для контексту (http://www.essex.ac.uk/centres/psycho/staff/Klein%20Early%20Repression%20Final.pdf): See for instance Aguayo’s (2000) account of the patronage offered Klein by Ernest Jones and the British Psychoanalytical Society. He contrasts that with the remarkable antagonism to Klein’s work in Vienna and Berlin from 1925 onwards. The need in Vienna, he speculated, was to find a loyal enough successor to Freud once the diagnosis of his cancer in 1923 had been made. What is less clearly enunciated is why Jones should have offered such a degree of professional (and personal) patronage, in direct conflict with Freud and continental psychoanalysts. One possibility (Hinshelwood 1997) is that Jones’ complex character needed an acolyte to enact his own independence of thought whilst he could simultaneously indulge his almost abject loyalty to Freud.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: :)
Date: 2008-12-31 03:02 pm (UTC)для контексту (http://www.essex.ac.uk/centres/psycho/staff/Klein%20Early%20Repression%20Final.pdf): See for instance Aguayo’s (2000) account of the patronage offered Klein by Ernest Jones and the British Psychoanalytical Society. He contrasts that with the remarkable antagonism to Klein’s work in Vienna and Berlin from 1925 onwards. The need in Vienna, he speculated, was to find a loyal enough successor to Freud once the diagnosis of his cancer in 1923 had been made. What is less clearly enunciated is why Jones should have offered such a degree of professional (and personal) patronage, in direct conflict with Freud and continental psychoanalysts. One possibility (Hinshelwood 1997) is that Jones’ complex character needed an acolyte to enact his own independence of thought whilst he could simultaneously indulge his almost abject loyalty to Freud.