My first trainee: reading unconscious and going back to the source:  The story of David on West End Lane and

 I

• Disclosure statement: The below account is a real example of study - David exists - location had been changed to preserve patient's anonymous status and confidentiality of "third" in the room.

Almost nine years ago I was invited to a private premiere of David Cronenberg's film about Spielrein, Jung and Freud “A Dangerous Method” hosted by the Confederation for Analytical Psychology, followed by a conference discussion with renowned writers such as Lisa Appignanesi.(https://www.andrewsamuels.com/a-dangerous-method-private-showing-and-conference-discussion/) Appignanesi was known to me from five years prior and by reading her books and attending live conference discussions i.e.Freud’s Women.The private screening and conference were offered as the fourth Andrew Samuels lecture. (http://www.ruthwilliams.org.uk/conference_flyer.pdf). That event remained an important reference to a discussion on meanings of therapeutic relationship as a “third” in a room. Analyses proposed during that conference came back to me almost unequivocally when I was asked to participate in all trainings since, but it also helped in rethinking all past contributions to readings of Klein (Melanie)  and how futile a possible dynamic comes into a block when two analysts (think) they speak same (analytic ) language and how that then can be modelled into a different modality of conversing.

David, my first trainee psychoanalytic study is by far (or rather) the best example of such an overcoming block. I have envisaged such a possibility a decade earlier and it cumulated with writings on how a split between Freud and Jung happened  and clear (mis) understandings on how  a "spiritual" X are unaccounted: here* and now* become the only norm of time orientation*. It has long being clear to me that unconscious road can be recreated  beyond a memory lane - it is sufficient one to account for A.I. possibilities, and  if that is deemed insufficient than - Counting strategy comes into the fore to predict a fact known* from a fact* predictable. Chess 8is one best example - predictability is key but chess moves are successful only when the unpredictable plays an unimaginable moves ahead and simultaneously accounts for several developed contingency plans at once - photographic memory is KEY. not for recall but for trials of building future blocks.  - That is one identified difference between chess and psychoanalysis - chess plays ahead - always, it also gives moves ideas to opponents to lay beliefs that things have, are and will develop a certain way. Psychoanalysis reads in the past - negotiates - successfully =- I would like to think that my therapy does both.

David was a good cause, he created a play without a dynamic possible and I am certain that David will never play chess, but it proved to be the best study ever allowing for the understanding in the rift caused between Freud and Jung and more importantly why Klein had such a hard time when moving to London earlier in her career. 

References: Klein, M.(1967) notes and letters