clare winnicott

• ikinci dunya savaşı ertesinde ingiltere'de kol gezen öksüz çocuk meselesine donald woods winnicott ile eğilmiş psikanalist.
• eşinin vefatından sonra kelimelere döktüğü onun hayatına dair gözlemlerinden bir tutam:
  
  "however, there is one detail he does not describe, and which ı observed both at his paddington green clinic and in his work with evacuee children in oxfordshire during the last war. he attempted to round off and make significant a child’s visit to him by giving the child something to take away which could afterwards be used and/or destroyed or thrown away. he would quickly reach for a piece of paper and fold it into some shape, usually a dart or a fan, which he might play with for a moment and then give to the child as he said goodbye. ı never saw this gesture refused by any child. ıt could be that this simple symbolic act contained the germ of ideas he developed in the “use of an object” paper written at the end of his life. there could also be a link here with the transitional object concept.
  
  ın attempting to give some idea of d.w.w.’s capacity to play ı have somehow slipped into an historical or biographical sequence of writing without intending to do so. this is in no way meant to be a biography. what ı have been trying to do is to illustrate how he related to people at different stages of his life and in different situations. but ı must now abandon the historical perspective which so far protected me, and bring him briefly into focus for myself and in relation to our life together. from now on “ he” becomes “ w e” and ı cannot disentangle us.
  ...
  early in our relationship ı had to settle for the idea that donald was, and always would be, completely unpredictable in our private life, except for his punctuality at meal times and the fact that he never failed to meet me at the station when ı had been away. this unpredictability had its advantages, in that we could never settle back and take each other for granted in day-to-day living. what we could take for granted was something more basic that ı can only describe as our recognition and acceptance of each other’s separateness. ın fact the strength of our unity lay in this recognition, and implicit in it is an acceptance of the unconscious ruthless and destructive drives which were discussed as the final development of his theories in the “use of an object” paper. our separateness left us each free to do our own thing, to think our own thoughts, and possess our own dreams, and in so doing to strengthen the capacity of each of us to experience the joys and sorrows which we shared."
  
  psycho-analytic explorations, 1988