No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Commentary on Reisner's "Reclaiming the Metapsychology" Reisner's (1991) article and Holt's (1992) commentary promulgate serious misunderstandings of the place of relational considerations both in the Freudian corpus and in the writings of second-and third-generation theorists. Specifically, the contention that ego psychologists narrowed and systematized a rendition of Freud as a drive theorist for whom endogenous, biological, nonpsychological force is central and relational dynamics are peripheral is challenged. The contributions of these theorists are highlighted and compared with Reisner's and Holt's contentions. Reisner's (1991) article "Reclaiming the Metapsychology: Classical Revisionism, Seduction, and the Self in Freudian Psychoanalysis" and Holt's (1992) commentary on it provide us with an opportunity to consider some prevalent views about contemporary psychoanalytic theory, theoretical diversity, and Freud's theoretical legacy, often referred to as his metapsychology. It is our contention that both Reisner and Holt have mounted a critique of what they consider the orthodox or classical Freudian position which is primarily politi-Requests for reprints should be sent to Janet Lee Bachant, PhD,