SONYA RUDIKOFF
31
some sort of "underlying megalomania." Despite all of this, the
discussion is thoughtful, and there is a surprising, even admiring, view
of Reichian therapy.
As a committed Freudian psychoanalyst, Dr. Kovel finds that the
alternative therapies do not pay enough attention to the transference,
that artificial construct of attachment
to
the analyst. Instead of
usi~g
the transference, which reproduces infantile neurosis, to analyze the
unconscious, many therapists exploit transference feelings. Some
therapies dilute and defuse those powerful feelings of respect, hero–
worship, adoration or infatuation (and their negative counterparts);
other therapies may minimize the relation between patient and therap–
ist, demystify or rationalize it, eliminating the demonic baggage of
childhood feelings, the powerful force of unconscious fears and wishes.
Freudian therory posits the requirement not only of transference, but of
its analysis and dissolution, to be achieved by free association. Therap–
ies which don't dissolve the transference also tend
to
avoid the uncon–
scious, either denying its existence or abandoning the specific verbal
analysis of it in favor of somatic or emotional acting-out, or by
adopting entirely different psychologies of motive and behavior.
These matters might concern some prospective patients, but,
except for intellectuals with a disinterested knowledge of the subject,
most people have neither the skill nor the wish to explore so closely all
the various therapies extant, especially if their need for help is at all
urgent. Referrals from friends or physicians might be more significant,
so might other criteria such as convenience. After all, only in the large
urban areas or in regional medical centers is it possible to contemplate
such a range of therapies. For the rest of the population, there is really
very little choice. Furthermore, the development of counseling in
schools and universities, in industry, and the expansion of pastoral
counseling and other services have so diffused therapy throughout the
culture that only the most serious conditions now necessitate such
exploration of alternatives. Obviously there are thoughtful readers
contemplating therapy who might be genuinely interested in this
discussion, but the more intellectual among such readers would find
the discussion too personal and informal, while another sort of reader
would be impatient with the theoretical considerations and especially
with the pervasive concern about transference.
Who is the book for, then, who can benefit from it? Not explicitly
addressed, there is nevertheless a hidden audience-Dr. Kovel's psycho–
analytic colleagues-for whom this discussion might be not a guide–
book or a theoretical manifesto but a kind of
apologia pro vita sua.
The
