Reviews

Mas Alla de Freud by Stephen A. Mitchell, Margaret J. Black

Only show reviews with written explanations

javorstein's review against another edition

5.0

A phenomenal overview of post-Freudian thought in the last hundred years. Mitchell and Black clearly portray the precise theoretical developments and disagreements central to each school of thought (interpersonal, Lacanian, self, ego, relational, object relations, etc.) as well as, in the two chapters on controversies in theory and technique, the most important questions in psychoanalysis today. Highly recommended for anyone looking to gain a broader understanding of the intellectual history of psychoanalysis and the problems each school focuses on and seeks to address.

mark_lm's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

This is an unusually lucid discussion of Freud and various subsequent variations of psychoanalysis up until about 1995. The jargon may get you down, but I think this has been handled about as clearly as possible. The various theories are presented in the classical fashion with an associated case history.
[There is no discussion of attempted measures of efficacy, controlled studies, or similar possible impediments to these creations, but there is plenty of literature on that (or its absence) in the last few decades.]

paulataua's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

I wanted a fairly accessible refresher on psychoanalytic thought before tackling Jacques Lacan and this book gave me everything I wanted and more. It did a fairly good job of starting with the early Freud , moving through the ego psychologists, the object relations school, psychologies of identity, contemporary revisionists, and ended with a short piece on Lacan. I feel a little braver about the journey to come thanks to this.

cavernism's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging informative slow-paced

2.75

Very dense and difficult to parse out. Explaining these concepts and theoretical approaches doesn't need to be this opaque!

seaya's review against another edition

Go to review page

1.0

It seems very interesting to me that a lot of people have called this book quite 'accessible', personally I though it was almost unreadable. 'Did not like it' is quite an understatement. Most of the descriptions are very abstract and it seems to me that the writer had trouble organizing the content into a coherent whole, for me it lacks structure and clarity. I had no trouble at all putting it down, on the contrary, it was a struggle every time to pick it up again. I don't experience this often when reading. Additionally, most of my classmates had the same opinion about the book. Therefore I was really surprised that most GoodReads reviews were so positive.