and Zimbardo (1973) stated that "the dispositional hypothesis has been embraced by the proponents of the prison status quo (blaming conditions on the evil in the prisoners), as well as by its critics (attributing the evil to guards and staff with their evil motives and deficient personality structures) [p. 71]." This statement, although not quite unfounded, tends to overlook a considerable body of literature in the sociological tradition.

The choice of a particular language for the conduct of analysis becomes an important theoretical and clinical question when both the analyst and the analysand are multilingual and share the same languages. Shift from one language into another language during analysis is an equally important question. This paper offers an analysis of the flight into a second language by both the analysand and the analyst within the transference-countertransference matrix. The focus of the discussion is the communicative nature of the mother tongue vis-à-vis a second language. The author argues that unconscious fantasies and memories of early childhood experiences are built into the mother tongue and are brought to life in the analytic dialogue by way of that language. Shift into a second language is viewed as primarily defensive in nature. It is, however, noted that a second language may at times provide the only space where the analyst can meet the patient out of each of certain personal and cultural ghosts. Finally, since the mother tongue is viewed as the preverbal register of the transitional space, it is suggested that the working through of preoedipal issues be ultimately carried out in that language.

There is rarely an introductory text in sociology that does not begin with C. Wright Mills’s (1967)distinction between personal troubles and structural or public issues. To lack sociological imagination is to confuse between these two levels of analysis in trying to explain public issues in terms of personal troubles, or history in terms of the individual’s biography. “Troubles occur within the character of the individual and within the range of his immediate relations with others; Issues have to do with matters that transcend these local environments of the individual and the range of his inner life” (Mills, 1967:8). Issues are generated in response to the dynamics of the social system and unfold within the larger structural and historical contexts where the character of the individual takes shape. Yet, the most popular explanation of the contemporary financial crisis with its disastrous social and economic consequences is personal greed. It is the greedy investment bankers, corrupt politicians, and unscrupulous lobbyists who are to take the brunt of the current economic meltdown in the United States. A few bad apples on Wall Street have created havoc on Main Street. Here, one may argue that greed that—if not kept in check—which seems to afflict almost everyone, transcending social class and status boundaries, may be a public issue—a structural problem—rather than a problem within the character of the individual. Not to be greedy within the contemporary social and economic system may be considered pathological, an instance of personal trouble.