Entry 12:

Dear Glen, Peggy, and Phil,

I would like to conclude the season with one final observation. Insofar as our weekly discussion of The Sopranos has attracted a sizable readership--and the Slate people tell us it has--this deserves some comment. It may not be obvious at first, but some of the same things that make people curious about the Mafia also make them curious about psychoanalysis. For we too appear as a closed organization, with our own initiation rights, rituals, vocabulary, practices, and codes of conduct. This, combined with the fact that we deal with the fundamental issues of life--love, sexuality, intimacy, separation, loss, aggression, and death--makes people naturally interested in finding out what we're about, just as they are interested in learning about the workings of the Mafia.

Currently, psychoanalysis has a rather bad image in the public eye. It is often seen as insular, stuck in the past, dogmatic, arrogant--and, in general, rigid and uptight. Now, I don't believe it is either possible or desirable to remove the cultic elements from analysis altogether. (This requires a long discussion.) But if, through our exchanges, we have been able to show that analysts can be open, involved in contemporary culture, can disagree with one another, have a sense of humor about themselves and the world, and enjoy themselves at the same time, we have accomplished something for "this thing of ours."

Joel