Home     Тест   Новинки   Пособия  Читальный зал  

 

Карта сайта

Об авторе
Издателю
Интернет-ресурсы

 Фройд

Словарь 

психоаналитических

терминов

Последователи

Россия

Russia by Alexander M. Etkind

The Reception of Psychoanalysis in Russia until the Perestroika

(Kutter P., ed.) Psychoanalysis international: a guide to psychoanalysis throughout the world. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, v. 2, 1995. - ().

Russian psychoanalysis has an interesting and highly documented history. Jack Marti (1976) was the first who tried to describe it; the value of his evidence is still highly due to his unique emigrant sources. H. Lobner and V. Levitin (1978), J. -M. Palmier (1982), E. Roudinesco (1986), I. Maximov (1983), A. Mikhalevitch (1989), M. Ljunggren (1989), M. Miller (1985, 1990), A. u. B. Pružinini (1991) described the general sequence of events. A. Carotenuto (1982) discovered extremely important archive data on the life and love of the distinguished Russian psychoanalyst S. Spielrein. J. L. Rice (1982) presented an analysis of the Russian stereotypes that were held by the founders of psychoanalysis. I. Manson (1991) described the Russian translations of Freud. In my recent book (1993) the history of Russian psychoanalysis is shown against the background of Russian intellectual life from the beginning of the 20th century to the Stalin era. Nevertheless this piece of history is far from being understood completely. Senior historians of Russian psychology both inside and outside the country still ignore Russian psychoanalysis.

Indeed, crucial problems of its history are still unclear. Among them are the biographies of leading figures and even the dates of the organization of Russian psychoanalytic institutions; the fate of S. Spielrein after her return to Russia; the nature of the Bolshevik support of psychoanalysis with visible easiness and profound distortions. The sources of archive and interview data becoming recently available both in the East and West might help to give new answers to these questions (Etkind, 1991).

The early history of psychoanalysis is full of Russian connections. Several major figures in the international history of psychoanalysis were of Russian origin. Lou Andreas-Salome, Sabina Spielrein and Max Eitingon were among them. Russian politics and culture were an important subject to everybody in this circle. For example, according to Jones, Freud imported the psychoanalytical concept of censorship from Russian political life (Jones, vol. 1, 403). "Even those Russians who are not neurotics are deeply ambivalent", wrote Freud to A. Zweig (S. Freud / A. Zweig, Correspondence. New York, 1988 ., . 55). The intensive and rather ambivalent attitude can be seen in Freud's own reactions to those Russians who interested him - "The Wolf Man" Sergey Pankeev (Gardiner, 1989), Sabina Spielrein, Dostoyevsky. In the same letter to Zweig Freud said that Russians seem closer to the Unconscious than Western people. If it is so it explains the relatively quick reception of psychoanalysis in pre-revolutionary Russia.

The early recognition of psychoanalysis in Russia was fully recognized by Freud. In 1912 he wrote to Jung with some irony: "In Russia (Odessa) there seems to be a local epidemic of psychoanalysis". In his "History of the Psychoanalytical Movement" he gave the following account of the Russian events: "In Russia, psychoanalysis has become generally known and has spread widely." Freud added that a "really penetrating comprehension" has not yet been achieved there; Russia in 1914 was the European country with the highest popularity of psychoanalysis as esteemed by Freud.

There are many indications of the natural affinity between Freud's circle and Russian intellectuals. Even in Paris Freud found the Russian milieu. His best friend at the time of his fellowship with Charcot was the Russian psychiatrist Darkshevich, the future doctor of Lenin (Letters of S. Freud. Ed. E. L. Freud. New York I960,177). Charcot himself was concerned with his patients from the Tsar family. Freud dreamed of curing Nicholas II. of his obsessional neuroses and of financing the psychoanalytical congresses with the Tsar's fees (Ibid, 338) - a plan that reminds us of Charcot's successes, the Odessa venture of Jacob Freud and also the profitable years of the Wolf Man's treatment. According to Jones (vol. 2, 14), a major part of Freud's patients in the first decades of his practice were from Russia and other East European countries.

Freud and his early followers lived in an environment full of Russian political and economic influences. In fact, many of the Russian acquaintances of Freud were of Jewish origin. Only one generation separated both Russian and Austrian Jews from their common Yiddish-speaking ancestors. Their cultural space covered all Eastern Europe. Two empires, the Russian and Austro-Hungarian, divided this space by military borders. Freud's mother spent several years in Odessa; Freud's father began his business there and failed (Jones, vol. 1, 3). Freud's sons fought against Russia in the battles of the war. Freud's disciples went there to spread his teachings.

Around 1910 he received several Russian visitors. In 1909 Nicolai Bazhenov (leader of the psychiatric reforms in Russia and founder of the influential free-masonic lodge in Moscow sent him a patient. In the same year, Eitingon organized the first Russian translations of Freud's books. Freud's fame in Russia came very fast. His fame could be compared, as some authors say, only with the Russian popularity of Nietzsche in the previous decade.

Nicolai Ossipov remembered that he read Freud from 1907 and "then was the first to popularize Freud in Russia". His correspondence with Freud began in 1910. Ossipov worked in the clinic of V. P. Serbski, a respected psychiatrist with a mild professional approach and leftist political beliefs. With several members of this clinic Ossipov founded a seminar which was psychoanalytically oriented. In 1910 Ossipov and N. Virubov founded a special journal Psychotherapy which published original psychoanalytical articles and translations and was published from 1910 to 1914 in Moscow. Ossipov emigrated in 1921 and started psychoanalytical practice and teaching in Prague.

Tatiana Rosenthal, another pioneer of Russian psychoanalysis, began as an activist in political strikes of 1905. She graduated in Zurich and came back to Petersburg. There she worked under V. Bechterev with children and wrote on psychoanalysis. She committed suicide in the same year, when Ossipov emigrated (Psychoanalysis in Russia. Int. J. of Psychoanal. 3 (1922), 513-520).

Freud had the highest opinion of another Russian psychoanalyst, Moishe Wuiff, whom he specially mentioned in his History as the "only trained psychoanalyst" in Russia. A Psychiatrist with German education, Wuiff was analytically trained by K. Abraham. In 1909 he was expelled from the Berlin clinic for his analytical approach. Wuiff decided to go back to Russia. When Jones later described this story he commented that in those years Russia was more liberal in these questions than Germany (vol. 2, 166). Wuiff was instrumental in introducing psychoanalysis in Russia. He published several translations and must be credited for developing Russian psychoanalytical terminology. From 1924 to his emigration in 1927 he was the President of the Russian Psychoanalytical Society. Then he worked in Germany and, after his second political emigration, in Palestine.

Leonid Droznes from Odessa called Freud in 1911 to inform him that Ossipov, Virubov and other Western historians took it as the date of the foundation of the Russian Psychoanalytical Society (Jones, vol. 2, 286). I found no confirmation of this fact in the Russian press or archives. History was more complicated. In September, 1911, the First Congress of the Russian Union of Psychiatrists and Neurologists was held. Bazhenov was elected to be the President of the Union, Virubov became the Union's Secretary, Ossipov was his deputy. The last two perceived themselves as professional psychoanalysts, the first was sympathetic to analysis. Instead of organizing the closed psychoanalytical "sect" like in other European countries after the Nurnberg Congress, Russian psychoanalysts become dominant among professionals in mental health.

Institutional psychiatry was not the major enemy of psychoanalysis in the Russian pre-revolutionary field. Psychiatry was in a deep crisis and looking for new ways itself (Brown, 1990). The major enemy was hypnosis. It was traditionally known in Russia and had there many influential adherents. Even Rasputin, according to police accounts, took formal lessons from one of the Petersburg "magnetizers". Hypnosis was the only method of psychotherapy that survived in the Soviet realm. It is clear that the problems of power, submission and freedom had dominant significance for Russian psychoanalysts. Those who belonged to the Moscow circle of Ossipov (M. Asatiani, N. Dobvnia) had personal contacts with Jung. His teaching was close to emigré Russian philosophers and philologists with mystical orientations, like Viacheslav Ivanov. But in medical circles Adlerian ideas become far more popular. It was especially clear in the influential journal Psychotherapy, edited by Virubov. Adler's wife, Raisa Epstein-Adler, a Russian Jew with radical-socialist views, systematically wrote in Russian on the Viennese events in Moscow Psychotherapy. Several authors of this journal, like Aron Zalkind, explicitly took Adlerian positions and terminology. In one of his articles of 1913, Zalkind wrote that psychoanalysis had much better positions in Russia than in the West.

Early popularity of psychoanalysis can be illustrated by the performance that one of the famous Russian producers, Nicolai Evreinov, put on the stage in Petersburg in 1912. Three actors played three "Is" of the same person - rational, emotional and unconscious. They woke the unconscious "I" up in the final scene of the suicide of the hero. The prologue contained the direct reference to Freud. In the last pre-War years the psychoanalytical sanatorium in Krucovo near Moscow was established and became known. Partly it was financed from the money of the late Russian writer Anton Chekov. Known people from the cultural elite were treated there.

The activity of the early Russian psychoanalysts was stopped by the War. The journal Psychotherapy, the sanatorium in Krucovo, the seminar of Serbski were closed for ever. The post-revolutionary history of Russian psychoanalysis was made in a very different style, though often by the same people. In May/June 1922 the Russian Ministry of Education officially established the Russian Psychoanalytical Society. Application documents were signed by 14 founders: four top functionaries from the Ministry of Education, four medical doctors, two professors of art, two professors of physics and two writers. As fas as we know, only three of the 14 founders had analytical practice. Ermakov was elected to be the President. The real leader of events was Otto Schmidt, astronomer, publisher and politician who was a member of several influential bodies of Bolshevik power. He was also the chief of the State Publishing House that translated many of Freud's books into Russian. His wife, Vera Schmidt, became the head of the Psychoanalytical Kindergarten, which was opened in Moscow in August, 1921.

There was another independent initiative which competed for recognition: The Kazan Psychoanalytical Circle with Alexander Luria. The young people from Kazan (Luria was 19 years old at the time) managed to outrun Moscow professors. Officially, the Russian Psychoanalytical Society applied for membership in the International Psychoanalytical Association at the 8th Congress in Berlin in 1922. Discussion at the Congress was difficult: The President Ernest Jones and another Englishman, Dougles Brian, braked the recognition of the Russian Society; Freud and Spielrein supported it (Int.J. ofPsychoanal. 4 (1923), 240 f.). The obstacle was the existence of the Kazan local group that seems to be specially supported by Jones for unknown reasons. A formal decision was postponed until the next Congress at Salzburg. Otto and Vera Schmidt traveled to Europe and explained to Freud and Abraham the difference between Kazan and Moscow. Finally, influential organizers of Soviet psychoanalysis solved the problem simply: they invited Luria with two other Kazan people to Moscow. Luria became the scientific secretary of the Russian Society. By the way, even in his 1957 volume Jones still considered the Kazan Society to be among the autonomous divisions of the IPA (Jones, vol. 3, Index).

In 1923 the same group (Schmidt, Ermakov, Luria) founded the State Psychoanalytical Institute. As a state body, it was financed directly by the Ministry of Education. The Psychoanalytic Kindergarten became a part of the Institute. Other activities were out-patient department, lectures, workshops and publications. Spielrein and Wuiff were respected members of the staff and surely aspired to keep the professional level. But young enthusiasts in the Institute and Association were more concerned with other problems. Luria and his friend Leo Vigotski, a member of the Russian Psychoanalytical Society, wrote in 1925: "Psychoanalysis attracts exceptional attention in Russia ... new original direction in psychoanalysis is coming into being before our eyes in Russia. It carries out the synthesis of Freudism and Marxism on the base of Pavlovian theory of conditional reflexes".

Comparisons between Freud and Marx were the main subject of the discussions. Heavy political involvement was continued by the new elections in the Russian Psychoanalytical Society in 1924. It gave the office of president to M. Wuiff; the vice-presidents were Ermakov and Victor Kopp, Bolshevik ambassadors in Berlin and Tokyo close to Trotsky.

The Psychoanalytical Kindergarten was financed partly by the State partly by the share in profits from Freud's publications in Russian, partly by international support from a German Trade Union. In 1923, 18 educators were busy with 12 children from 2 to 4 years old. According to the unpublished Charter of the Kindergarten written by Ermakov, "the major part of the children are children of the Party executives who give all their time to their work and are not able to rear their children (Ermakov-Archive). In fact, it was an elite institution supported by the officials to keep their children in hard times. Luria recalled orally that among these children was the son of Stalin (Vasilii, born in 1921). For parents of this kind psychoanalysis could be just an acceptable decoration.

The Kindergarten provoked rumors of sexual experimentation with children and complaints about their "non-proletarian composition". The unusual elite institution in the heart of Bolshevik Moscow was doomed. Numerous ministerial inspections checked its ideological and financial purity. The last inspection claimed that children in the Kindergarten practiced masturbation which they didn't know when living with their parents.

But all the time up to 1925 a very strong hand from the top saved the State Psychoanalytical Institute with its kindergarten. The most powerful figure who supported early Soviet psychoanalysis was Lev Trotsky. He had personal experience with psychoanalysts in his Viennese emigration in 1908. He was friendly with Adler and his wife, visited psychoanalytical meetings and left curious memoirs on this subject. In 1931 Trotsky sent his own daughter to Berlin psychoanalysts. His disciple, friend and life-long collaborator Adolph Ioffe was a patient of Adler. Once Ioffe even published in the journal Psychotherapy (1913, No. 4) a clinical case which he had analytically treated himself while doing slave labor in Siberia. Trotsky believed that "the Revolution cured Ioffe better than psychoanalysis". After 1917 Ioffe occupied the leading positions in Bolshevik's diplomacy.

In September, 1923 Trotsky, the Minister of Defense, wrote a personal letter to Ivan Pavlov, the Nobel prize winner. Trotsky recommended him to synthesize Pavlovian physiology with Freudian psychoanalysis. According to Trotsky, Pavlov and Freud looked in the same well of the human spirit: Freud looked from above, Pavlov from below, and both visions should be combined. The aim of the letter was to reinforce the ideological attempts of Moscow psychoanalysts with Pavlov's authority. Pavlov didn't respond to this appeal.

The immediate reason for the crash of the psychoanalytical movement in Bolshevik Russia was the political defeat of Trotsky. He was gradually removed from his chief positions in the Party in 1924-1927. Time limits of Soviet psychoanalysis coincide exactly with the ups and downs of Trotsky's power. When the Russian psychoanalytical institutions were founded in 1922, he was at his peak. The State Psychoanalytical Institute was closed by a governmental decision in August, 1925. The year of Trotsky's final defeat, 1927, was the year of the collapse of the Russian Psychoanalytical Society. President Wuiff emigrated; secretary Luria retired; the ex-patient Ioffe committed suicide.

Trotsky's writings of this period contain obvious reminiscences of his Viennese interests formulated in Bolshevik terms. Human nature should be reconstructed to let Bolsheviks pursue their goals. The problem was hardly foreseen by Marx, though it reminds us of the Nietzschean idea of constructing the super-man. Trotsky's project was to mobilize the best achievements of modern science for this most ambitious goal. Like others of Trotsky's projects, this one was rejected, then simplified and put into action by Stalin. The fall of Soviet psychoanalysis led to the development of paedology - the new, genuinely Bolshevik science of the "Construction of the New Mass Man". In 1926, the Psychoanalytic Society held meetings on the problems of paedology. Aron Zalkind became its official leader. An ex-psychoanalyst, he became the author of the unbelievably restrictive "The new sexual commandment of the proletariat" and infinite accusations against "bourgeois psychoanalysis" (Zalkind, 1930). Paedology had its boom around 1930; many psychoanalysts and psychologists, among them Sabina Spielrein in Rostov and Lev Vigotski in Moscow, found refuge in its immense material.

To the Bolshevik mind psychoanalysis was identical with the new, most "progressive" development of radical social thought. Rational knowledge was perceived to be able to change history, society and human nature. Everything should be conscious, planned, calculated, intellectually controlled; nothing should be spontaneous, random, unconscious. Psychoanalysis was taken for the scientific tool to achieve this aim in the application to the individual personality, like Marxism in its application to the whole society. To be sure, this interpretation of psychoanalysis distorts its basic truth. But it wasn't very unusual. W. Reich, for example, shared the same beliefs. He visited Moscow in 1928 to find them dominating (Wuiff, 1930). It was too late. In fact, totalitarian power was built on the direct violence that didn't need all these psychological subtleties.


Evidence of the political involvement of Max Eitingon is important for the understanding of Soviet psychoanalysis. Evidence published in the West on his participation in the General Miller kidnapping is controversial. Russian sources confirm that Dr. Max Eitingon was the brother (or "brother-in-law") of General Nahum Eitingon, chief of the counter-intelligence of the Stalin Government until 1952. He was personally responsible for several terrorist acts in Europe in the thirties and for the Trotsky assassination in Mexico. Sandor Rado, Eitingon's assistant in the Berlin Psychoanalytical Clinic, told in his oral memoirs: "(Max) Eitingon's personal income didn't come from medical practice, which he didn't have; but came from this fur establishment they (the Eitingons) had in five countries. The Eitingons were one of the biggest fur traders. They had an establishment in Russia, one in Poland, one in England, two in Germany, one here (in the USA). The old man died and the brother-in-law of Max Eitingon ran the whole establishment [...] For a while, even under the Communist regime, they had the biggest contract with the Russians for furs" (Reminescences of S. Rado, kept in the Office of Oral History of Columbia University, p. 84).

Soviet foreign trade was under strict Bolshevik control. In the mid-twenties it was supervised personally by Trotsky. Rado also said that "(Max) Eitingon paid every nickel that was spent in the (Berlin Psychoanalytical) Institute". Taking all this into account, I can say that collaboration between Russian Bolsheviks and German psychoanalysts had some aspects that are still unknown. To leave aside the moral evaluation of the Eitingon brothers' actions, the intellectual reason that Max Eitingon had for the collaboration with the Bolsheviks was the same that was important for the Russian psychoanalysts. To be sure, Eitingon wouldn't take money from the Nazi Government.

The most symbolic figure in Russian psychoanalysis, who combined great achievements with tragic failures, was Sabina Spielrein. Her outstanding role in the early history of the psychoanalytical movement was well-known after the publication of her diaries and correspondence (Carotenuto, 1984). Treated for psychosis, she later became the lover of C. G. Jung and was an important cause of his conflict with Freud. She was the first patient to become an analyst; she originated the concept of the death instinct. She came back to Russia in 1923, and up to now any valid information on the long Soviet period of her life was absent. I collected the interviews with Spiel-rein's relatives, her nieces and her stepdaughter and found her personal file in the archive of the Bolshevik Ministery of Education. She decided to go back to Russia because of financial, professional and personal reasons. Her husband left her with her daughter long before, just before the War, and went to Russia. Her practice in Geneva didn't give her enough money. She wasn't content with her Swiss colleagues. Though at least one of her patients, Jean Piaget, had a high opinion of her (Rice, 1982).

From September, 1923 Sabina Spielrein became a staff member of the new State Psychoanalytical Institute in Moscow. She worked also in two other positions, mainly with children. Her brother, Isaac Spielrein, was an important figure in Soviet applied psychology. Her file contains her unusual response to the formal question on her satisfaction with her job;

"I work with enjoyment; I consider myself to be called for my job, born to do it". She wrote also that she was going to finish two new texts on symbolic thinking. Nothing was published in Russian under her name. Her Western publications of that time were directed towards psychological understanding of a child's speech and thinking (Spielrein, 1920). Her ideas were close to the later contribution of Piaget (J. Piaget, La psychanalyse sur rapports avec la psychologie de 1'infant. Bulletin de la SodeteA. BinetIO (1920), 18-34; 41-58), whom she left in Geneva; and the same approach was accepted then by Alexander Luna and Lev Vigotski, who collaborated with the Institute. I hypothesize that Spielrein was the common source for both these important developments in child psychology, Swiss and Russian.

Despite her enthusiasm, she didn't stay in the State Psychoanalytical Institute for long. In 1924 she left Moscow for Rostov-on-Don. We don't know the reasons for this decision. Probably the atmosphere in Moscow scientific circles was too distant from the accustomed European one. There could be equally important personal reasons. In Rostov her husband returned to her. They had a daughter born in Europe; now, in 1926, another daughter was born. In Rostov Spielrein worked partly in the psychiatric hospital, partly in the school. There are some memories that she continued her private practice. Despite all moving she kept her intensive library in German and French. In her forties she made the impression of an old, very strange, unpractical and old-fashioned woman. Her last publication in the West was dated 1933. That means that she was able to keep some communication despite all the terrors of Russian provincial life. In 1935 her brother was executed as a Trotskyist. Her father was tortured and deprived of all his property. S. Spielrein was expelled from the hospital and had pan-time employment as a school doctor. At any rate, the Bolsheviks didnt persecute her.


In 1941 Nazi troops advanced on Rostov. There were chances to evacuate. The Russian ex-wife of her husband did it and saved her daughter. Spielrein made the free-will decision to stay in Rostov. We can compare her decision with Freud's hesitant behavior in occupied Vienna. Probably she didnt believe in a word of the Bolsheviks and thought that all information on Nazi massacres was just one more piece of propaganda. Soon after the occupation she was executed with both her daughters in the crowd of Rostov Jews.

There is no information on psychoanalytical activity in Russia in the thirties. Private practice continued by the secret efforts of several personalities; but it is doubtful that this practice could do more than diagnosis. Law did not persecute soviet psychoanalysts. As far as I know, only Ermakov died in prison, but he was arrested much later, in 1940, and for a different reason. The possible explanation is the presence in Moscow in 1933-1936 of William C. Bullit, the first ambassador of the USA in the USSR, the ex-patient and co-author of Freud. It is known that Bullit tried so save some Russians from the repressions. It is known also that during his service in Moscow he kept contacts with Freud. In 1934 the Journal of the IPA published the new list of the members of the Russian Psychoanalytical Society (Int. Z. f. PsychoanaL 20 (1934), 147). The list was a fiction; it named people who had betrayed psycho-analysis long ago, and many others who were not happy to be announced as psychoanalysts. It may be that this publication was designed by Bullit and Western psychoanalysts in an attempt to save Russian colleagues by giving them international recognition.

Perception of psychoanalysis as a kind of psychic power over the individual evoked resistance of an unusual nature. It was a kind of resistance that Russian liberal intellectuals have traditionally demonstrated. Vladimir Nabokov called psychoanalysis "the totalitarian state of the sexual myth". Anna Achmatova just said to a friend that she hated Freud. Michail Bachtin claimed that any psychologist was a spy. In fact, they resisted "Freudism" along with their resistance to Communist political power, which would be genuinely omnipotent if it managed to master psychoanalysis. Despite all this, psychoanalysis survived in the minds of several creative individuals. The satirical writer Michael Zoschenko explicitly wrote on its influence and allegedly cured himself through a unique self-analysis. Sergei Eisenstein, the world-famous Russian filmmaker, was analyzed in California and kept a life-long interest in psychoanalysis.

As a result, psychoanalysis in Russia was well known but often misunderstood. It was heavily politicized, maybe more politicized than anywhere. Professional psychoanalysts in some cases supported this perception by unrealistic promises. The Bolshevik political elite misrepresented it as an instrument to remake human nature. When direct violence was proved to be the only efficient way to keep totalitarian power, the Bolshevik flirtation with psychoanalysis was finished.

Paedology was prohibited in 1936 by a special Party decision. It was replaced by the "collectivistic pedagogy" that stressed identification with the leader, obedience to the group and aggression towards outsiders. New Stalinist theories neglected any kind of traditional psychology. But in practice, the process of communist society-building was highly psychological. The construction of a new society was designed as a social-psychological process of changing human perceptions, motivations and behaviors. The usual self-description of it was the concept of ideology. Ideology was perceived as a powerful instrument that can change human behavior, influence the effectiveness of labor and even increase military efficiency. To be sure, this ideological "psychology" was quite distant from the science which the West knows by this name. It exploited such psychological phenomena as ; conformity, emotional leadership, persuasion, suggestion and role playing, I; interpersonal manipulations, group cohesiveness, deception and self-deception. It used plenty of criminal techniques less known to scientific psychology because it is impossible to reproduce them in the laboratory. Sophisticated methods of practical psychology were invented and professionally realized by semi-literate politicians, officials and investigators as the most important part of their day-to-day activities. Primitivization of power techniques under Socialism gives way to the simplest methods of psychological (and biological) domination. If politics and economics conform to the networks of personal relationships, then the laws of these relationships rule everything in social life.

Psychoanalysis was impossible under these conditions. Indeed, in the decades before and after the World War Two psychoanalysis was practically absent from the Soviet scene. The local tradition of Russian psychoanalysis was broken for ever. The only branch that kept this genuine analytical continuity survived in Czechoslovakia. The senior Russian analyst Nicolaj Ossipov with his disciple, Fedor Dosužkov, established in Prague a psychoanalytical school. Their Czech followers transmitted the unique experience of surviving under Socialist conditions.

In Russia the official position of the established state structures towards ; psychoanalysis was highly negative until the late eighties. A rude and ignorant critique of Freudism" was written by Marxist philosophers specialized in the "critique of Bourgeois ideology". Universities, academic institutions and psychiatric clinics ignored psychoanalysis both as a science and a clinical method. Among methods of clinical psychotherapy, only hypnosis survived under the decades of Communist rule. The failure of psychoanalysis and the success of hypnosis under conditions that were full of genuine magic go in parallel with similar events in Nazi Germany; both cases are important examples of the congruence of the clinical milieu with the general cultural and political atmosphere.  

 

 

 
Сайт создан в системе uCoz