Abstract
This paper presents a re‐evaluation of Kris's personal myth. The notion has been used rather sparingly despite the Delphi Symposium in 1984 on the question of its clinical usefulness. After framing the notion of myth, some difficulties related to the question are identified. A clinical vignette exemplifies some of the ambiguities in its definition but stresses its clinical relevance. A discussion expands on these situations so as to propose three various aspects of personal myths to account for the two variants identified by Kris. The actualization of the underlying fantasy in the character organization is a third form and the technical aspect associated with it is reviewed from a new perspective. The family romance is revisited to reassess its role as the basis of the personal myth in the face of studies favouring an earlier development of the myth.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
