The publication of the diary of Anna G. has provided a new resource for the examination of the course of a psychoanalytic cure with Freud. The way in which Freud handled the (counter)transference and its effect on the femininity of his analysand is examined by analysing the diary as a form of free association. This method will allow us avoid the pitfalls of most other commentators. A slip of the tongue of the analysand (concerning Schnitzler’s Die Hirtenflöte) seems to hold the key to the transference in this cure.
Starting from the viewpoint that Art Brut cannot be differentiated from professional art on the basis of an analysis of either its style or its content, the author questions the nature of the creative process in Art Brut, with reference to his observation of a psychotic artist and to the work of Jean Oury on Creation and Schizophrenia (1989). It is argued that in Art Brut there are three main elements: (i) the need to create which manifests itself as an attempt to cure; (ii) a characteristic attempt to communicate or to install a social bond; and (iii) endless repetition. However, while these elements may be particularly explicit in Art Brut and therefore suggest an interesting perspective for the study of the creative process in general, it is concluded that they do not in themselves constitute a set of distinctive criteria with which to differentiate “Art Brut” from professional art.
In this case study, the author illustrates important elements of the treatment of actual neurosis: 1. (Re-) Installation of the primary relation between the subject and the Other; 2. Symbolisation of the manifestations of the real of the drive; 3. Secondary elaboration and signification; and 4. Subject amplification.