{"title":"Paul Ornstein","authors":"J. Lichtenberg","doi":"10.1080/15551024.2015.1019794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"W hen it comes to presenting and illustrating the theories of Heinz Kohut, Paul Ornstein is a “Yes, and . . . ,” I know because I am a “Yes, but. . . .” I will illustrate Paul’s skill as ambassador for self psychology through a retrospective appraisal of his 1993 article, “Chronic Rage From Underground: Reflections on its Structure and Treatment.” Paul began with a brief but erudite summary of the central dynamic of Dostoyevsky’s (1864) seminal Notes from the Underground. Here Paul, an ardent reader and scholar of the great Russian novelist, follows Freud and Kohut in drawing linkages between the insights of great creative artists and psychoanalysis. Parenthetically, in my first analysis I used Dimitri, Ivan, and Alyosha—the Brothers Karamazov—to attempt to discover and delineate who I was—emotional, intellectual, and/or spiritual? Consequently, I am an admirer of Paul and others of our colleagues who live in and with characters in literature as prototypes of living in or with the dyadic experience of analysis—the theater of two interacting minds. Paul notes: in reading or hearing the words of the protagonist in Notes from the Underground, “A whole gamut of reactions is mobilized . . . as if we were listening to a patient’s free associations. And we can completely extricate ourselves neither from the ‘underground man’s’ revelations nor from our own affect-laden reactions to them” (Ornstein, 1993, p. 143). Paul used his literary reference as prelude to his main purpose—to elucidate Kohut’s theory of narcissistic rage and illustrate the theory through Paul’s treatment of Mr. K. In Notes, the protagonist lives in a continuous altered state now regarded as a consequence of Kohut’s (1972) newly defined “narcissistic rage.” Huge investments of energy go into planning his revenge without gaining relief. “If he does act, he agonizes over having done it, and if he does not, he ends up in endless recriminations for his cowardliness. There is no escape for him from self-loathing and self-torment” (Ornstein, 1993, p. 142). Here we recognize elements of Kohut’s vision of Tragic man, of literary versions of existential anxiety, and of Sartre’s No Exit.","PeriodicalId":91515,"journal":{"name":"International journal of psychoanalytic self psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15551024.2015.1019794","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of psychoanalytic self psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15551024.2015.1019794","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
W hen it comes to presenting and illustrating the theories of Heinz Kohut, Paul Ornstein is a “Yes, and . . . ,” I know because I am a “Yes, but. . . .” I will illustrate Paul’s skill as ambassador for self psychology through a retrospective appraisal of his 1993 article, “Chronic Rage From Underground: Reflections on its Structure and Treatment.” Paul began with a brief but erudite summary of the central dynamic of Dostoyevsky’s (1864) seminal Notes from the Underground. Here Paul, an ardent reader and scholar of the great Russian novelist, follows Freud and Kohut in drawing linkages between the insights of great creative artists and psychoanalysis. Parenthetically, in my first analysis I used Dimitri, Ivan, and Alyosha—the Brothers Karamazov—to attempt to discover and delineate who I was—emotional, intellectual, and/or spiritual? Consequently, I am an admirer of Paul and others of our colleagues who live in and with characters in literature as prototypes of living in or with the dyadic experience of analysis—the theater of two interacting minds. Paul notes: in reading or hearing the words of the protagonist in Notes from the Underground, “A whole gamut of reactions is mobilized . . . as if we were listening to a patient’s free associations. And we can completely extricate ourselves neither from the ‘underground man’s’ revelations nor from our own affect-laden reactions to them” (Ornstein, 1993, p. 143). Paul used his literary reference as prelude to his main purpose—to elucidate Kohut’s theory of narcissistic rage and illustrate the theory through Paul’s treatment of Mr. K. In Notes, the protagonist lives in a continuous altered state now regarded as a consequence of Kohut’s (1972) newly defined “narcissistic rage.” Huge investments of energy go into planning his revenge without gaining relief. “If he does act, he agonizes over having done it, and if he does not, he ends up in endless recriminations for his cowardliness. There is no escape for him from self-loathing and self-torment” (Ornstein, 1993, p. 142). Here we recognize elements of Kohut’s vision of Tragic man, of literary versions of existential anxiety, and of Sartre’s No Exit.
当谈到展示和说明海因茨·科胡特的理论时,保罗·奥恩斯坦是一个“是的,而且……”我知道,因为我是一个“是的,但是. . . .”。我将通过回顾保罗1993年的文章《地下的慢性愤怒:对其结构和治疗的反思》来说明他作为自我心理学大使的技巧。保罗首先对陀思妥耶夫斯基(1864)开创性的《地下笔记》(Notes from the Underground)的核心动态进行了简短而渊博的总结。保罗是这位伟大的俄罗斯小说家的忠实读者和学者,他跟随弗洛伊德和科胡特,在伟大的创造性艺术家的见解和精神分析之间建立了联系。顺便说一句,在我的第一次分析中,我用了迪米特里、伊万和阿廖沙——卡拉马佐夫兄弟——来试图发现和描绘我是谁——情感上的、智力上的和/或精神上的?因此,我很钦佩保罗和我们的其他同事,他们生活在文学作品中,并与文学人物一起生活,作为生活在分析的二元体验中的原型——两种相互作用的思想的戏剧。保罗指出:在阅读或听到《地下笔记》中主人公的话时,“整个反应范围都被调动起来了……就好像我们在倾听病人的自由联想。我们既不能完全从‘地下人’的揭露中解脱出来,也不能完全从我们自己对他们充满感情的反应中解脱出来”(Ornstein, 1993, p. 143)。保罗用他的文学参考作为他的主要目的的前奏——阐明科胡特的自恋愤怒理论,并通过保罗对k先生的处理来说明这一理论。在《笔记》中,主人公生活在一种持续的改变状态中,现在被认为是科胡特(1972)新定义的“自恋愤怒”的结果。大量的精力投入到计划他的复仇中,却没有得到解脱。“如果他采取行动,他会为自己的所作所为感到痛苦,如果他不采取行动,他最终会因为自己的懦弱而受到无休止的指责。他无法逃避自我厌恶和自我折磨”(Ornstein, 1993, p. 142)。在这里,我们认识到科胡特对悲剧人的看法,对存在主义焦虑的文学版本,以及萨特的《无出口》的元素。