
The
following text is from an address Mrs Bion gave in April 1994 in
Toronto and Montreal, Canada. It was first published in The
Journal of the Melanie Klein & Object Relations Journal, Vol
13, No.1, 1995.
This is my first visit to
Canada. I know and am known by very few people in this vast
country, so we start on an equally unfamiliar footing. However, as
you and I have come together, I assume that there is someone who
is of mutual interest to us and whose name is familiar to us all.
After
recently re-reading most of Bion's writings, I found myself with
conflicting feelings about this talk. On the one hand, what can I
possibly add to what is already to be found in his collected works
and those of others who have written about him? On the other hand,
there is so much I could say on my favourite subject that
selection becomes a problem if I am not to exceed the limits set
by the clock, and thereby leave you wishing you had stayed at
home.
Before
studying the work of original thinkers in the field of human
behaviour and the human mind, it is surely valuable to know what
influences and experiences contributed to their personalities,
especially as seen through their own eyes. We are fortunate to
have a record of Bion's own impressions of his first fifty years
in The Long Week-End and All My Sins Remembered.
Less fortunately, we are left with an impression of unrelieved
gloom and of his dislike of himself. I tried, therefore, to
present a more balanced view by publishing a selection of his
letters to the family written during the following thirty years,
giving it the title, The Other Side of Genius. For those
who have not read those books, a brief biographical outline may be
the best way of setting the scene.
Wilfred
Bion was born in 1897 in Muttra in the United Provinces of
Northwest India where his father was an irrigation engineer. He
had one sister, three years his junior. At the age of eight he was
sent to school in England never to return to the India he loved.
His years
in the prep school were unhappy ones. To a child of eight it must
have seemed as though some incomprehensible and disastrous turn of
events had deprived him of parents, home and sunshine, and had
dumped him in an alien land inhabited by nasty little boys and
cursed with an even nastier climate. It was more than three years
before he saw his mother again - and then, momentarily, did not
recognise her. By the time he entered the senior school he had
adapted well, joined the 'enemy' and enjoyed the next
five years. He always said that what saved him was his large size,
physical strength and athletic ability.
He left
school in 1915, just before his eighteenth birthday, and joined
the Royal Tank Regiment in 1916. He was posted to France where he
was on active service until the end of the war. He was awarded the
DSO (Distinguished Service Order), the Légion d'Honneur
(Chevalier) and was mentioned in dispatches. The chapter on the
Battle of Cambrai in November 1917 in The History of the Royal
Tank Regiment, includes the following:
Some of the tankmen fought
on when 'dismounted'. A striking example was that of Lt.
W. R. Bion who, when his tank was knocked out, established an
advanced post in a German trench with his crew and some stray
infantry, and then climbed back on the roof of his tank with a
Lewis gun to get better aim at an opposing machine-gun. When the
Germans counter-attacked in strength he kept them at bay until his
ammunition ran out and then continued to fight with the use of an
abandoned German machine-gun, until a company of Seaforths came
up. Its commander was soon shot through the head, whereupon Bion
temporarily took over the company. He was put in for the VC
(Victoria Cross) and received the DSO.
After demobilisation at the
end of 1913, he went up to Oxford to read History at The Queen's
College. Compared with undergraduates entering university from
school, he and others were 'old' war veterans and must
have been in disturbed states of mind.
Nevertheless,
his years there remained a cherished memory all his life, not
least because he was a first- class athlete (playing rugger with
the Oxford Harlequins and captaining the water polo team). He also
remembered with gratitude conversations with Paton, the
philosopher, and regretted not having studied philosophy.
On
leaving Oxford, having disappointed his tutors by not achieving a
First Class Honours degree - due, they said, to the strain of
recent fighting) he tried school-mastering at his old school for
two years. and then embarked on medical studies at University
College Hospital in London, already knowing that he was primarily
interested in a strange, new subject called 'psychoanalysis'. He said he wisely avoided disclosing
this at his initial interview; he mentioned, instead, his athletic
successes at Oxford and, lo and behold! he was offered a place.
As with
his time at Oxford, the memories of these years from 1924 to 1930
were vivid and enduring. He was especially impressed by, and
admired, Wilfred Trotter who was not only an outstanding brain
surgeon, but also wrote Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War.
This was to prove an important influence on Bion's interest in,
and nascent theories about, group behaviour. It was first
published in 1916 when the horrors of the First World War had
already exposed the crass stupidity of leaders of nations and
armies alike.
Bion had
no copy of the book. It may have been among those he lost during
air raids over London in the early thirties and by the fifties it
was out of print. So I had not been able to read it until a few
years ago when by, by chance, I came across a copy for 20p in an
antiquarian bookshop in Oxford - a happy example of serendipity.
Trotter
makes observations which remind one strongly of Bion's later
views. He speaks of man's 'resistiveness to new ideas, his
submission to tradition and precedent'; of 'governing
power tending to pass into the hands of a class of members
insensitive to experience, closed to the entry of new ideas and
obsessed with the satisfactoriness of things as they are'; of
'our willingness to take any risk other than endure the
horrid pains of thought'. Of the war, then in its second
year, he wrote, 'Western civilisation has recently lost ten
millions of its best lives as a result of the exclusion of the
intellect from the general direction of society . . . so terrific
an object lesson has made it plain how easy it is for man . . . to
sink to the irresponsible destructiveness of the monkey'. And
twenty years later, 'man' was at it again.
After
obtaining his medical qualification Bion spent seven years in
psychotherapeutic training at the Tavistock Clinic , an experience
he regarded, in retrospect, as having been of very doubtful
benefit. In 1938 he began a training analysis with John Rickman,
but this was brought to an end by the Second World War.
He joined
the RAMC in 1940 and worked in a number of military hospitals,
trying to introduce new methods for the treatment of psychiatric
casualties. (This period is covered in detail in Eric Trist's
valuable contribution, 'Working with Bion in the 1940s: The
Group Decade', included in the book, Bion and Group
Psychotherapy.)
The
Northfield Experiment, ill-fated and short-lived, was one of the
earliest group therapy projects. He was also Senior Psychiatrist
to the WOSBs (War Office Selection Boards) set up to select
officers capable of leadership, using the way candidates dealt
with the tension arising in working groups to judge their
suitability. What he learnt from these wartime experiences formed
the foundation of his group work at the Tavistock in the years
immediately after the war, culminating in his papers published
between 1948 and 1951 in the Journal, Human Relations.
Early in
the war he married a well-known actress, Betty Jardine, who
tragically died when their daughter was born in 1945. So at the
end of the war he was left grieving, with a baby to care for, very
little money and no immediate regular income to depend on.
He
returned to the Tavistock Clinic, having written very little up to
that time (a paper entitled 'The War of Nerves', in a
collection called The Neuroses in War, published in 1940,
and 'Intra-group Tensions in Therapy', based on the
Northfield Experiment, published in 1943) but in the next five
years he had the opportunity to exercise his exceptional
abilities: he worked with many different kinds of groups, took a
major part in the whole re-organisation of the Clinic, chaired the
Planning Committee and the Executive Committee, entered into
analysis with Melanie Klein, and set up in private analytic
practice in Harley Street.
He was
also Chairman of the Medical Section of the British Psychological
Society to whom he delivered a paper, 'Psychiatry at a Time
of Crisis', in 1948. In 1950 he gave his membership paper to
the British Psychoanalytical Society, 'The Imaginary
Twin'.
So, when
we met at the Tavistock in 1951, he had already written his last
group paper and had a full-time analytic practice. It was
mid-March and we were married in early June. This sounds rather
like rushing from impulse to action without any intervening
thought: be that as it may, the partnership endured.
It was not
long before I was asked to persuade Bion to agree to the
publication of the group papers in book form. But, as he explained
in the Introduction, he was 'reluctant to do this without
changes embodying later experience'. The inclusion of the
1952 paper, 'Group Dynamics: A Re-view', went some way
towards achieving this.
Due to his
absorption in psychoanalysis, the writing of seven papers between
1952 and 1957, and his habitual lack of interest in past work, he
always preferred to concentrate on the present - Experiences in
Groups was not published until 1961. It proved to be his most
successful book in terms of copies sold. Its success surprised
him, especially as he was used to being told by reluctant
publishers in the sixties that his books sold, 'very, very
slowly'.
The demand
for it continues thirty years after its publication and forty
years since the original papers were written. I have lost count of
how many foreign editions there now are; I do know that from an
aesthetic point of view the Japanese is the most beautiful one to
look at.
Melanie
Klein was not sympathetic towards his group work; in her opinion
it was at odds with analytic work. She was suspicious of some of
his psychoanalytic theories, although she did ultimately
acknowledge their validity. Bion, on the other hand, did not
regard group work as totally divorced from that of analysis. He
wrote, in the Introduction to Experiences in Groups:
I
am impressed, as a practising psychoanalyst, by the fact that the
psychoanalytic approach, through the individual, and the approach
these papers describe. through the group, are dealing with
different facets of the same phenomena. The two methods provide
the practitioner with a rudimentary binocular vision.
He was convinced:
of
the central importance of the Kleinian themes of projective
identification and the interplay between the paranoid-schizoid
positions. Without the aid of these two sets of theories I doubt
the possibility of any advance in the study of group phenomena.
Some of what he says in that
Introduction was prompted by the frequent question, 'Why did you
give up group work?'
He was
already engrossed in the practice of analysis while taking groups
but ultimately realised that, for him at any rate, to practice
both methods in parallel , so to speak, would not be beneficial to
the group, the individual or the analyst.
In the
light of his increasing experience and changing views in his
practice of analysis, the papers of the fifties were published in
1967 as Second Thoughts with his commentary, a critique, to
accompany them. His continuing work with psychotics formed the
foundation of the four books of the sixties - Learning from
Experience, Elements of Psychoanalysis, Transformations,
and Attention and Interpretation. The formidable difficulties
involved in the analysis of such patients is clearly revealed in
his occasional writings both before, during and after the
production of those books: they show in detail the evolution of
his ideas and theories. They were published in 1991 under the
title, Cogitations, the name Bion gave them. They clarify
many of the obscurities in the books; in my opinion he pruned away
too much of the enormous amount of preparatory work that went into
the final product, leaving extremely concentrated faits accomplis
and earning for himself the reputation of being, at best,
difficult to understand, and, at worst, incomprehensible and
crazy.
André
Green wrote in a detailed and valuable review of Cogitations.
'Compared with Bion's published works, the Cogitations are
thrilling to read and often less difficult to assimilate, because
the author's formulations are less condensed and because he makes
us witnesses to the process of the unfolding of his thought. We
literally follow him.'
He often
talked to me about his feelings of being totally in the dark,
unable to make any headway towards fathoming a patient's
behaviour. There were infrequent occasions when he felt he had a
glimpse of understanding, only to fall back almost immediately
into doubts about the possibility of any effective treatment. He
would say, 'I'm in the wrong job', or, 'It's beyond
me', or, 'I can't make head or tail of it.' He
would sometimes emerge from his study, where he had been deep in
thought, struggling with these seemingly intractable problems,
looking pale and what I can only describe as 'absented'.
It was alarming until I realised that he had been digging so deep
into the nature of the psychotic mind that he had become
'at-one' with the patient's experience. Very rarely, he
was elated by a sudden flash of understanding; I remember him
exclaiming, 'I must be a bloody genius.' But he would
soon after decide that it had been a 'blinding flash of the
obvious'.
As an
administrator he was an outstanding influence; he could pinpoint
the crux of a problem and keep discussion 'on track' in
committee. With his acute mental vision and unerring instinct he
never allowed the trees to obscure his sight of the wood. Time
wasting was anathema to him: his heart would sink if, having
completed a meeting's agenda, someone said, 'I would just like to
raise the question of. . .'
Arriving
back late, he would exclaim to me, 'Have they no homes to go to!'
He never
sought positions of responsibility - they were thrust upon him:
Director of the London Clinic of Psychoanalysis from 1956-62;
President of the British Psychoanalytical Society from 1962-65;
Chairman of the Publications Committee and the Melanie Klein
Trust; and member of the Training Committee from 1966-68. In spite
of his deep dislike of evening meetings - two or three a week at
the end of an already very long day's work - he accepted these
positions as his contribution as a senior member of the Society.
Looking
back, it surprises me that in the midst of so much work and so
many commitments, we had any time for a private life. However,
weekends were sacrosanct times for relaxing with the family,
conversation, listening to music (our tastes were catholic but
favourites were Bach, Mozart, Haydn, Britten and Stravinsky),
reading, contemplating and writing. He once said, 'I want to be a
psychoanalyst. But I do not want that experience to make it
impossible for me to have a life worth living where I could
never go to the theatre or a picture gallery or paint or swim.'
The
children looked forward to his reading to them at bedtime; he was
their friend, talked to them as equals, was gentle and
even-tempered. I do not recall ever hearing him raise his voice in
anger, but angry he certainly could be - the look in his eyes and
a cutting remark were signs of stormy weather. He derived intense
pleasure from the children's successes, but never made them feel
diminished by their failures which he regarded philosophically as
a normal part of life. He restrained his natural anxieties to
allow them to go their own ways, although he was always ready to
offer advice, based on his own experience, which was usually given
in a light-hearted, amusing way. Parthenope recalls an episode
(included in her 1987 paper, 'Why we cannot say that we are Bionians'):
'I
was about to leave, at the ripe age of eighteen, for a long period
of study in Italy. The day before I left, my father called me into
his study, saying that he wanted to speak to me. I entered the
room; silence - he was writing and perhaps had not noticed my
presence. after a while, and without feeling at all enthusiastic
about the matter, since I expected some sort of rather oppressive
'good advice', I said, 'I'm here.'
'Oh
yes, I just want to say two things to you before you leave. First
of all, remember to go and see the contemporary paintings in
Palazzo Pitti too' (as much as to say, don't think that Italy
and Italian culture are things of the past; they are alive and
developing), 'and then this is for you when you get
lost'. 'This' was a map of Europe and Asia Minor.'
Remembering
his own medical school interview, he advised Julian, 'Be sure
not to mention any interest in psychoanalysis.' Julian has
said of him (during an interview for a 1990 article about the
Northfield Experiment and the subsequent treatment of mental
distress during the Second World War): 'It was evident to me from
an early age that my father was a man of tremendous courage and
immense compassion. Because of his degree of self-control this
was not always immediately apparent.'
When
Nicola told him that she had gained a place at Cambridge
University, he said, 'Well done.' He paused, and then,
with a mischievous smile, added. 'Pity - wrong university.'
I knew him
as a man of strong emotions who evoked equally strong feelings in
others. He was deeply moved by beauty in all its forms. He had a
wry sense of humour and an appreciation of the ridiculous; there
are many stories told of his droll remarks (some of them
apocryphal) that were impossible to anticipate and always took one
by surprise. When all is said and done, his published letters
illustrate his unique qualities more strikingly than any number of
anecdotes ever could.
During the
sixties we spent holidays in Norfolk where we had a cottage on the
North coast. Bion infected the children with a love of that area
known to him since boyhood, and had visited often during the
twenties and thirties. The bracing climate and austere landscape
were very much in tune with his temperament. We all remember
vividly the fascinating country walks, the endless supply of
beautiful churches to explore, ice-cold swims, lark song, primrose
picking - and he made it all precious with his deep fund of
knowledge and reminiscences. He particularly enjoyed painting
there; its clear air and wide skies make it a painter's paradise -
provided you can prevent the easel from being blown away by the
constant wind.
Books and
book collecting played a prominent part in our lives; conversation
at mealtimes usually led to a gradually increasing number of
reference books between the plates. He always declared that he
felt guilty about spending a great deal of money on books which,
he complained, only turn into millstones whenever they have to be
moved. Most of ours are much travelled: six thousand miles to Los
Angeles, and another six thousand back - there were, inevitably,
many more on the return journey.
Our
peripatetic years began in 1967 when Bion was invited to work for
two weeks in Los Angeles where a few analysts were interested in
the theories of Melanie Klein and hoped to persuade a
Kleinian-trained analyst to move to California to work with them.
Our
decision to uproot ourselves in January 1968 was not an easy one;
we had doubts and fears about the wisdom of such a major upheaval
and worried about leaving the family. But on the plus side it
offered Bion the possibility of freedom to work in his own
unorthodox way a freedom he felt he did not have within the Klein
group. He had for a long time experienced a sense of being, as he
expressed it, 'hedged in.'
Many of
the British psychoanalytic community were shocked and baffled; as
well as genuine regret at losing him, the reactions ranged from
surprise to the assumption that it was his way of going into
retirement, to incomprehension, to disapproval and to dire
warnings of culture shock and imminent racial bloodbaths in a land
of drug addiction and weird cults. The dangers to be faced turned
out to be of a somewhat different kind from those visualised by
the prophets in London: the likelihood of being sued by paranoid
patients; of being prevented from practising by the authorities on
the grounds of lack of American medical qualifications; of not
having a leg to stand on in a court of law as a 'resident
alien'; of actively hostile neighbours; even the possibility
of making an adequate income was in doubt for a time. These were
the serpents in that Garden of Eden where the sun shone, the
flowers bloomed all year and the swimming pool beckoned.
Change the
vertex again - as Bion might say - and I see many valuable,
long-lasting friendships, generous hospitality, wonderful art
exhibitions, thrilling orchestral concerts and recitals at the
Music Centre and UCLA. Our experiences were as diverse as the
country itself and its inhabitants. I must pay tribute here to our
many Californian friends for their help, support and invariably
stimulating company. I miss them still.
The
anxieties associated with the fundamental change in professional
status and the loss of a sense of security (probably illusory even
in one's own country but usually assumed to exist) added stresses
to the already difficult job of psychoanalysis. But from what Bion
told me and what I sensed, his work did not suffer; his courage
and characteristic reaction to a challenge were beneficial
stimulants.
A society
fed on distortions of the truth, facts spiced with phantasy, lying
by omission, the encouragement of false expectations, presents a
rocky foundation for a structure based on truth, but
psychoanalysis has to be practised in the real world, however
adverse the circumstances.
In late
1971, when we had been in California for almost four years, Bion
wrote in his cogitations, 'The relationship between myself
and my colleagues in Los Angeles could be accurately described as
almost entirely unsuccessful. They are puzzled by, and cannot
understand me - but have some respect even for what they cannot
understand. There is, if I am not mistaken, more fear than
understanding or sympathy for my thoughts, personality or ideas.
There is no question of the situation the emotional situation -
being any better anywhere else.' Nevertheless I am sure that
California provided the environment, both emotional and physical,
in which he could break free, develop further his individuality,
think what he called 'wild thoughts', give free rein to
'imaginative conjectures' - there is always the chance
that they may turn into realisations.
In the
mid-70s, the growing interest in so-called 'Kleinian'
analysis caused consternation in the 'traditional' American
Psychoanalytic Society. Bion said, in a 1976 interview,
'...American psychoanalysts think that psychoanalysis will be
undermined by sanctioning psychoanalysts who support the theories
of Melanie Klein.' He was reluctant to be drawn into this
kind of controversy, regarding it as an irrelevant waste of time.
He succeeded in preserving his independence by remaining an
'outsider'; he was not a member of any American psychoanalytic
society, institute or group.
His South
American travels began in August 1968 when he was invited to work
in Buenos Aires for two weeks. Unfortunately, I could not go with
him, so my comments are based on what he told me in letters at the
time and in conversations later, He enjoyed the experience
immensely, and repeatedly said, 'How I wish you had been
there!' He formed a sympathetic relationship with the
analytic society there, some of whom he had met previously in
London. One particularly valuable result of the visit was the
stimulus it provided for the writing, and publication in 1971, of
Introduction to the Work of Bion by Le6n Grinberg, Danío Sor and
Elizabeth Tabak de Bianchedi. A new edition has recently been
published with additional material on later works.
His next
working trip was in August 1969 to Amherst College in
Massachusetts, for a Group Relations conference. This was the
second and only other time he went without me; it was school
vacation time, and I took the children on a tour of Oregon. His
letters made clear that the usual group tensions and hostilities
made themselves felt no doubt exacerbated by the presence of the
Great Guru Bion. As he wrote to me, 'The continual 'Bion - Bion
Bion' did ultimately make me a bit angry and impatient.'
The next
two years were a time of adjustment, of building up a practice,
and of setting to work on The Dream which became the first book of
the trilogy, A Memoir of the Future. It was published in
1975, followed by The Past Presented, in 1977, and The
Dawn of Oblivion, in 1979. The three were finally published in
one volume in 1991, fulfilling a wish I had had for ten years.
This
exciting and disturbing 'magnum opus' (it is certainly a
hefty tome of almost seven hundred pages) is a fictionalised,
dramatised presentation of a lifetime's experiences, filled with a
crowd of character; voicing the many facets of his own personality
and thought, at the same time we recognize ourselves among the dramatis
personae. Had he remained in England he would certainly not
have felt able to express himself in this frank and revelatory
way. I saw the change in him and the relief he felt in throwing
off some life-long restraints. He wrote in the Epilogue: 'All
my life I have been imprisoned, frustrated, dogged by
common-sense, reason, memories, desires and - greatest bug-bear of
all - understanding and being understood. This is an attempt to
express my rebellion, to say 'Good-bye' to all that. It is my
wish, I now realise doomed to failure, to write a book unspoiled
by any tincture of common- sense, reason, etc., (see above). So
although I would write, 'Abandon Hope all ye who expect to
find any facts, scientific, aesthetic or religious in this
book', I cannot claim to have succeeded. All of these will, I
fear, be seen to have left their traces, vestiges, ghosts hidden
within these words; even sanity, like 'cheerfulness', will creep
in.'
In 1972
Bion gave three talks to the psychoanalytical society in Rome. I
hesitate to use the word, 'lecture,' because he always spoke
extempore, with no notes of any kind, declaring that he didn't
know in advance what he was going to say. In this way he achieved
an immediate contact, made all the more effective by his
commanding presence and piercing eyes.
The
invitation to visit São Paulo for two weeks in 1973 was prompted
by Frank Philips who had also left London in 1968 and is still
working in São Paulo.
Brazil,
with its repressive military government at that time, widespread
corruption and economic chaos, seemed unlikely soil in which
psychoanalysis might flourish, but adverse circumstances can
provide growth both in individuals and societies. It was an
intriguing prospect. Bion had already met some of the Brazilian
analysts in London during the fifties and sixties and had found
them receptive to his ideas and to those of Melanie Klein. They
are charming, affectionate, cultured people - a pleasure to know
and to work with.
His visit
aroused great interest and the lectures attracted large audiences.
Curiosity and unrealistic expectations were fuelled by absurd
press coverage about 'the most famous psychoanalyst in the
world', (although this was no worse than a New Yorker's
reference to him as 'the hottest thing in town'). It dismayed and
amused him, but exposure to such journalistic exaggeration is one
of the occupational hazards faced by those who, whether they like
it or not, are elevated to a kind of messianic status. As he often
remarked, it is akin to being 'loaded with honours and sunk
without a trace'. Fortunately for psychoanalysis, he
succeeded in keeping both feet firmly planted in reality.
He took
pleasure in the work and was stimulated by it. At the lectures I
sensed a marked willingness and desire to grasp his ideas, and
there was plenty of lively participation. For those unfamiliar
with his style, expectations would probably have needed
adjustment; those looking for cut and dried answers to their
questions were disappointed. He agreed with Maurice Blanchot's
statement that 'la réponse est le malheur de la
question'.
He said,
''answers' are really space-stoppers, a way of putting an end
to curiosity, especially if you believe the answer is THE
answer'. On another occasion he explained, 'When I feel a
pressure - I'd better get prepared in case you ask me some
questions - I say, 'To hell with it. I'm not going to look up this
stuff in Freud, or even in my past statement - I'll put up with
it', but of course I am asking you to put up with it too.'
And again, 'If you are looking for answers to questions. you
will not find them except through your own intuition and
understanding.' Accordingly, his replies were aimed at
clarifying the problem by approaching it by an indirect route, in
due course it became clear that the apparently irrelevant answer
had in fact illuminated the area of the question and beyond, like
a circular tour bringing the traveller back to the point of
departure but now seen with increased knowledge and experience
gathered on the journey. As Bion might have put it, 'back to a
higher point on the helix.'
The
following year, 1974, he was asked to go to Rio de Janeiro for two
weeks, followed by one week in São Paulo. He welcomed the
opportunity, although he had some misgivings about the wisdom of
going again so soon after the 1973 visit. His schedule was, as
usual, a heavy one: five evening lectures each week, and seven or
eight hours of seminars and supervisions daily. He was skilful in
pacing himself - he regarded this as highly important in any job -
he could carry a heavy load of work without any apparent falling
off in quality. He was also able, like Winston Churchill, to fall
asleep for a few minutes and wake refreshed. In this age of rapid
communication, the precedence accorded to speed - speed tests,
speed reading, snap decisions, 'quiz' contests aiming for answers
in seconds or even instantaneously - leaves less and less
opportunity for leisure, that is allowance to think or act without
hurry. Bion used to quote from Ecclesiasticus (xxxviii, 24),
'wisdom cometh to the learned man by opportunity for leisure.'
He asked,
'Is the growth of our wisdom likely to keep pace with our
intelligence? It is a matter of the greatest possible urgency
that the human animal should discover what sort of animal he is
before he has blown himself off the earth.'
In 1975,
Dr. Virginia Bicudo asked us to spend a month in Brasilia. That
year was the fifteenth anniversary of the founding of the city; to
mark the occasion, four meetings were held at the Bunti Palace to
provide a panel of discussants (including Bion) with the chance to
express their opinions, hopes and fears about this unique capital.
Apart from these meetings and three evening talks at the
University, clinical seminars and analytic sessions filled the
four weeks, five days a week. In addition to analysts from Brazil,
there were some from other parts of South America who attended the
seminars to take advantage of a month of concentrated work.
The
fourth, and last, visit to Brazil was for two weeks in 1978. Here
again, he worked in the same concentrated way: he held fifty
clinical seminars, daily consultations, and ten evening meetings.
Such a volume of work demonstrated his remarkable vigour and
stamina at the age of eighty.
There were
many other working visits between 1976 and 1979: they included
Topeka, London (four times), Rome (twice), Lyon, Paris, New York,
and Washington.
During the
seventies I undertook the task of editing his work for publication
- in addition to typing, proof-reading and corresponding with
publishers which I had already done for many years. It was obvious
that he would never have the inclination to do the job nor the
time available if he was to continue with the all-absorbing
occupation of creative thinking and writing. By that time I felt
that I knew him and his way of working and expressing himself as
well as anyone was likely to, and being present at all his talks
made it easier to recall not only what he said (if recordings were
of poor quality) but also how he said it. A tape recording tells
you only a limited amount about a speaker; it presents an editor
with the problem of how best to transfer the spoken word to the
printed page, preserving the individual style and spontaneity
while at the same time producing smooth-flowing prose. The most
difficult part of the whole job was persuading him to read the
finished product; it would have been easier to get a child to take
a dose of foul-tasting medicine. He expressed his feeling somewhat
crudely but graphically: 'I don't like examining my own vomit.'
The books
which grew out of the talks and seminars of the seventies - Brazilian
Lectures, Bion in New York and São Paulo, Four
Discussions (held in Los Angeles) and Clinical Seminars
(in Brasilia) reveal more about his convictions, his personality
and his methods than any of the earlier writings; they are an
invaluable extension of the theoretical books. They contain much
that is applicable to whatever discipline you follow: there is no
trace of jargon and he manages to discuss complex matters in
simple language that is nevertheless penetrating and filled with
wisdom.
By 1978 we
were seeing less and less of our family owing to their work
commitments; after lengthy discussions during that year and early
1979 we decided to return to England but were unwilling to sever
ties with California entirely. We sold our house and bought an
apartment, hoping to divide our time between the Western world and
Europe. Arriving in London on September 1st, Bion set to work (as
usual) while I once more went house-hunting in the Oxford area.
There were a few analysts in Oxford at that time, including Oliver
Lyth, Isabel Menzies, Donald Meltzer and Matti Harris. Bion's
arrival added a stimulus to the hope that the nucleus of a
psychoanalytic group could be formed where none existed.
Having
found a suitable house, we moved in at the beginning of October,
the container arrived from the docks, and unpacking began. I
recall the hours we spent emptying cartons of books, a tedious job
but one mixed with the pleasure of meeting 'old friends'
again.
It has
been suspected and believed that Bion wanted to return to England
because he knew that he faced imminent death, but although it
would have been natural for him to accept that at the age of
eighty-two his days were numbered, taking steps to keep a foothold
in California and agreeing to work with a group in Bombay in
January 1980, were not the actions of a dying man - unless he is
given to gross denial. Bion was, above all else, scrupulously
honest with himself and others.
He became
ill in the third week of October: myeloid leukaemia, diagnosed on
November 1st, developed with extraordinary rapidity and,
mercifully, quickly led to his death on November 8th.
I turn now
to those aspects of his work that were of major concern to him and
to which he returned time and time again in conversations with me.
I do not want to appear to be preaching what I do not practise, so
let me once make it clear that I base what I say on what I learnt
during twenty-eight years as receptor and confidante, and also
through subsequent reflection and experience during the fifteen
years since his death. I have discovered that, as with a
successful analysis, the close collaboration of a marriage makes
it possible for learning and development to continue with
increasing strength after its ending. An analyst's job is a lonely
one: even communication with colleagues cannot take the place of
contact with a close companion in whom to confide doubts,
struggles, fears and even, occasionally, the feeling that a piece
of work has been well done.
First and
foremost he placed respect for the truth without which effective
analysis becomes impossible. It is the central aim and as
essential for mental growth as food is for the body; 'without it
the mind dies of starvation.'
Bion
viewed the concept of truth in different ways: the usual, everyday
meaning; the search for truth by those engaged in music, painting,
sculpture, and so on; and the fear of knowing the truth
'which can be so powerful that doses are lethal.' And
then there is the kind of Truth that is both elusive and
unattainable. In his own personal search he constantly forged
ahead through mental complexities with an intensity which was
almost tangible, and as soon as he had overcome his
'monster', he moved on as if driven by an irresistible
force to the battle.
Experience
taught him the value of respect for the patient and for the unique
knowledge that the patient has of him or her self. No other
information about the patient, from whatever source, is of such
benefit. To quote him: 'If the analyst is prepared to listen, have
his eyes open, his ears open, his senses open, his intuition
open, it has an effect upon the patient who seems to grow.'
He
advocated the use of speculative imagination or imaginative
conjecture, without which the analyst will not be able to produce
the conditions in which the germ of a scientific idea can nourish.
At the same time he should keep it disciplined and avoid being a
prey to a state of rhapsody, that is metaphorically drugged with
optimism, pessimism or despair. In other words, be rid of memories
and desires. These interfere with the analyst's ability to focus
all attention on the 'here and now' they are
illuminations that destroy the value of the analyst's capacity for
observation, 'as a leakage of light into a camera destroys
the value of the film being exposed.' Psychoanalytic
observation is concerned neither with what has happened nor with
what is going to happen, but with what is happening. Every session
must have no history and no future - the only point of importance
in any session is the unknown.
It is hard
to know why this recommendation - to all appearances one of
obvious common sense - should have been adversely criticised and,
one suspects, wilfully misunderstood. Bion knew that it is
extremely difficult to achieve and can at first arouse fear and
anxiety in the analyst, but he also knew from experience and
perseverance, that it makes possible what he called 'at-one-ment'
with the patient. By divesting the mind of these temptations,
'the noise made by learning, training and past experience is
at a minimum.' Those who have succeeded in putting this
technique into practice have found it profoundly beneficial. I
know that it was central to Bion's own analytic method.
He
stressed the need for awareness of the dangerous nature of the
psychoanalytic experience: it is a stormy, emotional
situation for both people. The analyst, like an officer in battle,
is supposed to be sane enough to be scared while at the same time
remaining articulate and capable of translating what he is aware
of into a comprehensible communication.
The
development of his ideas associated with the impressive caesura
of physical birth occupied him for a considerable time, leading to
some intriguing suggestions about the effects of pre-natal on
post-natal life, particularly, but not exclusively, that of the
psychotic individual. Since he wrote his paper,
'Caesura', in 1975, there has been much research into
the pre-natal behaviour and responses of the human foetus. Only
two weeks ago I saw a film about experiments in foetal education
leading, so the researcher claimed, to increased intelligence and
maturation postnatally. In The Dawn of Oblivion there is a
particularly apposite conversation between Somites, Soma, Psyche,
Infancy, Childhood and Maturity.
Of the
birth of an idea he said, 'Each time somebody has a new idea, it
at once becomes a barrier, something difficult to penetrate;
instead of being liberating, it becomes imprisoning.'
He well
knew from personal experience that original thinkers face, first,
the struggle to express new concepts, and then the opposition and
hostility of those who are unwilling to suffer the turbulence
involved in making a similar effort. In New York, in 1977, he
said:
Whether it is
a group of people or an individual which is giving birth to an
idea, the pains which are associated with that experience are
extremely upsetting and disturbing, and somebody will certainly
try to put a stop to it; nobody likes pain. I should be surprised
if the phagocytes do not collect and try to gobble up this new
idea before it gets more troublesome, before it turns into a
contagion or an infection.
He regretted the
difficulties and restraints imposed by the exclusive use of verbal
communication in analysis. He was aware that, in order to
compensate, the analyst should be acutely aware of the necessity
of using all the senses to pick up messages, however faint and of
whatever kind, from the patient. He envied the poets, painters,
sculptors, composers of music, mathematicians, who can communicate
in a way that is penetrating and endures. Nevertheless he was able
to have a lasting effect on people through the way he expressed
himself verbally, and also through some indefinable non-sensuous
quality. Siegfried Sassoon wrote of his delight of knowing and
talking with Walter de la Mare,
'I
have never been in his company without a sense of heightened and
deepened perception. After talking to him, one goes away seeing
the world with rechristened eyes.' I have heard the same
thing said of Bion; sometimes a single meeting has been remembered
with gratitude for many years afterwards.
He
emphasised the importance of interpreting a silence - or what
seems to be a silence. He said, of the patient who is silent all
the time:
Restricting
ourselves to verbal intercourse won't get us far with this kind of
patient. What kind of psychoanalysis is needed to interpret the
silence? The analyst may think there is a pattern to the silence.
If he cannot respect the silence, there is no chance of making any
further progress. The analyst can be silent and listen - stop
talking so that he can have a chance to bear what is going on.
To quote
him from another occasion:
Some silences are nothing,
they are 0, zero. But sometimes that silence becomes a pregnant
one; it turns into 101 - the preceding and succeeding sounds turn
it into a valuable communication, as with rests and pauses in
music, holes and gaps in sculpture.
He drew
attention to the state of mind that the analyst has to be in
during the analytic session; the margin between being consciously
awake, able to verbalise impressions, and being asleep, is
extremely small. He found that 'being on the right wavelength
is comparatively rare and has to be experienced to be
recognised.' He told me that he also sensed this when alone
in deep thought; he would 'wake up' to find light had
been shed on a previously 'dark spot.' (Freud's words in
a letter to Lou Andreas Salomé.)
Bion found
it useful to consider the existence of a thought without a
thinker. On a tape, recorded before a visit to Rome in 1977, he
said:
If a thought
without a thinker comes along, it may be a stray thought, or it
could be a thought with the owner's name and address on it, or it
could be a wild thought. The problem is, what to do with it. Of
course, if it is wild, one might try to domesticate it. If its
owner's name and address are attached, it could be restored to its
owner, or the owner could be told that you had it and he could
collect it any time he felt inclined. Or, of course, you could
purloin it and hope either the owner would forget it, or that he
would not notice the theft, and you could keep the idea all to
yourself.
A word about the Grid: when he was working
on its construction in the early sixties, I remember that he
became very enthusiastic about its possible use as a tool for the
analyst - but not, as he pointed out, for use during the analytic
session. An unpublished paper he wrote in 1963 has recently been
brought to my attention. It is a more detailed explanation and
discussion of the Grid paper given in Los Angeles in 1971 (and
published in 1977).
He says:
'The procedures I advocate do help to keep the analyst's intuition
in training, so to speak, and do help in impressing the work of
the sessions on the memory.'
There are
those who have found it of value, and continue to do so, but he
gradually became dissatisfied with it as he realised its
shortcomings. In Rio de Janeiro in 1974 he said,
'The Grid
is a feeble attempt to produce an instrument - not a theory. I
think it is good enough to know how bad it is, how unsuitable
for the task for which I have made it. For me it is a waste of
time because it doesn't really correspond with the facts I am
likely to meet.'
As regards
the writing of patient notes, he ultimately found them useless and
irrelevant. This was, of course, his personal opinion and not
necessarily a recommendation to others. He recognised the risk in
not being able to produce detailed information about a patient as
evidence in a court of law, but was willing to take it. There was
a time when he made lengthy, detailed notes; finding them
unsatisfactory, he tried other methods, but gradually discarded
them all. He found that what might have helped to clarify his
thoughts immediately after sessions, clarified nothing at all
later.
The way in
which he 'recorded' clinical experience was by incorporating it
into his writing - a much more valuable method of 'thinking
through' the associated problems. As he says in the
introduction to Second Thoughts:
Memory is
born of, and only suited to, sensuous experience. As
psychoanalysis is concerned with experience that is not sensuous -
who supposes that anxiety has shape, colour or smell? - records
based on perception of that which is sensible are records only of
the psychoanalytically irrelevant. Therefore in any account of a
session, no matter how soon it may be made after the event or by
what means, memory should not be treated as more than
pictorialized communication of an emotional experience.
During the
late seventies he used another method of re-experiencing sessions
by drawing captioned caricatures of patients. I suspect that this
may have been as good a way as any. It is a pity that, for obvious
reasons, they cannot be published.
While on
holiday in France, six months before he died, he recorded some
thoughts on tape. Part of what he said makes a fitting conclusion
to these reminiscences of him and of our years together.
'Comparing
my own personal experience with the history of psychoanalysis, and
even the history of human thought, it does seem to be rather
ridiculous that one finds oneself in a position of being supposed
to be in that line of succession, instead of just one of the units
in it. It is still more ridiculous that one is expected to
participate in a sort of competition for precedence as to who is
top. Top of what? Where does it come in this history? Where does
psychoanalysis itself come? What is the dispute about? What is
this dispute in which one is supposed to be interested? I am
always hearing - as I always have done - that I am a Kleinian,
that I am crazy; or that I am not a Kleinian, or not a
psychoanalyst. Is it possible to be interested in that sort of
dispute? I find it very difficult to see how this could possibly
be relevant against the background of the struggle of the human
being to emerge from barbarism and a purely animal existence, to
something one could call a civilised society'.
Copyright
© 1995 Francesca Bion.

Back
to top
|