Premium
Reappraising W innicott's The P iggle : A Critical Commentary
Author(s) -
Reeves Christopher
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
british journal of psychotherapy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.442
H-Index - 17
eISSN - 1752-0118
pISSN - 0265-9883
DOI - 10.1111/bjp.12145
Subject(s) - context (archaeology) , interpretation (philosophy) , wife , reading (process) , set (abstract data type) , psychology , psychoanalytic theory , ambivalence , odds , sociology , media studies , psychoanalysis , law , linguistics , history , political science , medicine , philosophy , computer science , logistic regression , archaeology , programming language
The P iggle is one of only two substantial psychoanalytic case histories to be published under W innicott's name. W innicott felt that the case and the associated notes and reflections provided important material for discussion. Claire W innicott – his wife and literary executor – wanted to bring these to an audience, and did so by overseeing the posthumous publication of the work in 1977. The nature and purpose of the work's message is explored in an extended paper published in two parts, in this and the next issue of the J ournal. In P art I , published here, the author discusses the work in its historical context alongside other contemporary child analyses (notably K lein's N arrative of a C hild A nalysis and McD ougall's D ialogue with S ammy ) and its ambivalent reception by its contemporary audience. The author identifies theoretical issues raised by the material; the use of commotional and conjunctional interpretations; the use of time, and analysis on demand; the place of play in therapy and the role of the parents. He reviews the dialogue between analyst and child as set out in the text, identifying emerging themes. He attempts to understand what the child, G abrielle, was trying to communicate. He then reviews W innicott's interpretation of those sessions, identifying areas in which the interpretations may be at odds with what the child was experiencing. At the end the author encourages the reader to re‐read W innicott's original text before reading the discussion and critical evaluation that forms the basis of the second part of the paper, ‘ D iscussion and C ritique’.