Martín-Cabré L J
Int J Psychoanal. 1997 Feb;78 ( Pt 1):105-14.
Following Balint's view that the psychoanalytic community was traumatised by the Freud-Ferenczi controversy, the author considers whether the roots of the confrontation between drive-based and object-relations theories might lie in a failure to examine this disagreement in sufficient depth. Increasing interest, as reflected in the literature, is now focusing on Ferenczi's ideas after many years of neglect due in part to Jones's 'official' account of the 'mental deterioration' of his last years. Adducing late works by both Freud and Ferenczi, the author shows that the latter amplified Freud's ideas rather than breaking with them. To Freud, who had always been concerned to stress the role of the drives in psychopathology, Ferenczi's emphasis on external trauma smacked of his own, rejected, early seduction theory, but trauma does feature prominently in Freud's discussion of interminable analyses, as does Ferenczi himself. In the author's view, a careful reading of the two men's late works reveals a conception of trauma as lying in an intersubjective space as a consequence of the meeting of drive and object. Present-day conceptions of transgenerational trauma are shown to be already present in Ferenczi. The problems in the relationship between Freud and Ferenczi and their theoretical disagreements are also considered in the light of the latter's inadequate analysis with Freud.
遵循巴林特的观点，即精神分析学界因弗洛伊德与费伦齐的争论而受到创伤，作者思考基于驱力的理论与客体关系理论之间对抗的根源是否可能在于未能充分深入地审视这一分歧。正如文献中所反映的，在多年的忽视之后，现在人们对费伦齐的思想越来越感兴趣，部分原因是琼斯对费伦齐晚年“精神衰退”的“官方”描述。作者引用了弗洛伊德和费伦齐的晚期作品，表明后者是在扩充弗洛伊德的思想，而非与之决裂。对于一直致力于强调驱力在精神病理学中作用的弗洛伊德而言，费伦齐对外部创伤的强调带有他自己被摒弃的早期诱奸理论的意味，但创伤在弗洛伊德对无休止分析的讨论中确实显著存在，费伦齐本人亦是如此。在作者看来，仔细研读两人的晚期作品会发现，创伤的概念存在于主体间空间中，是驱力与客体相遇的结果。研究表明，代际创伤的当代概念在费伦齐那里已然存在。鉴于费伦齐与弗洛伊德的分析不充分，两人关系中的问题及其理论分歧也得到了考量。
