W.R.

BION

T A M I N G WILD

THOUGHTS

Edited by
I KANCESCA Bl( )N

KARNAC BOOKS

Taming W i l d Thoughts

Wilfred Bion
Stockholm, 1963

Taming W i l d Thoughts

Wilfred R. Bion

edited by
Francesca Bion

London

KARNAC BOOKS
First published in 1997 b y
H. Karnac (Books) Ltd,
118 F i n c h l e y R o a d ,
London NW3 5HT

C o p y r i g h t © 1997 b y the Estate of W i l f r e d R. Bion

T h e rights of W i l f r e d R. Bion to be identified as the author o f this w o r k h a v e
been asserted in accordance w i t h § § 77 and 78 of the C o p y r i g h t D e s i g n and
Patents A c t 1988.
A l l rights reserved. N o part of this publication m a y b e reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or b y any means, electronic,
mechanical, p h o t o c o p y i n g , recording, or otherwise, w i t h o u t the prior written
permission of the publisher.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Bion, W i l f r e d R. (Wilfred Ruprecht), 1887-1979

T a m i n g w i l d thoughts
1. Psychoanalysis
I. Title
150.Γ95
I S B N 978-1-85575-168-2
Edited, d e s i g n e d , and p r o d u c e d b y C o m m u n i c a t i o n Crafts
Printed in Great Britain b y B P C C W h e a t o n s L t d , Exeter
1098765432
CONTENTS

FOREWORD I Parthenope Bion Talamo vii

The Grid

INTRODUCTION / Francesca Bion 3

T h e G r i d , 1963 6

Untitled
INTRODUCTION I Francesca Bion 25
28 M a y 1977 27
29 M a y 1977 39

REFERENCES 53

INDEX 55

v
FOREWORD

Parthenope Bion Talamo

T
he two u n p u b l i s h e d pieces by W. R. B i o n contained
i n this booklet h a v e several themes i n c o m m o n , a l t h o u g h
they w e r e c o m p o s e d i n different circumstances a n d at
quite a length of time f r o m each other. T h e first is a p a p e r , ' T h e
G r i d ' , w h i c h w a s g i v e n to the British P s y c h o - A n a l y t i c a l Society
o n 2 October 1963, w h i l e the second is an untitled transcript b y
F . B i o n of tape recordings m a d e i n 1977.
T h e p r i n c i p a l theme is that of the classification (and hence the
taming) of the psychoanalytic objects that b e l o n g to the d o m a i n
of ideas, as B i o n defines t h e m at the e n d of the first chapter
of Elements of Psycho-Analysis (1963), a n d the w a y s i n w h i c h they
can be u s e d . T h e short p a p e r w o u l d seem to have been written
at m u c h the same time as Elements of Psycho-Analysis and might
constitute a n early draft w h i c h later g r e w into the book. M y rea­
sons for t h i n k i n g this are based o n a fairly detailed c o m p a r i s o n
of the t w o texts. In the first place, the G r i d itself has a slight
change i n it: i n the p a p e r p r i n t e d here, C o l u m n 5 is indicated as
O e d i p u s , whereas the G r i d p r i n t e d i n Elements of Psycho-Analysis
a n d o n w a r d s has this c o l u m n labelled as Inquiry, as t h o u g h the

vii
Viii FOREWORD

author h a d d e c i d e d to opt for the m o r e general category, of w h i c h

' O e d i p u s ' is s i m p l y a special case, as the discussion of this c o l u m n
i n the b o o k shows. Secondly, if y o u try to read Elements of Psycho-
Analysis 'innocently', so to speak, as t h o u g h y o u d i d not k n o w that
the b o o k contains the first a n d m a i n detailed discussion of the
G r i d , y o u w i l l discover that Chapters 5 a n d 6 discuss the h o r i z o n ­
tal a n d then the vertical axes of the G r i d w i t h o u t m e n t i o n i n g the
w o r d ' g r i d ' for a full nine pages, a n d w h e n it is b r o u g h t i n towards
the e n d of C h a p t e r 6, the term itself is not discussed at all. It is
almost as t h o u g h a n introductory piece h a d been left out at the
b e g i n n i n g of C h a p t e r 5.1 d o not think that the p a p e r p r i n t e d here
constitutes the m i s s i n g introduction—it is far too l o n g a n d detailed
for t h a t — b u t I suspect that B i o n m a y have h a d the paper i n his
m i n d , as s o m e t h i n g 'already written', w h i l e he was p r e p a r i n g
Elements of Psycho-Analysis for the press a n d d i d not feel the n e e d
to enlarge further o n the introductory aspects i n the b o o k itself.

It w o u l d not be the first time that something of this sort

o c c u r r e d i n Bion's p u b l i s h e d writings: the passages i n Cogitations
(1994) o n alpha-elements, d r e a m - w o r k - a l p h a , a n d beta-elements
seem to come into a similar category, that of a full d i s c u s s i o n of
terms w h i c h was then left out of the text to be p u b l i s h e d — o r taken
out, p e r h a p s , as b e i n g too introspective? In any case, I think it is
fair to say that one's u n d e r s t a n d i n g of b o t h the G r i d a n d the
a b o v e m e n t i o n e d concepts is m a d e easier b y s t u d y i n g w h a t c o u l d
p e r h a p s be thought of as b e i n g the 'parings', w h i c h B i o n w h i t t l e d
a w a y f r o m his finished writings.
A s it stands, this particular paper is a m o d e l of clarity a n d
highlights some b a c k g r o u n d characteristics of Bion's thought,
w h i c h he was never to a b a n d o n . T h e most important of these
s h o w s t h r o u g h w h e n he makes explicit the fact that w h a t he says
about the patient's development of thoughts or his usage of t h e m
c a n also a p p l y to the analyst, w h o , i n a s m u c h as he is a h u m a n
b e i n g , also suffers f r o m the vagaries a n d limitations of the h u m a n
capacity for thinking a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n . I d o not m e a n that B i o n
is talking about w h a t is called countertransference, either i n the
strict sense of the term or the looser one that it generally has today,
b u t that he was w o r k i n g o n a system that w o u l d h e l p h i m to track
d o w n after a session, i n a m o m e n t of relative peace a n d quiet, w h a t
h a d h a p p e n e d d u r i n g the session. A n d the things that h a p p e n
 FOREWORD ix

d u r i n g the session i n c l u d e just as m u c h the analyst's thought p r o ­

cesses a n d the use he makes of these as it does the patient's: a n d
they b o t h n e e d scrutiny at the e n d of the session.
H o w things m o v e d a r o u n d , developed, e v o l v e d (or failed to d o
so) w a s a never-failing source of interest to B i o n , a n d I d o not think
that it is too fanciful to see a n early precursor of the G r i d i n the
description that he gives, i n Experiences in Groups (1961; i n 'Intra-
G r o u p Tensions i n T h e r a p y ' , towards the e n d of the section o n
' D i s c i p l i n e for the N e u r o t i c ' ) , of his v i s u a l i z a t i o n of ' . . . the p r o ­
jected organization of the training w i n g as if it were a f r a m e w o r k
enclosed w i t h i n transparent walls. Into this space the patient
w o u l d b e admitted at one point, a n d the activities w i t h i n that
space w o u l d be so o r g a n i z e d that he c o u l d m o v e freely i n a n y
direction a c c o r d i n g to the resultant of his conflicting i m p u l s e s . . . .
A s a result, his b e h a v i o u r c o u l d be trusted to give a fair i n d i c a t i o n
of his effective w i l l a n d aims . . .' (Bion, 1961, p p . 14-15). T h e G r i d
itself plots the e v o l u t i o n a n d use of ideas a n d not the d e v e l o p m e n t
of m e n , b u t the ' v i s u a l i z a t i o n ' b e h i n d b o t h the fantasy a n d the
G r i d is n o t substantially different i n its aims i n b o t h cases.

A n o t h e r interesting l i n k between Experiences in Groups a n d the

present p a p e r c a n b e f o u n d i n the discussion of the importance
of the circumference of the circle as a factor i n the fecundity of
thought: a brief m e n t i o n of this (Bion, 1961, p. 13) i n the earlier
b o o k , later to be p i c k e d u p again i n a cursory a n d almost j o k i n g
fashion i n Transformations (1965, p . I l l ) , receives a far m o r e d e ­
tailed treatment i n this v e r s i o n of the G r i d . There is another sense,
too, i n w h i c h Transformations seems to b e f o r e s h a d o w e d b y this
paper. It contains the discussion of the 'transformation' of the field
of p o p p i e s that becomes the starting p o i n t for the 1965 book; it also
introduces the s y m b o l s for short-hand i n d i c a t i o n of the analyst's
a n d patient's transformations.
W h y B i o n never p u b l i s h e d this paper, w h i c h has a n i m p o r t a n t
l i n k i n g function between the w o r k that preceded it a n d that w h i c h
came later, as w e l l as constituting a remarkably clear discussion of
the w h y s a n d wherefores of the G r i d itself, a n d then later, i n 1971
(Bion, 1977), p r o d u c e d another one w i t h the same title, remains a
m y s t e r y . T h e 1971 p a p e r g r e w out of a talk that he gave to the L o s
A n g e l e s Psychoanalytic Society i n A p r i l of that year a n d is u n u s u a l
i n that it contains s o m e fairly detailed clinical material. It is also
X FOREWORD

rather m o r e discursive i n style than the present paper (as are the
two transcripts that follow the latter i n this collection), a n d I think
that o n the w h o l e , although there is a certain a m o u n t of o v e r l a p ,
the two G r i d papers complement each other i n a rather interesting
fashion. T h e y might e v e n be said to make u p the two viewpoints of
a possible binocular v i s i o n (for the reader), 1963 a n d 1971, E n g l a n d
a n d C a l i f o r n i a , inception of the G r i d a n d a re-visitation of it. (With
Nachtraglichkeit? Perhaps.)
T h e two transcripts, o n the other h a n d , seem to h a v e been
i n t e n d e d as the first chapters of a book of w h i c h n o m o r e is k n o w n ;
the recordings were m a d e o n two consecutive days i n late M a y
1977, w h e n A Memoir of the Future (1991) was already finished a n d
B i o n was w o r k i n g o n his autobiography, but they are different i n
k i n d f r o m b o t h of these. In the first 'chapter', he takes u p the idea
of stray a n d w i l d thoughts a n d h o w to capture t h e m a n d intro­
duces the concept of beta-element, i n a n almost w h i m s i c a l fashion,
as a 'box' into w h i c h to p u t one sort of captured stray. T h e d i s ­
cussion that develops links u p w i t h the G r i d , as it deepens and
d e v e l o p s the notions of a l p h a - a n d beta-elements, d r e a m thought,
a n d r h y t h m i c , n o n - v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n . B i o n goes o n to s h o w
s o m e t h i n g of what he h a d i n m i n d w h e n he talks of language
achievement, as a sort of high-point of sophisticated a n d efficacious
c o m m u n i c a t i o n , a n d then returns to the p h y s i c a l level, beta­
elements, e n d i n g w i t h a discussion of archaic vestigial aspects of
the m i n d . T h e style is very discursive—conversational, almost—
a n d m i g h t be thought of as r a m b l i n g , but it is i n itself a g o o d
example of the v a l i d i t y of the 'large circumference' of a circular
argument, since the return to the theme of beta-elements towards
the e n d of the chapter is notably enriched b y all that has occurred
' o n the w a y ' . (I have often thought that Bion's concept of a circular
argument was w e l l illustrated b y the circular f o r m of Joyce's
Finnegan's Wake.)
T h e second 'chapter' takes u p the p r o b l e m of evaluation; start­
i n g again f r o m sensorial data, beta-elements, w h i c h B i o n seems to
assume i n a relaxed sort of w a y as a non-questionable ' g i v e n ' o n
w h i c h to b u i l d his architectonics of thought, he m o v e s o n to the
question of psycho-analytic s u p e r v i s i o n . Several points come u p
for discussion o n the first section, w h i c h might be h e a d e d 'specula­
tive i m a g i n a t i o n ' — a n o t h e r term for w i l d thoughts: the relevance
 FOREWORD Xi

of the past o n l y i n a s m u c h as it obtrudes o n the present; the deep

a n d p r o f o u n d respect for the patient's present, for his presence
i n the r o o m , a n d for the experience of this, w h i c h the analyst
can have if he allows himself to d o so; the noxiousness of hopes
a n d fears, tying u p w i t h m e m o r y a n d desire but f r o m a slightly
different angle; the m i n i m u m conditions necessary for analytic
w o r k to be done.
T h e second section takes u p the theme of speculative r e a s o n —
that is, the discipline that has to be a p p l i e d to the speculative
i m a g i n a t i o n — a n d is followed b y a brief sortie into w h a t B i o n calls
reconstruction, but w h i c h turns rather r a p i d l y into a short essay o n
theory l e a d i n g o n to a discussion of unconscious thought that has
never been conscious, d u b b e d the 'inaccessible state of m i n d ' .
Despite the recurrent themes i n the two pieces presented here,
their style is completely different, a n d the transcript p r o b a b l y re­
flects Bion's greater confidence i n the validity of psychoanalysis as
h e practised it, a n d consequently his o w n greater self-confidence.
O n e m i g h t say again that the transcripts represent the e n d i n g
point, coincident w i t h the b e g i n n i n g (represented b y ' T h e G r i d ' ) of
another circle w i t h a n ever w i d e r circumference, f r o m the early
formulations of a l p h a - a n d beta-elements to the later ones, w i t h all
his m a t u r i n g analytical experiences o n the w a y r o u n d .
Turin
April 1997
THE GRID

 Introduction

In 1994 D r R o s a Beatriz, f r o m R i o d e Janeiro, sent m e a c o p y of

this p a p e r , w h i c h h a d b e e n g i v e n to her b y D r H a n s T h o r n e r i n
1971, w h e n she w a s i n L o n d o n . I a m grateful to h e r for resur­
recting this piece, especially as it h a d d i s a p p e a r e d f r o m m y
r e c o r d s — a n d m y m e m o r y — a n d has not been p r e v i o u s l y p u b ­
l i s h e d , w i t h the exception of its i n c l u s i o n i n a m a g a z i n e c o n ­
taining the contributions to a w o r k s h o p h e l d i n R i o d e Janeiro
i n N o v e m b e r 1994. B i o n presented it at a scientific m e e t i n g
of the British P s y c h o - A n a l y t i c a l Society o n 2 October 1963; I
believe that a h a n d - w r i t t e n date o n the first page, 2 / 1 0 / 6 3 ,
was added b y D r Thorner.

It w a s written after the p u b l i c a t i o n of Learning from Experience

(1962b), i n w h i c h the G r i d is not m e n t i o n e d , a l t h o u g h B i o n
h a d been w o r k i n g o n the idea for s o m e time before that. W e
discussed v a r i o u s possible names for the n e w ' o f f s p r i n g ' about
w h i c h he w a s then expressing all the u s u a l enthusiasm aroused

3
4 TAMING WILD T H O U G H T S

b y a n e w i n v e n t i o n — f o l l o w e d ultimately b y the equally u s u a l

realization of its defects (see B i o n , Two Papers, 1977, p. 16).

In this 1963 paper, his a i m is to give a clear a n d detailed e x p l a ­

n a t i o n of the G r i d ' s construction a n d its uses; this h e does
a d m i r a b l y a n d does not 'digress', as he c o u l d be said to d o i n
the 1971 v e r s i o n , w h i c h is twice as l o n g . T h a t p a p e r contains
s o m e v i v i d clinical material a n d a fairly lengthy discussion of
six m y t h s ( R o w C constructs); he l a i d increasing stress o n the
importance of their use f r o m 1963 (Elements of Psycho-Analysis,
1963) o n w a r d s .

H e p r o d u c e d plenty of evidence to highlight the deficiencies of

the G r i d : T c a n say that a n early casualty i n t r y i n g to use the
G r i d is the G r i d itself.' B u t he goes o n , 'Nevertheless, its use
has m a d e it easier for m e to preserve a critical a n d yet i n f o r m a ­
tive, i l l u m i n a t i n g attitude to m y w o r k ' (Bion, 1977, p. 6). I n
1974, i n R i o d e Janeiro, he said, ' T h e G r i d is a feeble attempt to
p r o d u c e a n i n s t r u m e n t . . . . I think it is g o o d e n o u g h to k n o w
h o w b a d it is, h o w unsuitable for the task for w h i c h I h a v e
m a d e i t ' (Bion, 1974/75). A n d as late as 1977, i n N e w Y o r k , he
stated: ' A s soon as I h a d got the G r i d out of m y system I c o u l d
see h o w inadequate it is . . . the satisfaction does n o t last for
l o n g / A s k e d if it w a s difficult, he r e p l i e d , ' N o t for m e — o n l y a
waste of time because it doesn't really c o r r e s p o n d w i t h the
facts I a m likely to meet' (Bion, 1980). A l t h o u g h it w a s certainly
not his intention, these remarks were d i s c o u r a g i n g , to say the
least; o n the other h a n d , i n San P a u l o i n 1973, h e reacted w i t h
o b v i o u s interest a n d enthusiasm to a question about a possible
amplification of the G r i d (see Bion, Brazilian Lectures, 1974/75,
p p . 41-42). In reply he spoke of v i s u a l i z i n g the G r i d as repeat­
i n g itself as a helix. A g a i n i n San Paulo i n 1978, he touched o n
a n interesting extension of the G r i d (see Bion in New York and
Sao Paulo, 1980, p p . 91, 92): he i m a g i n e d it t u r n e d so that 'the
distances between the lines w o u l d become very fine' a n d called
it a G r a t i n g .

B i o n e m p h a s i z e d that the G r i d is not a theory, n o r s h o u l d it b e

u s e d d u r i n g the session, b u t it c a n be u s e d to advantage ' i n
relative isolation f r o m attack'. H e gave a w a r n i n g : ' . . . it cannot
 THE GRID 5

do h a r m , p r o v i d e d it is not allowed to intrude in the

a n a l y s t - a n a l y s a n d relationship as a theory about the patient
w h i c h is stored u p a n d then discharged like a missile i n b a t t l e /

It m a y be h e l p f u l to set out the uses to w h i c h , he b e l i e v e d , a n d

i n d e e d f o u n d t h r o u g h his o w n experience, the G r i d c o u l d be
p u t . T h e y are these:

1. to keep the analyst's intuition i n training;

2. to h e l p i n i m p r e s s i n g the w o r k of the sessions o n the

memory;

3. to increase the accuracy of observations;

4. to m a k e it easier to b r i d g e the gap between events of a n

analysis a n d their interpretation;

5. as a ' g a m e ' for psycho-analysts to set themselves exercises

as a m e t h o d of d e v e l o p i n g their capacity for intuition;

6. to h e l p i n d e v e l o p i n g a m e t h o d of written r e c o r d i n g analo­
gous to mathematical c o m m u n i c a t i o n , e v e n i n the absence of
the object;

7. as a p r e l u d e to psycho-analysis, not as a substitute for it;

8. to p r o v i d e a mental climbing-frame o n w h i c h psycho­

analysts c o u l d exercise their mental muscles;

9. as a n instrument for classifying a n d ultimately u n d e r s t a n d ­

i n g statements.

F.B.
 1963

his p a p e r is to introduce a m e t h o d I have f o u n d useful i n

t h i n k i n g about problems that arise i n the course of p s y c h o ­
analytical practice.
W e are familiar w i t h anxieties arising i n the course of treating
patients a n d of the n e e d to deal w i t h these anxieties b y b e i n g
ourselves analysed. T o d a y I a m concerned w i t h a n aspect of this
that seems to have received little or no attention, n a m e l y , w h a t
m i g h t be called reasonable anxiety that arises w h e n it is clearly
i m p o r t a n t to solve a p r o b l e m that is b y virtue of its complexity
v e r y difficult to solve. Because of our w o r k , there is a tendency
to r e g a r d s u c h anxiety as counter-transference a n d to forget that
it m a y also be p r o p e r to the search for an adequate response to a
danger. M y a p p r o a c h must not be regarded as i m p l y i n g that
there is a n y less need for the analyst's personal analysis. W h a t I
shall say s h o u l d i n fact contribute to the a p p r o a c h t h r o u g h p e r ­
s o n a l analysis.
M y subject does not belong directly to the sphere of w o r k
d o n e i n analytic situations or throw m u c h light o n h o w to r e c o r d
sessions. Yet it has a bearing o n the w o r k of the session because the
procedures I a m about to advocate d o help to keep the analyst's
intuition i n training, so to speak, a n d d o help i n i m p r e s s i n g the
w o r k of the sessions o n the m e m o r y . Later perhaps it m i g h t help i n
d e v e l o p i n g a m e t h o d of written recording analogous to that e n ­
j o y e d b y the mathematician w h o can record his findings a n d use
the record for c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d further w o r k o n his findings
e v e n i n the absence of the object.
T h e instrument that I have elaborated for this task is the G r i d
(Figure 1).
It w i l l be seen that there are two axes, one vertical m a r k e d A - H ,
the other horizontal, w h i c h is n u m b e r e d 1 , 2 , 3 , . . . to n . T h e vertical
axis is genetic a n d is d i v i d e d r o u g h l y into phases of sophistication.

6
 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... n
Defini­
tory
Hypo­ Nota­ Atten­
thesis tion tion Oedip* Action

A Al A2 A6 An
p-Elements

B Bl B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 Bn
a-Elements

C
Dream Thoughts
CI C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 Cn
Myth, Dream,
Model

D Dl D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 Dn
Pre-conception

E El E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 En
Conception

F Fl F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 Fn
Concept

G
Scientific Gl G2 G3 G4
Deductive System

H H2
Algebraic
Calculus

*Later changed to 'Inquiry'. See "The Grid', in Bion, Two Papers (1977).

FIGURE 1: T h e G r i d

7
8 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

T h e m e a n i n g is b r o a d l y indicated b y the terms I have u s e d . T h e y

are b o r r o w e d f r o m p h i l o s o p h y a n d elsewhere but m u s t not be
taken to have the m e a n i n g w i t h w h i c h they are already invested i n
their rigorous e m p l o y m e n t i n the discipline f r o m w h i c h they are
b o r r o w e d ; they m u s t be regarded as intended ultimately to h a v e a
m e a n i n g appropriate to psycho-analysis.
T h e horizontal axis relates to 'uses to w h i c h the elements i n the
7

genetic axis are put. I have annotated the n u m b e r s i n an imprecise

m a n n e r similar to that w i t h w h i c h I have u s e d terms to annotate
the vertical axis. W h e n a n element i n the vertical axis appears
to be identical w i t h that i n the horizontal axis the confusion w i l l
d i s a p p e a r if it is r e m e m b e r e d that the term i n the vertical axis is
i n t e n d e d to denote a phase i n development, whereas i n the h o r i ­
zontal axis it is intended to denote the use that is m a d e of the
element.
T h e G r i d is intended to a i d the analyst i n the categorization of
statements. It is not a theory, t h o u g h psycho-analytical theories
h a v e been u s e d to construct it, but has the status of a n instrument.
A w o r d or two is necessary to explain m y use of the t e r m 'state­
ment'.
B y 'statement' I m e a n a n y t h i n g f r o m an inarticulate grunt to
quite elaborate constructions s u c h as this p a p e r itself. A single
w o r d is a statement, a gesture or grimace is a statement; i n short it
is a n y event that is part of c o m m u n i c a t i o n between analyst a n d
a n a l y s a n d , or any personality a n d itself.
T h e horizontal axis is incomplete a n d is accordingly d i v i d e d
into c o l u m n s m a r k e d to indicate that the series is extensible.
W h e t h e r it s h o u l d be so extended, a n d if so i n what m a n n e r , is
left to be determined i n the course of its use. T h e existing c o l u m n s
h a v e been u s e d b y m e a n d I d o not think they s h o u l d be lightly
d i s c a r d e d . T h e y were d e v i s e d p r i m a r i l y w i t h w h a t I have called
a K link i n m i n d , b u t their usefulness is u n i m p a i r e d for L a n d H .
I m a y e x p l a i n that K is intended to denote the d o m a i n of learning
f r o m experience, L to denote the d o m a i n of love i n all its aspects,
a n d H the d o m a i n of hate. T h e d o m a i n s are assumed to o v e r l a p ,
despite the rigidity that the signs m a y seem to impart. T h e letters L ,
H , a n d K are to facilitate discussion i n a m a n n e r similar to that
described later w h e n I discuss a a n d p.
 THE GRID 9

T h e h o r i z o n t a l axis is intended to relate to a statement that is

constant; its m e a n i n g changes only because its use has c h a n g e d i n
accordance w i t h the c o l u m n i n w h i c h it is felt to be appropriate to
place it.
C o l u m n 1 is subtitled 'definitory hypothesis'. T h i s term, like
m a n y others I use, is not to be taken as possessing the m e a n i n g it
already has alone a n d u n m o d i f i e d . It is u s e d to indicate a n aspect
of statements that b e l o n g to, or are p l a c e d i n , that category. State­
ments to w h i c h this category is appropriate m a r k that elements
p r e v i o u s l y r e g a r d e d as unrelated are believed to be constantly
conjoined ( H u m e , Hume's Enquiries; Poincare, Science and Method)
a n d to h a v e coherence. A statement i n this c o l u m n s h o u l d be c o n ­
s i d e r e d to h a v e significance but not m e a n i n g . T h e t e r m 'cat' i n this
context indicates that the observer has become c o n v i n c e d of the
constant conjunction of, say, fur, life, eyes, a n d so o n . T h i s constant
conjunction is felt not to be s o m e p r e v i o u s constant conjunction
(Aristotle, T o p i c s , V I , 4, 141, & 26 sqq.), a n d the statement is i n ­
t e n d e d to b i n d the elements constantly conjoined a n d to define the
area w i t h i n w h i c h the conjoined elements reside; it is i n this respect
that it resembles w h a t is o r d i n a r i l y considered to be a definitory
hypothesis. F r o m the fact that the definitory statement does not
refer to a n earlier conjunction springs the objection, sometimes
m a d e , that a definition is negative. T h e b i n d i n g of a constant c o n ­
j u n c t i o n a n d the i m p l i c a t i o n of significance it carries w i t h it makes
possible the next step i n l e a r n i n g , the task of f i n d i n g out w h a t 'cat'
means.

C o l u m n 2 is to categorize the 'use' to w h i c h a statement—of

whatever k i n d it m a y be a n d h o w e v e r untrue i n the context—is p u t
w i t h the intention of p r e v e n t i n g a statement, h o w e v e r true i n the
context, that w o u l d i n v o l v e modification i n the personality a n d its
outlook. I have arbitrarily u s e d the sign \|/ to emphasize the close
relationship of this 'use' to p h e n o m e n a k n o w n to analysts as ex­
pressions of 'resistance'.
C o l u m n 3 contains the categories of statements that are u s e d to
record a fact. S u c h statements are fulfilling the function described
b y F r e u d as notation a n d m e m o r y ( F r e u d , 1911b).
C o l u m n 4 represents the 'use' described b y F r e u d , i n the same
p a p e r , as the function of attention. T h e statement 'cat' w o u l d then
10 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

be u s e d to ensure sensitiveness to a repetition of the constant c o n ­

junction. Statements p r o p e r l y regarded as appropriate to C o l u m n
4 relate to constant conjunctions that have been p r e v i o u s l y experi­
enced, a n d the 'use represented b y C o l u m n 4 categories differs i n
7

this respect f r o m the 'use' represented b y C o l u m n 1.

C o l u m n 5, particularly the gloss ' O e d i p u s ' , requires s o m e ex­
planation. In so far as it represents a 'use' similar to C o l u m n 4,
it m a y be regarded as redundant. I a m loth to d i s c a r d it, partly
because it serves as a n example of a 'use' that makes m e u n w i l l i n g
to formulate 'uses' prematurely. A criticism of O e d i p u s i m p l i c i t i n
the story (I refer specifically to the Sophoclean version) is the obsti­
n a c y w i t h w h i c h he pursues his inquiry. T h i s aspect of curiosity
m a y seem u n i m p o r t a n t to the philosopher of science, but it is of
significance clinically a n d therefore w o r t h i n c l u d i n g w i t h C o l u m n s
3 a n d 4 as representing something that is m o r e than a difference of
intensity, just as 4 (Attention) is more than a n intense 3 (Notation).
A situation that w i l l serve as a n example is an occasion w h e n the
analyst has to distinguish between a l l o w i n g himself too easily to
a b a n d o n a n a p p r o a c h to the solution of a p r o b l e m a n d pressing it
b e y o n d the patients' capacity for endurance.
T h e last c o l u m n , w h i c h I have annotated ' A c t i o n ' , also requires
comment. It refers to those p h e n o m e n a that resemble m o t o r d i s ­
charge i n t e n d e d to u n b u r d e n 'the mental apparatus of accretions
of s t i m u l i ' ( F r e u d , 1911b, p. 221). T o qualify for i n c l u s i o n i n this
category, the action s h o u l d be a n expression of a theory that is
readily detectable—otherwise it cannot be described as a 'use' of a
theory. T h e p r o b l e m of clarifying G r i d categories arises f r o m the
fact that clarification must d e p e n d o n experience. Inclusion i n a
G r i d category is itself a statement b y the analyst: all G r i d categories
m a y be regarded as h a v i n g the quality of C o l u m n 1 categories i n
that they are significant but cannot be h e l d to have m e a n i n g u n t i l
experience invests them w i t h it.
T h e first two rows of the genetic axis m a y be discussed to­
gether: p-elements a n d oc-elements are intended to denote objects
that are u n k n o w n a n d therefore m a y not even exist. By speaking of
a-elements, P-elements, a n d oe-function, I intend to make it possible
to discuss something, or to talk about it, or think about it before
k n o w i n g w h a t it is. A t the risk of suggesting a m e a n i n g , w h e n I
w i s h the s i g n to represent something of w h i c h the m e a n i n g is to be
 THE GRID 11

a n o p e n question, to be answered b y the analyst f r o m his o w n

experience, I m u s t e x p l a i n that the t e r m ' p - e l e m e n f is to cover
p h e n o m e n a that m a y not reasonably be regarded as thoughts at a l l
I n c l u d e d i n this category are the p h e n o m e n a that I have p r e v i o u s l y
tried to describe i n a discussion of bizarre objects (see Learning from
Experience). T h e p r o b l e m , f r o m m y p o i n t of v i e w , arises because of
the tendency for m e a n i n g to creep i n prematurely. Ideally, a n y
m e a n i n g that the t e r m accumulates s h o u l d derive f r o m analytic
practice a n d f r o m analytic practice alone. M u c h the same is true of
the a-element, except that this term s h o u l d cover p h e n o m e n a that
are reasonably considered to be thoughts. I w o u l d regard t h e m as
elements that m a k e it possible for the i n d i v i d u a l to h a v e w h a t
F r e u d d e s c r i b e d as d r e a m thoughts.

R o w C includes dreams a n d other possible o r g a n i z e d systems

of d r e a m thoughts. M y t h is to be i n c l u d e d , together w i t h o r g a n i z e d
structures that are p r i m i t i v e forms of m o d e l .
A l l r o w s except the first are to represent categories of state­
ments that are unsaturated—that is, capable of a c c u m u l a t i n g
m e a n i n g . In this respect it m a y seem m i s l e a d i n g to describe R o w E
as consisting of pre-conceptions to the exclusion of the r e m a i n i n g
r o w s , for they are capable also of functioning as pre-conceptions
(because p r e - c o n c e p t i o n m a y refer either to a phase of d e v e l o p ­
m e n t or a 'use ) i n a n ascending order of sophistication. A s I h a v e
7

s a i d elsewhere, I d o not think it likely that i n analytic practice a n

analyst w o u l d discover a n y t h i n g that w o u l d pass muster, b y a n y
r i g o r o u s s t a n d a r d of accepted scientific m e t h o d , for i n c l u s i o n i n
R o w s G a n d H . Nevertheless I think it important that these catego­
ries s h o u l d exist, a l t h o u g h it i n v o l v e s the p a r a d o x of e m p l o y i n g or
a p p e a r i n g to e m p l o y rigorous standards loosely. O n e reason for
s u c h categories lies i n the fact that statements that, u n d e r analytic
scrutiny, t u r n out to be loose statements are often e m p l o y e d b y
scientists a n d p h i l o s o p h e r s as if they were rigorous.
If a competent artist, u s i n g the artistic conventions familiar to
W e s t e r n civilization, were to paint a field of p o p p i e s , w e s h o u l d
h a v e n o difficulty i n s a y i n g it w a s a field of p o p p i e s . W h y s h o u l d
this be so? T h e lines o n a straight stretch of r a i l w a y w o u l d be
thought of as b e i n g parallel, yet w e s h o u l d recognize a p a i n t i n g
i n w h i c h they were represented b y lines that c o n v e r g e d . A n d
so o n .
12 T A M I N G WILD T H O U G H T S

I p r o p o s e to use the term 'transformation' to describe the p r o ­

cess, whatever it is, b y w h i c h the painter has transformed his
experience into oil a n d pigment disposed o n the canvas. But I d o n ' t
w i s h the term to m e a n w h a t it w o u l d m e a n if I said a b u i l d i n g h a d
b e e n transformed b y a painter a n d decorator—that the field of
p o p p i e s has been u s e d as r a w material for the manufacture of
canvas, o i l , a n d pigment. N o r d o I m e a n to suggest that the o b ­
server of the p a i n t i n g thinks he has discovered the source of the
r a w material if he describes the p a i n t i n g as a field of p o p p i e s . In
short, I p r o p o s e to use the term 'transformation', i n accordance
w i t h m y description of elements i n C o l u m n 1, as a b i n d i n g together
of a constant conjunction so that I can proceed, w i t h the help
of this term, to f i n d out what the constant conjunction means.
T h e constant conjunction to w h i c h m y term relates occurs i n
psycho-analytic sessions, a n d I h o p e to b i n d it b y this term a n d to
c o m m u n i c a t e the experience to the reader. If I can succeed i n m y
a i m , I h o p e that those to w h o m I communicate it w i l l be able to
discover the m e a n i n g of the term 'transformation' a n d the e m o ­
tional experience w h o s e constantly conjoined elements I have
represented b y the term.

A s a first step towards u n d e r s t a n d i n g the m e a n i n g , I shall

resume m y discussion of m y m o d e l , the field of p o p p i e s a n d the
p a i n t i n g that represents it, a n d m y ' m y t h ' that a n artist has effected
a transformation. T h e realization—i.e. the field of p o p p i e s a n d all
similar objects—I shall represent b y the sign ' O ' .
In analysis I shall assume that the m e d i u m for the transforma­
tion is conversational E n g l i s h . By this I m e a n that grammatical
a n d v e r b a l exactitude is not to be l o o k e d for, a n d that m i e n a n d
gestures—muscular m o v e m e n t s — a r e i n c l u d e d i n the expression
'conversational E n g l i s h ' . I shall further assume that c o m m u n i c a ­
tion is b e i n g m a d e b y patient a n d analyst. F i n a l l y , I shall assume
that the analytically relevant part of the communications of b o t h
patient a n d analyst is about an emotional experience. F o r brevity, I
shall use the f o l l o w i n g signs:
T a p signifies the process of transformation i n the m i n d of the
patient; Toca the same process i n the m i n d of the analyst. S i m i l a r l y ,
T(ip a n d T(ia represent the finished product, the result of the p r o ­
cess of transformation, the analytic counterpart of the artist's
p a i n t i n g . In o u r w o r k , O must always be a n emotional experience,
 THE G R I D 13

for the assumption i n psycho-analysis is that patients come for help

w i t h , a n d therefore p r e s u m a b l y want to talk about, a n emotional
difficulty.
T h e r e are a n u m b e r of interesting ramifications into w h i c h I
cannot enter here. It is only necessary to consider questions s u c h as
those touching the nature of the artist's c o m m u n i c a t i o n — w h e t h e r
he is attempting to record a particular landscape or his emotions
about it, whether he does or does not w i s h to influence the p u b l i c
to w h o m the finished p r o d u c t is to be d i s p l a y e d , a n d so forth—to
see the complexities that are i n v o l v e d . I shall therefore introduce
one m o r e point o n l y , n a m e l y the question w i t h w h i c h I started:
w h y is there n o difficulty i n recognizing that a p a i n t i n g represents
a field of poppies? I shall answer it b y s a y i n g that there is always
something i n the transformation that is invariant b o t h to O a n d TP,
the finished p r o d u c t .
T o return n o w to the G r i d : I h a v e said that it is a n instrument
for classifying a n d ultimately u n d e r s t a n d i n g statements. T h e o b ­
ject of m y discussion of transformations is to introduce the i d e a
that i n analytic practice all statements m u s t be r e g a r d e d as trans­
formations. E v e n a single w o r d s u c h as 'cat', w i t h its a c c o m p a n y ­
i n g m o v e m e n t s , intonation, a n d so forth, is a transformation of a n
e m o t i o n a l experience, O , into the final p r o d u c t , TPp. It is for the
analyst to decide w h e n the transformation is complete. H e m a y
think that this point has been reached w i t h the utterance of a single
w o r d or after a verbal c o m m u n i c a t i o n lasting for a considerable
period.
T h e analyst's communications m a y be scrutinized b y the same
m o d e of analysis as that to w h i c h I have subjected the c o m m u n i ­
cations of the patient. But it must be borne i n m i n d that his a i m is
to give a n interpretation. A n y interpretation is a statement a n d a
transformation but it is also something more a n d less than b o t h ,
and the term 'interpretation' s h o u l d a p p l y o n l y to something
peculiar to the practice of the psycho-analyst. I h o p e that use of the
G r i d to classify the analyst's statement, a n d scrutiny of the trans­
formation, m a y lead to a clearer u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the qualities that
are necessary before a statement can be p r o p e r l y regarded as a
psycho-analytical interpretation.
I h a v e attempted so far to formulate some of the elements
i n v o l v e d i n observation. T h e y m a y all be i n c l u d e d u n d e r the h e a d ­
14 T A M I N G WILD T H O U G H T S

i n g of d e t e r m i n i n g three things: the significant, its m e a n i n g , a n d

the interpretation of the meaning. It w i l l be seen therefore that I
w i s h to establish a distinction between m e a n i n g a n d p s y c h o - a n a ­
lytic interpretation. T o p u t it i n another w a y , I think it h e l p f u l to
m a k e a distinction between what the patient's m e a n i n g i n conver­
sation w o u l d be, a n d what the interpretation of that is w h e n it is a
psycho-analysis a n d not an ordinary conversation.
T o s u m m a r i z e : the analyst is concerned w i t h m a k i n g observa­
tions o n b e h a v i o u r i n w h i c h a n u m b e r of components m a y be
distinguished. These are: the genesis a n d use of the statements,
the nature of the statement as a transformation, the process b y
w h i c h the transformation is effected (Tap), the e n d - p r o d u c t of
the transformation (T(Jp), invariants, a n d the G r i d category of the
transformation.
T h e analyst, to observe correctly, must be sensitive to as m a n y
of the p h e n o m e n a that are i n c l u d e d i n these headings as possible.
T h e m o r e nearly he is able to approximate to this i d e a l , the nearer
he is to the first essential i n p s y c h o - a n a l y s i s — o r , for that matter,
a n y other science—namely, correct observation. T h e complement
of the first essential is the last essential—correct interpretation. B y
'first' essential I m e a n not only priority i n time but priority i n
importance, because if a n analyst can observe correctly there is
always hope; it is of course a b i g ' i f . W i t h o u t the last essential he is
not a n analyst, but if he has the first essential he m a y become one i n
time; without it he can never become one, a n d no a m o u n t of theo­
retical k n o w l e d g e w i l l save h i m . This brings m e to reconsideration
of the nature of interpretation.
Interpretation is a special case: it is like all other statements i n
analysis i n that it can have any of the characteristics, t h o u g h ideally
it s h o u l d not, that I have attributed to the statement, a n d , like all
statements, it is a transformation. It is unlike i n that it s h o u l d have
K characteristics a n d be classifiable i n a restricted range of rows. It
s h o u l d , o n the face of it, be restricted to C o l u m n s 3, 4, a n d , m o r e
rarely, 1 a n d 5. W h e n I deal later w i t h the psycho-analytical game
(see p. 20), I shall s h o w that it m a y be placed h y p o the tically i n any
G r i d category that the reviewing analyst thinks might stimulate a
useful train of thought. W i t h these points I shall deal after discuss­
i n g some of the implications of m y proposal to regard only partic­
ular aspects of events i n an analytical session as peculiarly the
 THE GRID 15

p r o v i n c e of psycho-analytical observations. T h i s is already i m p l i c i t

i n the a p p l i c a t i o n of psycho-analytical theories: I w i s h to m a k e it
explicit as a theory of observations that are to be m a t c h e d w i t h
psycho-analytical theories. F o r , if observation is s o u n d , the c o n ­
c l u s i o n that certain observed p h e n o m e n a appear to approximate
to a psycho-analytical theory w i l l also be s o u n d . But the soundness
of the c o n c l u s i o n is i m p a i r e d if the theory, w h i c h is always a
p r e - c o n c e p t i o n (Row D ) , colours the selection of the facts to be
observed. T h e object of the G r i d is to a i d i n d e v e l o p i n g a p r e ­
conception, i n the analyst, that is not directly psycho-analytical
so that the observations m a d e are not s u c h that they are b o u n d to
approximate to a psycho-analytical theory. F o r if the p r e - c o n c e p ­
tion is psycho-analytical, there is clearly a risk that the observa­
tions m a d e u n d e r s u c h a pre-conception appear to approximate to
a psycho-analytical theory because they i n fact derive f r o m it. S u c h
a c o n d i t i o n amounts to circular argument. I h a v e n o objection to
the circular a r g u m e n t a n d shall discuss the nature of its dangers
later (see p . 18). F o r the present I shall assume the desirability
of a v o i d i n g a circular argument to return to the consideration of
'statements'. T h o s e , as I have said, must be considered to be 'trans­
formations' i n the sense i n w h i c h I have u s e d the term above, b u t ,
i n a d d i t i o n to the characteristics already described, they m u s t also
be r e c o g n i z e d as h a v i n g the character of a theory. In other w o r d s ,
the objects of psycho-analytic s t u d y (psycho-analytic objects) h a v e
the characteristics I h a v e b o u n d b y the term 'statement', the
characteristics I h a v e b o u n d b y the term 'transformation', a n d n o w
also the characteristics I w i s h to ' b i n d ' b y the term 'theory'. So I
shall n o w discuss the term 'theory'.

Reference to the G r i d w i l l s h o w that I m i g h t equally w e l l

choose the term ' p r e - c o n c e p t i o n ' (Row D) b u t prefer a term that
w o u l d be appropriately categorized i n a relatively m o r e sophisti­
cated category.
T h e theory, n o matter w h a t the statement (or formulation)
m a y be or w h a t characteristics it has d e r i v e d f r o m its nature as a
transformation, is never right or w r o n g : it is m e a n i n g f u l . M u c h
confusion exists amongst scientists through beliefs that theories are
right or w r o n g a n d accordingly require to be v a l i d a t e d b y e m p i r i ­
cal testing. I must therefore make it clear that this a p p r o a c h is
u n r e w a r d i n g a n d that any supposition o n w h i c h it is based must be
16 T A M I N G WILD T H O U G H T S

r e p l a c e d , as far as psycho-analysis is concerned a n d i n the context

of this discussion, b y the s u p p o s i t i o n that the p s y c h o - a n a l y t i c a l
object (- statement-transformation-theory) m u s t be regarded i n its
theoretical aspects as if it were a f o r m u l a t i o n b i n d i n g a constant
conjunction. T o m a k e m y p o i n t clear, I shall choose a n extreme
example.
A patient, t h o u g h aware of the a p p r o a c h of a car, w a l k e d out i n
front of it, was k n o c k e d d o w n , a n d sustained m i n o r injuries. T h i s
result w a s apparently quite unexpected. M a n y of his statements
h a d p r e p a r e d m e to expect that he was d o m i n a t e d at the time of the
event b y the c o n v i c t i o n that he w a s a puff of flatus.
T h e statements a m o u n t i n g to a n assertion that he w a s a puff of
flatus constitute a n example of w h a t I m e a n b y theory.
F r o m the point of v i e w of the patient, this w a s not a theory that
n e e d e d v a l i d a t i o n to test the truth or otherwise of the statement.
(I shall assume f r o m n o w o n that the reader is aware of the special
sense i n w h i c h I use the term 'statement'). A c c o r d i n g to m y theory
of the statement, he was engaged i n establishing its m e a n i n g .
F u r t h e r m o r e , the 'statement' was not o n l y the verbal account he
attempted to give m e b u t was, i n m y o p i n i o n — a l t h o u g h I w a s not
there to s e e — p r o b a b l y also the correct t e r m to a p p l y to the event
itself: it was a statement indistinguishable f r o m the m a n y state­
ments to w h i c h , as his analyst, I a m a witness. I shall n o w consider
the i m p l i c a t i o n s of r e g a r d i n g this as a statement.
L e t us first take the p o i n t that the statement is never right or
w r o n g b u t o n l y m e a n i n g f u l . A n y v i e w that the episode w a s a n
e m p i r i c a l testing of a hypothesis leads to a d e a d e n d . But if it is
r e g a r d e d as a statement designed first to b i n d a constant conjunc­
tion a n d thereby to take the first step i n establishing the m e a n i n g of
the constant conjunction, certain aspects of the episode become
clearer. T h e accident a n d its attendant conclusions d o not c o n ­
tribute m e a n i n g to the statement that he is a puff of flatus. F o r s u c h
a c o n t r i b u t i o n to be possible, a realization m u s t be f o u n d that
approximates to the statement. In this respect the situation is i n n o
w a y different f r o m that presented b y a h i g h l y sophisticated state­
m e n t s u c h as the mathematical f o r m u l a for the expansion of gases.
F o r the investigator to catch a b u s c o u l d not a d d to the m e a n i n g
of the f o r m u l a . But if he were to experience a n explosion, it might.
But i n the instance I h a v e g i v e n , the r e a l i z a t i o n — m y patient's
 THE GRID 17

a c c i d e n t — d i d not approximate to the theory. It d i d not falsify it

either. W h a t is r e q u i r e d is a realization that does approximate to
the theory. F r o m a sane point of v i e w , or what is generally k n o w n
as s u c h , the patient is u n l i k e l y to f i n d , i n the w o r l d of external
reality, any realization that approximates sufficiently to his state­
ment to constitute m e a n i n g ; there is n o t h i n g that w i l l mate w i t h his
p r e - c o n c e p t i o n to p r o d u c e a conception. Therefore there cannot be
a n y d e v e l o p m e n t s u c h as is represented b y the vertical axis of the
G r i d . B u t i n the w o r l d of psychic reality there are realizations that
approximate to the patient's statement.
T h i s fact, r e c o g n i z e d b y psycho-analysts since F r e u d m a d e his
discoveries, is not taken sufficiently into account b y the scientist
w h o considers that a single negative fact can invalidate the theory
it appears to contradict. S u c h a n attitude to theory ignores its s i g ­
nificance as a factor of mental g r o w t h . I stress the point because for
the analyst it is essential to recognize this quality of the statement.
T h e fact that a statement, a n d any scientific theory, can be m a t c h e d
b y a realization i n the d o m a i n of psychic reality is i g n o r e d b y the
natural scientist because it is i n the w o r l d of p h y s i c a l realizations
that he seeks his a p p r o x i m a t i o n , a n d because he fears a n d dislikes,
w i t h v a r y i n g degrees of intensity, the existence of a n approximate
realization i n the r e a l m of p s y c h i c reality. T h i s was, w i t h reserva­
tions, true of m y patient.
M y patient's statement, his account of the episode a n d his d i s ­
p l a y of feeling about it, required an interpretation f r o m me. Briefly,
a part of the interpretation was that he thought he was a p u f f of
flatus. I attempted to m a k e clear that his associations indicated
the presence of a fantasy that he was a puff of flatus. A s far as I
c o u l d tell, there w e r e two m a i n obstacles to his u n d e r s t a n d i n g of
this: first, it i n v o l v e d recognition of a d o m a i n that he feared, a n d
second, that if he recognized the realization (his fantasy) as a reali­
zation that c o r r e s p o n d e d to his statement, others i n c l u d i n g myself
w o u l d consider h i m m a d .
O b v i o u s l y this has substance, for an outside observer if he
accepted the statement w o u l d not expect external reality to p r o ­
v i d e a realization that a p p r o x i m a t e d to the statement, b u t w o u l d
c o n c l u d e that the explanation of the patient's statement was that
the patient was m a d . But, i g n o r i n g these obstacles, another p r o b ­
l e m n o w arises.
18 TAMING WILD T H O U G H T S

If the statement that the patient is a puff of flatus has as

its a p p r o x i m a t i n g realization a fantasy that he is a puff of flatus,
a logical construction that is a circular argument has come into
b e i n g . It is similar to another argument that was typical of h i m . It
w o u l d emerge that he was angry: he was angry because he was
depressed. W h y was he depressed? O b v i o u s l y (in his view) be­
cause he w a s angry. A n d so o n . I shall therefore consider the
circular argument before taking u p further details of this episode.
Experience of the circular argument, of w h i c h I have h a d a
considerable amount, has c o n v i n c e d m e that there is not m u c h
w r o n g w i t h its logic, that it involves acceptance of a theory of
causation, a n d that p r o b a b l y any logical argument is essentially
circular. Since I a m disposed to believe this of even classical
instances of logical i n q u i r y , I felt that the failures of circular
arguments, s u c h as those of m y patient, to lead to any d e v e l o p m e n t
h a d to be sought elsewhere than i n their circularity. I d e c i d e d that
the difficulties that arose d e p e n d e d (to extend the use of the circle
as a model) o n the diameter. If the circular argument has a large
e n o u g h diameter, its circular character is not detected a n d m a y , for
all I k n o w , contribute to useful discoveries s u c h as I u n d e r s t a n d
the curvature i n space to be. But the curvature i n space, i n so far as
I a m able to understand it, p r o v i d e s m e w i t h a m o d e l for the
postulate of a circular argument of s u c h large diameter that it is
c o n d u c i v e to the development of thought a n d personality. C o n ­
versely, the diameter can be so r e d u c e d that the circle itself
disappears a n d o n l y a point remains. Similarly w i t h the circular
argument. Restating this i n the instance of m y patient, the circular
argument ends i n the point (it m a y not be frivolous to say ' i n the
p o i n t of the argument') that he is a puff of flatus.
I shall try to m a k e this statement clearer b y r e t u r n i n g to the
patient a n d g i v i n g some details of w h a t happens if the argument is
not d i m i n i s h e d i n this w a y .
In m y paper o n t h i n k i n g at the E d i n b u r g h Conference (1962a),
I p o i n t e d out the relationship of a 'thought' to a 'no-breast'. T h e
thought owes its genesis to the absence of the object. I cannot enter
into the bearing of this o n the negative nature of a definition for
lack of time but must point out that the statement, as the element
that b i n d s together a constant conjunction, at the same time implies
 THE GRID 19

that the constant conjunction is not any one of the constant conjunc­
tions already b o u n d .
In s o m e instances the 'no-breast is indicated, as it were, geo­
7

metrically. T h a t is to say, the mathematical counterpart of a

thought is a point, something that marks the place where the breast
w a s . S i m i l a r l y , a line m a r k s the place where the penis w a s — t h e
' n o - p e n i s ' . T h e successive attacks o n the breast, the 'no-breast , the
7

thought (the place where the breast was) are repeated i n the m o r e
complex c o m b i n a t i o n of thoughts logically c o m b i n e d to f o r m a n
argument. W e thus witness the reduction of the fruitful, g r o w t h ­
p r o d u c i n g circular argument, b y the successive d i m i n u t i o n s of
'diameter , until it becomes the sterile circular argument, of w h i c h
7

the 'diameter' is further d i m i n i s h e d until the circle disappears a n d

o n l y a p o i n t remains.
D o e s the statement 'circular argument' represent more than a n
element that can be categorized i n a compartment of R o w C ? O n
the answer to this depends the usefulness of extending the m o d e l
to i n c l u d e ideas of diameter. A s I a m not w r i t i n g a clinical paper, I
m u s t limit clinical material to illustrations; I prefer, therefore, that
the reader s h o u l d not attach importance to them as a n y t h i n g other
than m o d e l s — p a r t of m y private thinking, w h i c h I hope m a y n o n e ­
theless serve for p u b l i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n .
A w e e k or ten d a y s elapsed after the episode of the accident
h a d been p r o d u c e d i n analysis. T h e time was taken u p w i t h m a n y
interpretations, i n c l u d i n g attempts to d r a w his attention to the
circular argument. I d i d not say it was of s m a l l diameter, but I h a d
this i n m i n d myself. I was also able to s h o w h i m his fear of any
interpretation that d r e w his attention to the fact that he h a d two
dissimilar views about the same facts. T h e interpretations were not
n e w but appeared to p r o d u c e a response i n h i m . H i s statements
c o n t i n u e d to be remarkable more for their distance f r o m any point
(I m e a n this to be u n d e r s t o o d b y the reader as a conversationally
loose phrase) than for any attempt to get to grips w i t h the point. O r
(I n o w e m p l o y m y model) he was engaged i n a circular argument,
the diameter being determined b y the need to say n o t h i n g that
b r o u g h t h i m nearer the centre of the circle.
T h e n , not h a v i n g directly referred to the episode again after his
first m e n t i o n of it, he said the car driver h a d called h i m a f u c k i n g
20 TAMING W I L D THOUGHT S

fool. I feel better n o w , he said. I regarded this as m e a n i n g that his

circular progress h a d b r o u g h t h i m r o u n d to the point o n the circle
that was 'opposite 7
the statement that the car h a d c o l l i d e d w i t h
h i m . In time, at least, the argument was a circle of measurable
diameter. But d u r i n g that p e r i o d of circular argument w e h a d h a d
o p p o r t u n i t y for a n u m b e r of interpretations, i n c l u d i n g the inter­
pretation that he felt he was a puff of flatus. I therefore said that he
felt the car accident was a sexual intercourse between a puff of
flatus a n d the car and its driver. H e said he felt better a n d a d d e d he
felt he w a s g o i n g m a d .
T h e p o i n t I w i s h to illustrate is that the circular argument of
small diameter, t h o u g h it precludes the matching or correlation of
two statements a n d is therefore sterile, is preferred to the argument
i n a circle of relatively w i d e diameter because of the risk of a
m a t c h i n g of two ideas that is accompanied b y a feeling of madness.
There is i m p l i c i t i n this the possibility that there m u s t be distance
between the correlated statements if m e a n i n g is to be achieved. If
'madness' is feared, the operation that leads to m e a n i n g is a v o i d e d .
T h e circular argument must therefore be of s m a l l diameter to p r e ­
clude the conjunction of m e a n i n g a n d a feeling of madness.
B y m y illustration I have intended briefly to indicate the v a l u e
of considering the p h e n o m e n a of psycho-analysis as statements
(= transformations) that can be assessed b y reference to G r i d cate­
gories. M y contention is that accuracy of observations is increased
a n d that they are thereby brought into closer a p p r o x i m a t i o n to
psycho-analytical theory. T h e gap between the events of a n analy­
sis a n d their interpretation consequently becomes easier to bridge.
In conclusion I shall refer briefly to the psycho-analytical game.
S u p p o s e , i n the course of r e v i e w i n g some aspect of the d a y ' s
w o r k , the analyst is satisfied that the interpretations he gave were
adjusted w i t h a reasonable degree of accuracy to the needs of the
material. H e m a y compare the categories to w h i c h he has assigned
the patient's statements w i t h the categories to w h i c h he w o u l d
assign his interpretations. F r o m this he m a y proceed to consider
the nature of the relationship between material a n d interpreta­
tion. But he m a y also arbitrarily assign either interpretation or
patients' statements to some different category a n d attempt to
w o r k out the implications of the arbitrary categorization. F o r
example, he can place an interpretation that he is satisfied w a s
 THE GRID 21

correct i n a C o l u m n 2 category s u c h as D 2 a n d then ask himself

w h a t the interpretation, correct though it m a y be, w o u l d be e x c l u d ­
i n g . T h e analyst can set himself similar exercises not as a mere tax
o n his ingenuity b u t as a m e t h o d of exercising a n d d e v e l o p i n g his
capacity for intuition.
UNTITLED

 Introduction

T h e f o l l o w i n g pages are transcripts I m a d e f r o m t w o tapes

r e c o r d e d b y B i o n sitting alone i n his study, t h i n k i n g of his
forthcoming visit to R o m e i n July, 1977, to give talks a n d h o l d
seminars. (Those seminars were p u b l i s h e d i n Italian b y Borla i n
1983, u n d e r the title, Seminari Italiani.)

H e speaks i n a relaxed, reflective, meditative w a y , t h o u g h it is

clear that he is not talking to himself b u t to a n i m a g i n a r y ,
attentive audience. H e sees himself ' i d l i n g a w a y m y time',
t h i n k i n g i n a n 'almost thoughtless' w a y , a n d then l o o k i n g to
see w h a t h e has caught i n 'the net of m y idleness'. But these
v e r b a l cogitations are far f r o m the lazy meanderings of a d a y ­
dreamer; they are clear, sharp, a n d d i s c i p l i n e d a n d tinged
w i t h his i n d i v i d u a l q u i r k y sense of h u m o u r . W i l d thoughts are
domesticated, a n d stray thoughts are f o u n d a h o m e .

T h e themes are a l l familiar ones to be f o u n d elsewhere i n h i s

writings, but he s e l d o m repeated himself w o r d for w o r d ; there

25
26 T A M I N G WILD THOUGHTS

are variations, expansions, additions, a n d some v i v i d meta­

p h o r i c a l passages.

O n l y m i n o r editorial changes a n d corrections have been m a d e ,

mostly w i t h ease of reading i n m i n d . Both d a y s ' recordings
e n d e d i n mid-sentence; the tape r a n out, not the speaker.

F.B.
 28 May 1977

I
f a thought w i t h o u t a thinker comes along, it m a y be w h a t is a
'stray thought', or it c o u l d be a thought w i t h the owner's n a m e
a n d address u p o n it, or it c o u l d be a ' w i l d thought'. T h e p r o b ­
l e m , s h o u l d s u c h a thought come along, is w h a t to d o w i t h it. O f
course, if it is w i l d , y o u m i g h t try to domesticate it. I shall consider
later h o w y o u m i g h t try to d o that. If its owner's n a m e a n d address
is attached, it c o u l d be restored to its o w n e r , or the owner c o u l d be
told that y o u h a d it a n d he c o u l d collect it any time he felt i n c l i n e d .
O r , of course, y o u c o u l d p u r l o i n it a n d h o p e either that the o w n e r
w o u l d forget it, or that he w o u l d not notice the theft a n d y o u c o u l d
keep the idea all to yourself. If the o w n e r is p r e p a r e d to allow y o u
to h a v e it, or if it w a s u n d e r s t o o d that y o u were quite entitled to
keep it, then y o u m i g h t try to train it i n the w a y it s h o u l d go a n d i n
a m a n n e r that w o u l d m a k e it m o r e amenable to the habits of y o u r
o w n resident thoughts a n d to the thoughts of the c o m m u n i t y of
w h i c h y o u were a m e m b e r , i n s u c h a w a y that it w o u l d g r a d u a l l y
become assimilated a n d part a n d parcel of the totality of the g r o u p
or p e r s o n i n w h o m the thought is to continue its existence.
W h a t I a m concerned w i t h at the m o m e n t is the w i l d thoughts
that t u r n u p a n d for w h i c h there is no possibility of b e i n g able to
trace i m m e d i a t e l y any k i n d of o w n e r s h i p or even any sort of w a y
of b e i n g aware of the genealogy of that particular thought.
First of all, it seems to m e to be simplest to try to tackle the
p r o b l e m b y considering what this strange thought is. W e m i g h t get
a clue to it b y w o n d e r i n g i n w h a t frame of m i n d or i n w h a t c o n d i ­
tions this w i l d thought t u r n e d u p a n d became enmeshed i n o u r
m e t h o d of t h i n k i n g . It c o u l d be that it seemed to occur to us w h e n
w e were asleep. I a m u s i n g this expression, ' w h e n w e were asleep',
because it is a state of m i n d w i t h w h i c h most people think they are
familiar, so w e can start w i t h this somewhat familiar idea.

27
28 T A M I N G WILD T H O U G H T S

I w a n t to consider the peculiar state of m i n d i n w h i c h w e are

w h e n w e are asleep or, as is also frequently said a n d w h i c h has
e v e n become c o m m o n p l a c e of psycho-analytic t h i n k i n g , w h e n w e
are unconscious, m e a n i n g b y that w h e n w e are i n a state i n w h i c h
w e are not aware of our thoughts a n d feelings—or not quite. There
are also some peculiar events that take place w h e n w e are asleep
w h i c h are notorious a n d w h i c h are historically k n o w n to us, b o t h
i n o u r private histories a n d i n the history of the race. T h e y are
often said to be dreams. But I think it is as w e l l to consider that it
m i g h t be m u c h more compatible w i t h the events that take place if
w e c o u l d say to a p e r s o n w h o reports that he has not been a n y ­
w h e r e but has been i n b e d a n d has slept w e l l a n d so o n , that w h a t
w e w o u l d really like to k n o w is where he went a n d w h a t he saw
d u r i n g those h o u r s w h e n , according to h i m n o w , he was asleep. It
is m o r e than likely that he w o u l d reiterate that he went n o w h e r e —
he s i m p l y went to b e d . But it is possible that he m i g h t also say:
' W e l l , of course, I h a d a d r e a m — b u t then, it was only a d r e a m /

F r e u d w a s one of these peculiar people w h o seemed to think

that dreams are w o r t h y of further consideration. T h i s has often
h a p p e n e d . In the B o o k of Genesis dreams have been reported,
including what are s u p p o s e d to be interpretations of those
dreams. There are other similarly w e l l - k n o w n reported events, for
example i n the Book of D a n i e l , i n w h i c h actual figures have been
r e p o r t e d — m i n a , m i n a , a n d half m i n a s — w h i c h seem to be straight­
f o r w a r d e n o u g h because they are applicable to weights and
measures. H o w e v e r , there was something about t h e m that l e d the
d r e a m e r — n a m e l y the person w h o p i c k e d u p what I call this 'stray
t h o u g h t ' — t o feel that these w o r d s h a d some other m e a n i n g than
the o b v i o u s one. W h y he s h o u l d think so, I d o n ' t k n o w ; a n d w e
never shall. But he actually f o u n d somebody w h o appeared to fall
i n w i t h his idea a n d w h o gave the w o r d s a n interpretation that, so
it is s a i d , turned out to be correct.
I want to leave it aside for a m o m e n t a n d not consider that
matter any further than just to r e m i n d y o u of the existence of this
peculiar state of m i n d where w e see things a n d go to places w h i c h ,
w h e n our state of m i n d changes because w e h a p p e n to do w h a t w e
call ' w a k e u p ' , then w e ignore these facts, these journeys, these
sights, o n the g r o u n d s that they are only dreams.
 UNTITLED 29

In case one of these strays comes along, I think I shall try to be

p r e p a r e d for its reception b y arranging certain categories that
m i g h t be suitable for p l a c i n g the stray i n a t e m p o r a r y — w h a t ? It is
difficult to f i n d the w o r d for it. I d o not f i n d that the v o c a b u l a r y
that is available to m e is v e r y suitable for the p u r p o s e s for w h i c h I
w a n t it just n o w , so I a m g o i n g to call it a 'box'. T h e first box I a m
d u n k i n g of is really not suitable for anything so ephemeral as w h a t
I u s u a l l y call a thought, n a m e l y , something that is p h y s i c a l ; I shall
call it a 'beta-element'. I d o n ' t k n o w w h a t that means a n d I d o n ' t
k n o w w h a t it is, a n d as it hasn't turned u p I a m still ignorant. But
a n y w a y , there it is, i n case that strange creature s h o u l d exist a n d
s h o u l d it s w i m into m y k e n .
T h e r e is something a bit m o r e sophisticated: that is to say a
similarly p h y s i c a l creature, but one that arouses i n m e p r i m o r d i a l
thoughts or feelings, something that is a sort of prototype of a
mental reaction. These I shall call 'alpha-elements'. I likewise d o n ' t
k n o w m u c h about them, but I think I have been i n states of m i n d i n
w h i c h I a m aware of their existence. T h a t is to say, I h a v e w h a t I
call a stomach ache or a headache, or I a m possibly told that I h a v e
been extremely restless a n d have been tossing a n d turning a r o u n d .
I remember this o n a n occasion i n w h i c h I w a s a m u s e d to hear that
i n the school s a n a t o r i u m I h a d been i n a state that was really rather
impressive; I w a s told I h a d been delirious after a n accident. T h a t
gained m e a certain prestige amongst m y fellows that I h a d been so
seriously ill. D u r i n g this stage I h a d actually p i c k e d u p a chair a n d
h u r l e d it across the r o o m — l u c k i l y not hitting a n y b o d y .
T h e r e h a v e also been these occasions w h e n I h a v e again fallen
into the prevalent idea of s a y i n g that I h a d a d r e a m , b u t I can o n l y
say that I felt p h y s i c a l p a i n — m y a r m ached; I even h a d some k i n d
of reminiscence after w a k i n g u p that m y a r m was stiff. T h a t is the
k i n d of thing, s h o u l d it turn u p , that I s h o u l d like to p u t i n this
category.
There is another one i n w h i c h I a m nearly awake a n d nearly
asleep; there I h a v e certain ideas that are comprehensible to m e
w h e n I a m fully awake a n d of w h i c h I can tell y o u exactly i n terms
of v e r b a l formulations of v i s u a l images w h a t I say I dreamt or saw
i n m y sleep. B y this time I think I c o u l d consider that I a m i n a
different state of m i n d , n a m e l y a conscious or w a k i n g frame of
30 TAMING WILD T H O U G H T S

m i n d . A g a i n I a m i n difficulties because I d o n ' t i n fact k n o w w h a t

to call it, but perhaps y o u might be able to grasp m y m e a n i n g .
Perhaps it w o u l d be better at this stage if I took the precaution
of g o i n g back again a n d resorting to numbers, calling the beta­
elements 1, the alpha-elements 2; these pictorial images a n d so
forth I c o u l d put into the category of 3, or C . It c o u l d be A , B, C ; 1,
2, 3, a n d then D 4 , E 5 , F , G , H . . . . B e c o m i n g w i d e r a n d w i d e r
awake, I hesitate, because I w o u l d like at the same time to h a v e
these boxes available for rather different, or apparently different,
creatures, so that I c o u l d consider w h a t c o u l d be called, m a t h ­
ematically, the negative versions of it. T h e y c o u l d be m a r k e d H - ,
G - , F - , E - , etc. d o w n to zero (0). In that k i n d of w a y one has r o o m
for quite a zoo, quite a n u m b e r of strays a n d thoughts without
owners or w i t h owners . . . [a temporary break in recording]
T h e advantage of what I have said so far is that I think I can put
this d o w n , record it o n a piece of paper o n w h i c h I c o u l d make the
appropriate marks. I can try to communicate it to y o u .
T h i n k i n g it over, I find I a m somewhat dissatisfied, a n d
a l t h o u g h I also feel it is very unlikely that I shall ever be satisfied,
I w i l l attempt to p u t m y dissatisfaction to some g o o d p u r p o s e b y
considering one or two other possible methods of m a k i n g p r o ­
v i s i o n for these strays.
It occurs to m e that, i n case they become visible to me, I m i g h t
be able to p u t them into the appropriate colour; for example, tak­
i n g the cue f r o m dreams that I have h a d , colours like the blue of
the sky, the r e d of b l o o d , a n d the yellow of ochre, the colour that is
m a d e out of earth. T h e y are p r i m i t i v e colours, these p r i m a r y c o l ­
ours, a n d they m i g h t be very useful. W h e n it comes to this sort of
thing w h i c h I have called a beta-element, it gets m o r e difficult; I
d o n ' t k n o w w h a t to call that. Perhaps, provisionally it w o u l d d o to
say, 'gross darkness', w h i c h is different f r o m darkness, w h i c h has
a certain a m o u n t of light i n it; this w o u l d be w i t h absolutely n o
light whatsoever, the sort of light verbalized b y V i c t o r H u g o as 'le
neant', or b y Shakespeare [Macbeth, V . iii] w h e n he talks about ' a
tale told b y an idiot, full of s o u n d a n d fury, signifying n o t h i n g ' —
zero, 0. I a m not v e r y h a p p y about it because, thinking of it i n a
somewhat linear manner, I w o u l d like to start w i t h these positive
n u m b e r s a n d letters d o w n to m i n u s 1, 2, 3, 4, indefinitely. I think
it w o u l d lead to infra-red a n d ultra-violet. If it were the n u m e r o ­
 UNTITLED 31

logical categorization, there I w o u l d h a v e to use s o m e term like

'infinity'. T h e w o r s t of not b e i n g a mathematician or a n artist is
that I a m v e r y m u c h i n the p o s i t i o n of the infant or foetus, w h i c h , I
i m a g i n e , hasn't adequate m o d e s of expression or c o m m u n i c a t i o n ,
a n d i n m a n y w a y s hasn't a great deal to communicate. I s u p p o s e
the infant m i g h t w a n t to communicate that it w a s either lonely or
h u n g r y . A n d I, i n this peculiar w o r l d i n w h i c h I n o w f i n d myself,
a m b o t h i n n e e d of n o u r i s h m e n t a n d of s o m e b o d y w i t h w h o m to
c o m m u n i c a t e , n o t because I have a n a w f u l lot to say, b u t because I
f i n d m y s e l f i n the state of m i n d w i t h w h i c h I a m distressingly
f a m i l i a r — t h e state of m i n d i n w h i c h I can o n l y say I a m a b y s m a l l y ,
literally a n d metaphorically, ignorant. That is one reason w h y it is
a matter of s o m e urgency to m e to be able to f i n d some sort of
n e t w o r k i n w h i c h I c a n catch a n y thoughts that are available.

I think y o u c a n see I a m already f i n d i n g myself i n difficulties,

so I w o u l d like again to p i c k u p s o m e further tentative categoriza­
tion that w o u l d be suitable for a n y thoughts. T h e nearest I c a n get
to it is p r o b a b l y the sort of thing the musicians k n o w about
a n d have d e v e l o p e d v e r y successfully. I remember seeing s o m e
k i n d of a n i m a l i n a z o o w h e n I w a s v e r y small: it w a s rattling its
h o r n s o n the bars of the enclosure. T h e peculiar thing about this
creature w a s that it kept o n entirely r h y t h m i c a l l y . It w a s most
extraordinary, so m u c h so that I w a s able to d r a w the attention of
a g r o w n - u p w h o w a s w i t h m e , w h o w a s himself a v e r y perceptive
m a n , a n d he agreed that this w a s remarkably a n d clearly a n estab­
l i s h e d r h y t h m that c o u l d be written d o w n .
I a m still stirred b y these r h y t h m i c a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n s . It is
fascinating to hear a g r o u p of d r u m m e r s p e r f o r m i n g ; it has the
same sort of effect u p o n m e as is described b y a poet w h e n h e talks
about 'the brave m u s i c of a distant d r u m ' (The Rubdiydt of Omar
Khayyam, F i t z g e r a l d , 1859, p. xii). I remember i n w a r b e i n g i n c r e d ­
i b l y m o v e d w h e n I h e a r d the distant m u s i c of the bagpipes of a
H i g h l a n d d i v i s i o n that w a s to a c c o m p a n y us i n battle. I h a v e
h e a r d m a n y different k i n d s of m u s i c since then, i n c l u d i n g that
described b y Osbert Lancaster as betraying the presence of the
E n g l i s h a r m y , n a m e l y , 'snatches of tuneless song'. W h e n I first
h e a r d Stravinsky's m u s i c to Petrouchka, I thought it w a s s o m e ­
w h a t incomprehensible a n d not v e r y pleasing, b u t v e r y sophisti­
cated. I shall h a v e occasion to refer to this again later o n .
32 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

I h a v e been i d l i n g a w a y m y time, t h i n k i n g i n this w a y — a w a y

I c o u l d describe as b e i n g almost thoughtless. If, as a c h i l d , I h a d
been caught at it, s o m e b o d y w o u l d have said, ' W h y o n earth d o n ' t
y o u f i n d s o m e t h i n g to d o ? ' I w o u l d n o w like to have a l o o k i n case
I have caught a n y t h i n g i n the net of m y idleness.
W h a t is this first specimen? ' G o l d e n boys a n d girls all must,
like chimney-sweepers, come to d u s t / T h i s stray has a n a m e a n d
address attached to it—Shakespeare. ( ' G o l d e n lads a n d girls all
must, / A s chimney-sweepers, come to dust': Cymbeline, IV. ii.) T h e
o n l y address I k n o w is S t r a t f o r d - u p o n - A v o n , but I gather he is
d e a d a n y w a y , so I'll a d o p t this piece of p r o p e r t y that is i n fact his.
I a m afraid it seems terribly h a c k n e y e d to me. It is one of these
things about w h i c h I c o u l d say, 'Yes I k n o w . . . yes I k n o w ' , w o r d s
I h a v e learnt to regard w i t h great s u s p i c i o n a n d sadness. W h e n ­
ever I hear the expression, 'Yes I k n o w ' or ' Y o u k n o w ' , repeated
a g a i n a n d again, I f i n d myself feeling sad, because I feel that it is
g o i n g to be v e r y difficult to get to, or to communicate, w h a t I w a n t
to k n o w or communicate—there's h a r d l y r o o m for it because
e v e r y b o d y k n o w s , i n c l u d i n g myself. It is almost a n archaeological
operation to excavate this k n o w l e d g e i n the hopes of f i n d i n g a
thought b u r i e d somewhere inside it, possibly even some w i s d o m .
In a w a y this is rather like experiences I h a v e i n p s y c h o ­
analytic sessions. Patients w h o come to m e have nearly all h e a r d
e v e r y t h i n g I h a v e to say; they have r e a d it i n books, they have
h e a r d about psycho-analysts a n d psychiatrists a n d e v e n cures.
W h a t they have to say to m e is also deeply b u r i e d because they
have become so u s e d to saying it a n d k n o w i n g that it is a complete
waste of time trying to find a n y b o d y w h o w i l l listen to w h a t they
are s a y i n g .
T h e sort of excavation that w o u l d seem to be r e q u i r e d to get
t h r o u g h to a little bit of w i s d o m is so i n t i m i d a t i n g that one feels
n o t h i n g short of a spade or a shovel, or n o w a d a y s e v e n a n atomic
b o m b , w o u l d ever get t h r o u g h to it. H o w e v e r , although I a m sure
that these forcible means of c o m m u n i c a t i o n m i g h t sometimes
expose something valuable, I don't think that I w o u l d advocate
atomic e x p l o s i o n as a m o d e of archaeological exploration of the
Z i g g u r a t . A s a matter of fact even extremely knowledgeable, wise
people like Sir A r t h u r E v a n s [have been accused of b e i n g destruc­
 UNTITLED 33

tive] o n the g r o u n d s that they have destroyed m o r e than they have

i l l u m i n a t e d b y their excavations a n d re-constructions. Just as the
archaeologist has to be v e r y careful w h e n he thinks he has reached
s o m e potentially revealing object a n d has to resort not to a spade
or a s h o v e l but a camel-hair b r u s h , so the analyst has to k n o w
w h e n to d i s c a r d these c r u d e a n d violent m e t h o d s a n d w h e n to
p i c k u p something far gentler, far m o r e revealing a n d less destruc­
tive t h a n a shovel. It is difficult to k n o w — a n d this is one, a n d o n l y
one, r e a s o n — w h y psycho-analysis needs to be carefully d o n e , be­
cause the situation is so precarious a n d because it is so difficult
to f i n d the m i n i m u m conditions for a c h i e v i n g w i s d o m either i n
oneself or i n one's c o l l a b o r a t o r — n a m e l y the patient.
L e t ' s go back to the f i n d — ' G o l d e n b o y s a n d girls all m u s t like
c h i m n e y - s w e e p e r s c o m e to dust', together w i t h , 'Yes I k n o w , w e
all k n o w that, a n d p r o b a b l y w e are as sick to death of it as w e are
of other c h u n k s of Shakespeare w e have p i c k e d u p i n our time, or
b e e n forced to learn at school'.
H u g h K e n n e r , b y accident overhearing a W a r w i c k s h i r e y o k e l
talking, d i s c o v e r e d the further m e a n i n g , p r o b a b l y current i n
Shakespeare's time: ' g o l d e n b o y s a n d girls' c o u l d refer to the d a n ­
d e l i o n , w h i c h , w h e n the petals have d r o p p e d , looks like a c h i m n e y ­
sweep's b r o o m a n d is then k n o w n as a 'chimney-sweeper'. So f r o m
that p o i n t of v i e w Shakespeare is able to use a s i m p l e phrase a n d
s i m p l e language, w h i c h then communicates a n i d e a h u n d r e d s of
years later to p e o p l e w h o have p r o b a b l y forgotten entirely the
c o m m o n p l a c e m e a n i n g of the w o r d s he u s e d originally a n d w h i c h
w e r e c o m m o n p l a c e w h e n he used them, a n d transformed t h e m
into i m m o r t a l phrases that last for h u n d r e d s of years a n d take their
m e a n i n g w i t h them, A similar state of affairs is p r o d u c e d b y h i m
over a n d over again, as w e all k n o w . T h e r a v e n himself is hoarse
that croakes the fatal entrance of D u n c a n u n d e r m y battlements'
[Macbeth, I. v]. T h e most difficult a n d longest w o r d i n that sentence
is 'battlements', a n d yet the total sentence conveys a m e a n i n g
w h i c h is extremely depth-stirring a n d provokes p r o f o u n d feelings.
W h a t , then, is the language, the m e t h o d of c o m m u n i c a t i o n , that w e
are to e m p l o y w h e n w e w a n t to describe, or w h e n w e w a n t to
formulate or capture, as it were, a n idea that comes to us, m a y b e
that is c o m m u n i c a t e d b y s o m e b o d y else, b u t m a y b e comes to us i n
34 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

o u r dreams or i n frames of m i n d w i t h w h i c h w e are not familiar

whether w e are awake or asleep?
W h a t I w a n t to express is some k i n d of experience that w e are
able to have if w e are psycho-analysts a n d concerned w i t h that
area of thought. Y o u m i g h t ask, what area of thought? W e have to
use w o r d s like ' p s y c h o - a n a l y s i s ' — t h e y are l o n g w o r d s , ugly
w o r d s , impressive w o r d s , a n d w o r d s that are d e v o i d of m e a n i n g .
I c a n o n l y say, ' Y o u have to have a n analysis to k n o w w h a t I a m
talking about, or y o u have to be an analyst', w h i c h is v e r y unsatis­
factory if I w i s h to communicate it or pass it o n . W e think that the
analytic experience, the real thing, the basic thing, the fundamental
thing, is w o r t h preserving a n d therefore w o r t h c o m m u n i c a t i n g
to people next week, next year, next century, a n d perhaps three
or four h u n d r e d years later—not i n order to i n f o r m them, b u t i n
order to let t h e m see the sort of path of thought or b e i n g that
stretched out i n front of us, a n d w i l l stretch out i n front of us
p r o b a b l y for a l o n g time if there are any of us to see it. ' T h e y closed
the r o a d t h r o u g h the w o o d s m a n y years a g o ' — t h e e n d i n g of the
p o e m w h e r e K i p l i n g describes the s o u n d of the horses g a l l o p i n g
t h r o u g h the w o o d s . [ T h e y shut the r o a d t h r o u g h the w o o d s /
Seventy years a g o . ' — ' T h e W a y t h r o u g h the W o o d s ' . ] W e can talk
about the w o o d s that still exist, u s i n g the t e r m metaphorically,
m e a n i n g it as a m e t h o d of talking about w h a t w e are concerned
w i t h n o w , t o m o r r o w , a n d all the tomorrows, because the r o a d
t h r o u g h the w o o d s is obscured b y the trees a n d can e v e n be
o b s c u r e d b y the w o o d s that s p r i n g u p , so w e are concerned
w i t h a v e r y peculiar f o r m of excavation. W e occasionally come
across a c h i l d w h o cannot learn the alphabet. U s u a l l y antagonism
is aroused i n the teacher because the c h i l d is so s t u p i d , but it is
forgotten that for m a n y reasons the child m a y not see or u n d e r ­
stand w h y it s h o u l d learn the alphabet. After all, I a m familiar w i t h
the situation i n w h i c h w e have patients w h o cannot see the w o r d s
for the alphabet, w h o cannot see the sentences for the w o r d s , a n d
w h o certainly cannot see the spirit of m a n l u r k i n g somewhere
b e h i n d this plentiful crop of jargon or verbal weeds that proliferate
at a n extraordinary pace, a n d i n some climates flourish i n s u c h a
w a y that it is difficult to believe there is any m e a n i n g i n p s y c h o ­
analysis whatsoever.
 UNTITLED 35

F r e u d w a s extremely impressed w i t h Charcot's statement that

w h e n y o u d o not u n d e r s t a n d a situation, w h e n y o u cannot per­
ceive w h a t the diagnosis is, y o u s h o u l d go o n u n t i l the obscurity
begins to be penetrated b y a pattern, a n d then y o u can formulate
w h a t the pattern is that y o u see. W i t h regard to ourselves, w e are
confronted w i t h w h a t seems to be a single i n d i v i d u a l . O u r atten­
tion is u s u a l l y focused o n a recently d e v e l o p e d capacity of the
h u m a n b e i n g , n a m e l y his capacity to elaborate a n d use articulate
speech. It is o b v i o u s l y a v e r y p o w e r f u l a n d useful achievement.
But w h i l e w e are i n the frame of m i n d i n w h i c h it is possible to
command the use of relatively recently d e v e l o p e d techniques
like articulate speech, w e also have to contend w i t h the m a n y
o b s c u r i n g w o r d s , thoughts, sounds, physical feelings, p h y s i c a l
s y m p t o m s , i n order to excavate the u n d e r l y i n g , basic, a n d f u n d a ­
mental feature. N o t so l o n g ago doctors were v e r y satisfied to
detect the fact that a patient was suffering f r o m a disease k n o w n as
d r o p s y . H a v i n g detected the disease k n o w n as d r o p s y , they f i n d
there isn't one: there are all sorts of diseases—heart failure a n d so
forth. It is v e r y d i s c o u r a g i n g i n spite of the gratification that can be
obtained b y apparently getting that m u c h nearer to the o r i g i n .
W h a t about the m a n or w o m a n w h o presents himself i n y o u r
office? T h i s person is the most p o w e r f u l , knowledgeable collabora­
tor y o u are ever likely to f i n d . In this lonely job one has to d o all b y
oneself, alone, a l t h o u g h at the same time i n the r o o m w i t h some­
b o d y else, that ' s o m e b o d y ' is both the person w h o presents himself
for assistance a n d the p e r s o n to w h o m w e look for the most p o w e r ­
f u l assistance w e are ever likely to f i n d .

If w e are concerned w i t h physical disease, w e have to learn the

language the b o d y talks; w e can look at the expression, the r u d d y
b l u s h of health, ' r u d e ' health, a n d distinguish that f r o m a n obscure
b l o o d disease, a n d so o n . T h e h u m a n a n i m a l , u n l i k e other species,
can lie a n d has p r o b a b l y h a d a g o o d deal of practice at l y i n g a n d
m i s i n f o r m i n g f r o m a v e r y early stage, because feelings of guilt
precipitate a proliferation of a capacity to lie a n d d e c e i v e — b o t h the
p e r s o n himself a n d w h o e v e r else might be able to detect the s u p ­
p o s e d crime that the infant does not k n o w about, a l t h o u g h the
infant can s h o w any amount of guilt. T h e question is, then, w h a t is
the mental counterpart of these lies, these statements, this deceiv­
i n g b l u s h of r u d e health, this appearance of athletic somatic health
36 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

a n d capacity, the apparent facility w i t h w h i c h a male b o d y c a n

d i s p l a y erectile tissue? M a n y people have been taken i n b y s u p p o s ­
i n g that the b o y or m a n is b o t h potent because he has a penis a n d
because it c a n become visibly erect. T h i s is m u c h m o r e h i d d e n w i t h
the w o m a n i n w h o m it m a y be more difficult to detect any signs of
erection, b u t psychologically she m a y be v e r y potent, m u c h m o r e
potent than the b o y or m a n to w h o m she looks, a n d f r o m w h o m she
expects sexual potency. W e all k n o w situations i n w h i c h mothers
h a v e been shocked a n d frightened at discovering that their babies
c a n cause their nipples to become erect a n d so f i n d it difficult to
feed the b a b y ; the infant finds it difficult also to participate i n the
feeding because of the mother's d r e a d of these peculiar sensations,
w h i c h can also be aroused b y s u p p o s i n g that the feeding b a b y
itself s h o w s signs of erection. Those are all p h y s i c a l — w h a t the p s y ­
chological or mental counterpart of it is I d o n ' t k n o w . T h a t is one
reason w h y I think it is useful to consider k e e p i n g this box into
w h i c h I propose to p u t m y various beta-elements, situations that
are not really thoughts a n d about w h i c h it is easier for m e to say, T
think I k n o w w h a t this patient is thinking, but I a m jolly sure they
w o u l d say they w e r e n ' t — i f they were thinking at a l l /

T o return to a point I have already m e n t i o n e d — I c o u l d say to a

patient, ' w h e r e were y o u last night a n d w h a t d i d y o u see?' a n d
they say they went n o w h e r e a n d saw n o t h i n g — t h e y w e r e asleep,
asleep i n b e d , a n d can hotly d e n y that they went a n y w h e r e or saw
a n y t h i n g . I can see that if y o u restrict y o u r v i s i o n or y o u r topic of
conversation or discussion to geographical m o v e m e n t , then it
w o u l d be perfectly true that there are m a n y places that c o u l d be
s a i d not to have been visited. W h a t does M a n d a l a y l o o k like? O r
Pondicherri? O r Samarkand? O r Jerusalem? Some p e o p l e m i g h t
give a description of i t — t h e y k n o w what it looks like; they have
travelled so m u c h a n d k n o w so m u c h about these places a n d
others like them that they cannot really answer m y question.
W h a t does 'sex' mean? W h a t does ' O e d i p u s situation' mean?
L o o k it u p , if possible, i n the position i n w h i c h there are o n l y two
people, n a m e l y the analyst a n d the analysand. W h e r e w o u l d y o u
locate this story? A n d a n y h o w , w h a t is the story? Y o u can look it
u p i n the m y t h o l o g i c a l dictionary, if y o u like. I d o n ' t k n o w w h y
the S p h i n x is so often not mentioned. Perhaps it is because the
S p h i n x committed suicide a n d w e d o n ' t k n o w whether to exercise
 UNTITLED 37

o u r curiosity or whether to k i l l it off. W e are so familiar w i t h

p s y c h o - a n a l y t i c theories that w e tend to forget the basic points; so
m u c h so, that it is difficult to say w h a t the f u n d a m e n t a l points are.
Free associations—sometimes w e hear of analysis i n s u c h a w a y
that w e think w h a t a w o n d e r f u l time w e are all h a v i n g , w a n d e r i n g
about amongst the weeds, p l u c k i n g the w i l d a n d beautiful flowers,
a d m i r i n g the brambles, the bushes, a n d not getting a n y w h e r e near
to d i s t u r b i n g the sleep of the sleeping b e a u t y — t h e w i s d o m that
lies fast asleep somewhere i n the thickets; somewhere b u r i e d , not
o n l y literally u n d e r the m o u n d s of the Z i g g u r a t or the site of U r of
the C h a l d e e s or K n o s s o s , b u t w h a t about the O r a c l e at D e l p h i ? Is
that voice i n a n y w a y audible? Does this s o u n d v e r y r o m a n t i c i z e d
w h e n it comes to a question of Doctor X a n d this tiresome w o m a n ,
or perverse m a n , to s u p p o s e that somewhere b u r i e d beneath these
accumulations of k n o w l e d g e there is some spark of w i s d o m that
c o u l d still be b l o w n into a flame? T h e r e are always p e o p l e w h o
say, 'Yes it can. D o n ' t d o it. If y o u b l o w the sparks into a flame, y o u
w i l l start a conflagration, a n d goodness k n o w s w h e r e that w i l l
e n d — d o n ' t d o i t / T h e r e are p l e n t y of p e o p l e w h o still w i l l say,
' T h e w o r l d w a s all right till these a w f u l F r e u d i a n s a n d K l e i n i a n s
came to it. T h e y are the p e o p l e w h o are responsible for all this
sexual p r o m i s c u i t y a n d general d i s o r d e r / A s Freud himself
p o i n t e d out, there is n o t h i n g n e w about the situation where people
c o m p l a i n about doctors as always d i s c o v e r i n g a n d i n v e n t i n g n e w
diseases a n d illnesses—they have a vested interest i n d o i n g so
because, after all, they can get p a i d for c u r i n g them. T h e r e is a
certain plausibility i n it; there is plenty of r o o m for c o r r u p t i o n ,
dishonesty, f r a u d , b u t e v e n so I think there is s o m e t h i n g to be
s a i d for w h a t w e call ' m e d i c a l science . These terms like 'science'
7

are so debased; they are like coins i n w h i c h the d e n o m i n a t i o n is

impossible to detect because it has been w o r n so s m o o t h that it
is n o longer possible to distinguish the d e s i g n that w a s originally
m a r k e d u p o n it a n d that m a d e it comprehensible.

W h a t I w a n t to d o is to indicate the sort of area w i t h w h i c h w e

are all concerned. Later I h o p e to consider h o w w e are to t u r n our
concern into activity that is w o r t h w h i l e .
F o r the present w e have to consider w h i c h of our capacities are
of a n y v a l u e i n this particular regard. W e d o not i n fact k n o w w h o
the p e r s o n is today, t o m o r r o w , w i t h w h o m w e are meeting. W h a t
38 T A M I N G WILD T H O U G H T S

w e already k n o w a n d what the patient already k n o w s is of n o

consequence or importance; the past is past, a n d a n y h o w that term
is part of the convenience of articulate expression. T h e reason w h y
w e concern ourselves w i t h things that are remembered, w i t h o u r
past history, is not because of what it w a s — a l t h o u g h that m i g h t be
quite important i n its o w n r i g h t — b u t because of the m a r k it has
left o n y o u or m e or us now. In what w a y are any of these things
detectable? T h e embryologists say w e can detect remains of a ves­
tigial tail, branchial clefts, etc., seeming to suggest a fishy o r i g i n
of a v e r y p r i m i t i v e k i n d f r o m w h i c h w e have d i v e r g e d . But if that
is the case physically, I think it is possible that it m i g h t also be
mentally; there might still be traces i n the m i n d or character or
the personality, in the present, of particles that have a l o n g history,
things that w e w o u l d expect to be fundamental, basic, p r i m o r d i a l .
D o any of these remnants betray themselves i n w h a t w e can
n o w observe i n the h u m a n speech of the p e r s o n w e are talking to,
as w e l l as i n ourselves w h o are d o i n g the talking? T h a t is w h a t
seems to m e to be one of the fundamental discoveries of p s y c h o ­
analysis: archaic states of m i n d , archaic thoughts a n d ideas, p r i m i ­
tive patterns of b e h a v i o u r are all detectable i n the most c i v i l i z e d ,
cultivated people; i n more primitive people w e w o u l d expect t h e m
to be less h i d d e n . These archaic elements m a y t u r n out to be of
s o m e consequence today; suppose, for example, that the remnants
of a b r a n c h i a l cleft c o u l d develop into a branchial cleft t u m o u r . In
this w a y there can be certain detectable archaic elements i n o u r
personalities or m i n d s , w h i c h are really survivals a n d w h i c h
are capable of proliferating i n a beneficent manner, but also i n a
cancerous m a n n e r , a pathological manner. That is the only reason
w h y it seems to me to be interesting to be seeing a patient today
a n d t o m o r r o w a n d i n the future if he or she w i l l submit to being
observed again a n d also . . . [tape ends]
 29 May 1977

A
n y b o d y r e a d i n g this account so far i n the first chapter can
see that it is h a r d l y w h a t y o u w o u l d describe as 'scien­
tific ; that is to say, it c o u l d be seen as s o m e t h i n g that,
7

a c c o r d i n g to the i n d i v i d u a l w h o is r e a d i n g it, can be assessed as

imaginative, or fanciful, or imitation science. It is a matter of
o p i n i o n . I m e n t i o n this p o i n t because these o p i n i o n s h a v e to be
entertained w h e n one is attempting to e v a l u a t e — w h a t e v e r it is:
whether it is the p h y s i c a l appearance of a p e r s o n , or whether it is
his character that seems to be betrayed i n w h a t he says or writes
or does. In short, w e are m a k i n g a k i n d of interpretation of w h a t
evidence is b r o u g h t into us b y o u r senses. There is still the fact that
it w o u l d be h e l p f u l to k n o w w h a t the quality of the i n f o r m a t i o n
is w h i c h is b r o u g h t i n , because w e d e p e n d o n evaluating that
evidence. First of all w e h a v e to evaluate the v a l u e of the actual
gathering m e c h a n i s m . I, for example, have n o w a g o o d d e a l of
experience o n w h i c h to base m y o p i n i o n about h o w reliable I
w o u l d consider m y impressions to be, a n d h o w healthy I consider
m y ability to see, h o w accurately m y eyes w o r k , a n d so o n .
A l t h o u g h it is possible to d i v i d e this discussion u p w h e n it is
a question of talking or w r i t i n g , m a k i n g these v e r b a l transforma­
tions, w e cannot i n fact d i v i d e u p whatever it is w e are i n contact
w i t h a n d w h i c h w e w i s h to assess a n d to u n d e r s t a n d ; that is not
d i v i d e d u p , not even i n any w a y , although I suppose y o u c o u l d say
y o u ' h e a r d ' it, or ' s a w ' it, or y o u h e a r d s o m e b o d y 'say it. T h o s e
7

d i v i s i o n s are m o r e applicable to the m a c h i n e r y , the personality

a n d its e q u i p m e n t , w h i c h is gathering the information, than it is
to the universe i n w h i c h w e exist. T h e universe does not obey
the laws of articulate speech, or the laws of optics, a l t h o u g h w e
consider that the laws are a p p r o x i m a t i n g to light itself. B u t it is
questionable h o w m u c h of the laws a p p l y to the actual objective
p h e n o m e n a a n d to w h a t extent the laws only a p p l y to, or are

39
40 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

largely significant of, the h u m a n capacities. W e shall see later that

this is true of a n u m b e r of different activities that w e can talk about
i n the sense of our logical capacity as w e l l as our capacity to feel
a n d think a n d observe.
T h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n is itself a pause i n w h i c h I a m attempting to
evaluate w h a t I have already said i n the process of c o n t i n u i n g
to talk, to think about this subject.
I a m not really attempting to assess the nature of the i n f o r m a ­
tion that is b r o u g h t to m e b y m y physical senses, what I w o u l d call
the beta-elements, material that seems to be m o r e p h y s i c a l than
mental. I k n o w n o t h i n g about it. I merely suppose that it exists;
I merely suppose that it is o n a structure of that k i n d that I h a v e
built u p the w h o l e system, architectonics of thought. So I shall
go o n f r o m this point, w h i c h I c o u l d describe as a n operation of
curiosity, a fact-gathering tendency, to the nature of the facts
I gather, a n d then to the c o m m u n i c a t i o n of s u c h information as I
consider m y activities have gleaned.
T h e point at w h i c h I a m starting is what I c o u l d call speculative
i m a g i n a t i o n a n d speculative reasoning. I w o u l d like to d i v i d e the
two for the m o m e n t into categories that I c o u l d describe, b o r r o w ­
i n g f r o m mathematics, as sub-sets of a m a i n set.
First, I w o u l d consider speculative imagination. W h a t sort of
v a l u e is to be attributed to that? M y o w n i m p r e s s i o n is that it is
v e r y important. W h e n I h a v e attempted to supervise p e o p l e w h o
w a n t to c o m e to m e for analytic s u p e r v i s i o n — p a r t of a learning
activity—I suggest they s h o u l d not bother very m u c h about w h a t I
or a n y b o d y else m i g h t think about their contributions, but s h o u l d
p r o c e e d to say what their interpretation is of the material they
have told me. I f i n d they are invariably v e r y suspicious a n d v e r y
anxious to give a n interpretation that has the blessing of some
psycho-analytic authority, or that they think I m i g h t a p p r o v e of if I
were a psycho-analytic authority of sufficient importance a n d c o n ­
sequence. I w o n ' t bother to consider the nature of that authority,
because I k n o w quite e n o u g h about myself to regard the tendency
to believe that I a m a psychoanalytic authority as v e r y m i s l e a d i n g
i n d e e d a n d obstructive to progress. I stress this point: 'Please say
w h a t y o u like; please say w h a t y o u think or imagine is the m e a n ­
i n g of w h a t y o u have told m e / T h e reason w h y I say this is not
because I a m suggesting that all y o u have to d o is to disconnect
 UNTITLED 41

y o u r m i n d f r o m y o u r jaw a n d allow y o u r jaw a n d y o u r tongue to

waggle. T h a t is not m y idea, but I think it is a p r e l i m i n a r y ; e v e n
before w e are able to think v e r y m u c h , or have e n o u g h capacity to
be able to think, w e s h o u l d learn to be able to let o u r tongue a n d
o u r jaw w a g g l e , as I p u t it; e v e n if it doesn't make m u c h sense, it
m a y be a step o n the w a y to articulate speech. Similarly, these
speculative imaginations, h o w e v e r r i d i c u l o u s , h o w e v e r neurotic,
h o w e v e r psychotic, m a y nevertheless be stages o n the w a y to w h a t
w e w o u l d ultimately regard as scientific, psycho-analytic f o r m u l a ­
tions. T h i s i d e a m a y be quite erroneous, but I p u t it f o r w a r d
because y o u can test it for yourselves a n d come to y o u r o w n c o n ­
clusions. F r o m m y experience it seems to be v e r y important. W h e n
y o u have, as honestly as y o u can, allowed y o u r imagination to p l a y
o n the material a n d a l l o w e d yourself to state it i n s u c h terms as
y o u can, then y o u c a n assess the nature of the product. I w o u l d
say, therefore, that it is a g o o d thing to say w h a t y o u think y o u
h a v e seen. N e v e r m i n d w h a t y o u r state of m i n d is; let's forget all
that, let's h a v e respect for the information that y o u gather i n that
state of m i n d , n o matter w h a t it i s — w h e t h e r it is a state of m i n d
that subsequently y o u can assess b y s a y i n g y o u dreamt it, or y o u
hallucinated it, or y o u just painted it, or y o u ' d o o d l e d ' it onto a
piece of p a p e r w h e n y o u weren't t h i n k i n g about a n y t h i n g i n p a r ­
ticular, or that y o u might, if y o u were gifted i n that w a y , actually
c o m p o s e it or p l a y a tune or whistle or sing it. I have heard people
say it is useful for a stammerer to try singing, a n d then he becomes
able to articulate i n the o r d i n a r y manner. I regard speculative
i m a g i n a t i o n as w o r t h y of c o n c e r n — n e v e r m i n d whether you
dreamt it, hallucinated it, or whether it is an object of d e l u s i o n ,
o r — I d o n ' t k n o w w h a t a d r a w i n g or p a i n t i n g is the p r o d u c t of. I
take it that p r e s u m a b l y the artist saw or thought he saw w h a t he
has d r a w n . If w e consider renaissance art, for example, w e can see
plenty of pictures of saints, crucifixions, adorations; w h e n d i d they
see them? A n d h o w c o u l d they see them so clearly that they c o u l d
e v e n p u t a line a r o u n d t h e m a n d give them colour a n d f o r m i n
s u c h a w a y that I can look at one of those things n o w a n d say, ' T h i s
m a n saw this three h u n d r e d , four h u n d r e d , four thousand years
ago'. O r I was able to w a l k into the Lascaux caves a n d see o n the
walls various m a r k s a n d signs of p a i n t i n g a n d d r a w i n g — s o m e ­
w h a t distorted, it is true, because I see them w i t h the a i d of electric
42 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

lighting, w h i c h reveals v e r y clearly their shape a n d colour. I d o n ' t

k n o w w h a t sort of light they were seen i n w h e n they were d r a w n .
Similarly, I can w a l k into the Elephantine caves near B o m b a y a n d
once again see the carvings that were m a d e ; again, I d o not k n o w
i n w h a t light or i n w h a t frame of m i n d . I guess that m y frame of
m i n d is rather different f r o m the frame of m i n d of the artist w h o
painted them, i n m u c h the same w a y as I think I can u n d e r s t a n d
the verbal formulations of a Shakespeare p l a y — a t least I a m
h e l p e d to d o so if I can get v e r y capable actors w h o k n o w h o w to
translate a printed d r a m a into the dramatic form. I say this because
I think it is sometimes forgotten that n o w a d a y s w e are already
dependent o n fine performances, even of a Shakespeare p l a y , be­
fore w e can say w e really understand it. It depends v e r y m u c h o n
b e i n g able to trust the evidence of o u r senses, o n b e i n g able to
d e p e n d o n the actors to make the p l a y comprehensible. I h a v e
quoted Cymbeline: ' G o l d e n boys a n d girls all must, like c h i m n e y ­
sweepers, come to dust.' I have to interpret that i n a state of m i n d
that is, three or four h u n d r e d years later, fully conscious, w h e n I
a m w i d e awake; it is quite different f r o m that state of m i n d of the
p e r s o n w h o wrote those lines originally. I d o not k n o w w h a t the
state of m i n d was; I do not k n o w what the E n g l i s h was that was
s p o k e n i n W a r w i c k s h i r e at that time. I can o n l y m a r v e l at the
p r o d u c t of a state of m i n d like that, as I can m a r v e l at the state of
m i n d of a L e o n a r d o w h o sees Saint A n n , the V i r g i n M a r y , a n d can
see t h e m so clearly. T h e best I can do is to make myself available to
learn whatever it is that they might have been able to c o m m u n i ­
cate w h e n they were alive a n d of w h i c h they have left a record that
I can still see or hear for myself.

T h i s somewhat l o n g - w i n d e d description is to d r a w attention to

the fact that w h e n y o u see y o u r patient t o m o r r o w , I d o not k n o w
w h o m y o u w i l l see a n d nor d o y o u . It might be a n y b o d y . I a m sure
w e have to have respect for that m i n d or personality; that seems to
m e to be the most valuable thing about the w h o l e of p s y c h o - a n a l y ­
s i s — t h e suggestion that the h u m a n m i n d a n d its products are
w o r t h y of attention. I a m not suggesting y o u are g o i n g to see
W i l l i a m Shakespeare; I a m not suggesting y o u are g o i n g to see the
writer of the Baghavad Gita or some famous painter or sculptor or
composer, a M o z a r t — w e don't k n o w . But I d o suggest that y o u
w i l l not k n o w unless y o u are able to respect the actual experience
 UNTITLED 43

m a d e available to y o u w h e n the patient goes so far as to s p e n d

time a n d m o n e y c o m i n g to see y o u . If y o u are not d e a l i n g w i t h
s o m e b o d y w h o is w o r t h all that scrutiny, all I can say is, it is
possible that it m a y be w o r t h w h i l e if w e ourselves are sufficiently
w o r t h w h i l e to be capable of learning something f r o m the experi­
ence. So there is always a chance that the engagements y o u a n d I
h a v e m a d e for the m o r r o w c o u l d be t u r n e d to g o o d account. It
m a y t u r n out to be v e r y w o r t h w h i l e because the patient is a p e r s o n
of s o m e importance or consequence a n d has gifts that h a v e so far
n o t been revealed or, if they have been revealed, have been d i s ­
m i s s e d o n the g r o u n d s that he or she is s t u p i d , or psychotic, or
crazy. T h e same thing m a y a p p l y , a l t h o u g h it is n o w u n l i k e l y , to
o u r s e l v e s — u n l i k e l y because most of us have l i v e d quite l o n g
e n o u g h for s o m e sort of gift to have m a d e itself manifest b y this
time. Let us h o p e that analysis has afforded us a chance, b y b e c o m ­
i n g psycho-analysts, to betray s u c h abilities as perchance w e have.
I a m b o u n d to say that I think it is a matter of o p t i m i s m ; I d o n ' t
think a great d e a l of importance can be attached to a n y h o p e of
that k i n d — n o t as far as I myself a m concerned. But o n the other
h a n d I d o n ' t think that w e s h o u l d be obstructed either b y hopes or
fears. If hopes are d u p e s , fears m a y be liars ['If hopes were d u p e s ,
fears m a y be liars': A r t h u r H u g h C l o u g h , 'Say N o t the Struggle
N a u g h t A v a i l e t h ' ] ; so w e have to have respect for ourselves a n d
for the a n a l y s a n d .

T h e p o i n t is important because I f i n d psycho-analysts have

difficulty i n realizing that there are m i n i m u m conditions necessary
for the activity w e call psycho-analysis. Some of those conditions
lie w i t h i n o u r o w n control; that is to say, w e can a v o i d b e i n g i n a n
unsuitable frame of m i n d ; w e can a v o i d b e i n g a prey to w h a t I c a n
m o s t easily describe as a state of r h a p s o d y , of b e i n g i n s u c h g o o d
h u m o u r that w e allow all o u r emotions a n d wishes a n d desires
f u l l p l a y . T h a t is not m u c h m o r e use than it w o u l d be to arrive
h e a v i l y d r u g g e d , literally w i t h alcohol, or metaphorically w i t h o u r
o p t i m i s m or p e s s i m i s m or despair. In this respect it is therefore
i m p o r t a n t to be r i d of o u r memories a n d desires.
A s regards s u p e r v i s i o n , it is a g o o d thing not to look to the
s u p e r v i s o r to give information or k n o w l e d g e about psycho­
analysis. In so far as it is possible to p i c k u p a n idea or two i n a
s u p e r v i s i o n , or even i n analysis, it m a y be just as w e l l to forget
44 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

t h e m w h e n y o u are w i t h the analysand because if y o u d o n ' t then,

y o u r m i n d can already be so filled w i t h y o u r wishes, desires, theo­
ries, expectations, that there s i m p l y isn't r o o m for a n idea; there
are n o interstices t h r o u g h w h i c h what is available to y o u r senses
can penetrate to y o u r capacity to understand. I a m not g o i n g to
bother y o u at the m o m e n t w i t h w h a t this capacity to u n d e r s t a n d
m a y be; that is another matter w e have to consider later. It is
s o m e t h i n g that has been discussed a n d debated for m a n y cen­
turies, even before psycho-analysis was ever h e a r d of.
T h e analyst needs to be divested or d e n u d e d of his m e m o r i e s
a n d his desires so as to leave r o o m for h i m to be o p e n to the
p r e s e n t — w h a t I call the present. Psycho-analysis gives the i m p r e s ­
sion, b y w h i c h I think w e are liable to be m i s l e d , that w h a t is
i m p o r t a n t is the past. T h e past is not important, because y o u can
d o n o t h i n g about it; the only things about w h i c h y o u can d o a n y ­
thing are the remnants, the vestiges of the past, of past states
of m i n d or archaic parts of our p h y s i c a l m a k e - u p — t h e b r a n c h i a l
clefts, the vestigial tail, etc., o u r s i m i a n ancestry—but it is possible
to m a k e use of these vestiges that are discernible i n the present
if w e allow ourselves to discern them. E v e n p h y s i c a l l y it m a y be
useful to have some k i n d of remnant of k n o w l e d g e about e m b r y o l ­
o g y if w e are trying to assess a patient w h o comes c o m p l a i n i n g of
s o m e t u m o u r of the neck or other p h y s i c a l s y m p t o m s that have
b e g u n to obtrude.
O u r position, as I see it, is that although w e tend to have shifted
o u r observations away f r o m the b o d y to the sphere of the m i n d ,
the b o d y has not ceased to exist. Because w e try to m a k e use of the
facts that the patient reports b y turning them into w h a t w e call
'free associations' that w e can then interpret, it doesn't m e a n that
the facts weren't facts. Patients sometimes say, ' B u t isn't it reason­
able for m e to feel this w h e n I told y o u what I have been seeing?'
O f course I d o n ' t k n o w whether it is reasonable or n o t — t h a t is u p
to the patient. I a m i n n o w a y d o u b t i n g the accuracy, or that he is
not sincere i n believing that he has g i v e n m e a n accurate descrip­
tion of w h a t he has seen, but I a m disregarding those aspects of it
because he k n o w s more about it than I do. I a m trying to look at
something else, to hear something else, to be o p e n to something
else—vestiges, mental vestiges. I d o n ' t k n o w where they come
f r o m ; I d o n ' t k n o w where the patient comes from. I d o n ' t m i n d
 UNTITLED 45

whether he has g i v e n m e his n a m e a n d address a n d telephone

n u m b e r , because that is not of immediate consequence—it is i m ­
portant for o b v i o u s reasons, b u t because it is obvious it is not
i m p o r t a n t — w h a t is obvious is obvious, a n d there is n o t h i n g m o r e
to be said about it. T h e patient c a n have his o w n o p i n i o n of w h a t
he c a n see a n d k n o w for himself; w h a t is m u c h m o r e difficult for
h i m is something he cannot see, a n d that is w h y he has come to m e .
Patients h a v e difficulty i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g that they h a v e not come
to m e because they k n o w the answer, i n spite of the fact that w e
often hear p e o p l e say, 'Yes I k n o w . . . yes I k n o w . . . yes I k n o w ' ,
a n d ' W e l l , I k n e w that a n y w a y ' . T h a t k i n d of statement is i n d i c a ­
tive, it is a sign, it is w h a t w e m i g h t call a s y m p t o m to w h i c h the
analyst p a y s attention, not because there is a n y difficulty about the
g r a m m a r or syntax b e i n g e m p l o y e d , but because it is revelatory, or
c o u l d be potentially revelatory, of a state not so far discerned or of
w h i c h the patient is not aware.

It is important that the e m b r y o - a n a l y s t , the candidate, s h o u l d

dare to use his i m a g i n a t i o n a n d dare to try to articulate it i n a
s u p e r v i s i o n . T h a t is one reason w h y I regard a s u p e r v i s i o n as
b e i n g possibly valuable; if o n l y those w h o come dare to say w h a t
they think a n d if o n l y they w i l l use that occasion as a w a y of
practising t r y i n g to articulate w h a t they think, either i n v e r b a l
t e r m i n o l o g y , or if they find any other, I a m perfectly h a p p y . A
patient once s a i d to m e , T f y o u o n l y h a d a p i a n o here, I c o u l d p l a y
the t h i n g to y o u ; I can't talk like this to y o u . ' If I c o u l d u n d e r s t a n d
m u s i c , I s h o u l d be v e r y g l a d for h i m to d o so, b u t here again, there
are these m i n i m u m conditions that are necessary for analysis.
After a time I b e g i n to k n o w w h a t the m i n i m u m conditions are for
me to d o analysis. T h e same t h i n g has to be determined b y a n y
other analyst. It is a great mistake for a n analyst to lose sight of that
fact. Y o u can m a k e concessions if y o u w a n t to; y o u can relax y o u r
o w n rules if y o u w a n t t o — t e m p o r a r i l y , at any rate—but that is a
matter of o p i n i o n a n d a matter of judgement. But generally speak­
i n g , w h a t y o u have to k n o w is w h a t y o u r m i n i m u m conditions are.
F o r example, the patient m a y think he has the right to d r a g y o u out
of y o u r chair, or to wrestle w i t h y o u , or even sometimes to use
firearms against y o u to m a k e w h a t y o u have to say inaudible. T h e
analyst m u s t be clear i n his m i n d where he d r a w s the line, where
the m i n i m u m conditions for h i m to analyse have ceased to exist
46 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

because they have been so e r o d e d b y denial. T h i s crops u p w i t h a

c h i l d w h o does not k n o w h o w to behave i n the analyst's r o o m , a n d
the c h i l d ' s parents v e r y often don't k n o w h o w to behave w i t h
regard to the analyst w h o is trying to analyse their c h i l d . But the
analyst has to be v e r y clear a n d quite f i r m i n stating his m i n i m u m
requirements, w i t h o u t w h i c h it becomes impossible for h i m to d o
analysis. T h a t is the o n l y reason for exerting a certain discipline;
not because w e w a n t to prevent a n y b o d y f r o m d o i n g whatever
they like; w e don't-even w a n t them to come for analysis, necessar­
ily. P e o p l e are free to take u p a n analysis if they w a n t to d o so, but
w e are also obliged to say what are the conditions w e have to have
i n order to be able to fulfil that a i m .
T h e p o i n t w e are discussing a n d to w h i c h this is relevant is this
matter of speculative imagination. Unless the analyst allows h i m ­
self the exercise of his speculative imagination he w i l l not be able
to p r o d u c e the conditions i n w h i c h the g e r m of a scientific idea can
flourish. W e have to bear i n m i n d that even psycho-analysis itself
is at the b e g i n n i n g of its career. It is o n l y quite recently that the
h u m a n race has learnt h o w . . . [tape ends]
T h e r e are m a n y different k i n d s of language; s o m e forms are
h a r d l y to be translated into articulate speech, because they are not
really articulate forms of c o m m u n i c a t i o n . Chinese, for example,
has a great m a n y h i e r o g l y p h i c signs. N o t o n l y is it true of their
language; I think there can be a conflict between, say, C h i n e s e a n d
Russians, a l t h o u g h superficially there can be agreement, a p p a r ­
ently, between their ideas of the w a y i n w h i c h the h u m a n race
s h o u l d be governed. But the C h i n e s e , w i t h their h i e r o g l y p h i c
m e t h o d of c o m m u n i c a t i o n , also attach a lot of importance to the
small muscles of the face a n d are prejudiced i n favour of c o m m u n i ­
cations w i t h people w h o allow themselves facial e x p r e s s i o n — m u s ­
cular e x p r e s s i o n — w h e n they talk. T h e y d o n ' t like people w h o s e
faces are impassive. So there m a y be great agreement between the
ideas of different races, but great differences that are not o p e n l y
expressed because they are expressed i n m u s c u l a r w a y s , p h y s i c a l
w a y s . In the famous g u i d e book o n S p a i n , F o r d (1845, V o l . 1, p. 83)
gives a g o o d description of the gestures c o m m o n l y e m p l o y e d — t h e
gestures of the h a n d , etc. It is extremely informative a n d shows
h o w m u c h importance w o u l d be attached b y two people, talking to
 UNTITLED 47

each other, to what they say a n d h o w that is a c c o m p a n i e d b y

m o v e m e n t s of m u s c l e s — h a n d s , face, etc.
T h e analyst has to be quite clear, or as near as he can get i n the
course of time, as to what are the m i n i m u m requirements o n w h i c h
he proposes to exist. F o r example, I feel that if a n y b o d y wants a n
analysis they w i l l h a v e to come to m y consulting-room, because I
have not the means b y w h i c h I can get to theirs, or the time. It is
not because that is a particularly g o o d thing for the patient, it
s i m p l y h a p p e n s to be the limitation i m p o s e d o n m e b y m y o w n
limitations. I have to say, T shall have to ask y o u , if y o u w a n t to
try this, to come to see m e here at a particular time, for another
session, or two m o r e sessions/ But of course it is n o t h i n g like as
simple as that; there are so m a n y things w h i c h are not easily for­
m u l a t e d , a n d it is not until y o u k n o w w h a t the patient is capable of
i n the w a y of c o m m u n i c a t i o n , obstruction, hostility, that y o u can
be quite clear whether y o u can stand it or whether y o u can't. T h e
reason for discussing the matter at all is because y o u need to be
p r e p a r e d to say to the patient, 'thus far, a n d n o f u r t h e r ' — n o t
because y o u want to stop h i m f r o m d o i n g a n y t h i n g he likes, but
because y o u u n d e r s t a n d that he wants a n analysis a n d y o u k n o w
whether or not y o u can d o analysis i n the conditions the patient is
proposing.

O n the w a y to being a n analyst, y o u have to reserve the right to

i n d u l g e y o u r speculations, y o u r speculative imagination. Perhaps
y o u m i g h t w a n t to sculpt, or paint, or d r a w , or compose m u s i c or
fiction, i n order to give y o u r imagination a n airing, to give it a
chance to develop into something that might be scientific.
A n o t h e r sub-set: speculative reason, similar to the other. H e r e
again, y o u can give y o u r reason for whatever it is. Reasons are
extremely prolific, they flourish, they crop u p like weeds. A s I said
earlier, they can be like brambles that proliferate so v i g o r o u s l y that
they make cultivation impossible. This means that i n the course of
this speculative imagination, speculative reason, there is n o p a r ­
ticular reason to p r e v e n t — a n d I think every reason w h y w e s h o u l d
not p r e v e n t — y o u r speculation a n d y o u r capacity for reason f r o m
exercising itself. But I think it s h o u l d not be a l l o w e d for too l o n g
to be p u r e l y a sort of r h a p s o d y , p u r e l y a state of affairs s u c h
as V a l e r y describes: it is i m a g i n e d that the poet goes to sleep or
48 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

i n d u l g e s i n a d r u n k e n orgy a n d wakes u p to be able to write d o w n

a p o e m . H e says that that is not the w a y i n w h i c h poetry is written;
i n fact the poet has to be m u c h nearer to b e i n g a mathematician. So
w h i l e I say that it is extremely important to exercise y o u r i m a g i n a ­
tion, to let it go, to give it a chance to flourish, at the same time
keep it u n d e r s o m e sort of discipline.
A t some point, w h i l e y o u are exercising y o u r i m a g i n a t i o n , y o u
are t r y i n g to imagine w h a t sort of p e r s o n this is that y o u are
m a k i n g contact w i t h . W h e n the p e r s o n comes into y o u r r o o m , it
m a y be possible to answer that question starting w i t h the a n s w e r —
the n a m e a n d address a n d telephone n u m b e r , etc., of that p e r s o n .
But y o u c a n go further than that; y o u can see whether it is a m a n
or w o m a n , tall or short, covered u p b y the clothes or revealed b y
them. Y o u have to interpret the clothes w o r n , the manners d i s ­
p l a y e d , a n d w o n d e r , ' C a n I imagine w h a t a p e r s o n is like w h o
looks like X w h o has just w a l k e d into m y r o o m ? ' C o u l d y o u ever
h a v e i m a g i n e d that that person, w h o looks just like a m a n , existed?
O r that that p e r s o n w h o looks just like a m a n but has r o u g e d
cheeks, or is w e a r i n g sports clothes, c o u l d have existed? If y o u are
frank, I think y o u h a v e to a d m i t y o u couldn't. T h e one thing that is
really incredible is a fact. C o n v e r s e l y , w h e n s o m e b o d y comes into
y o u r r o o m w h o looks just like a n y b o d y else, y o u still have to be
able to retain y o u r scepticism a n d say, ' C o u l d a n y b o d y w h o looks
just like a n y b o d y else possibly exist?' Y o u have to believe y o u r
senses a n d say, 'Yes, apparently'. T h e facts are incredible, but don't
be b e g u i l e d into b e l i e v i n g them because they are facts.

W h a t d o y o u believe, then? W h e n y o u k n o w w h a t y o u believe,

then y o u might think it useful to communicate it to s o m e b o d y w h o
isn't y o u . I can believe that it might be useful to try to c o m m u n i ­
cate to people w h o are not me what I think psycho-analysis is, or
h o w I s h o u l d be a psycho-analyst. I d o n ' t k n o w that it is really
possible, but it is possible that other people m i g h t get a n idea of
h o w I d o psycho-analysis if they are g i v e n a chance to f i n d out.
T h e y d o n ' t necessarily have to rely o n w h a t I say is h o w I d o i t —
they can f o r m their o w n o p i n i o n . E v e n w h e n y o u are not sure
about this matter of s o u l a n d super-soul, a super-ego, a n i d , a n d
a n atmen, perhaps y o u can come to some architectonic, s o m e i d e a
of h o w y o u w o u l d describe the structure of the personality as a
b y - p r o d u c t of what y o u see w h e n a person comes into y o u r
 UNTITLED 49

c o n s u l t i n g - r o o m a n d says, ostensibly quite truthfully, that they

w a n t a n analysis. Speculative imagination, speculative reason­
i n g — t o p u t into pictorial terms, a n e w - b o r n infant o p e n i n g its eyes
a n d staring at its mother. Imagine it or pictorialize it as y o u w i s h .
W h a t next? W h a t stage w o u l d succeed that of a speculation
a n d imaginative reconstruction of this kind? Possibly reconstruc­
tion has s o m e t h i n g to d o w i t h it; possibly w e d o attempt to
formulate a k i n d of architectonic, the b u i l d i n g - u p of a system of
thought into a stable f o r m . I can think of various versions of it,
like C a n t o r ' s exploration of matrices. W e are familiar w i t h F r e u d ' s
attempt to b u i l d u p a system; w e are also familiar w i t h the fact that
he felt that he h a d not completed his investigation, that his life w a s
not p r o l o n g e d sufficiently for h i m to satisfy e v e n himself that he
h a d c o m p l e t e d his system or w h a t he was capable of. T h e p r o b l e m
has to be passed o n , delegated to his s u r v i v o r s , the inheritance
passes to others w h o m i g h t be called his professional family, his
professional colleagues.
Recently e v e n the mathematicians have considered theories
like Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, the incompleteness
theory; they indicate h o w the same awareness of incompleteness,
uncertainty, has penetrated into things that have appeared to be so
settled, so serviceable, s u c h as mathematics, logic. E v e n a logical
construction is criticized o n logical g r o u n d s ; this means that there
is still s o m e sort of logic b u t o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of logic has to
e x t e n d — n o t that the logic is inadequate. T h i s is w h a t is h a p p e n i n g
w i t h the Intuitionists—Brouwer, H e y ting, etc.: they are investigat­
i n g or p r o p o s i n g a mathematics that arouses a g o o d deal of
hostility o n the part of the established mathematicians. In meta­
p s y c h o l o g y G o d e l ' s investigation, his theory about the L a w of the
E x c l u d e d M i d d l e , also arouses curiosity. W e c o u l d say that this
exercise of curiosity, of speculation, extends even into the realms of
speculation. T o that extent w e c o u l d say there is something that
hitherto has not been revealed b u t has been sufficiently revealed to
s h o w the u n k n o w n even i n psycho-analysis: the idea of there b e i n g
an unconscious, as w e l l as a quality of u n c o n s c i o u s — t h i n g s are
unconscious, w e have unconscious feelings a n d ideas.
It w o u l d be as w e l l to consider a n unconscious that has never
b e e n a n y t h i n g else, has never been conscious. I suspect that a clue
to this is g i v e n b y this theory of M e l a n i e K l e i n ' s — p r o j e c t i v e i d e n ­
50 TAMING WILD THOUGHTS

tification. E v e n the foetus develops a capacity for w h a t is later

called projective identification. In other w o r d s , it has feelings or
p r i m o r d i a l ideas that it tries to deal w i t h b y evacuating t h e m — a
p r i m i t i v e m e c h a n i s m d e r i v e d m a y b e f r o m the p h y s i c a l capacity
for evacuation, literally, so that the amniotic fluid is p o l l u t e d w i t h
m e c o n i u m . I a m suggesting that besides the conscious a n d u n c o n ­
scious states of m i n d , there can be another one. T h e nearest I c a n
get to g i v i n g it a p r o v i s i o n a l title is the inaccessible state of m i n d . It
m a y become inaccessible because the foetus gets r i d of it as s o o n as
it can. W h e t h e r it is a n awareness of its heartbeat, or a n awareness
of feelings of terror, of s o u n d , or of sight—the k i n d of sight experi­
enced through the pressure o n the optic pits b y changes of pressure
i n the intra-uterine fluid—all that m a y never have been w h a t w e
w o u l d call either conscious or unconscious. It is difficult to contem­
plate because w h e n w e are contemplating it, w e are i n a conscious
state of m i n d — l i k e w a k i n g u p a n d saying w e h a d a d r e a m . T h a t
is a n elaboration i n a state of m i n d appropriate to b e i n g w h a t w e
call 'awake'. But the d r e a m took p l a c e — i f it w a s a d r e a m — w h e n
w e w e r e asleep, a n d that is a quite different state of m i n d . So the
conscious account of this event, these places w e w e n t to, these
places w e saw, is certainly erroneous. It is possibly r a t i o n a l — F r e u d
claims that dreams are rational, that they c a n b e g i v e n rational
interpretations, w h i c h is perfectly true. But that is not of the d r e a m
itself. W h e n someone w h o is w i d e awake has one of those experi­
ences, w e say that he is hallucinated or d e l u d e d ; that state of m i n d
has not been investigated because it is so m u c h simpler to p u t that
patient into a mental hospital or into a n entirely different state of
m i n d b y the administration of drugs. A n d a n y w a y it has to be
investigated b y somebody w h o is w i d e awake, fully conscious, a n d
i n possession of all his senses. W h e n I say ' a l l his senses', I d o not
m e a n all of w h a t m y contemporaries a n d what rational a n d reason­
able people call 'senses'; I include senses of w h i c h I myself m a y not
be fully or particularly aware—the uncertainty p r i n c i p l e , the i n ­
completeness principle. So even the mathematicians cannot help
m e v e r y m u c h , because I think they themselves have reached a
similar impasse i n this p r o b l e m of trying to elaborate w h a t they
call rigorous thought or rigorous thinking. I have already touched
o n this i n talking about the fact that a state of rhapsody a n d expres­
sions of rhapsodic excitement aren't g o o d e n o u g h ; w e d o n e e d
 UNTITLED 51

s o m e sort of discipline, r i g o u r of thought. I haven't s a i d w h a t k i n d

of r i g o u r . I d o n ' t think I c o u l d . S o m e d a y , perhaps n o w , s o m e b o d y
w i l l be able to. But they h a v e first of all to be acquainted w i t h ,
a n d able to recognize, a state of m i n d that is not adequate. T h e r e is
not m u c h r o o m for d o g m a t i s m or bigotry; that has gone too far;
that seems to m e to cross the p o i n t of n o recall. S o m e b o d y w h o is
that a m o u n t d i s c i p l i n e d , or that a m o u n t rigorous, or that a m o u n t
b i g o t e d , is not w i t h i n reach of the realms about w h i c h w e n e e d to
k n o w more.
Since w e are n o w e m b a r k i n g o n a somewhat different theme,
w e w o u l d d o w e l l to consider w h a t the theme is that w e are e m ­
b a r k i n g u p o n . It has a great deal to d o w i t h this matter of
judgement, because b y this time w e have a lot of information avail­
able o n w h i c h to operate. If w e consider for a m o m e n t w h a t w e
gather, w h a t w e h a v e the intelligence to be able to gather, h o w are
w e to h a v e the w i s d o m to k n o w w h i c h part of this gathered infor­
m a t i o n is w o r t h y of further consideration at the present time? W h a t
is to p u t all this material into o r d e r — i n order of precedence? W h o
or w h a t chooses or decides or acts as the authority i n the person? It
m a y be possible that the matter c o u l d be i l l u m i n a t e d to s o m e
extent b y o b s e r v i n g . . . [tape ends]
REFERENCES

Bion, W . R. (1961). Experiences in Groups and Other Papers. L o n d o n :

Tavistock.
Bion, W . R. (1962a). A Theory of Thinking. International Journal of
Psycho-Analysis, 43: 4r-5. [Also in Second Thoughts: Selected Papers
on Psycho-Analysis. L o n d o n : Heinemann, 1967; reprinted L o n d o n :
Karnac Books, 1987.]
Bion, W . R. (1962b). Learning from Experience. L o n d o n : Heinemann
[reprinted L o n d o n : Karnac Books, 1984].
Bion, W . R. (1963). Elements of Psycho-Analysis. L o n d o n : Heinemann
[reprinted L o n d o n : Karnac Books, 1984].
Bion, W . R. (1965). Transformations. L o n d o n : Heinemann [reprinted
L o n d o n : Karnac Books, 1984].
Bion, W . R. (1974/75). Brazilian Lectures. Rio de Janeiro: Imago Editore
[new edition i n one volume, L o n d o n : Karnac Books, 1990].
Bion, W . R. (1977). Two Papers: The Grid and Caesura. Rio de Janeiro:
Imago Editore [reprinted L o n d o n : Karnac Books, 1989].
Bion, W . R. (1980). Bion in New York and Sao Paulo. Strathclyde: Clunie
Press.

53
54 REFERENCES

Bion, W . R. (1991). A Memoir of the Future (Books 1-3 with ' A Key').
L o n d o n : Karnac Books.
Bion, W . R. (1994). Cogitations (extended edition), ed. F. Bion. London:
Karnac Books.
Fitzgerald, E . (1859). Free translation of The Rubdiydt of Omar Khayyam.
F o r d , Richard (1845). A Hand-Bookfor Travellers in Spain, and Readers at
Home (2 volumes). London: John Murray.
Freud, S. (1911b). Formulations o n T w o Principles of Mental Func­
tioning. Standard Edition, 12 (pp. 213-226). London: Hogarth Press.
INDEX

Action, as used in Grid, 7,10

Classification, 5,13,14

Algebraic Calculus, as used in

of psychoanalytical objects, vii

Grid, 7
Clough, A. H„ 43

Alpha:
Cogitations, viii

-element(s), viii, xi, 29, 30

Communication(s):

as used in Grid, x, 7, 8,10,11

analysis of, 12,13

function, 10
artist's, 13

Archaic vestigial elements, x, 38,

over centuries, 33,42

44
difficulty of, 31-34,48

Aristotle, 9
mathematical, method of

Attention, as used in Grid, 7,10

recording analogous to, 5,

function of [Freud], 9
6

modes of, 46

Beatriz, R., 3
patient's, 47

Beta-element(s), viii, xi, 30, 40

rhythmical, x, 31

as 'box', x, 29, 36
Concept, as used in Grid, 7

as used in Grid, x, 7,8,10,11

Conception, as used in Grid, 7,

Bion in New York and Sao Paulo, 4

17

Bizarre objects, 11
Constant conjunction, 9,10,12,

'Box', beta-element as, x, 29, 36

16,18,19

Brazilian Lectures, 4
and implication of significance,

British Psycho-Analytical Society,

9

vii, 3
Counter-transference, viii, 6

Brouwer, L. E. J., 49
Curiosity, 40

Cantor, G., 49
Daniel, Book of, dreams in, 28

Categorization of statements, with

Definitory hypothesis, as used in

Grid, 8
Grid, 7, 9

Charcot, J. B., 35
Delusion, 41, 50

Circle, ix, xi, 18,19, 20

Denial, 46

Circular argument(s), x, 15,18-20

Desire and memory, xi

failure of, 18
importance of being rid of,

fruitful vs. sterile, 19

43-44

55
56 INDEX

D r e a m ( s ) , 30, 3 6
speculative, x, xi, 40,41, 4 6 , 4 7 ,

i n B i b l e , 2 8
49

c o m m u n i c a t i o n through, 34,41
use of i n supervision, 45

F r e u d on, 50
I n c o m p l e t e n e s s p r i n c i p l e , 49, 5 0

vs. hallucination, 50
Inquiry, as used i n G r i d , vii, 7

s i g n i f i c a n c e of, 28, 2 9
Interpretation, 5 , 1 3 - 1 4 , 1 7 , 1 9 - 2 1 ,

- t h o u g h t s , as u s e d i n G r i d , x, 7,
28, 40, 50

11
and material, 20

a s u s e d i n G r i d , 11
psycho-analytical, vs. m e a n i n g ,

-work-alpha, viii
14

as t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 1 4

E d i n b u r g h Conference, 18
and as statement, 13

Elements of Psycho-Analysis, vii,

Intuition:

viii, 4
d e v e l o p m e n t o f c a p a c i t y for, 5,

Evaluation, x, 39
21

E v a n s , A . , 3 3

Experiences in Groups, i x
t r a i n i n g of, 5 , 6

F i t z g e r a l d , E . , 31, 51
Joyce, J., x

Ford, R., 46,51

K - l i n k , u s e o f G r i d for, 8 , 1 4

Free associations, 44
Kenner, H . , 33

F r e u d , S., 9 - 1 1 , 1 7 , 2 8 , 3 5 , 3 7 , 4 9 , 5 0
Kipling, R , 34

Klein, M . , 49

G a m e , p s y c h o - a n a l y t i c a l , 14, 2 0

G e n e s i s , B o o k of, d r e a m s i n , 2 8
L , u s e o f G r i d for, 8

Godel, K . , 49
L a n c a s t e r , O . , 31

Grating, 4
L a n g u a g e , k i n d s of, 4 6

G r i d , v i i , 1-21
Learning from Experience, 3,11

G u i l t , a n d c a p a c i t y t o lie, 3 5
Leonardo da Vinci, 42

Los Angeles Psychoanalytic

H , u s e o f G r i d for, 8
Society, i x

H a l l u c i n a t i o n , 41, 5 0

Heisenberg, W. K . , Uncertainty
Mathematical c o m m u n i c a t i o n , 5,

P r i n c i p l e of, 4 9
6 , 1 6 , 30, 4 0

H e l i x , the G r i d as, 4
Mathematical counterpart of

H e y t i n g , A . , 4 9
thought, 19

H u g o , V , 3 0
M a t h e m a t i c s , u n c e r t a i n t y i n , 49,

Hume, D., 9
50

H y p o t h e s i s , definitory, 7
Meaning:

d e f i n i t i o n of t e r m as u s e d i n
v s . p s y c h o - a n a l y t i c a l i n t e r p r e t a ­

Grid, 9
tion, 14

o f s i g n i f i c a n t , i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of,

Identification, projective, 49
14

I m a g i n a t i o n , x, 45^49
Memoir of the Future, A, x

 INDEX 57

M e m o r y :
R e c o n s t r u c t i o n , x i , 4 9

a n d desire, x i
Resistance, 9

i m p o r t a n c e o f b e i n g r i d o f ,

43,44
Scientific D e d u c t i v e S y s t e m , as

and notation [Freud], 9

used i nGrid, 7

M i n d :
S h a k e s p e a r e , W . , 30, 32, 33, 4 2

a r c h a i c v e s t i g i a l a s p e c t s of, x
S p e c u l a t i v e i m a g i n a t i o n , x, x i , 40,

state o f (conscious, u n c o n s c i o u s ,
41, 46, 47, 4 9

inaccessible), 50
S p e c u l a t i v e r e a s o n i n g , xi, 40, 47,

M o d e l , asused i nGrid, 7,11,12,

49

19
Speech, articulate, 35

M o z a r t , W . A . , 4 2
Statement(s), 5, 8-20, 35

Myth, asused in Grid, 4,7,11,12

analyst's, G r i d u s e d t o classify,

13

Nachtraglichkeit, x
definition o fterm, 8

No-breast, 19
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as, 1 3

and thought, 18
l o o s e v s . r i g o r o u s , 11

N o - p e n i s , 19
m e a n i n g f u l n e s s of, 16

N o t a t i o n , a s u s e d i nG r i d , 7 , 1 0
p s y c h o - a n a l y s i s as, 2 0

and m e m o r y [Freud], 9
r i g h t n e s s / w r o n g n e s s of, 1 6

as transformations, 15

O , u s e o f G r i d for, 1 2 , 1 3
u n s a t u r a t e d , 11

Object(s):
S t r a v i n s k y , I. E , 3 1

b i z a r r e , 11
S u p e r v i s i o n , p s y c h o a n a l y t i c , x, 40,

psycho-analytical, 15,16
43, 4 5

c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of, v i i

O b s e r v a t i o n ( s ) , 5 , 1 3 - 1 5 , 20, 4 4
T a l a m o , P. B i o n , v i i - x i

psycho-analytical, 15
T o a , 12

t h e o r y of, 1 5
T a p , 12,14

O e d i p u s , asu s e d i n G r i d , vii, viii,

TPa, 12

7,10
Tpp, 12,13,14

Theory, 16

O m a r K h a y y a m , 31
m e a n i n g o f term as used i n

Grid, 15,16

P o i n c a r < § , J. H . , 9
r i g h t n e s s / w r o n g n e s s of, 15

P r e - c o n c e p t i o n , as u s e d i n G r i d , 7,
T h o r n e r , H . , 3

11,15,17
T h o u g h t ( s ) , passim

Projective identification, 49
archaic, 38

P s y c h o - a n a l y s i s (passim):
architectonics of, 4 0

m i n i m u m c o n d i t i o n s for, 43, 4 5 ­ d e v e l o p m e n t of, p a t i e n t ' s , v i i i

47
d r e a m - , x , 11

Psycho-analytic supervision, x
and no-breast, 18,19

R e a s o n i n g , s p e c u l a t i v e , xi," 4 0 , 4 7 ,
rigorous, 50

49
s t r a y , x , 2 7 , 28, 2 9 , 3 0

58 INDEX

Thought(s) (continued)
verbal 39

unconscious, xi
Transformations, ix

wild, 27
Two Papers, 4, 7

Transformation(s), ix, 12-16, 20

analyst's, ix
Uncertainty Principle, 49, 50

definition of term, 12
Unconscious thought, xi

Grid category of, 14

interpretation as, 13
Valery, P. A., 47

patient's, ix

statements as, 15
\|/, as used in Grid, 9

 Taming Wild Thoughts

b y Wilfred R. B i o n

Taming Wild Thoughts brings together previously u n p u b l i s h e d works from

two different periods of Bion's life w h i c h are l i n k e d , as Parthenope Bion
T a l a m o s a y s i n h e r I n t r o d u c t i o n , b y the c o n c e p t of c l a s s i f y i n g a n d
conceptualizing thought. T h e first paper, " T h e G r i d " , dates from 1963 a n d
is a d i s c u s s i o n of great c l a r i t y a b o u t o n e of B i o n ' s m o s t w i d e l y - u s e d
conceptual tools; it predates his more discursive paper of the same title
(published i n Two Papers) by several years. A s a teaching paper on this topic,
this version of " T h e G r i d " is without parallel, a n d will doubtless be of great
value to all students of his work.

T h e second part of the book consists of transcripts of two tape-recordings

m a d e b y Bion i n 1977. T h e y were apparently intended to serve as the first
chapters of a book w h i c h Bion never completed. T h e y underline his interest
in " w i l d " or " s t r a y " t h o u g h t s ; a n d they p r o v i d e a n i n s i g h t into his
extraordinary sensibility at the time of A Memoir of the Future.

Learning from Experience (1962), Elements

W. R. Bion's other writings include
of Psycho-Analysis (1963), Transformations (1965), Second Thoughts (1967
Attention and Interpretation (1970), Two Papers: The Grid and Caesura 097
Brazilian Lectures (1990), A Memoir of the Future (1990), Cogitations (1992
Clinical Seminars and Other Works (1994), and three volumes of autobiography:
The Long Weekend (1982), All My Sins Remembered (1985), a n d War Memoi
(1997).

Karnac Books, C o v e r illustration

58, Gloucester R o a d , C h i l d r e n of D r o w n e d F i s h e r m a n "
London SW7 4QY by Anthea C r a i g m y l e
C o v e r design by
M a l c o l m Smith
http://www.karnacbooks.com ISBN 1 85575 168 2