Abstract
The author suggests that, although Donald Winnicott presented some important criticisms of Melanie Klein’s work, at times he tried to advance his perspectives too definitively without adequately considering her own. Because of this, he failed to acknowledge sufficiently that he was offering a model of human nature and development that could be revised. The fact that his differences with Klein arose in the context of a complex relationship in which each played numerous roles for the other, especially in the context of their affiliation with the British Psychoanalytical Society, periodically made it difficult for him to present his ideas more carefully and in his more characteristically open manner.
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
