ABSTRACT

In this paper, the author revisits Stephen Mitchell’s important developmental tilt hypothesis in light of his treatment of Winnicott’s most creative contributions to psychoanalysis. It is the author’s contention that neither Winnicott’s focus on play as the central factor in the therapeutic action of psychoanalysis nor his role, along with Bion, of creating an ontological turn in psychoanalysis were accounted for in Mitchell’s reading of Winnicott. The author argues that in Mitchell’s useful attempt to redress some of the ways that regression had been concretized in psychoanalytic practice and theory, he overlooked Winnicott’s complex view of holding and the mutual elements of regression that occur between patient and analyst in play. Play embodies tensions between the symmetrical and asymmetrical elements of the analytic relationship in ways that Mitchell did not consider in his developmental tilt hypothesis.

摘要

在这篇论文中，作者根据斯蒂芬米切尔对温尼科特对精神分析最具创造性的贡献的处理，重新审视了他的重要发展倾斜假说。作者的论点是，在米切尔对温尼科特的阅读中，既没有考虑到温尼科特将游戏作为精神分析治疗作用的核心因素，也没有考虑到他与比恩一起在精神分析中创造本体论转向的作用。作者认为，在米切尔纠正回归在精神分析实践和理论中具体化的一些方式的有益尝试中，他忽略了温尼科特的复杂观点，以及在游戏中患者和分析师之间发生的回归的相互要素。