On May 3–6, 2018, the International Sándor Ferenczi Network chaired by Carlo Bonomi organized the 13th International Sándor Ferenczi Conference, with the title “Ferenczi in our time – A Renaissance for psychoanalysis.” This took place in Florence, at the Convitto La Calza, not far from Palazzo Pitti, in the “Oltrarno” part of town. Around 350 colleagues from more than 20 countries spent four very intense days together working and getting to know each other here. The first Sándo Ferenczi Conference took place in New York City in 1991, inspired by Stephen Mitchell, and organized by Lew Aron (1952–2019) and Adrienne Harris, the editors of the 1993 volume The legacy of Sándor Ferenczi. In Issue 4/1998 of this journal, Carlo Bonomi edited a selection of the papers presented at the fourth of these conferences, held in Madrid (Bonomi, 1998). In Issue 1–2/2004, Franco Borgogno edited the best papers presented at the seventh conference, held in Turin in 2002 (Borgogno, 2004). And in Issue 1/2014 Carlo Bonomi and Franco Borgogno edited a collection of papers presented at the 11th Conference, held in 2012 in Budapest (Bonomi & Borgogno, 2014). The 12th Conference took place in Toronto in 2015, and the next one will take place in Sao Paulo in May 2021. Last but not least, a first selection of papers from the Florence conference appeared in Issue 4/2018 of the American Journal of Psychoanalysis (Koritar, 2018). In the first article of this issue, “Freud–Ferenczi correspondence, revisited,” Ernst Falzeder and Eva Erhart (his daughter, an anthropologist) revisit the 1246 letters exchanged by Ferenczi and Freud between February 1908 and May 1933, proposing some of the most interesting, significant, and dramatic formulations through which Ferenczi and Freud tried to understand each other and to create what is perhaps the most fascinating relationship from the history of psychoanalysis. The authors end up agreeing with Peter Lomas’s amazement at Ferenczi’s courage, a virtue that also characterizes Ernst Falzeder’s unique contribution to making the history of psychoanalysis into not only a scientific field (Falzeder, 2015), but also a new profitable professional activity. Ferenczi’s letters to Freud also form the basis of the second article of this issue, “Ferenczi and Freud – From psychoanalysis as a ‘professional and personal home’ to the creation of a ‘psychoanalytic home’ for the patient,” by Marco Conci. From Ferenczi’s letters, it is possible to document how, through his relationship with Freud, Ferenczi found the kind of “professional and personal home” that allowed him to later offer his patients the “psychoanalytic home” they needed. From this point of view, his Clinical diary was also motivated by his desire to keep alive the dialogue with Freud that played such a crucial role in his life and work. In the article “An extract of the analysis of the Monkey Puzzle Boy,” by the Irish colleague Fergal Brady, this journal’s editorial board were also able to find the same courage and originality that characterize Ferenczi’s work and legacy, and that made it possible for the author to constructively work with an artist who had been sexually abused as a child, and who had been able to psychically survive through his artistic work. Through Brady’s multiple readings and discussions with the patient of Carlo Bonomi’s work (Bonomi, 2015, 2018), the wider Ferenczi community also became part of the story of the analysis. The Boston colleague Andrea Celenza puts Ferenczi right in the center of our contemporary analytic debate by revisiting his legacy in terms of his concept of mutuality, that is, in terms of his pioneering contribution to field theory. Her article, “From relation to the field: Modes of unconscious fantasy elaboration,” is also very stimulating in terms of her comparative analysis of relational and field theories, which she formulates in the light of a clinical vignette. Finding herself subscribing to both visions at different times, the author justifies her position by invoking a concept of unconscious as “potentially multiple,” that is, of unconscious fantasies as not existing separate from the moment in which they are formed and

中文翻译：

---

Sándor Ferenczi 和当代精神分析：第 13 届国际 Sándor Ferenczi 会议论文选集，佛罗伦萨，2018 年 5 月

2018 年 5 月 3 日至 6 日，由 Carlo Bonomi 主持的国际 Sándor Ferenczi Network 组织了第 13 届国际 Sándor Ferenczi 会议，会议的主题是“我们时代的 Ferenczi——精神分析的复兴”。这发生在佛罗伦萨的 Convitto La Calza，离皮蒂宫不远，在镇的“奥尔特拉诺”部分。来自 20 多个国家的约 350 名同事在这里度过了四天非常紧张的工作和相互了解。第一届 Sándo Ferenczi 会议于 1991 年在纽约市举行，受到 Stephen Mitchell 的启发，由 Lew Aron（1952-2019）和 Adrienne Harris 组织，他们是 1993 年卷“Sándor Ferenczi 的遗产”的编辑。在本期刊的第 4/1998 期中，Carlo Bonomi 编辑了在马德里举行的第四次会议上发表的论文选集（Bonomi，1998 年）。在 Issue 1–2/2004 中，Franco Borgogno 编辑了 2002 年在都灵举行的第七届会议上发表的最佳论文（Borgogno，2004）。在第 1/2014 期，Carlo Bonomi 和 Franco Borgogno 编辑了 2012 年在布达佩斯举行的第 11 届会议上发表的论文集（Bonomi & Borgogno，2014 年）。第 12 届会议于 2015 年在多伦多举行，下一次会议将于 2021 年 5 月在圣保罗举行。 最后但并非最不重要的是，佛罗伦萨会议的第一批论文发表在美国精神分析杂志的第 4/2018 期（科力达，2018 年）。在本期第一篇文章“重新审视弗洛伊德-费伦齐通信”中，恩斯特·法尔泽德和伊娃·埃尔哈特（他的女儿，人类学家）回顾了费伦齐和弗洛伊德在 1908 年 2 月至 1933 年 5 月之间交换的 1246 封信，其中提出了一些最有趣的，费伦齐和弗洛伊德试图通过这些重要而戏剧性的表述来相互理解并创造可能是精神分析史上最迷人的关系。作者最终同意 Peter Lomas 对 Ferenczi 的勇气感到惊讶，这种美德也体现了 Ernst Falzeder 的独特贡献，使精神分析史不仅成为一个科学领域（Falzeder，2015），而且成为一项新的有利可图的专业活动。Ferenczi 写给弗洛伊德的信也构成了本期第二篇文章的基础，“Ferenczi 和弗洛伊德——从作为‘专业和个人家园’的精神分析到为患者创造一个‘精神分析之家’”，作者 Marco Conci。从 Ferenczi 的信件中，可以记录下他如何通过与弗洛伊德的关系，Ferenczi 找到了那种“专业和个人之家”，这使他以后可以为患者提供他们需要的“精神分析之家”。从这个角度来看，他的临床日记也是出于他希望保持与弗洛伊德对话的动力，而弗洛伊德在他的生活和工作中发挥了至关重要的作用。在爱尔兰同事 Fergal Brady 撰写的文章“猴子拼图男孩的分析摘录”中，该杂志的编辑委员会也能够找到与 Ferenczi 的工作和遗产相同的勇气和独创性，这使得提交人与一位在孩提时遭受过性虐待的艺术家进行建设性的合作，该艺术家能够通过他的艺术作品在精神上幸存下来。通过 Brady 与 Carlo Bonomi 工作的患者的多次阅读和讨论（Bonomi，2015，2018），更广泛的 Ferenczi 社区也成为分析故事的一部分。波士顿的同事 Andrea Celenza 将 Ferenczi 置于我们当代分析辩论的中心，根据他的相互性概念重新审视他的遗产，即他对场论的开创性贡献。她的文章“从与领域的关系：无意识幻想阐述的模式”在她对关系理论和领域理论的比较分析方面也非常令人兴奋，她根据临床小插曲进行阐述。作者发现自己在不同的时间都认同这两种愿景，因此通过将无意识的概念称为“潜在多重”的概念来证明自己的立场，也就是说，无意识的幻想与它们形成和存在的时刻是分开存在的。