In a message dated 3/22/97 2:20:35 PM, David Mittelman wrote:

>
>I joined this forum about one week ago.  So forgive me if I don't understand
>Dr. Gillett's concerns about the members' "avoidance" of discussing
>psychoanalysis.
>It has been my impression that this is exactly what we have been
discussing--
>through clinical vignettes, references to readings, etc.  I'd appreciate it
>if Dr. Gillett or someone else could clarify this, in order to put his
recent
>posting into context.
>
>Thank you.
>
>David Mittelman

Here's some context from my point of view-- Dr. Gillette has been making
postings of this sort for quite some time.

 He frequently interprets the responses of some of his critics as
fearfulness, intolerance, ignorance, or plain bad faith.  He attacks The
Analytic Establishment for either ignoring him or failing to give what he
considers adequate attention to his ideas, even though he has published in
reputable journals.

 I get the feeling he's not happy with the amount of impact on analytic though
t he believes he's having, and can't quite get what people are talking about
when we get tired of his reiterations that we are being intellectually
dishonest or cowardly if we ignore him or fail to engage him in protracted
debate.

He has, incidentally, received some very  thoughtful  and not unsympathtic
responses in this forum from some of us,  but these responses  have not
seemed to alter his sense of how things are, and he continues to accuse and
complain that lively discussion and debate are not general in the analytic
community.

His postings are posted, nonetheless, and he continues to be responded to
despite his criticisms. Or perhaps because of them.

In which case, he must be, Sysyphus-like, a happy man.


best of luck to us all--

John Buksbazen