The is on Jordan Peterson’s list of recommended reading and covers the dynamic psychiatry that holds great interest for me. It is really 4-5 books at an imposing 1269 pages, it is the longest book I have read all at once. It took me three and a half months to read. This is only for reading if you have a special interest in the subject matter.
Ellenberger spends the first 200 pages with a lot about witch doctors, medicine men and shamans and implying these might have been the first psychotherapist and this is where we find the roots of psychotherapy. The role of exorcists, magnetists, mesmerists, hypnotists, and faith healers who are involved with the spirit hold much more of the tradition of psycho-dynamic psychotherapy than medical doctors who recently have co-opted their knowledge as their own. As an aspiring psychotherapist I have to acknowledge I have more in common with a snake oil selling faith healer, than I do a medical doctor. This knowledge reinforces the importance of faith, and rejects the complete acceptance of the positivism of scientific method bringing them into balance. Psychotherapy seems more Art, than Science. Art is the balance to Science.
Ellenberger identifies Janet, Freud, Alder and Jung as the four pillars of modern Psychodynamic Psychotherapy. He links these practitioners with Greek philosophy. “Stoicism showed certain features that can be found in Adlerian and existentialist schools of today, that some of the characteristics of Plato’s Academy can be found in the Jungian School, whereas Epicurus aimed at the removal of anxiety and has been compared in that regard to Freud” (p 64).
“Gassner wrote a booklet in which he explained the principles of his healing method. He distinguished two kinds of illnesses: natural ones, that belonged to the realm of the physician, and preternatural ones, that he classified into three categories: circumsessio (an imitation of a natural illness, caused by the devil); obsessio (the effect of sorcery); and possession (overt diabolical possession), the least frequent of them” (p 82). I can see that modern medical knowledge is useful for what Gassner would describe as ‘natural ones’ and that ‘preternatural’ the realm of the Psychotherapist. I can see parallels with the above categories in people whom I come into contact with professionally. I comment to colleagues that it is rare to see someone who is ‘fully mad’ (possession) when you work with mental illness.
Ellenberger identified the importance of establishing rapport for the mesmerists, and that this became a foundation of psychotherapy” (p 212). This is the great truth of any therapeutic relationship. One must first establish and maintain rapport. A tool of doing this was identified by Janet “I believe those people until it is proven to me that what they say is untrue” (p 481). It reminded me of what Tom Ryan told me he learned from Phil Barker about ‘believing everything’ in the context of the therapeutic relationship. It is more fruitful to understand someone and identify what problems their beliefs might cause them being in their world and how to address those challenges, than trying to change those beliefs. Ellenberger identified the importance of the person receiving psychodynamic psychotherapy directing what that therapy should be and what they want to achieve. Do not take a persons problems from them, rather try to be the catalyst for coming up with better responses to their problems.
“This was a decisive turning point in psychoanalysis: Freud found that in the unconscious it is impossible to distinguish fantasies from memories, and from that time on he was not so much concerned with the reconstruction of events from the past through the uncovering or suppressed memories, than with the exploration of fantasies” (p 657). I thought when reading this that we need care around ‘recovered’ memories. I have memories that I am not sure of the veracity of, and have been corrected by my Mother around memories of my childhood. I noted in the work of Kezelman in “Practice Guidelines for Clinical Treatment of Complex Trauma” was advocating returning the legitimacy of recovered memories with amnesia for the disasters this caused in the 1990’s. Especially in therapy we must be mindful of the infallibility of memory and what Freud recognised as the difficulty in distinguishing memory from fantasy. Later I will argue that we should believe people in the therapy context, and this is something I believe. What comes up in therapy should not be the basis for a legal case. Therapists should not become witnesses.
“The tendentious jokes also help us to tolerate repressed needs by allowing a socially acceptable way of giving vent to them. The two main differences Freud found between dreams and jokes were that dreams express wish fulfilment and jokes satisfy the pleasure of play; dreams are a regression from the level of language to thinking in picture, but jokes regression is from logical language to play language (the ludic function of language in which young children find so much pleasure)” (p 666). I believe that social media has been toxic on the playful use of language. Now we have Cards Against Humanity to give us an outlet to say the unsayable. Comedians are self censoring, epitomised by the increasingly unfunny Hannah Gadsby’s Nannete. She used to be really funny. When we can no longer use humour to playful speak about what is dark we have lost a psychic outlet. Watch George Carlin joke about rape. We have a need to joke about the darkest aspects of our psyche and trauma. It is important.
“La Piere, for instance claims that Freudiansim ruined the ethics of individualism, self discipline, and responsibility that prevailed among the Western World” (p 730). I can see this argument, and I believe it is valid. Somewhere between Enlightenment Rationalism and Romanticism is a truth. The Romantics and Post Modernists do get thing correct, but I would not base my choices on Rousseauian or Marxist philosophy. They do have a point. We are Schrodinger’s Cat both completely individual and completely one at the same time.
Adler ‘courage is the highest virtue’, I can see Jordan Peterson channelling Adler in this respect. Before I read this I had believed that Peterson was more Jungian, but having not read more about Adler I can see that Peterson borrows a lot from Adler as well. Courage works much better in the long term than avoidance in responding to our anxieties about the world. Development of courage should be a feature of psychotherapy.
“The synthetic-hermeneutic method, commonly known as Jungian therapy, differs in many regards from Freudian psychoanalysis. As in Adlerian therapy, the patient does not lie on a couch but sits on a chair facing the psychotherapist” (p 960). Yes, this is how I prefer to practise, but am happy for people to lie on the couch should they wish to do so.
“Jung always proclaimed that he was an empiricist: that man is ‘naturally religious’ does not necessarily prove the truth of region, nor does the existence of the archetype of God prove the existence of God” (p 973). How can you know the unknowable? A form of belief seems to work out better for people than no belief. When belief becomes an ideology, it causes its own problems. The middle path of Buddha, Jesus, and Aristotle seeking a golden mean.
Ellenberger gives one of the best descriptions of the political climate leading up to the first world war and how Europe was a tinder box of ethic grudges (and one can still see this is just under the surface). This is used to show the effect on the psyche of citizens.
Ellenberger shows how the Nazi’s and their book burnings moved the ligna fraca from German to English (and even the language of capital). The Nazi’s damage to German culture and confidence was profound. E writes the Russian’s in the Cold War era accused American Psychotherpists of idealism, which is ironic given the ideals communism is based on. The best thing about Capitalist philosophy is its pragmatism. It has the quality of working, not for all but for many. Communism seems to work for a much smaller proportion of the population, if at all when the rubber hits the road.
Ellenberger identifies “the right to practise the method should be restricted to physicians or extended to well trained laymen. Freud was definitely in favour of lay analysis” (p 1139). Given Ellenberger shows that the roots of psychotherapy is with exorcists, magnetists, mesmerists, hypnotists, and faith healers, not with medical doctors. It makes sense that psychotherapy should not be owned by medicine. We are modern day witch doctors, medicine men and shamans. “The subject is convinced that he has gained access to a new spiritual world, or that he has attained a new spiritual truth that he will reveal to the world. Examples of this illness can be found among Siberian and Alaskan shamans, among mystics of all religions, and among certain creative writers and philosophers” (p 1199).
“Each dynamic psychiatrist has his own specific feeling for psychic reality, and his theories are also influenced by the events of his life” (p 1196). The importance of context and history in defining not only who we are, but the Alchemy of who we are to become. We cannot be all things to all people. The book concludes with “We might then hope to reach a higher synthesis and devise a conceptual framework that would do justice to the rigorous demands of experimental psychology and to the realities experienced by the explores of the unconscious” (p 1210).
My take was that this was an interesting, but tangential book that did not hesitate to stray from its identified subject matter. If could have easily been between a half and a third of the size and adequately covered its professed aim. Ellenberger writes well. This is a book for people like me who want to know more and more, about less and less. Do not read unless you have a specialist interest in Dynamic Psychotherapy and the Unconscious.