2014 December

Your analyst wears combat boots

Posted by | Uncategorized | No Comments

Bragin’s recent IP.net post on combat veterans suggests a belated call for analysts to lace up their combat boots.  The Veteran’s Adminstration has the largest mental health system in the United States; psychoanalysts are a shadow presence. Prudence Gourgechon encouraged more involvement at the January American Psychoanalytic Meetings.

This contrasts sharply with psychoanalysts engagement and dedication in WWI and WWII.  Simmel in WWI saw thousands of “shell shocked” soldiers and ported that information back to Freud and colleagues, influencing our initial ideas about trauma and mourning.  In WWII, Kardiner, Grinker, Spiegel and others were officers in the US Army and joined our men at battle.  Grinker, (one of my teachers), was analyzed by Freud, and developed the first effective treatment for acute stress disorder.  Grinker and Spiegel’s Amytal interviews are an extension of Freud’s early abreaction work.  These psychoanalysts returned to the U.S. with great credibility from  their scientific discoveries, clinical acumen and earned both military and societal respect.  They saw men at the front, most with diagnosable mental ailments; some not. And the soldiers saw these psychoanalysts who ventured from behind the couch to care for them at times of great pain and need: not just “care,” but return them to functional lives.

Further, these psychoanalysts’ involvement with the military extended analysts’ commitment to society. Aichhorn ran the streets with his delinquents (and influenced the early pioneers such as Anna Freud, Peter Blos Sr., and Erik Erikson). Erikson, to learn about the Sioux and Yurok, lived among them.  Anna Freud brought Jewish orphans from Theresienstadt and cared for them.  Fraiberg set her infant-parent program amongst the most indigent communities in Michigan and later in San Francisco.  More recently, Twemlow, seeking to decrease youth violence, succeeded in the most violent schools in Jamaica; Natti Laor, during the second Lebanese War, when one million Israeli refugees fled the North, moved his staff and clinic from Tel Aviv to Haifa and surrounding bombed villages; they migrated against the stream, closer to the war, closer to those in need.

Analysts carry valuable knowledge about inner life.  We construct a refuge in our offices as part of our analytic frame so that we can ease the difficult work of our analysands.  But, this analytic frame is also a frame of mind; a manner of listening. When I interviewed Israeli elite soldiers, several expressed surprise that so many were willing to talk with me  —  even confide — and recruit buddies. We can carry this listening and absorption outside the office to engage those in other settings.  This is another way both to serve society and to strengthen our presence in society’s mind.

Meeting the soldier near the front, listening to those who are too stoic or not culturally prepared to come into an analyst’s office also increases our truer knowledge of the inner life of soldiers.  Jonathan Shay has written two compelling accounts of the mental flotsam from the wake of Viet Nam washed up on American shores: Achilles in Vietnam and Odysseus in America.   He is not an analyst He did not work in the battlefield; he interviewed those men who came to the V.A. severe PTSD program.   Yet, his accounts come closer to the soldier’s soul in distress.  Shay’s work was well-received in the U.S. Army War College and by the Secretary of the Navy.

Analysts extend our understanding of the frontiers inner life by exploring them not only in our offices but also outside; we learn more about the vicissitudes of inner pain and how to ameliorate such suffering.  In such settings, we are stripped bare: we have no office, no stance behind the couch. In some ways this work is closer to working children and adolescents: they see us face-to-face, demand, hope and also battle against their hopes.

Stepping into the public arena, into the lives and settings of soldiers, strengthens our credibility as clinicians and scientists. But, there are other ways to learn about soldiers’ inner lives, such as asking them to speak to us.  A former student at the Hebrew University, Amit Goldenberg, was a member of Special Forces. For his Bachelor’s thesis, he interviewed all the (surviving) men in his unit: none had ever spoken to a psychotherapist; none planned to. But, all spoke with him; he is one of them. His findings are heart-compelling (and earned him an honors degree). He is now a journalist and has finished his first novel. He has agreed to write something about what he has learned for IP.net.  I hope that this is the beginning of a lively dialogue between analysts and soldiers, between ourselves and society.

Emotions Concealed and Revealed: Contributions to a Common Ground in Psychoanalysis

Posted by | Uncategorized | No Comments

I presented this in San Francisco June 2011 at the American College for  Psychoanalysis with Paul Ekman. There, our work was well-received. (In fact, Dr. Ekman was invited to teach for the day.)

But this paper has been hibernating for two years. Then, I wrote what I thought was a straightforward summary of Emotions research, a field birthed by Darwin, but empirically developed by Paul Ekman and colleagues. I’ve known Paul first as colleague, then dear friend since 1996. After years of discussions both about his research and later watching his meetings with the Dalai Lama, I thought it wa time to summarize and present the implications of emotions research for psychoanalytic work.

Emotions researchers are like physicists who work on the basic laws of the universe: analysts are closer to engineers who try apply the rules of physics to improve our lives.

Or, emotions researchers are like basic scientists in medical school; analysts, the docs who apply new knowledge. Of course, sometimes, the engineers or clinical docs participate in new discoveries or question old ones.

Yet, I found that analysts were either not knowledgable or even opposed to findings of four decades of empirical work on emotions. Emotions researchers have established basic facts about discrete emotions — such as happy, sad, angry, fear, disgust, contempt: they are universal (across cultures, as Darwin hypothesized), that we have micro expressions which conceal and reveal our true inner states. These scientists have a consensus about these basics and have shown physiological (including fMRI) correlations. Further, their work is accepted and applied by the U.S. Defense of Defense in wartime, the CIA, the French and British secret services and the Mossad. Even Pixar used their work to make their characters more “human.” Yet, I found that psychoanalysts are either unacquainted or even contest their findings. This opposition does not bother emotions researchers (nor the CIA, the Mossad nor Pixar); it should bother us. If emotions are not cross-culturally universal, then we do not have a common language about them; if they are universal (as these researchers have established), then, at some level, ” Alle Menschen sind Brüder ,” we are brothers (and sisters).

 I present this here both to inform and to raise discussion about this research in a related  field — emotions research — that should be integrated into our thinking and clinical work and training on identifying emotions in practice: both one’s own and one’s analysand’s.

Nathan Szajnberg
————————-

Emotions Concealed and Revealed: Contributions to a Common Ground in Psychoanalysis

Nathan Szajnberg, MD (Presented in San Francisco June 2011 at Am College for Psychoanalysis)

 Emotions, a core concept for psychoanalysis, has been studied avidly by Paul Ekman and colleagues for more than four decades. Yet, its empirical study was initiated by Charles Darwin (1872). I review the researchers’ fundamental contributions, particularly 1) the universal expression and interpretation of basic emotions, 2) the presence of fleeting microexpressions, and 3) non-conscious attempts to cover-up emotions. Then, I present objective assessment of emotion recognition accuracy for several basic emotions, and discuss the implications of this work for psychoanalytic training and practice, such as accurately reading both one’s own and one’s analysand’s emotions as a component of empathy. If a fundamental area of practice is along the transference/countertransference continuum, then improving candidates’ (and our) emotional accuracy within this continuum is both desirable and feasible. Improved accurate emotion recognition, like playing on-key for a musician, is one approach to a “more transparent assessment of psychoanalytic competence…” (Tuckett, 2004). This offers a bridge to an adjacent and potentially collaborative, discipline, emotions research.

Infrequently, studies at the fringes of psychoanalysis become woven into our fabric, enriching its pattern. For instance, attachment research — although founded by Bowlby, a psychoanalyst — was carried into an almost forty year productive “exile” by academic psychologists such as Ainsworth, Main, Waters and colleagues. Recently, psychoanalytic researchers recaptured and applied attachment theory to psychoanalytic thinking (Fonagy, 2001). Attachment theory may guide transference technique (Szajnberg and Crittenden, 1996).

Here, we view another such cloth woven outside of psychoanalysis: Paul Ekman and colleagues’ four decades’ work on emotions. The aim: to explore its application to training and clinical work. Emotions is one common tapestry covering psychoanalytic ground, a juncture where psychoanalytic cultures may meet (Wallerstein, 1990, Green, 1999). This is only an introduction to the idea of emotions as a common area of clinical discussion, an introduction to assay its usefulness in daily clinical work and collegial dialogue. Linking psychoanalysis to emotions’ research serves at least three functions: 1) it gives a basis for a more universal language of discourse; 2) it returns us to the more bodily experiences and origins within which emotions are embodied and from which we have been estranged (Stern, 1985; Green, 1999); 3) it offers a more objective platform for candidate training and evaluation (Tuckett, 2004).

To begin, we need a common vocabulary, a challenge as we move across the many languages of psychoanalysis.

Darwin emphasized emotion expression, focusing predominately — for humans — on the face, with which Ekman began his studies (Darwin, 1872; Ekman, 2003). Here is Ekman’s working description of emotions: ” … a(n) automatic appraisal influenced by our evolutionary and personal past, in which we sense that something important to our welfare is occurring… set of physiological changes and … behaviors … (begin to) deal with the situation …. We… use words when emotional, but we cannot reduce emotion to words.” (Ekman, 2003).

Ekman articulates six qualities of emotions’ mental state. It is
1.a signal that “lets others know what is happening inside us” (2008, p. 37); which is
2. “triggered automatically in under a quarter of a second.. (during which it is) totally opaque to consciousness ”;
3. we are typically not aware of our emotions as they occur;
4. other animals have emotions (40);
5. emotions are short-lived (as brief as a few seconds), unlike moods; 6. Each emotion has a set of sensations.

Further, emotional arousal has individual-specific profiles — onset rise, idiosyncratic duration and a refractory period — during which we “read” our environments through the lens of that emotion. In the refractory period following fury, for instance, it may be difficult to perceive affects or entreaties other than anger (p. 47 ff.) (In psychoanalytic terms, an overwhelming experiencing ego interferes with observing ego.) This “profile” — rise, duration and dissipation — has the conformation of a volcano, but with durations that vary for each phases depending upon the individual. Intriguingly, for an individual, the emotional profiles of anger, fear and anguish are similar. Profiles can vary across individuals with more rapid or gradual rise in onsets; shorter or longer durations and variable lengths for dissipation of emotions. Individuals with, for instance, more explosive onsets of negative emotion, appear to be more resistant to reconfiguration of their more impulsive emotional onsets (Ekman, personal communication), a finding with implications for clinical work and familiar to those who work with severely borderline characters (Giovacchini, 2000).

That is, emotion is a signal, an automatic quick appraisal of what is happening, that “lets others know what is happening inside of us“. One must develop the skill to gain consistent consciousness of emotional awareness (both of self and others); emotions are not unique to humans and involve physical sensations. (Dalai Lama and Ekman, 2008, p 40).

In psychoanalytic literature, we are challenged by the variegated, even contested
meanings for “emotion” terms both across languages and even within language. In German, Freud used Affekt, Empfindung, and Gefuhl (LaPlanche and Pontalis, 1973). Strachey’s confounding English translations are: Empfindung is “feeling” or “emotion”; and Gefuhl is “feeling” or “emotion,” with Affekt usually translated “affect.” Even Freud complicates: when he wrote “Obsessions and Phobias” in French (1895), he translated Affekt as the academic sounding “etat emotif,”; this is later translated into English as both “”affect” and “emotion.”

In French, Green discusses the dilemmas of translating Affekt (1999). He describes two categories of terms connected with “feelings.” First, those words close to “affect”: Affecter (to affect), affectif (emotional), affection and affectivite. Second words with progressive gradation of tone: “When dealing the emotional life, the French … usually distinguished … emotion, an acute transitory state; sentiment, a more attenuated, more durable state , and passion … violent, profound and lasting.” (Green, 1999).

LaPlanche and Pontalis (1973) ground us with psychoanalytic terminology and translations. They define “Affekt” as “any affective state, whether painful or pleasant, whether vague or well-defined and whether .. a massive discharge or … general mood. According to Freud, each instinct expresses itself in terms of affect and… ideas (Vorstellungen).”

In fact, Freud’s distinction between affect and ideas fits closely with what Ekman and colleagues were to confirm about Darwin’s theory about universal emotions and how emotions and ideas are separable: while emotions are universal, the ideas that evoke them
may be culture-specific, as Ekman comments in the re-issue of Darwin’s Expression of Emotion in Man and Animals (Darwin, 1998).

Etymologically, Emotion comes from emotionem, “to move out.” Listen to both emotion’s archaic and contemporary definitions. “1. A moving out, migration, transference from one place to another (obsolete) (author’s italics); 2. a moving … perturbation in a physical sense (obs.); 3. A political or social agitation… 4. Any agitation or disturbance of mind … any vehement or excited mental state; (b) a mental “feeling or affection” (e.g. of pleasure or pain … etc…) as distinguished from cognitive or volitional states …”

When Ekman and the Dalai Lama first approximated a common working concept of emotion (lacking a Tibetan term), it was this sense of “being moved” (for better or worse) that worked (Dalai Lama and Ekman, 2008) (3).

Here, we use “emotion” rather than “affect” for two reasons. First, “emotion” is the researchers’ term; second, “affect” has such a rich, variegated, and voluminous scientific literature; even summarizing the latter would be onerous.

Further, I focus on the discrete emotions – such as sad, happy, angry — rather than what Stern calls vitality (1985) — such as lively, phlegmatic, zest, although we will return to this in connection with some of Ekman’s early work on gesture and deceit. (4)

Emotions Revealed

Ekman made two major discoveries about human emotion. First, he demonstrated definitively that emotions are universal, as Darwin theorized. Second, he described micro-expressions (both facial and gestural) — brief, emotional displays that generally occur out of our awareness, particularly in moments of (self- and other-) deceit.
Darwin suggested that we have evolved eight emotions: happy, sad, angry, disgust, contempt, reflection, surprise and shyness (Darwin, 1998). But by the mid-twentieth century, cultural anthropologists such as Margaret Mead, argued against the idea of universal display of emotions.

Ekman took on the challenge of emotions’ universality/cultural specificity in the early 60’s. He chose and studied a remote tribe in New Guinea, who had no exposure to photos, television or film (5). Natives could identify at least six affects in the same manner as Westerners: happy, sad, disgust, anger, surprise, fear. In years of ongoing studies of facial expression alone, Ekman confirmed and revised these findings. Culture does not determine the expression nor interpretation of most emotions (6) . However, disguise or attempted suppression of certain emotions are culturally-influenced: Japanese in the presence of an observer try to suppress anger (with a tight, obicularis oris “smile”) in contrast to Americans. Yet, Japanese sitting alone (being filmed via one-way mirror), do not suppress anger or disgust.

Further, Ekman described a series of additional emotions for which we may not have words in English, but recognize emotionally: for instance, Schadenfreude (the “pleasure” we may take in someone’s downfall), or the Italian, fiero, the pleasure we take in having achieved a difficult goal, or the Yiddish, naches, the pride we have in the achievements of those we love. While we may not have simple English words, most people can identify the feeling state.

We have EEG and Galvanic Skin Response evidence of emotion, before we are conscious of it (Emotions Revealed, Ekman, 2005) While much of his early work focus on facial expression, he also pioneered work on gesture and emblems (8) (Ekman, 2005; Goffman, 1990), which are much more culturally determined –as Darwin predicted
(Darwin, 1998). The latter research is being applied to anti-terrorism efforts, precisely because facial expression (and physiology) of emotions are so rapid and more difficult to suppress.

Ekman’s second major discovery is micro-expressions of emotion and deceit. Patients who in fact were suicidal (unknown to the interviewer) and were trying to suppress the information, made gestures or had brief facial micro-expressions (lasting about 1/25th of a second) revealing an attempt at cover-up (9).

Telling Lies (Ekman,1985), gives detailed examples of facial features of micro- expressions associated with deceit (asymmetries of facial expressions; eyebrow shifts), and gestural features, including that such gestures are generally made outside our usual “frame”: that is, between the neck and waist. He disproved previously held ideas about deception-revelation, such as “neurolinguistic” gaze aversion: this doesn’t work reliably. In addition, he and colleagues demonstrated the inaccuracy of lie detectors: trained humans do better. His work is reminiscent of Erving Goffman’s The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, but with greater detail. “Lies” or deceit are more difficult to cover when the issues are emotionally more charged. (10) One can also use this method to determine when people tell the truth (Ekman, 1997).

Recently, Ekman and colleagues have expanded work on negative emotions, working with Tibetan Lamas, celibate men who have meditated daily for several decades. They have mastered a form of internal scanning to monitor and control emotions. One finding will be presented here. During EEG and physiologically monitored experiments in a laboratory, while the Lamas were exposed to adverse experiences, they showed initial EEG evidence of negative emotions, such as anger; this was quickly squelched electroencephalographically and before the Lamas could become conscious of the emotion (Lutz et. al., 2004). Ekman, their recent book, speculates that someone who has focused on controlling (via meditation) usually-unconscious (or preconscious) act, such as breathing, walking or eating, may also be able to extend this radar-like screening for “incoming missiles” of negative emotions, thereby foreshortening the overt response. Whether this is closer to suppression or repression needs further study.
Read my lips (and my brows and my cheeks)
Even limiting our study of emotions to facial expression, matters are not simple. Professionals whom we would expect to read hidden (facial) emotions accurately, do no better than chance (psychologists, police, judges, and others, except for the C.I.A.). The research group has devised a computer program to assess, then train viewer’s accuracy on reading facial expression of emotion (Microexpression Training Tool; METT-2, 2008) (11). For instance, a senior psychoanalyst achieved 84% overall accuracy on pre-training for micro-expression of seven emotions; but, he ranged from 75% on three emotions to 100% on four. After reflecting on his inner inhibitions to more accurate perception of these three emotions, he took the 30-40 minute training session and achieved 100% accuracy on all seven emotions. That is, a trained analyst did not achieve enhanced accuracy on reading facial emotions until examining why he missed certain emotions, then training up to improve performance.

The METT-2 measures accuracy of reading only seven emotions. In analysis we deal with many more and with combinations and without reading the face. How much more challenging, how much more expertise in both reading oneself accurately (including blocks against reading certain emotions) and reading the analysand accurately; all this before we can be prepared to make an observation, let alone an effective interpretation. Imagine, for the moment combinations of emotion in the consulting room: the tears of joy or relief; the mix of anger and contempt (the only unilateral facial expression of emotion); the laughter in a moment one expects sadness.

Here are several considerations for psychoanalysts from Ekman’s findings. Why do people tend to miss certain micro-expressions, particularly deceit or negative emotion? In general, we elide, edit-out, quite simply miss these clear signals in order to maintain a sense of believing the speaker, or sustaining politesse. An extreme example of this is a study of Munchhausen’s-by-Proxy, where there is a long line of professionals who “miss” life-threatening abuse. Szajnberg et. al demonstrated that when two observers are present, with one interviewing the known perpretrating mother, the engaged observer does not believe that the mother is guilty, an as-if personality inducing countertransference confusion (Rusakow, et. al. 1993; Deutsch, 1942). But, analysts can extend this work on self-deceit, using our understanding of repressed unconscious, whether due to wishes, phantasies, fears, representations, or signifiers. Emotions research simply sharpens our ability to notice when self-deceit occurs; the analytic work then pursues the why and what is being held back.

Our work is enriched (both complicated by and enabled by) gauging emotions via gesture, body shifts, vitality emotions, vocal prosody and of course, words, including whether the content fits the tone (as in irony or sarcasm). Our personal analyses prepare us to read ourselves more accurately; evenly hovering attention, or reverie (Ogden, 2005) gives us breathing space within which to attend to both our emotions and what is evoked in us during our work. Words in particular, as Stern suggests in his developmental study of self, may distance ourselves from our earlier selves (1985, 2005).

Analysts may be concerned with patients deceiving us about emotions: however, our greater challenge is self-deceit (the analyst’s and the analysand’s), particularly if this is
unconscious. At those moments, we need be more accurate about “reading through” the self-deceit and re-presenting this to the analysand.

For example, a young mother in analysis had for some weeks complained about her intrusive, jealous and denigrating mother-in-law. The analysand recognized her anger. But, as we listened, there was a tone of quiet terror in her voice, one familiar from earlier in her long analysis. When the analyst mentioned that there seemed to be also a tone of fear, she silenced, then whispered, “She gets under my skin.” This, we both knew, referred to early molestation by a relative. The anger had been present and more conscious; but it was the terror intruding into the present that evoked past fears.

In more familiar analytic terms, one of our basic analytic tools is empathy (Einfuhlung — “feeling into”). As such, we need be as accurate as possible at identifying the patient’s feeling (Gefuhl) into which we are trying to feel.

Child work is more face-to-face. Child analysts learn to read the child’s face, body, posture, gesture, in order to understand the child’s feeling states. While E. James Anthony wrote of trying to achieve the ideal “sessile position” (Anthony, 1977) for the analyst — trying to stay seated for much of the session — most of us know the bodily feeling of tuning our physical responsiveness to the child’s cues. (Paradoxically, child work may be more challenging, in that it permits the analyst less time, less space to guage what is happening with emotions.) In this sense, reading and responding to children’s feelings brings us closer to Freud and Hoffer’s concept of the first ego as a body ego — and that body ego endures, Piaget suggests, as a framework for all earlier phases of cognitive development (Piaget and Inhelder,1969) and Stern for self development (1985).

After laying-out the apparent simplicity of Ekman’s study of the basic emotions, I have layered and imbricated the complex challenges we face: psychoanalytic work on reading,
feeling, responding and interpreting emotions — both our own and the analysands — over the course of an hour, and over an analysis.

What Does this mean for Psychoanalysis?

So what? Some analysts argue that all work done outside the consulting room, outside the frame of transference/countertransference is irrelevant to psychoanalysis (Green, 20005). But, let us think further.

When Wallerstein asked whether we could find a common ground in psychoanalysis, a meeting place, an agora, where we can join in discussion, find a common ‘language,’ he did not stop at this appeal. Rather, he proceeded, using consensus from international colleagues, to find: that we can agree that “character” is a major clinical focus in psychoanalysis; that we hope and work for change in troublesome aspects of character; that we can come to reliable agreement about seventeen aspects of character. (12) He first achieved reliable cross-cultural agreement about seventeen aspects of character. Then, Leutzinger-Bohleber and colleagues (2003), in a landmark study, demonstrated that character shifts post-psychoanalysis could be documented. That is, we have the ability, should we desire, to discuss character as a phenomenon about which there may be consensus. (13)

Here, we try to present another area of consensus: emotions and their embodiment. Emotions are the same across cultures. This we share. What differs culturally to some degree is what ignites certain emotions and, to some extent, which emotions do certain cultures try to suppress (or emphasize). In the first case, we know from Ekman’s work that specific events also universally elicit certain emotions. Shown a sad face and asked to tell a story about what might cause this expression, the New Guinea stone-age man
cites the death of a child, maybe a wife. But, other emotion elicitors are culture-specific: shown a face displaying disgust, this same man will describe coming across a rotting boar in the jungle: while we may understand the look and smell of disgust, few of us would cite spontaneously boar putrifaction as a disgust evoker. Skewered, roasted scorpions in a Beijing street market evoke lip-smacking among natives and disgust among (some) visitors. As usual in matters human, things are not so simple. This is an example of how ideas (roasted scorpions) may evoke different emotions in different cultures, an elaboration of Freud’s distinction between emotion and idea mentioned earlier.

Another significant objection: Ekman’s observations are on facial expressions; how is this relevant to adult analysis: we don’t use faces to assess emotion?

At least two responses: first, the face is perhaps our most articulate instrument of emotion expression to others (Darwin, 1998; Ekman and Rosenberg, 1997). This makes evolutionary sense: well-muscled, well-vesseled, the face is built to “tell” others what we feel, and do so rapidly, efficiently and (perhaps unfortunately) despite ourselves. Developmentally, this is certainly true: infants express basic emotions (such as happy, sad, disgust, fear, surprise) well before they have the words to say it. The face is but an expressor of the feelings within; psychoanalytic technique is built upon transforming both feelings and thoughts into words. The process of this transformation alone may be therapeutic, shifting us towards greater symbolization, literally towards better articulation. Psychoanalysts care most about the emotions, not the muscles of the face nor the blood-vessel nor the galvanic skin responses associated with the feelings. We learn from Ekman about emotions, not simply what “facial action systems” are being activated. In fact, one of his most technical books is entitled, What the Face Reveals (Ekman and Rosenberg, 1997), emphasizing that the subject here is emotions not grimaces. Put
simply, to describe Ekman’s research as only about facial expression, is like describing psychoanalysis as only about “words”: both settings — emotion research and psychoanalytic research — use the best available signs to guide us on the roads and the detours of inner life.

Second, while Ekman grasped that the face, our physiology, gesture and emblems.(14) One of Freud’s major contributions is to show the deep correspondance between our inner lives and our bodies; Erikson’s elaboration of Abraham’s ideas about development can be understood as how our psyche makes sense of the changes in our bodies, at least through adolescence (and then into pregnancy and senescence). Frankly, at some level, learning from Ekman about bodily articulation of emotions brings us back to our psychoanalytic, bodily origins. This paper does not imply that analysts need learn or use physiological measures to understand emotions: quite the contrary, Ekman’s overall aim is to permit us to read ourselves and others more honestly and accurately in vivo. Ekman’s oevre is about emotions, not simply faces, nor even gestures.

Emotions Heard and the Present Moment

Words help interpretation, how we transmit what happens in the consulting room, between analysand and analyst, within our minds. But, as Stern demonstrated (1985, 2005), prosody — the sing-song, the sine waves of our voice — underlie words. Stern demonstrated a logic of prosody with parents and infants. When a mother asks, “You hungry, tired?” she does so with uplifting half sine waves. To quiet or reassure, mothers use descending half sines, “That’s O.K. Mommy has food for you. O.K., O.K.” And when mothers recite and want to keep the baby’s attention, a serious of continuous full sine waves emit: “Yessss. We’ll get dressed, then the stroller, the with auntie Lily we’ll go the park and watch the swans….” This is early. Babies begin their “speech” before words with sing-song. So too, to some degree we hear this in our voices or our analysands. Imagine for a moment giving an interpretation in a flat monotone. Prosody too can be somewhat cultural: when we were studying affect attunement among mothers and infants, we found that the attunements tended to be more toned-down among British Isles mothers as opposed to American-Hispanic (Stern, personal communication). Or, in the U.S., a Minnesotan’s statement of fact may end in an upward cadence; this is heard as an interrogatory along the Northeast, lending a touch of ambiguity in a Manhattan analytic office.

Prosody is connected with feeling-tone, part of what Stern called “vitality affect” — liveliness, enthusiasm, phlegmatic, calm — as opposed to the “discrete affects” about which we have a more familiar vocabulary (sad, happy, angry, etc..) and unlike mood, which has a longer-duration quality (1985). While this paper focuses on the more discrete emotions, we don’t ignore the degree to which daily speech transmits, via prosody for instance, feeling-tones that explicitly or implicitly slip into our consciousness or unconsciousness. Freud (1915, p 194) asked how the unconscious of one person reacts to that of another “without passing through consciousness.” Prosody, the feeling-tone, the emotion, let us say of the music beneath the words may be one route. Robert Pinsky described poetry writing and reading as a very physical act (Pinsky, 2008); perhaps so too there is a poetry of the soul that we call psychoanalysis. Stern, in The Present Moment (2005), painstakingly elaborates how we can construct meanings from a three to ten- second episode in the consulting room, provided we attend to the feeling tones and the content of what is said. Psychoanalysts can extend Ekman’s findings on discrete emotions with Stern’s elaboration of vitality emotions to help identify more clearly what is going on in the session — within the analyst, within the analysand and between them.
A first step — this is the intent of this paper — is that we more accurately identify the emotions hovering in the office.

Freud’s three criteria for a decent interpretation are almost Aristotilian: content, timing and delivery (1915). Delivery includes the emotional tone beneath the words, how they are borne. This vocal tone is related to Stern’s study of prosody and vitality, the sing- song beneath or even delivering our words. this sing-song is closer to the body physicality of feelings, as is true of poetry (Pinsky, 2008). We embody our words with feelings; our feelings are very much embodied.

What is true of interpretation may be true of the analysand’s own interpretations or observations. For instance, the words of this analysand following the birth of her first child, when read, may partly explain the analyst’s reaction; when heard, they are clearer: “I would not have lived long enough to become a mother without my work with you,” said by a woman some 15 years after beginning five times weekly treatment at seventeen with an extensive delusional system, self-cutting, self-burning and eating-disordered. The reader can imagine the prosodic, whispered but felt tone of the sentence that resulted in the analyst feeling a poignance, touched with inner tears. Freud, a man of science, insisted (1915, p. 168), “No physiology.. or chemistry can give us a notion of (latent states of mental life).” But, the emotions that evoke the physiology may begin to explain, particularly as we can connect them with mental content (Vorstellungen). Ekman’s work, particularly when collated with Stern’s dissection and exploration of what occurs in a consulting room in a tree-to-ten second exchange, gives us purchase on how to teach the more abstract phenomenon “empathy” in more discrete steps, such as learning how to read our universal emotions.

Here is an example of this brief “present moment” and the opportunity that evenly hovering attention offers us to read ourselves. This example will sound familiar to many analysts. At the end of a session, in which the analysand — with a long history of borderline traits — continued to talk, then spent time gathering her belongings, then folded the Matisse blanket on the couch, then fluffed the pillow. Finally, she turned to the analyst and said coldly “You hate me!” (Winnicott, 1977). The analyst realized that he felt irritated (that the patient ran over and he had a young child waiting to see him), but did not feel hatred — a different set of sensations than irritation. He could tell this woman that he was irritated that she delayed leaving, but did not feel hatred towards her.

We have a common felt vocabulary. That is, identifying discrete emotions and how we try to both suppress and reveal them facilitates our work. Because our emotions are universal — the analyst in Argentina understands fully well emotions such as joy, anger, sadness, even awe, as does the analyst in France, America or Germany, even if the word representations are different — “joy, alegria, joie, Freude“. When we listen, we also hear emotion, we even may feel it.

A Training application: a transparent assessment of clinical work
Tuckett’s article, “Does anything go?: Towards a framework for the more transparent assessment of psychoanalytic competence” (2005) is a disciplined attempt to find methods to assess candidate clinical ability in a pluralistic field. His group evolved three areas of consensus to assess ability: 1. participant-observer stance; 2. conceptual framework that is not over-intellectualized; 3. interventional frames, which include emotional tone, coherence and non-intellecutalized intervention. Tuckett’s group assessed balance of the analyst’s interpretation’s affect/intellectual illumination and “appropriate emotional tone.” Knowing that emotions are universal, means having greater agreement about reading and assessing emotions, including emotions denied or hidden.

Emotion reading is done quickly, done often. Yet, ironically — from Ekman’s work and from our rich clinical work — emotions may be missed or misinterpreted. In Telling Lies (Ekman, 1985) and “Why don’t we catch liars,” (Ekman, 1996), he showed that we often miss subtle, but present signals of “deceit”, particularly in intimate situations for various reasons: to “protect” the relationship rather than see, hear, feel the true emotions expressed. We expect psychoanalysts to be experts in reading such (self)-deceit; it is the substance of our clinical work. Yet, emotions researchers have shown the that psychologists, among others, are not so adroit at reading “deceitful” emotions. How do we help the analysand have a true reading of oneself, not continue to live with a predominately false self, rather, to be and feel as true to ourselves as humanly feasible? The psychodynamic reasons for self-deceit in particular, can be multiple; but these can be pursued only after we are better able to read the underlying emotions.

This paper leans on emotions research to suggest basic forms of clinical supervision and training closer to Stern’s method in the Present Moment (2005). But, rather than Stern’s recounting and reconstructing the internal events that occurred over a three to ten second “present moment,” we focus on identifying the emotions present in the consulting room — both those in the analysand and those evoked in the analyst. With defensive processes, we would anticipate and analyze more surface “deceits” and the underlying emotions. In a sense, this would be a form of analyzing false social and true selves, using emotions as markers (Winnicott, 1974; Giovacchini, 2000). We could use the emotional profile (for instance, reaction formation overlaying anger) as a road to identify, explore and explain the multiple false/true selves with which we live (Giovacchini, 2000). This
brings us closer to emotional empathy, that subjective phenomenon, which now can be more objectively identified.

Others — including Bion (2005), Ferro (2009) — have explored the transformation from emotions to thoughts: this goes beyond this paper, which is an appeal to begin with basic emotion recognition. We can have greater certainty about teaching the transformation from emotions to thoughts, once we have some consensus about identifying the emotions in the consulting room. Further, embodying emotion raises the further exploration of the traumatic origin of cognitions and fantasies about the reason for our suffering. This extends beyond the fundamental aims of this paper.

Returning to Tuckett’s challenge — finding consensus on judging clinical work — psychoanalysts could agree upon reading emotions accurately, one’s own and one’s analysand’s. This ability is very basic, like singing on-key for a performer. Reading emotions well should lead to clarity. This would be one among other aspects to assess the quality of clinical work, such as: those outlined by Tuckett; the consensus about character structure demonstrated by Leutzinger-Bohelber and Wallerstein et. al.; assessing the transference/countertransference via attachment (Szajnberg and Crittenden, 1995; Fonagy, 2001). Of course, accurate emotion reading is not just to assess candidates’ abilities; it is part of our daily work. Assessing, reading, feeling emotions accurately — particularly those which are hidden form ourselves or mixed with other emotions — is where we can have more grounding in the bodily origins of our emotions, and agreement across cultures, in our “body analytic,” our pluralistic psychoanalytic “cultures.”

Anthony, E. J. (1977). Nonverbal and Verbal Systems of Communication — A Study in Complementarity. Psychoanal. Study of the Child, 32: 307-25.
Bion, W. (2005). The Tavistock Seminars. London: Karnac
Boyer, L. B. (1989) Countertransference and Technique in Working with the Regressed Patient: Further Remarks. Int. J. Psychoanal., 70: 701-14.
Dalai Lama and Ekman, P. (2008). Emotional Awareness: Overcoming obstacles to Emotional Balance and Compassion. Henry Holt.
Darwin, C. (1998) The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. Oxford.
Deutsch, H. (1942). Some Forms of Emotinal Disturbance and their Relationshiop to Schizophrenia. Psychoanal. Q., 11: 301-21.
Ekman P and Freisen, W. V. (1969). Nonverbal leakage and clues to deception. Psychiatry, 32, 88-105.
Ekman, P. (1985). Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics and Marriage. NY: Norton.
Ekman, P. (1996) Why don’t we catch liars? Social Research, 63, 801-817.
Ekman, P. (1997) Expressive Behavior and the Recovery of a Traumatic Memory: Comments on the Videotapes of Jane Doe. Child Maltreatment 2:2 113-116.
Ekman, P. and Rosenberg, E. (1997). What the Face Reveals. Oxford.
Ekman, P. (2003) Emotions Revealed. NY: Holt.
Fonagy, P. (2001) Attachment Theory and Psychoanaysis. Guilford.
Ferro, A. (2009) Transformations in Dreaming and Characters in the Psychoanalytic Field. IJP. 90: 2; 209-30.
Freud, S. (1926). Inhibitions, Symptoms and Anxiety. SE. XX. p. 77-178
Giovacchini, P. (2000). Impact of Narcissism: The Errant Therapist on a Chaotic Quest. NJ: Aronson.
Goffman, E. (1990). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Penguin
Green, A. (1999) The Fabric of Affect in the Psychoanalytic Discourse. Routledge.
Hoffer, W. (1950). Development of the Body Ego. Psychoanal. Study of the Child, 5: 18-23.
Laplanche and Pontallis (1973). The Language of Psychoanalysis.
Lasch, C. (1979) The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations. Warner.
Leutzinger-Bohleber, M., Stuhrast, U. Ruger, B. Beutel, M. (2003). How to study the quality of psychoanalytic treatments and their long-term effects on patients’ well -being: A representative, multi-perspective follow-up study. Int. J. Psycho- anal. 84: 263-90.
Levenson, R. W., Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V (1990) Voluntary facial action generates emotion-specific autonomic nervous system activity. Psychophysiology., 27, 363-384.
Lutz, A. Greischar, L. Rawlings, N Ricard,M and Davidson, R (2004) Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony during mental practice PNAS Nov. 16, 2004 vol. 101 no. 46.
Ogden, T. (2005). This Art of Psychoanalysis: Dreaming Undreamt Dreams and Interrupted Cries. New Library of Psychoanalysis.
Piaget, J. and Inhelder, B. (1969) The Psychology of the Child. NY; Basic.
Pinsky, R. (2008). Memory and Modernism. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 56: 1081-7.
Rostovtzeff, M. (1963). Greece. Oxford.
Rusakow, L., Gershan, W., Bulto, M., and Szajnberg, N. (1993). Munchausen’s Syndrome Presenting as Cystic Fibrosis with Hemoptysis. Pediatric Pulmonology, Vol. 16:326-329.
Szajnberg, N. and Crittenden, C. (1997). The Transference Refracted Through the Lens of Attachment. J. Am Acad. of Psa. 25: 3, 409-438.
Tuckett, D. (2004) Does Anything go?: Toward a framework for the more transparent assessment of psychoanalytic competence. IJP 86: 31-49.
Wallerstein, R. (1990). Psychoanalysis: The Common Ground. Int. J. Psycho- Anal. 71: 3-20.
Wallerstein, R. Dewitt, K. Hartley, D. , Rosenberg, S. Zilberg, N. Scales of Psychological Capacities. Unpublished MS.
Winnicott, D.W. (1977). Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment. Karnac.

Footnotes
1 These emotions have specific behaviours (e.g. gaze aversion and eyelid lowering for shame) and physiologies without having universal facial expressions.
2 The latter two are mostly obsolete, but these are useful to understand the historical roots and tendency of the word. For instance, under the sixth definition is “To put on a pretense of … assume a false appearance of; to counterfeit or pretend.” We use this to describe someone with an affected air, let us say, of an aristocrat. This definition has more in common with “persona,” the mask Greek actors use to “display” a “personality” — one’s social presentation (an aspect of false self) — as opposed to “character,” something “engraved” in one’s self, which may be closer to the “true self” (Winnicott, 1974).
3 The concept of a “transference from one place to another” echoes Freud’s earlier idea of affect emanating from impulses, a concept developed by contemporary French psychoanalysts (Freud, 1926; Green, 1999).
4 Here, I will not discuss anxiety, both its position relative to affect and emotion and its position in our inner lives. In fact, anxiety has a priviileged position both in Ekman’s work and in psychoanalysis, a position not entirely within the category of affect, but not entirely outside “feelings,” as by definition, it is felt, and by extension, it has some relationship to emotions (Freud, 1926). For Ekman, anxiety has components of fear (facially and physiologically), but is not the same; unlike fear, Ekman, following both psychoanalytic and pre-psychoanalytic thinking, anxiety has no (obvious) external object; fear clearly does. However, this would take us beyond the confines of this paper’s exploration of emotion and psychoanalysis.
5 This tribe was also being studied by Gajdusek for their neurodegenerative Kuru, which he demonstrated was due to their cannibalism of their relatives who had died of this slow-virus.
6 When Mead wrote a review of Paul’s first book, she emblazened the review with the title, “THE APPALLING STATE OF THE HUMAN SCIENCES.” One doesn’t have to be a psychoanalyst to hear the “Paul” in Appalling.
7 For instance, he identifies “awe” as an infrequent, but powerful emotional experience.
8 Gesture and emblems are more culture-specific body movements. For instance, folding the arms across the chest may mean holding back information in certain cultures in certain situations (and may mean other things also). That is, these do not have the universal and rapid presentation that facial expression has in displaying emotions. On the other hand, deceit may be uncovered by catching such behaviors, among others. But, this takes us beyond this paper.
9 In an early study, a professor stressed students in individual interviews. For instance, a female student maintained outward equanimity, but unwittingly “gave the finger” to the professor. Intriguingly, when Ekman described this to them, both denied that it had happened; only when they watched the film, did they see it.
10 In this author’s experience, for instance, an attorney for a wealthy alleged child molester challenged the author in Court to assess whether the attorney was lying. He asked, “Is my middle name Roderick?” The author responded, that he could test the attorney’s truthfullness, but the question needed to be more important to the attorney, such as “Your client has molested this child, Yes or No?” The attorney refused to continue.
11 This is a computerized series of actors showing specific facial expression of emotions at various speeds. The program first tests the observers reliability reading emotions. Then, after a training period, retests.
12 These are: Hope; Zest; Attribution of responsibility; Flexibility; Persistence; Standards and Values; Relationship commitment; Empathy; Affect regulation ; Impulse regulation; Sex regulation; Self Assertion; Reciprocity; Trust; Empathy; Self assertion; Rely on self/others; Self esteem; Self coherence.
13 I use the term “character” rather than “personality,” which is more commonly used in the psychiatric terminology. Both words have ancient Greek origins. “Character” refers to something that is etched or engraved in us; Personality, from “persona” refers to the mask used by actors to portray someone. Heraclitus insisted that character was destiny (even as he also said that one could not dip one’s foot in the same river twice): that is, he suggests that character is ingrained and determines one’s fate. Psychoanalysis being psychoanalysis would be more interested in one’s character than in persona. One dilemma: while we may have consensus about assessing character, we may have greater challenges across cultures assessing what is optimal or healthy character. For instance, Lasch in his stunning assessment and critique of American society in 1974, found that there was a new prevalence of narcissism as a valued character trait (not just a psychopathology); he connected this with changes in American capitalism and bureaucratization of government and industry, associated with a weakening of the family, loss of presence of fathers and rise of valuing appearance and “getting along, over previous values associated with a meritocracy. That is, if Lasch is correct, the sudden interest and rise of Narcissistic Personality Disorder in the 1960’s may have more to do with cultural drift in American society and its values, than with a “discovery” of a previously “hidden” phenomenon. If we pursue Lasch’s challenging ideas, different cultures may value different character traits. Then, we might expect possibly different goals in psychoanalysis in different cultures. But, this takes us beyond the bounds of this paper.
14 An emblem is “a gesture that has precise meaning known to all members of a cultural group such as the A-OK emblem in the U.S” This same emblem in Sicily refers to a perverse sexual act. (Ekman, personal communication).
15 In an intriguing study, Levenson, Ekman and Friesen (1990) found that holding one’s facial muscles in the pattern of specific emotions (a sad face; a happy face, resulted after some minutes in the evocation of the emotions The researchers discovered this first on themselves, much as Harvey first explored blood flow in his own arm — or, Freud on his own dreams.

End of Space, End of Time: Learning about Mourning

Posted by | Uncategorized | No Comments

“In War, Fathers bury their sons”

–Herodotus

 

There are too many memorial sites for dead soldiers in Israel. I stop at one, as I drive north during the Second Lebanese War. At a vista overlooking the now-bombed-out, smoldering brow of the Benjamin Hills bordering Lebanon, I press a button for an audio tour about this dead soldier and his unit. The first words I hear: the boy’s voice, his cell phone message; if you leave your number, he flatly insists, he’ll call you back. He no longer responds.

Listen instead to David Grossman’s tale from the edge of space to the end of time; from his books “To The End of the Land” to “Falling out of Time.” Listen and we may learn more (from a poet of the soul) about Freud’s insistence that at the end of mourning (work), the ego becomes free and uninhibited.

But, you may decide rightly not to take this voyage. You can turn back. Grossman can no longer.

Grossman did not want to be known as one who wrote a book hinting at a son’s death. He began “To the End of the Land” several years before his son was killed on the last day in the last hours of the Lebanese War, even as this father was protesting the War.

His son, Uri (“My Light”) would ask over the three years before death how the story was going. Then, he is dead. And in some manner, Grossman finishes this book about a mother’s ventures to the edges of the land. (This Land, which, Freud wrote to Zweig, is so odd: it has spawned no great science nor art, but three illusions — Judaism, Christianity, Islam. This Land, Freud concluded, deserves further study. This Land for which too many have died.) Let’s use this novel, this work of art from the Land, to follow Freud’s advice; see what we can learn about that Land, about ourselves. Here, I will not review “To the End,” only select some thoughts on mourning for us.

Grossman writes “To the End” mostly in a woman’s voice, Ora’s (“Light”). Briefly, her son, Ofer, having finished his obligatory army service, hears that his unit is called up to fight in Lebanon. Surreptitiously from his bedroom, Ofer (“Deer”) telephones his unit; asks them to call him back into service so he can join them. Then, he comes downstairs to tell his mother — whose husband and younger son have recently left her — that Ofer has been called up for the war. She suspects correctly his ruse.

Nip just one moment from early in the book: Ora rides a cab to take Ofer to the border. Not far in Israel. (Nothing’s too far.) There, surrounded by TV cameras, buddies, buses of uniformed young men, and the tumult and smoke of war along the horizon and closer, Ofer embraces his mother twice. The second time, as the TV camera man tries to eavesdrop on them, Ofer whispers into her ear. Then, he turns to smile, wave at the camera and leaves. Ora stands stunned, speechless; the newsman demands to know what he whispered. She tells us only much later.

But, Ora makes a deal with herself; this drives the book. She knows that should Ofer be killed, two officers (of a special unit) will find her to deliver the news. She makes a deal, plays her own Mephistopheles: If she is not findable — if she can disappear from home, from phones, from newspapers, from radios — then, well, then they can’t find her and … nothing can happen to Ofer.

The rest of the book is of her journey through the fringes of Israel’s northern hills with a soul-ravaged man, who two decades earlier, after being kidnapped and bestially tortured by the Egyptians, is now brain-singed, barely functioning, Avram. Avram is Ofer’s father.

They skirt civilization — papers, radios, cell phones. She rebuilds some of his humanity. The book ends coyly. We do not know what happens to Ofer.

We do know of Uri, Grossman’s son.

And the words Ofer whispered to his mother before he turned to leave, smiling and waving broadly for the news cameras? Into her ear, he leaves these words: if I don’t come back, if something happens to me, leave this country. There is nothing left for you here.

During the long hike, Ora tells Avram, who has avoided seeing Ofer, about his life, his growth, his character. At the end, at the End of the Land, she reveals her stratagem to Avram and us:

“…I thought that if we both talked about him, if we kept talking about him, we’d protect him, together, right?”
Grossman’s epilogue also reveals his unsuccessful stratagem. “I had the feeling — or rather, a wish — that the book I was writing would protect him.”

Freud’s “Mourning and Melancholia” stands on its own; we needn’t know that he worked- through his thoughts during the early years of World War I, as he watched the wholesale slaughter of a generation of young man. But, we do know that this deeply thoughtful man was affected not only by what he heard in his consulting room, but also what he absorbed from his era.

So too, “To the End of the Land” will stand alone, I believe, as you read it. It is a book that I had to put down often: first, it evokes harsh feelings (as Aristotle demanded of fine art); second, I realized that I had developed the thought, more the fantasy, that if I didn’t finish reading the book, Uri would not die.

But, I also read it while living in Israel. I read it after going north during the Lebanese War both to visit soldiers whom I’d interviewed for my “Reluctant Warriors” book and to volunteer as a physician in Kiryat Shemona, that small city near the finger tip sticking into enemy territory. As I read Grossman, I remember approaching the junction to Kiryat Shemona in my rented Hyundai Getz (a sardine can with an engine) and feeling it buffeted sideways. First, I was surprised: I hadn’t recalled such side winds here. Then, I realzed that I was being shaken by Hezbollah bombs from Lebanon. I saw the Jewish National Forest trees transformed into charred, smoking stumps. I felt some relief that I would be protected from shrapnel by the car. But when, I entered the town , I saw a car hulk with a missle through its back window; others that were reduced to sieves, giant collanders by shrapnel. I quickly found the bomb-sheltered Emergency Room to report for duty.

One of my soldiers, a published poet, Eliaz Cohen, told me this after the war. This people are healthy; the government, the army who command are ill. The people absorbed one million refugees from the North of Israel; into homes, apartments; into schools. The people, the soldiers with boots on the ground, were ready to protect their families, their neighbors from rockets. But, what soldiers told me of this longest of Israeli wars was how frustratingly badly it was run by Central Command. Elite units, dropped into enemy territory for 72 hours, were told first to attack that hill, then not; this hill, then not; then told to take refuge in a house, which made them targets for Hezbollah

artillery. My first funeral was for Ro’i (“My Shepherd”), recently married, who had fallen onto a grenade to save his buddies. His buddies, tough, broad-shouldered stood around the grave, (and around Ro’i’s widow as she fainted); their sunglasses could not hide the tears streaming down cheeks. I won’t write more here about military matters or the politics that resulted in having a Defense Minister, a former labor union organizer, who had never served as a military officer, but got his position because he got enough votes. Or a Prime Minister who was better at getting indicted for financial dealings, better at getting coalitions for power, than he was at governing. I am a psychoanalyst; no expertise in such matters.

I was bathed in this milieu as I read Grossman’s book; then, read it later again.

Freud insists that with the work of mourning — and it is hard labor — the ego can eventually become free and uninhibited again. But, can the ego become uninhabited?

Anna Orenstein spoke so poignantly in her plenary, of the deaths in the concentration camps; it may take time to begin to mourn, particularly without proper goodbyes.

Ironically, Grossman with his recent book may elaborate on Freud ‘s idea on the work of mourning. That the act of writing, of recounting, of entering or creating a fantasy world may (just may) help us accept the external reality of death. But, as Herodotus says bluntly, war reverses the tide of mankind: fathers bury their sons.

Imagine for a moment that some Hezboll-ish Mephistopheles had come to Grossman before the Lebanon war and offered a deal: write no book and Uri will live. From Grossman’s sentiments, we know he would have taken the deal. We would not have these two books, but Grossman would have his Uri, his light.

But, there was no such deal. We have Grossman’s writing and heartfelt, heartbreaking thinking. It is up to us to learn something about the Land that creates such writing, such people and possibly to learn more about our potential capacities should we have to mourn. Or better yet, how can we (psychoanalysts and colleagues) protect ourselves from mourning our sons and daughters by preventing the wars that consume them, that reverse life’s proper course?

 

click here to read:The unquenchable bereavement of losing a child. David Grossman employs poetry and a surreal fictional setting to examine the unquenchable bereavement of the parent who has lost a child. By Avaraham Balaban on the Haaretz.com web site on August 11, 2011.

A Towering Angell Engages Psychopharm

Posted by | Uncategorized | No Comments

A macabre Gorey drawing initiates the NY Review of Books’ intellectual combat between Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, and major figures in American Psychiatry: John Oldham, Richard Friedman, Andrew Nierenberg and Daniel Carlat (“The Epidemic of Mental Illness: Why?” “The Illusions of Psychiatry”;  (NYR June 23; NYR July 14; IP/net Aug 3).  A boy stretches tiptoed on a stool, reaching unsuccessfully for a squadron of bottles beyond his grasp.  We readers are like that boy, trying to get a grasp of what’s at hand here; a battle is engaged and will be formidable; how it will proceed is uncertain. But, we also know that Angell and the New York Review of Books have ignited an important rethinking of using drugs in mental illnesses: no turning back now.

In brief, Oldham, President of the APA,  says Angell should have been more balanced.  Carlat (whose book Angell reviewed), begins, “Her argument is correct in its essentials.” that psychiatrists over diagnose; are overly fixated on medication, have taken drug industry money.  Yet, he states, drugs “on the whole, work.”

Friedman and Nierenberg give no quarter, beginning with  “…Angell’s review…contains serious factual and conceptual errors…” and concluding, “she has distorted the potential adverse effects of psychotropic drugs with anecdotes and flawed data…”

Angell’s response is lengthy and detailed and crisp. She starts with “… these letters simply assume that psychoactive drugs are highly beneficial… none .. provides references … (to) substantiate that…”  Then, she lists evidence, after evidence. For instance, the U.K. agency overseeing their NHS found that antidepressants provide no  clinically significant change in the Ham-D depression index. In general, she restates, while there may be short-term effects for some drugs, there is no evidence for long-term efficacy. She condemns the quality of clinical research in psychiatry; as an expert in judging clinical studies, she is on solid ground.

And what about our kids?  Stuart Kaplan’s Newsweek article challenges the stunning rise of bipolar disorder in children and their over medication (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/06/19/mommy-am-i-really-bipolar.html).  Biederman’s life’s work is discredited in part because of his dealings with pharmaceutical companies: when he claims that 1-4% of all U.S. children are bipolar; his credibility suffers further.  Kaplan argues that bipolar is a fad diagnosis; that many of the symptoms described in recent popular books, such as Brandon and the Bipolar Bear (imagine Where the Wilds Thing Are revised to sell drugs), portray either the norms of childhood, or (Kaplan argues) more parsimonious diagnoses.

Adolescents often keep us honest or at least not hypocritical: they point out that we tell them (consciously) not to use street drugs, then say that we have just the right drug for you in our cabinet.   And colleagues will try to respond to the teen, “You are trying to medicate yourself for your (fill in the diagnosis); I can do it better for you.”  But, can we? And why, in many cases, can’t we use the more sophisticated, highly individualized treatment of interacting with the teen (or adult) examining feelings, thoughts, wishes, fears, dreams: that engagement we call psychoanalysis; a treatment that our brain-imaging colleagues may some day show results in pharmacological or neuro-structural changes (If we do our treatment well.).

The New York Review of Books, Angell, Newsweek and Kaplan have provided an important public service, a breach in the wall of big pharma.   Psychoanalysts can step into that breach to promote what is in society’s better interest.

Here analysts meet a great challenge. Can we begin to initiate the careful study of adult analytic outcome as Leutzinger-Bohleber and colleagues have done in Germany, or Fonagy and Target’s courageous reexamination of the records in the Anna Freud clinic to find out what works (and doesn’t work as effectively) with children?  This kind of research takes a team; takes a discipline willing to support its teams; and takes scientific courage.

Psychoanalysts can show that we are willing to examine our practices and strut our stuff.

Cultural Theory and Psychoanalytic Tradition

Posted by | Uncategorized | No Comments

 

Book Review: David James Fisher, 2009 “Cultural Theory and Psychoanalytic Tradition.”  Written by Nathan Szajnberg, MD; NYPSI and Columbia University. Wallerstein Research Fellow in Psychoanalysis. Training Analyst, Israel Psychoanalytic Society

Too rarely, a work, like some comet, soars into our psychoanalytic ken. This work, this comet, has collected the dust, debris, remnants of psychoanalytic history, then sweeps into our vision with news about our origins, explanations of our past that cast light on our present and possibly future trajectories. And, like some bygone Hayley’s comet, if we unfortunately miss its first past through our solar system, this psychoanalytic comet may pass by again.

Such is David James Fisher’s book, Cultural Theory and Psychoanalytic Tradition, which passed this way in 1991, but fortunately for us, is reissued. The reader will benefit with greater understanding of, for instance, our French psychoanalytic cousins, who in some ways live in another universe, as well as historical figures, including Romain Rolland, whose thought has been incorporated into our framework, often with our forgetting the origins of those thoughts.

Fisher, trained as a cultural historian and later as a psychoanalyst, opens his book with a remarkably candid account of his professional life trajectory so that we may understand his viewpoint when he writes, the lens through which he sees worlds. He studied in Wisconsin, then spent two years post-graduate work in Paris at L’Ecole Practique des Hautes Etudes. He is not just fluent in French, but more significantly, appears fluent in French cultural, particularly French intellectual culture, a segment of the Parisian life in which a philosopher, such as Sartre, ruled supreme, cut a public figure. When Fisher describes the universe of our psychoanalytic and intellectual French neighbors, when he returns from orbiting those spheres to orbit in our system, he brings unique understanding of our psychoanalytic universe, helps us understand better ways of thinking and being that unite and divide us.

I will not review the entire book, but give a flavor of it. The book has three sections: The history of psychoanalysis; cultural criticism; psychoanalysis of history (including psychohistory).

In the first section, we find essays on Lacan, Romain Rolland, Jung and Fenichel. He begins the Lacan chapter ironically, quoting another Frenchman, one of Freud’s teachers, Charcot: “La theorie c’est bon, mais ca n’empeche pas d’exister,” “Theory is good, but doesn’t prevent things (facts) from existing.” Lacan commits most of his professional life turning Charcot on his head. “lacan…subordinated … technique and clinical praxis to theoretical and even literary considerations. Science.. revolved around theory building….” For more on how this attitude of French thinking influenced a different path in the physical sciences at least until the early twentieth century, see Freeman Dyson’s essay in the New York Review of Books a few years back. Lacan insisted he was returning to original Freud, thereby denying an autonomous ego, deemphasizing affects and drives and building his theory based on de Sassure’s linguistics. Lacan was a devotee of the Surrealists. Fisher describes a polar Lacan: genius and imposter. His obscurity was “willed and calculated,” and towards the end of his life he built a cult about him, acting “tyrannically and capriciously.” What can we make of a man who announces in his public lecture, “..for the moment I am not fucking, I am talking to you. Well! I can have exactly the same satisfaction as if I were fucking….” (14)?

Romain Rolland was widely known in his time, yet is now mostly forgotten. Yet, he was Freud’s inspiration for trying to grasp the sense of Oceanic feeling (and failing to do so) and ultimately, one impetus for writing “Civilization and Its Discontents.” This essay concentrates Fisher’s scholarly book-length study, Romain Rolland and the Politics of Intellectual Engagement.

In the Jung chapter, Fisher displays the man who seduced his psychotic patient, Sabina Spielrein. When Spielrein’s mother in Russia wrote to tell him to desist, Jung told her to pay her bill. (Spielrein, however, apparently shifted out of her psychosis to become a successful, thoughtful psychoanalyst, snuffed out by Stalin. See Bettelheim’s NY Review of Books review of “A Secret Symmetry for rich detail.) Jung also appropriated her original ideas and published them as his own. Jung had already seduced his own psychoanalyst, a nurse at the Burgholzli. After treating Spielrein, he descended into his lengthy psychosis, which he documented in the recently published Red Book, but also in his autobiographical writings. It is likely the Spielrein seduction that led Freud to distancing himself from Jung (possibly even explaining his fainting upon shaking his hand as they were about to embark for the U.S.). He discusses the later Jung, the Nazi sympathizer, who wrote bluntly about the shortcomings of the Jewish mind as “lack(ing) vitality, univeralism, rootedness and creative depth.”

As difficult as it may be to bookend this section with Jung — seducer, psychotic, anti-Semite — with Lacan — obfuscater, genius, entertainer — we are served up two men who were part of our history.

I promised not to review every chapter of this book. My copy is scribbled with marginalia, reflecting the book’s wealth of knowledge and ability to ignite critical thinking. Fisher’s discussion of Civilization and its Discontents is thorough and scholarly. He leads us through some of Bettelheim’s thinking — one of my more influential teachers — “a nonconforming and free thinking intellectual” who contributed to our understanding of maintaining autonomy in a mass age, building a total therapeutic milieu, seeing male ritual incisions as a form of womb envy, listening to the psychoanalytic wisdom in fairy tales.

A historian himself, he closes with surveying the life work of Peter Gay and Peter Loewenberg, the history of studying crowds, Newton’s malignant narcissism.

Best to read this book, even to savor it slowly. It voyages through the universe of psychoanalysis and collects knowledge and wisdom to help us better understand our discipline.

My Father Does Not Live In America

Posted by | Uncategorized | One Comment

My father does not live in America, never did. In 1951, my father arrived in Rochester, NY, home to Kodak, home to Xerox, where he stayed to this very day. He goes nowhere without my mother. Restaurants, dinner parties, not unless they go together, with my mother. Movies, certainly not without her. Concerts, for sure not.  Baseball games, never, even with her. To shul, he drives alone.

In 1999, she died. Would he go in California, to visit me in his loneliness? “Not without your mother.” Today, a snow-packed day, my father announces he and I will go to see my mother. We must leave immediately, clean up the grave, prepare for spring planting. In Rochester! In February! In Rochester, in February, the snowdrifts rise to four feet and more. As a kid, walking to school in winter, I always wished they’d top four feet, so school would be cancelled: up to my nose, my brow, topping my head. Now, 45 years later, snows bid my boy-wishes. The Rochester Jewish cemetery is located in Irondequoit, on the banks of Lake Ontario. No Jews alive there; only dead ones are planted, never to grow. Live Jews are south, one hour away. Not one hour drive for him, though; for him, two hours. He drives local roads, not freeways, and slowly. He wants death to be cancelled or at least delayed. No rush to be reminded she’s dead and there.

The texture of the road is rock salt, ice, and grime, a slush tinted with the grayish shades of an industrial town. My father’s old rear-wheel Olds fishtails along the Genesee River. We swim upstream to the cemetery, to death locale, off an unplowed side road, off another side road, and another one, surrounded by tiny, irrelevant houses. Infuriated as he scans a sea of snow swallowing the tombstones, my father declares that no one cares – no one -, to dig a pathway into the cemetery. No one has ever cared for anyone in here. Not even the caretakers, who are nothing but careless-takers. He erupts volcanically. Never tall, stunted in Auschwitz, and now shrunken further by time, but in spite of the size, always been an active Etna, ready to blow. To the doctor of the Intensive Care Unit, where my mother laid in coma, amputated, dialyzed, intubated, respirated, just because the surgeon had suggested it might be the end, “To die?” my father exploded, “Everyone is going to die! You are going to die too, you know! Doctor? A doctor in Auschwitz you are.” Lava spewed.

He parks up a curb to let other cars slither by, gets out, pops the trunk, hands me two snow shovels, yanks a 50-pound bag of sand onto his shoulder, and says nothing. Wrapped in the shadows of pre-war Lodz, muscular and spirited, the 82 year-old man is ready to dig his way to his wife’s grave through a mountain of snow, no matter how far it will be. I see Paul Celan, soil in his eyes, excavating to meet the dead, expiring. I take point position to attack that virgin white snow impeding our visit. I dig and look back surreptitiously with shovel throws over my left shoulder. I see myself rescuing him, resuscitating him in a snowy grave. I too curse, but within. Without, I dig. I feel insignificant compare to the veteran snow digger, the Golden Shovel knight, the miniature Hercules cleaning the Aegean stables. Trained as a machinist, my father follows, correcting my path. He removes patches of snow I throw on the buried lawn and straightens the sides. His eyes plumbing ninety degrees admonish me to make the snow ramparts straighter. As meticulously as with the sheet rock he laid for our living room walls.

We reach the stone. He collapses on it. He embraces it. His face buried in his forearm, his shoulders lurching with sobs. I hear prayers. He turns to my younger sister’s neighboring pink monument, erected 10 years ago, and he weeps forever.

At the end, we did not turn our backs, but backed away with respect for the deceased, as the High Priest in the Temple did when leaving the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur, lest he was struck dead.

The four-year-old silver Olds is in perfect shape, with 25,861 original miles. Each mile I made, he says triumphantly, is my own. The radio speaks of today, with the same radio voice, disregarding all his wishes. So he reaches from the seat box his “Chazoinem” tape with his favorite old cantors, masters of Yiddish mourning melodies and plaintive poetry. He then breathes, the deepest breath I have heard today, and drives back home. Back to Lodz. For my father does not live in America, never will. He lives in Past, Perpetual, home to memory, wailing at the Present, telling who is dead and what is dead.

He does not live in America, but in a place where Auschwitz will not happen. The Present jolts him awake from his truer dreams. My father wants to sleep.

Control Cases, Out-of-Control: When a Low-Fee is no Bargain

Posted by | Uncategorized | No Comments

Summary: I describe three consecutive referrals from a Psychoanalytic Institute’s Low-Fee clinic, in order to demonstrate the inherent organizational and possibly characterological difficulties in such cases that could interfere with successful analysis by a candidate. All three cases were discussed with at least two training analysts, both of whom recommended against accepting all three cases into treatment because of ego and superego difficulties that would have interfered with a successful psychoanalytic treatment, and in fact,
might have resulted in a pseudo analysis (as described by Winnicott, 1972). I discuss the specific challenges faced by candidates in communities with a shortage of low-fee cases and the countertransference issues specific to a middle-aged candidate hearing time’s winged-chariot beating behind. This brief reports’ intent is to open discussion of weighing advantages and disadvantages of any process for accepting low-fee analysands in a psychoanalytic training program, particularly when fewer patients come for analysis and more institutes and consequently candidates seek patients.

Because of institutes’ autonomy, there are varying approaches to recruiting control cases for candidates. Further, with shifts in cultural mores, fewer people pursue analysis, even at low fees. Finally, with the rise of additional institutes, particularly following the lawsuit in the USA (Wallerstein, 2000), more candidates seek patients. These synergistic forces result in greater vicissitudes for candidates seeking patients, particularly when compared to the ethos in the US during the 1950’s and 1960’s. Other pressures include external realities of lengthy training analyses, and idiosyncratic countertransference issues of the candidate – not only countertransference of childhood origins, but also of current life circumstances.

I describe and discuss the interaction among the character traits of three prospective control cases, the Institute’s referral process, and the candidate’s countertransference issues.

First, the circumstances of the Institute. The Institute chose to shift its evaluation and referral process of the low-fee clinic, established for finding control cases for candidates. In the past decade, rather than having prospective low-fee cases see a senior analyst over several sessions, patients would be seen once, possibly twice, then referred to a candidate. Patients were told that the fee would be negotiated with the candidate, based on the patient’s finances. But, many prospective patients told candidates that they had heard from others that the fee could be as low as $10/session. Child psychoanalytic candidates were so desperate for cases that they bantered amongst themselves about paying parents to bring children.

Candidates were expected to meet several times with the prospective patient, then present the case to a supervisory analyst to decide upon accepting the

case.1 The issue of “analyzability” was discussed, but with sensitivity that a patient may not be analyzable with one candidate/analyst, but may be with another. If the supervisor and candidate agreed not to accept a patient, he or she was referred back to the clinic for a referral to another candidate.

I will briefly report each case, then discuss their presentations and the difficulties for both the candidate and prospective patients.

Case One: Mr. Z., in his mid-30’s drove up to the analyst’s home office in a bright yellow, Hummer, with Burberry plaid interior . The analyst could see the details of the car, for Mr. Z. had parked on the sidewalk in front of the analyst’s home and partially blocking a neighbor’s driveway. He was a handsome, lean, tan, well-groomed fellow, who entered with a sense of self-assurance. He removed his butter-soft black, tailored napa leather jacket, folded it twice, and laid it upon the couch, smoothing, then caressing the jacket before he sat down. He smiled. He had bought this Armani jacket, he began, on his last trip to Italy; brought back good memories. He had changed careers. He had been in retailing, an executive, remarkably successful:
took early retirement to enlist in a psychology graduate program, at one of several new Psy.D. professional programs that had sprouted up in the last few years. After buying a house in a tony San Francisco suburb, he and his new wife agreed that they could live off his golden parachute from his last job.

He was delighted to be training in psychotherapy. He had majored in business in college, entered the family business, but really wanted to do therapy. He was pleased to be accepted in this graduate school, since his GRE scores were too low for the local traditional Ph. D. programs. Now, he wanted to have his own analysis, since he had heard much about Freud and thought that this would make him a better therapist. He did not think that he had neuroses, but he thought that an analysis would better help him understand his patients.

He missed his second visit and called afterwards. He arrived for the third visit, with a jaunty enthusiasm. They had a new baby and he looked forward to learning much about development even as he was in analysis; he had learned that the candidate was a child psychiatrist, specializing in infancy. He had never been in therapy, relished new experiences, challenges. Periodically, he reached over to smooth an unseen wrinkle in the leather jacket lying on the couch. He looked forward to using the couch.

Finally, the candidate introduced the fee.

The patient was surprised; sat back with a jerk. What was to discuss? He had heard from fellow psychology students that the fee was ten dollars.

The candidate ventured that the Institute’s policy is that the fee would be based on his ability to pay.

The patient leaned forward angrily. Would the analyst take “food from the mouth of my baby” to charge a higher fee. He was outraged. He said that the analyst should think about this, since he knew that candidates were hungry for patients. He would return to the low-fee clinic, report the candidate and request another referral.

Case Two: Mr. R. was in his mid-fifties. He had just finished a graduate
program in fine art, having taken early retirement from a dot.com, after
helping found the company and bringing it public. His lover had urged him to
become a conceptual artist, perhaps do performance art, his dream. He enjoyed his three years in art school and now looked forward to devoting full-time to art. He would not work, but create art all day. He had been the oldest student in his school, but hoped that by doing art full-time, unlike his fellow students who had to work during the day or wait tables on weekends and evenings, he would have one-man shows soon.

He had had various psychotherapies. But, he thought analysis would be good for his art; after all, he had heard, read many stories about artists of the ‘50’s
and ‘60’s and their analyses. Look at Woody Allen. Analysis would help him
get in touch with his inner self, enrich his artistic processes.

He was glad to hear about the low-fee clinic. Otherwise, he said, he would have to return to work at least part-time to pay for his analysis. Ten dollars a session was a good deal, he said.

The candidate, after discussing the case with two training analysts, referred the patient back to the low-fee clinic.

Case Three: Ms. W. came to the first meeting, after a senior analyst, telephoned the candidate. The senior analyst really liked this patient; if the patient could afford a private fee, she would treat her herself. She was glad that they had but one meeting, otherwise the analyst would have developed too strong an attraction to the patient, an attraction – the candidate learned – which was mutual.

This training analyst had heard about the candidate; that he was a seasoned therapist and was looking for a fourth case. She thought that this would be an excellent case for the candidate. Could the candidate call back after the evaluation?
Oh, by the way, the patient was a neighbor and friend of Dr. X, a very prominent training analyst. Dr. X. had referred the patient saying that he wanted her to have a more senior candidate.

This women was poised, dressed in an understated, but classically elegant manner. Although it was winter in San Francisco, she arrived in a skirt and nylons, and a slinky, silk beige blouse with décolletage.

She had been through a terrible divorce from a very wealthy man who had “ripped her off” in the divorced because of a pre-nup. She had been a
successful writer before the four-year marriage, her first, then was out-of-work for almost a year. Finally, she just got a job that paid $60,000 a year, well below the standard of living to which she had been accustomed. They had no children, and she was relieved that she had gotten the house in _______(a desirable village), mortgage- free.

She felt that she had issues that had contributed to her marrying late and her unsuccessful marriage. She wanted to address these in analysis so that she would not repeat them. Dr. X., a very close friend, recommended analysis. He would treat her, but he explained that he could not because they were friends. He assured her that he would help her get a good candidate. I should call him

with any questions, she offered.

On the second visit, we discussed details of frequency, use of the couch and the nature of free association. The candidate raised the issue of fee. The patient drew herself upright. She was assured by Dr. X. that I would charge her ten dollars a session. She drew her chair forward, until her knees leaned against the candidate’s ottoman, her décolletage offered. She spoke huskily, “ I am making a commitment to this process already, offering to come four times weekly. I have a great deal to offer.“ Surely the candidate would take this into account in accepting the ten dollar fee.

On second thought, she felt as if the candidate was ripping her off like her former husband. She would be sure to telephone Dr. X. about this. This Institute would take notice, she insisted.

Discussion:

In all three cases, the candidate felt both internal and external pressures to accept the last control case, having waited two years. Externally, the director of the low-fee clinic had explained that there was a shortage of cases to refer. He gave preference to first year candidates. In one of the three cases, the
director of the clinic thought that since the patient had significant narcissistic issues, the patient would do well with an experienced candidate, who had had training in Kohut’s work during his residency.

The candidate also felt the peer pressures of colleagues seeking patients.

Most candidates insisted that it was better to get patients from one’s own caseload, rather than the low-fee clinic.

An internal pressure was the candidate’s approaching his fifth decade with a family to support. These countertransference issues were discussed in supervision. He discussed specific countertransference issues raised with these patients. The artist, only a few years older than the candidate, had rubbed against the grain when he said that he was pleased that he would not have to work to pay for his analysis. The candidate had worked as an ICU nurse during medical school on the graveyard shift to pay for his first analysis. It is quite possible that another candidate (or analyst) who did not have these experiences, would not have reacted adversely to the artist’s remark.

The same issues applied to graduate student/former retailer. Stepping back, one could see with greater empathy that the student’s driving a Hummer, wearing Armani leather, laying his “skin” and caressing it on the couch, were manifestations of a narcissism in which external valuables might be covering

a core emptiness, worthlessness. One can’t be certain from only two interviews. But the sense of entitlement and remarkable wealth, evoked feelings in this candidate that permitted only an intellectual formulation of the patient’s narcissism, without sincere empathy. One training analyst, upon hearing the case, offered trepwerter, “after thoughts,” that he might have said: “I don’t blame you for trying to get away with anything. You’re welcome to try.

But, do you expect me to be blind and dumb?” He recommended against accepting this as a training case.

The third case, if I described it clearly, raised additional difficulties. As this attractive woman leaned forward, the candidate felt a sense of seduction. He did not find that this was an idiosyncratic countertransference, rather one being brought in by the patient very early in the evaluation. Her case raised additional complications of the special patient, first discussed

by Thomas Main (Main, 1956; Szajnberg, 1985; 1994). The ”special” patient brings along complications that are not necessarily in the patient’s best interest. (The senior training analyst, Dr. X, did call after the woman’s
last visit, expressing disappointment that the “experienced” candidate would not reconsider his decision and accept the patient into treatment. Of course, Dr. X., did not want to interfere in the process, but wanted to let the candidate know that she was a very fine person.)

Onetraininganalyst,whowassupervisingthecandidateinanothercase, was concerned that the characterological issues in two of the cases were so severe that a several-year course of exploratory psychotherapy would be necessary before an analysis (one that fulfills the criteria for certification) were feasible. Given the candidate’s age and desire to complete his training, the analyst recommended against accepting both patients. In fact, he thought that both patients would present challenges to an experienced analyst.

In each case, I want to emphasize, a different candidate or analyst might have been able to treat the patients successfully, addressing issues such as entitlement, seductiveness and certain aspects of narcissism.

Freud first wrote about entitled patients in his “Some Character Types met within Psychoanalytic Work” (1916). His paper is remarkably atheoretical, more a descriptive account of three character types – “exceptions,” wrecked by success, and criminals from a sense of guilt — in which he did not give clinical material, using references to literature. While Freud initiated our inquiry into what we now call character analysis, of the three character types, the “exceptions” present with the expectation that the analyst make special exemptions. “They say that they have renounced enough and suffered enough and have a call to be spared any further demands…” such as psychoanalytic work expects. On exploration, these patients give a history of early “suffering…of which they new themselves to be guiltless…’ (1916; 312-3).

But it is Kohut’s work (1967) that brought the character disorder of narcissism to the fore. To a significant degree, such patients have become the coin of the psychoanalytic realm. While Kohut eventually developed a detailed theoretical developmental model of two lines of parallel development and a lack of parental empathy, his early work focused on revised psychoanalytic technique with such patients. Kernberg (1975), Giovacchini (2000) and Andre Green (2002), among many others, have suggested that the narcissistic character is along a continuum of character disorders. Further, Giovacchini and Kernberg in particular have articulated healthy aspects to narcissism, distinguishable from that in character pathology.

Ironically perhaps, it was a social historian, Christopher Lasch (1974), who raised our awareness of narcissism as a characteristic of American culture arising in the late twentieth century. In an encyclopedic review of changes in American society — a shift in capitalism, bureaucratization of work, government and decrease in family power and responsibility – Lasch describes narcissistic elements in society, including a sense of entitlement, emptiness and associated pursuit of desires, trivialization of personal relations, and a pseudo-self awareness and self-absorption with a search for identifications (as opposed to identity) and various “therapeutic” modalities of self- realization or self-improvement. That is, Lasch sees the Narcissitic Personality Disorder only as an epitome of an ailment in contemporary American society. In terms of the patients who presented here, this complicates our diagnostic challenge: we need think not only in terms of specific character pathology, but also an overlay of entitlement (and underlying emptiness) in the culture.

But, in terms of these three patients, there were specific aspects of narcissism that (combined with this analytic candidate’s needs for a timely finish of training) mitigated the likelihood of successful analysis: an overarching sense of being an exception, being entitled; an unusual lack of awareness of their presumptuousness; a sense that they could appeal to higher powers to prevail on the candidate (or others); and a demeaning of both the analytic situation and the analyst/candidate. In terms of demeaning, all three prospective patients were from monied backgrounds, were prepared to pay well for what they valued. None of these aspects are insurmountable in a sufficiently lengthy analysis with an analyst aware of the countertransference issues involved – countertransference in the more recent sense of counteridentification or evoked response, rather than Freud’s thoughts of a more idiosyncratic countertransference.

In the early psychoanalytic institutes, “free” or low fee clinics brought many, many patients (Makari, 2008). When Eitigen and colleagues opened the free psychoanalytic clinic in Berlin2, there was a press of patients, almost overwhelming the capacity of the clinic. Circumstances have changed profoundly.

What does this imply for candidates? There were at least three interacting factors here: the manner in which prospective patients were referred; societal valuation of this matter of psychoanalysis; the candidate’s need to finish particularly nearing training.

Any institutional decision about screening and referring has implications with advantages and disadvantages. The advantages of this Institute’s minimal screening — include brief patient contact with a training analyst and accepting that a patient may not be treatable by a particular candidate, but possibly by another — theoretically provides greater openness, receptivity to patients; avoiding disappointment associated with extended assessments by a training analyst before referral; and offers greater hope that lack of “fit” with one candidate does not preclude “fit” with another. The disadvantages include referring to a candidate before an experienced analyst can assess not only the patient’s formal diagnosis, but also what Winnicott (1972) or Schlesinger (2002) referred to as assessing the nature of analytic process.

My paper addresses possible complications of a more “open” screening process. This is simply a caution to training centers.

Now, as a training analyst, I have discussed these three cases with colleagues. Reactions have been complex. One suggested at first, that she would have tried to interpret their attitudes, such as seeing the analysis as a “good deal,” a cheap treatment — but, she could not think of an interpretation at the moment. Then, she described a recent referral – a graduate student in psychology — who insisted on either a lower fee or lower frequency, as she was planning to buy a new car. Another colleague recounted a more complex situation: in his Institute, one must be in analysis for one year before applying for training. An older therapist came for analysis, as she had heard he was highly regarded at the Institute and on the Education committee. But, she warned him, that if she were not accepted at the Institute, she would not continue her analysis. He was concerned that a false analysis was in process.

I write this paper as a caution, without offering solutions. I write this to open discussion among candidates and Institutes to recognize the dilemmas associated with any referral process, particularly low-fee cases.

The low-fee clinic may attract prospective patients with specific characterological constellations: entitlement, a pseudo-investment in psychoanalysis, and possibly, a not- too-subtle demeaning of the analyst/analysis. If this is the case, then it is useful for Institute clinics, training analysts and candidates identify and address such issues in order to facilitate more successful referrals and psychoanalytic treatment, less encumbered by character traits that may require lengthier analyses.

1 I thank Drs. Robert Wallerstein, Alan Skolnikoff, and Owen Renik for supervising the intake of these cases and others.

2 This clinic and the one in Hungary were funded in large part by Eitigen’s family’s fortunes from the fur business.

References:
Freud, S. (1916). S. E. Volume XIV. Some Character-Types Met with in Psycho-

Analytic Work. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XIV

Giovacchini, P. (2000). Impact of Narcissism: The Errant Therapist on a Chaotic Quest. Jason Aronson.

Green, Andre (2005) Psychoanalysis: A Paradigm for Clinical Thinking. Karnac.

Kernberg, O. (1975) Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism. Jason Aronson.

Main, Thomas (1956), “The Ailment.” The British Journal of Medical Psychology, 29.
Makari, G. (2008) Revolution in Mind. Harper Collins.

Schlesinger, H. (2002) The Texture of Treatment. NY: Analytic Press.

Szajnberg, N. (1985), “Staff Countertransference, in the Therapeutic Milieu: Creating an Average Expectable Environment.” The British Journal of Medical Psychology, 58; 331-6.

13

Szajnberg, N. (1994). Educating the Emotions: Bruno Bettelheim and Psychoanalytic Development. NY: Plenum.

Wallerstein, R. (2000), The Talking Cures NY: IUP.

Winnicott, D.W. (1972) True and False Self, In The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment. NY: IUP.

A Sioux Tale

Posted by | Uncategorized | No Comments

From afar, it might have sounded like “Thunk, thunk, thunk, thunk”; at the base of my skull, it was more like “K’thunk, K’Thunk, K’thunk, K’Thunk.” What I didn’t know was what how it sounded to a rattlesnake in the dusk of the Dakota scrubland. My second day’s doctoring done on Eagle Butte, the heat dissipating quickly at sunset, I hit the asphalt’s edge to jog.

In Chicago, I had snagged a pair of Nikes, the early waffle-sole design, discovered by Bill Bowerman when he poured urethane onto his wife’s waffle iron. Then, Bowerman and Knight’s company was still called Blue Ribbon Sports; word was that their victory shoe would protect knees and add speed. I came up in an era when leather was treasured for feet; once yearly, before Pesach, we visited the leather shoe store, where we played with this tall contraption, like a scale, into which you could insert your feet and see your skeleton; a time more innocent, before parents knew to protect their children from Xray exposure. Good money, hard-saved dough, was spent on a pair of Oxfords. High-tops of flimsy cloth and thin sole were for basketball and any other weekend activity. It was an era before I knew the difference between an Oxford and a Brogue, between open- and closed-lacing, nor would have cared; a time when I most admired my pediatrician’s penny-loafers, shining coppers adorned. Loafers I desired, but parents believed that laces protected growing feet. Now, over two decades on, I had laid out precious bucks on some rapidly evolved descedant of polyester to protect my feet and knees.

In the afternoon Dakota summer, minimally dressed — white T, running shorts (the days before wick-a-ways) and my Nikes — I ran with traffic, not yet knowing the treacherous combination of Sioux and cowboy drivers in pick-ups (often booze-fueled before Ethanol engines). But, it was the K’Thunking in my head, the tatooing of my feet in the desert eve that should have hinted to me why the Indians came out to look, some pointing, some waving — not quite a greeting, not a hello, a different sort of wave; a mother stepped onto her veranda holding her child, pointing; words were shouted, muddled in the evening breezes so I understood them not; I thought it was a welcome to the new doc.

As I returned, Nurse Alpern greeted me in the lot between hospital and my apartment building. “Rattlers are out.” Like this M.D., Crotalus Horridus also leave their rocks in the eve, but looking for meals. Rattlers also hear K’Thunking or Thunking, or some rattled version of this to find their meal: they too are served, who simply listen and wait. Mrs. Alpern, the ever practical: “Don’t do this again; can’t afford to lose docs.” The Indians who came out to see the doc in shorts and Tee? They thought I was dumb; wondered how far I would get.

It was a few weeks later that I saw my first snake bite. It’s more strike, than bite, when it happens. The boy was in jeans, work boots; brought in on the back of an ancient half-ton Ford 100, the twin I- Beam front grill with a grim or determined look to it. Ranchers — Sioux and Washichu (White Man) — knew about bites hereabouts. Boss told the boy to lie still on the bouncing pick-up; tournequitted and elevated the leg. Even after the half-hour trip cutting across grazing land, the boy looked OK: no vomit, no drool, no shock; just local swelling and hemorrhaging. Anti-venom treatment and he would be fine. When I saw him, I knew that I did not want to be brought in on the back of a pick-up.

Rattlers ruled hereabouts, although I never saw one, I kept hearing about them. When I went off to Cherry Creek, off to a corner of this 5,000 acre reservation to visit one of our clinics, in the hope also of meeting the medicine man, I came up against rattlers again, but incidentally, by-the-by. It wasn’t the unseen rattlers nor the absent medicine man whom I recall best; rather the clinic, the mother and child.

About the medicine man, despite my requests, my interest, Mrs. Alpern and the nurses murmured excuses; not around much, doesn’t have much to say; no one really sees him. Finally, came out that he was in the sauce much of the time, stewed. I had read Illness and Curing in Zinacantan, the Harvard study of various shamans or medicine men in this Mexican village; had studied with Bob Levine about the Ibo and Hausa (a few decades later showing an stunning capacity to slaughter one the other); had read and re-read Erikson’s Childhood and Society, when he had spent the ’30’s visiting the Sioux and also the Yurok. I too wanted to learn as they did; but I had to settle for what the people said and did; never visited by a shaman. The Sioux staff weren’t romantic-eyed as I; they wanted the real Western stuff — a doc who could cut and sew, a doc who could give meds. Decades later, in the Bay Area I met many Washichus who believed in medicine men and burning sage; many more than I could find among the Sioux. One woman told me that her Native American medicine man kept her bowel disease in check by giving her various weekly belly kneadings during which flames emitted from her elbows and knees, relieving — her shaman said — her bowels of its inflammation. When her ex-husband would phone, her medicine man gave her a shrub of sage to set afire and smoke-out his spirit from the house. She wasn’t Sioux. Her nine-year-old daughter watched with veiled lids, dismayed look.

Our Cherry Creek “clinic” was a single-wide trailer on cinder blocks. Cinder blocks also were the three steps leading up to the entrance. Only after I stepped up, then stepped into the cool darkness of the clinic, even as my eyes adjusted and before I could see the mother and child wating for me — only then did the nurse tell me how the rattlers liked to coil-up beneath the trailer or in the cells of the cinder blocks. A few moments I needed to adjust to both the dark and what lurks beneath.

What happened next was a quiet, brief drama. Mother watched me examine her daughter as the girl sat on her lap. Something minor (for a pediatrician; not for a parent): a middle-ear infection. Mother, reassured that I could care for her child gently, then told me of her chronic cough, and the blood, and the weight loss. She let the nurse take her daughter, so that I could examine mother. TB, I thought, from the history, from the look of things. TB, I hoped. Apical Xrays, I remembered, the bacilli favoring the upper lobes. Next week, I felt relieved that TB and a course of INH would take care of her.

After this, a descent into the blaze of day, tripping down the cinder block steps, beneath which, the nurse said lay coiled death. Home in the red Fiat to K’thunk the sunset down.

Questions and Answers of Reluctant Warriors

Posted by | Uncategorized | No Comments

1. What’s a Reluctant Warrior?

1. I write about elite soldiers, all of whom chose after obligatory service to return to civilian life, as do most of Israeli soldiers. Israel is a democracy in which ninety percent of boys and seventy percent of girls serve in the army — three to four years for boys; two for girls. They do this after high school; college comes later. Based on a complex system of scoring (physical, academic, background, emotional and cognitive testing), recruits are given a score — called a Kaba. The men in this book received the highest Kaba. Ironically, in Israel, those with the highest scores strive to be in the toughest, often dangerous combat units. Unlike in the US army,officer training comes only after basic training and service; everyone enters as foot soldier.

I call them Reluctant Warriors, as I was struck with the contrast between their military competence and their inner reluctance to have soldierly identities. These men wanted to be husbands, sons, fathers, teachers, professionals, not soldiers. Yet, they served and served well.

2. Why write Reluctant Warriors?

I finished a thirty-year American study of development from infancy to adulthood, Lives Across Time. I was intrigued by the transition from adolescence to young adulthood. At a Hannuka party, I met a thirty-year-old Israeli graduate student who was in the US on a prestigious fellowship. He was older than many of his fellow grad students. He asked about my US study, then remarked that their lives until eighteen sounded not too different than his. But after eighteen, he said there was a watershed, a Continental Divide, between American and Israeli youth. He said a bit cryptically, “Whoever doesn’t understand the Army, doesn’t understand Israel.” I recall thinking right then: I don’t know about the Army; I want to learn about Israel. This set me on a six-year voyage into the lives of these warriors.

3. How did you do this study?

Well, for four years, I made twenty-four trips to Israel, each 2-3 weeks. I had read the major books on Israeli soldiers and also met with two authors, Amia Lieblich at the Hebrew University and Reuven Gal, formerly chief psychologist of the Army. I also met with retired generals and decided to study those soldiers who were in face-to-face combat units after they had completed their army service. I chose to do this study outside of the Army organization, so that there would be no restrictions. As a psychoanalyst, I am interested in inner landscapes: what makes a person who he or she is. I focus on the person’s child development to learn about how they became elite soldiers, on their seminal, critical experiences in the army, on their losses and the four to six years post army to learn how their service affected them. But, they also affected their society.

In my fifth year, I realized that I needed to move to Israel to complete the interviews and the book. I met with these men over several years, meeting where they chose: in Kibbutz guardhouses at midnight, in cafes near the Universities, at the border checkpoint of Jenin, near the Lebanon border during the war.

The “how” of my interviews is central. Before these men agreed to talk with me at length, they wanted to meet, to chat, to go for long walks, to check me out. They were recruited by other soldiers in my study and were motivated to be certain that I got the “truth” about their experiences. I was impressed that most had not discussed their experiences with anyone, except a close friend and sometimes their wives. I also was impressed that they did not want to regal me with battle tales; they yearned to talk about buddies or relatives who had been killed or how their inner lives were sculpted by their experiences.

Then War:

When I thought I had enough information from six years of interviews, the Second Lebanese War erupted. Several of my soldiers called me, wanting to talk about their experiences in Lebanon. I felt obligated to include these.

4. Were there any frightening or dicey experiences?

Hard to answer. For the Israelis, some experiences have become almost mundane, every day.

I had a couple experiences that helped me understand the sense of chronic tension of life in Israel even between wars. I write about some of these in the introduction. I hailed a cab on a Jerusalem street to go to the University, which is poised on a visible hill. I’d been there several times and knew the route. This cab took me through the Arab sector, then into some neighborhood in a valley I did not recognize; I could no longer see the University Hill. The cab drive — Arab, I now noticed — pulled over with the engine idling. When I said that I couldn’t see the University, he turned to me and said I would see it soon enough. I pulled out my phone to dial a friend. When he saw this, he shifted into gear; shortly we passed an Israeli checkpoint and I realized that he had taken me outside the city limits.

On another occasion, I was to interview a soldier in Gush Etzion, which is in the West Bank. I took the usual armored civilian bus, its front windshield covered with turkey wire to protect from thrown rocks, its side plexiglass windows scarred from missiles. The driver would open his side door at junctions, since he couldn’t see through the side glass to look for oncoming traffic. We had to turn back as there were fires in the road and rocks being thrown. I rescheduled that interview, but the soldier missed the next one, as he had been shot in the thigh while on reserve duty. We met on the third interview.

During the Lebanese War, I rented a Hyundai Getz to drive up north both the volunteer at the Kiryat Shemona Emergency Room and to talk with some of the men in my book. Approaching the town, I first heard the rockets land and felt the car trembling before I saw the rockets, then the scorched Benjamin Hills. Entering the town, I saw burnt-out hulks of cars in the town and realized that the tin can I was driving offered little protection. One boy whom I visited at his home because he was terrified, gave me a gift of shrapnel he had found in his backyard. I have them on my desk.

5. Any surprises over the years?

Surprises sometimes came from those who heard about the soldiers or read parts of the manuscript. One father who had helped recruit some of the soldiers, was surprised at how honest and candid these men were. He had expected that they would not be so revealing. One female officer whom I had interviewed early on, remarked that she thought these men had revealed too much, that they should have “sucked it up,” rather than talk about their hurt and sadness over their losses. At a major US university, one reflective psychiatrist, an Iranian woman, was impressed that these boys expressed no hatred. I was surprised at her comment, as I had been accustomed to these men talking without hatred.

Surprises for me? The degree of deep thoughtfullness, the level of complexity these men saw in their society and lives. I suppose I shouldn’t have been surprised by this, but I was certainly impressed. Also, I write about courage in my last chapter, as these men spoke about rare acts of courage in ways that no one had written about before, except for an ancient Chinese philosopher.

Besides surprise, there more moments of quiet shock. I begin one chapter with a soldier/medic shooting a sniper, the soldier’s first kill. The medic falls to the ground with mixed confusion, fear and excitement, asking himself, “What am I, a medic, a soldier, a Jew?” He has a crisis of identity. Only then does he let himself realize (as I do) that he “saw” the sniper in a tree from the glint of the sniper’s gun sight: he realizes that the sniper was aiming for him.

6. What was your most memorable experience?

So many. One soldier agreed to talk with me if I went on midnight guard tour of the periphery of his kibbutz in the West Bank. A woman had been shot to death some months earlier as she was walking along the kibbutz fence, so the kibbutz had regular night rounds with a jeep to check that no one had cut through the fence, that the electronic security systems were intact. As we bumped along the rocky route, the thickened night illuminated by the flood lights atop the Jeep, the soldier chatted. He stopped abruptly, looking into the darkness beyond the fence and pointed quietly. I saw nothing, nothing but night. As he aimed the floods, he then identified a feral dog or wolf slinking along the fence. I still saw nothing. He resumed driving and chatting.

But, it was the stories that are most memorable. I ask about courage of a now-middle-aged professor, highly decorated as a soldier, his legs so full of shrapnel that he cannot get through airport detectors. He responds, “Courage? Someone who has shit in his pants under fire.”

Another soldier whom I’ll call Ayal, on a final training with a buddy tells of being dropped at night by helicopter and needing to rendevouz. His buddies knee is shattered as he jumped from the ‘chopper. He insists that Ayal continue without him. Instead, Ayal dumps their backpacks and puts his buddy over his shoulders to complete the mission.

And, one soldier, Eliaz, who becomes an editor and poet, grew up in a mixed Arab-Jewish village. His best friends were twin Arab boys. When Eliaz is on guard duty outside Tulqarm after the Passover bombing in Netanya, he sees suspicious activity as teen-age boys and girls carry tubes with Rocket Propelled Grenade launchers within. Eliaz’s gunner asks for permission to shoot above their heads to scatter them. Eliaz hesitates, jeapordizing his unit and others, as he “sees” his twin Arab buddies before him.

There is much more that tells of the hearts and souls of these men.

7. What do you hope people will take away from this book?

First, to hear the men’s stories and their wish we remember those who were killed.

But, I think that most readers will want to know these men. They are upright, responsible, thoughtful, the kind of person whom you might want as a neighbor.

Further, I hope that readers will think about the implications of having conscript military service in a democratic society. George Washington thought it was robust for democracy to have its citizens serve in the army. Imagine what decisions we would make — and our representatives — if our children (and our Senators’ and Congresspersons’ children) served in the military. I don’t argue that this is a better system; I suspect that most military commanders prefer a professional, volunteer army. Rather, that we open the discussion as should be in a democracy.

If we listen to these men and to ourselves, it will only benefit our society.

Revisiting Erikson: The Lakota Sioux forty years later

Posted by | Uncategorized | No Comments

First thing being first, before replacing the sloughed skin on Mrs. R’s arm, I had to find out why

her forearm was raw to the muscle. New here, I am surprised to learn that my fundamentalist Christian colleagues (and one ancient Roman Catholic always fiddling with her rosary) hadn’t checked this elderly, chunky lady’s blood sugar: diabetic, sure enough, never diagnosed. So, first thing’s first: stabilize her blood sugars, treat the diabetes, and give proper antibiotics (for anaerobes and aerobes — they missed this too), then when you see the shiny, glimmer of healthy tissue margins, go for a skin flap transplant.

The pharmacist was my surgical assistant; he was the brightest of the bunch, from N’orlins, La before the Flood, he couldn’t get into med school, he said, but he was smart, hard-working and pleased to assist. He also ordered special hickory chips from N’orlins, La. to barbecue and made his own roux. It was then that I learned I loathed ochra, that slimy matrix it exudes.

Then how to unskin a lady was not to be straightforward as it was at the University hospital where I studied. The surgical suite — well-endowed — had not been used for years; surgery was sent eighty-miles up-road to Mobridge to the White hospital; none done here, except deliveries (which too often evolved into C-sections who had to be sent, ambulance screaming, up to Mobridge. One trip, the eternally-drunk obstetrician kept his fist in the mother’s vagina to keep the baby from popping out.

To unskin a forearm means to find a donor site from the inner thigh. Anesthesia needed for this and there was no anestheiologist, no nurse-anesthetist, even in the 1970’s. I do double duty. First, a lumbar block to numb the donor site; second, a brachial plexus block — in the armpit — to numb the recipient, the naked forearm. Lumbars I had done many of: babies with possible meningitis; Southside Chicago girls in active labor, with no prenatal care and needing an urgent C-section. But, brachial plexus block was a never-done for me; remembered the anatomy, the complex twistings and routings within that armpit, like some noodling of telephone wires beneath the city streets, but never stuck a needle there. The night before surgery, I bone-up on my Netter’s anatomy and hit the spot square-on the next day in the O.R. Before hitting the OR, I had done several days debriding of the sloughed wound: fresh it must be to transplant the sod of skin. In the OR, flipped on her side, I slid into the vertebral space between L4 and 5; a bit lordotic pull by the nurses and I had a clear tunnel in. Then, flapped on her back, Mrs R. was ready. The thigh well scrubbed, Betadined, aproned, an oval hole isolating the site. Instruments we had. The strange loopy-scalpel to slice
just-thick-enough epidermis and a touch if dermis to both take to the new site, yet leaving some dermis to heal-over the thigh; something like a large cheese knife the instrument looked. Forearm next. Her arm flung up, like some lop-sided angel wing, I probed left-handed with two gloved fingers, then slid the massively long needle in between the stretch of skin. Wait. Wait. Numbness without paralysis in the arm. First, a touch of the skin (for sensitive fibers); then a pinch with a forceps (for the pain C-fibers) and success.

Laying the layers onto the site is much like laying sod; carefully, side by side, the edges trimmed to the wound shape. The “root” growing will take on its own, a pressure bandage holding the skin sod in place. A fine lawn it will hopefully be; like sodding around a putting hole — it should look good. And after five or six days of brief peeks, it looks darn good.

But, Mrs. R. wants a pass to leave early. There wil be a Sundance ceremony with several

initiants, including, I learn later, Russel Means, wanted by the FBI for shooting three men on Rosebed reservation, down south. I explain, I plead in fact, that she can’t rotate the arm; she must stay in hospital a week or so until we know healing has happened. Mrs. R. has donated two buffalo for eats at the ceremony and insists, politely, quietly, firmly, that she is going. Wakantanka, the Sioux god whose voice one hears shushing through the Black Hills, will protect her. She invites me.

Being invited was one thing; getting in another. I and Debby were the only washichus, white men, attending. While this was a Lakota Sioux ceremony, it had become politicized; other tribes, mostly the more militant ones, as far away as the Navajo, had sent “guards”: thick-armed toughs with long, greasy black hair and their image of mean on their faces. The fellow who greeted us — we had the red Fiat 128 in South Dakota — commanded us out. A face like a piece of steak with two eyes embedded, he frisked me; looking for drugs and guns, he said. His compatriots searched the tiny Fiat’s baggage, checked under the carriage, beneath the seats, glove compartment. When he turned to frisk Debby, I told him firmly, no way: I would turn around and he could explain to Mrs. R. why I was not admitted. Her name was a key to the lock that was his harshness. We were passed through.

I did not expect to be the only Washichu; thought other docs would be invited; learned later that my collegial Christ-touting,
Bible-spouting blowhards who come to save the Indians are not so welcome. Already, I had dispensed with making morning rounds with them, as I tired and was irritated at the “religion” they spouted at bedside; told them I needed to round earlier.

We formed a large circle. Formed is not quite right. A circle was somehow formed by the few hundred there, centered by the cottonwood from which leather strops hung. Each strop was anchored with a bone hook — from what animal I don’t recall, perhaps antelope. The six piercees entered; I’m told by Mrs. R. that they had purified themselves in the wild for several days with fasting and water. The hooks are pierced into the pectoral muscle, not the skin, to hold more firmly; one on each side. as the men leaned back against the leather thongs, faces skyward, Cubist, uptilting tits were formed: this manly ceremony giving rise to a touch of woman. A moaning or humming was emitted by them by these men; also those in the circle, as the men stomped sidewise about, a dance they called it, in a hypnotic slowness. A timeless quality it felt.

Near the end, several men appear with massive shallow wooden bowls, face us in the circle and pass around the dried buffalo donated by Mrs. R.

She is called to near the center. A peace pipe is to be given to her for her generosity. As some chiefly type raises the pipe, his arms extended, palms upward, I realize, a touch shocked, that she will now rotate her arms upward to receive the peace pipe with both hands. I feel a belly clutch: will she tear the stitches?

Mrs. R. looks back at me afterwards; a smile of reassurance. Thanks to Wakantanka the skin is fine, she explains.

One weekend, we go to the Black Hills, find a cabin, rest outside beneath a sky filled with more

stars than I have ever imagined. I feel a sense of annoyance as I hear the rush of what sounds like highway traffic just beyond the ridge. Ridge top I look: no highway; it is Wakantanka speaking through the black pine. The only time He has ever spoken around me.