. (1994).Google Scholar
  16. Fowlie, W. (1976). Preface to: Mathieu, B. (1976). Orpheus in Brooklyn: Orphism, Rimbaud, and Henry Miller (pp. xi–xii). The Hague: Mouton Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Frankel, J. B. (1998). Ferenczi’s trauma theory. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 58, 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Freud, S. (1900). The interpretation of dreams. Standard Edition (Vols. 4–5, pp. 1–626). London: Hogarth.Google Scholar
  19. Freud, S. (1923). The Ego and the Id. Standard Edition (Vol. 17, pp. 3–66). London: Hogarth.Google Scholar
  20. Freud, S., & Ferenczi, S. (1925–1933). Briefwechsel [Correspondence], Vol. III, 2 (1925–1933). E. Falzeder & E. Brabant (Eds.), Wien, Köln and Weimar: Böhlau. 2005. Also see: The correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Sándor Ferenczi, Volume 3, 1920-1933. E. Falzeder & E. Brabant (Eds.), with the collaboration of P. Giampieri-Deutsch under the supervision of A. Haynal. P. T. Hoffer (Trans.) With an Introduction by J. Dupont. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. (2000).Google Scholar
  21. Goethe, J. W. (1806). Weltseele [World-Soul]. In Sämtliche Werke in 18 Bänden. [Collected works in 18 volumes] (Vol. 1, pp. 511–512). Zürich: Artemis Verlag. (1977).Google Scholar
  22. Goethe, J. W. (1817). Urworte. Orphisch [Primal words. Orphic]. In Sämtliche Werke in 18 Bänden. [Collected Works in 18 Volumes] (Vol. 1, pp. 523–524). Zürich: Artemis Verlag (1977).Google Scholar
  23. Goethe, J. W. (1821). Eins und Alles. [One and Everything]. In Sämtliche Werke in 18 Bänden. [Collected works in 18 volumes] (Vol. 1, p. 514). Zürich: Artemis Verlag (1977).Google Scholar
  24. Gurevich, H. (2016). Orpha, Orphic functions, and the Orphic Analyst: Winnicott’s “Regression to Dependence” in the language of Ferenczi. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 76, 322–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Guthrie, W. K. C. (1935). Orpheus and Greek religion. A study of the Orphic movement. London: Methuen & Co. (1952).Google Scholar
  26. Gutiérrez-Peláez, M. (2018). Confusion of tongues. A return to Sándor Ferenczi. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Herder, J. G. (1766). Orpheus. Versuch. Geschichte der lyrischen Dichtkunst. [Orpheus. An essay. A history of the lyrical poetry]. In W. Pross (Ed.), Werke [Works], (Vol. 1, pp. 85–140). Berlin: Weidmann (1899).Google Scholar
  28. Herder, J. G. (1774). Älteste Urkunde des Menschengeschlechts. [Oldest document of the human race] (Vol. 1). In Sämtliche Werke [Collected Works] (Vol. 37): Religion und Theologie. [Religion and theology] (pp. 3–440). Karlsruhe: Im Bureau der deutschen Klassiker. (1827).Google Scholar
  29. Hristeva, G., & Poster, M. F. (2013). Georg Groddeck’s maternal turn: Its evolution and influence on early psychoanalysts. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 73, 228–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jones, E. (1957). The life and work of Sigmund Freud. Vol. III. The last phase: (1919–1939). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  31. Locke, L. (1997). Orpheus and Orphism: Cosmology and sacrifice at the boundary. Folklore Forum, 28(2), 3–29.Google Scholar
  32. Lothane, Z. (2010). Sándor Ferenczi. The dramatologist of love. Psychoanalytical Perspectives, 7, 165–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mathieu, B. (1976). Orpheus in Brooklyn: Orphism, Rimbaud, and Henry Miller. The Hague: Mouton Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McGahey, R. (1994). The Orphic moment: Shaman to poet-thinker in Plato, Nietzsche, and Mallarmé. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  35. Meisner, D. A. (2018). Orphic tradition and the birth of the gods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Plato. (1993). Phaedo (D. Gallop, Ed., Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Poster, M. F., Hristeva, G., & Giefer, M. (2016). Georg Groddeck: “The pinch of pepper” of psychoanalysis. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 76, 161–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rachman, A. W. (1997a). Sándor Ferenczi: The psycho-therapist of tenderness and passion. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.Google Scholar
  39. Rachman, A. W. (1997b). The suppression and censorship of Ferenczi’s confusion of Tongues paper. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 17, 459–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rachman, A. W. (2018). Elizabeth Severn: The “evil genius” of psychoanalysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Rilke, R. M. (1907). Orpheus, Eurydice, Hermes. In New Poems (pp. 151–156) (L. Krisak, Trans.). Woodbridge, UK: Boydell & Brewer (2015).Google Scholar
  42. Rilke, R. M. (1922). Sonette an Orpheus. [Sonnets to Orpheus]. In Werke in drei Bänden [Works in three volumes] (Vol. 1, pp. 487–529). Frankfurt am Main (1966).Google Scholar
  43. Schopenhauer, A. (1819). The world as will and idea (Vol. 3) (R. B. Haldane, & J. Kemp, Trans.). London: Trübner Co. (1886).Google Scholar
  44. Smith, N. A. (1999). From Oedipus to Orpha: Revisiting Ferenczi and Severn’s landmark case. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 59, 345–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Soreanu, R. (2018). The psychic life of fragments: Splitting from Ferenczi to Klein. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 78, 421–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Strauss, W. A. (1971). Descent and return. The Orphic theme in modern literature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Taylor, T. (1824). The mystical hymns of Orpheus (T. Taylor, Trans.). London: Bertram Dobell. (1896).Google Scholar
  48. Windelband, W. (1900). Platon. Stuttgart: Fr. Frommann’s Verlag (E. Hauff), 1910.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AalenGermany

Personalised recommendations