As usual for our journal, in this issue we have done our best to collect a variety of interesting papers centered around a specific topic, thus documenting not only the richness of approaches that characterizes our field, but also its intellectual roots and its continuing contribution to our contemporary cultural debate. As we learned from Philip Aries’ 1962 still classic Centuries of childhood, the concept of childhood is a social construction that emerged very slowly in the course of modern history. Starting with Freud’s 1909 treatment of Little Hans, from early on psychoanalysis contributed to a new knowledge of children’s basic needs and to the treatment of their psychological problems. Through the Hampstead War Nurseries, Anna Freud and Dorothy Burlingham continued in London the practical work of applied psychoanalysis which they had already started in Vienna. These experiences still represent one of the main historical roots of the field of analytic pedagogics, the development of which Helmwart Hierdeis (2016) recently reconstructed in his very wellwritten book Psychoanalytische Pädagogik – Psychoanalyse in der Pädagogik. Another product of the war climate and its consequences upon the welfare of children was John Bowlby’s attachment theory, whose original formulation through the three classical articles “The nature of the child’s tie to his mother” (1958), “Grief and mourning in infancy and early childhood” (1960a), and “Separation anxiety” (1960b) represented such a big challenge to traditional analytic thinking that only in recent years has his point of view been at least partially accepted by the analytic community. In fact, it has been largely utilized in the field of empirical research and rediscovered in the new clinical approach to the process of mentalization pioneered by Peter Fonagy (see Fonagy & Bateman, 2006). This is what allowed the psychoanalyst Karl Heinz Brisch to use the title “John Bowlby (1907–1990) – ‘Der Bindungs-Psychoanalytiker’,” that is, “the attachment psychoanalyst,” for the chapter that Wolfgang Mertens and I invited him to write for our 2016 anthology Psychoanalyse im 20. Jahrhundert (Brisch, 2016). Such a complex relationship between psychoanalysis, on the one hand, and psychological observation and empirical research, on the other, characterizes of course the peculiar role played by the concept of “trauma” throughout the history of psychoanalysis. Although Freud himself inaugurated this field of study, he later founded psychoanalysis upon the concept of “psychic” as opposed to “external reality.” Pioneered by Ferenczi in the 1930s, a new emphasis on trauma emerged in the 1960s from several areas of repressed psychic suffering: the scars of the Holocaust, the post-traumatic disorders of Vietnam veterans, and violence against women and children. In 2014, Howard Levine redefined the analytic trauma concept from a Bionian point of view in terms of “whatever outstrips and disrupts the psyche’s capacity for representation” (Levine, 2014). It would not be possible to understand the experience and method of Psychoanalytic Infant Observation without the preliminary concepts sketched out above, and it is no wonder that it was developed at the London Tavistock Clinic by Esther Bick at the time of her collaboration with John Bowlby, and under the later influence of Wilfred Bion’s theory of thinking, as we can gather from her 1964 paper “Notes on infant observation in psycho-analytic training” – which does not contain a bibliography! This is the specific topic of the central article of this issue, “Musical rhythms in an infant observation: Harmonies, pauses, dissonances, and interruptions,” authored by the Italian colleagues Silvia Cimino, Enrica Fondi, and Luca Cerniglia. Through an extensive use of clinical vignettes and theoretical considerations, they describe an infant observation conducted weekly for two years, highlighting how a mother’s problematic relationship with herself negatively influenced her child’s capacity to relate to her, and how the father was often able to moderate such problematic interactions and help his daughter separate from the mother. It is amazing how well Psychoanalytic Infant Observation can allow us to reconstruct and illuminate in such detail the interaction between internal world and external reality, that is, the conceptual question at the origin of so many ideological and scientific conflicts.

中文翻译：

---

童年、依恋、分离和创伤

与我们的期刊一样，在本期中，我们尽最大努力收集了围绕特定主题的各种有趣论文，从而不仅记录了表征我们领域的方法的丰富性，而且记录了它的知识根源及其对以下领域的持续贡献我们当代的文化辩论。正如我们从菲利普·白羊座 1962 年仍然经典的童年世纪中学到的那样，童年的概念是在现代历史进程中缓慢出现的社会建构。从弗洛伊德 1909 年对小汉斯的治疗开始，从早期的精神分析开始就对儿童的基本需求和心理问题的治疗有了新的认识。通过汉普斯特德战争苗圃，安娜弗洛伊德和多萝西伯灵厄姆在伦敦继续他们已经在维也纳开始的应用精神分析的实际工作。这些经历仍然代表了分析教育学领域的主要历史根源之一，Helmwart Hierdeis (2016) 最近在他写得很好的书 Psychoanalytische Pädagogik – Psychoanalysis in der Pädagogik 中重建了这一发展。战争气氛及其对儿童福利的影响的另一个产物是约翰·鲍尔比的依恋理论，该理论通过三篇经典文章“儿童与母亲关系的本质”（1958 年）、“婴儿期的悲伤和哀悼和幼儿期”（1960a），而“分离焦虑”（1960b）则代表了对传统分析思维的巨大挑战，以至于近年来他的观点至少被分析界所接受。事实上，它已被大量用于实证研究领域，并在由 Peter Fonagy 开创的心理化过程的新临床方法中重新发现（见 Fonagy & Bateman，2006）。这就是精神分析师卡尔·海因茨·布里施 (Karl Heinz Brisch) 在沃尔夫冈·默滕斯 (Wolfgang Mertens) 和我邀请他参加的那一章中使用“约翰·鲍尔比 (1907–1990) – 'Der Bindungs-Psychoanalytiker'”这一标题的原因，即“依恋精神分析师”为我们的 2016 年选集心理分析写作 20. Jahrhundert（布里施，2016 年）。一方面，精神分析与心理观察和实证研究之间存在如此复杂的关系，另一方面，当然表征了“创伤”概念在整个精神分析史上所扮演的特殊角色。尽管弗洛伊德本人开创了这一研究领域，但他后来根据“心理”而非“外部现实”的概念建立了精神分析。由 Ferenczi 在 1930 年代首创，在 1960 年代出现了对创伤的新重点，这些领域来自几个被压抑的精神痛苦领域：大屠杀的伤疤、越战老兵的创伤后障碍以及对妇女和儿童的暴力行为。2014 年，霍华德·莱文 (Howard Levine) 从 Bionian 的角度重新定义了分析创伤的概念，即“任何超越和破坏心理表征能力的事物”（Levine，2014）。如果没有上面勾勒出的初步概念，就不可能理解精神分析婴儿观察的经验和方法，难怪它是由埃丝特·比克在与约翰·鲍比合作时在伦敦塔维斯托克诊所开发的，在后来的威尔弗雷德·比昂 (Wilfred Bion) 思维理论的影响下，我们可以从她 1964 年的论文“心理分析训练中的婴儿观察笔记”中收集到——其中不包含参考书目！这是本期中心文章“婴儿观察中的音乐节奏：和声、停顿、不和谐和中断”的具体主题，作者是意大利同事 Silvia Cimino、Enrica Fondi 和 Luca Cerniglia。通过广泛使用临床小插曲和理论考虑，他们描述了一项为期两年的每周婴儿观察，强调了母亲与自己的问题关系如何对孩子与她的关系产生负面影响，以及父亲如何经常能够缓和这种有问题的互动并帮助他的女儿与母亲分开。令人惊讶的是，精神分析婴儿观察能够让我们如此详细地重建和阐明内部世界与外部现实之间的相互作用，即引发如此多意识形态和科学冲突的概念问题。以及父亲如何经常能够缓和这种有问题的互动并帮助他的女儿与母亲分开。令人惊讶的是，精神分析婴儿观察能够让我们如此详细地重建和阐明内部世界与外部现实之间的相互作用，即引发如此多意识形态和科学冲突的概念问题。以及父亲如何经常能够缓和这种有问题的互动并帮助他的女儿与母亲分开。令人惊讶的是，精神分析婴儿观察能够让我们如此详细地重建和阐明内部世界与外部现实之间的相互作用，即引发如此多意识形态和科学冲突的概念问题。