Blair Casdin and Justine Duhr, co-editors of Analysis Now, took some time to interview the current co-directors of the Manhattan Institute, Veronica Csillag, LCSW, and Steve Kirschner, LCSW, about their start at the institute and what they see for the future of psychoanalysis.

 

Blair Casdin and Justine Duhr: Can you tell us a bit about yourselves and the history of your involvement with the Manhattan Institute?

 

Veronica Csillag: I graduated from the Manhattan Institute in 2008. I joined the Colloquium Committee as a first-year candidate and eventually became its co-chair along with Naomi Cutner. It was a tremendous experience. Naomi and I have become close friends and I cherish this relationship. I also got to meet and make connections to some of the most influential and exciting people in contemporary psychoanalysis, including but not limited to Tony Bass, Andrea Celenza, Marcus Coelen, Jade McGleughlin, Francisco Gonzalez, Adrienne Harris, Anton Hart, Eyal Rozmarin, Avgi Saketopoulou, Don Stern, and Melanie Suchet. The list continues and does not even mention those affiliated with our institute of which there are many!

I spent the early part of my mental health career as an agency social worker, supervisor, teacher, etc. at the Jewish Board. While often trying, it was an extremely enriching journey. I learned so much there. At the Manhattan Institute, I have been conducting training analyses, teaching and supervising for years. Previously, I taught at NYU and the Jewish Board.

 

Steve Kirschner: I graduated from the Manhattan Institute in 2002. I joined the Curriculum Committee while still a candidate and eventually became co-chair. My first teaching opportunity was the Comparative Issues course in the One-Year Program. Later I began teaching Object Relations I. Last year I accepted the position of Manhattan Institute co-director.

 

BC & JD:  How’s the co-directorship going so far?

 

SK: I can’t imagine a better co-directing partner than Veronica. I think it’s going well as we move through the second year. Among the things we hope to accomplish in our tenure is to increase transparency between candidates and the administration of the institute. To foster greater diversity among candidates, faculty and supervisors. To support efforts to have a curriculum that combines respect for our history and the best contemporary developments. To reinforce the sense that the institute is all of us and the sum of our efforts. The more everyone participates, the more the institute can accomplish.

 

VC: I agree with Steve that we are a great match, which we did not know coming into this constellation. In challenging situations we tend to agree and we support one another even if we have different perspectives. Another lifelong friendship in the making, unless we screw it up, which I do not think we will.

 

BC & JD: You’ve had numerous articles published in psychoanalytic journals. How did you get into writing?

 

VC: Writing has always been important to me. I started to publish in psychoanalytic journals while at the Jewish Board and I continue to do so. I enjoy the acknowledgement, and beyond that psychoanalytic writing helps me process clinical experience and consolidate my theoretical perspectives.

 

BC & JD: What’s your favorite thing about the Manhattan Institute? What’s your favorite thing about co-directing the Manhattan Institute?

 

SK: My favorite thing about the Manhattan Institute is the people who constitute the institute, the candidates and faculty. I’ve had the opportunity to learn from, work with and teach a lot of amazing people. My favorite thing about being co-director? You’ll have to ask me when it’s over.

 

BC & JD: Where do you see the institute headed in the future? And how about psychoanalysis in general?

 

SK: Obviously the future of the Manhattan Institute and the future of psychoanalysis are deeply intertwined. I think one of the most significant changes that has taken place has been the creation of the Licensure Qualifying Program in Psychoanalysis. This has opened training opportunities to people from a much broader range of backgrounds. It has been both invigorating and challenging and I think the institute and the field of psychoanalysis are still figuring out how to best train, support and utilize these new candidates. Another thing I see in the future is greater racial diversity. There used to be a gender gap in the field and that’s gone. I hope the same thing happens to the racial gap. I think the commonalities between psychoanalysts are greater than ever and that this has been for the good. Theoretical discord is resolving into a greater sense of shared understanding.

 

VC: The future of psychoanalysis? Who knows? We live in an autocratic and dangerously illiberal era, the kind typically hostile to psychoanalysis. Still, in many ways, psychoanalysis is thriving. It is being reinvigorated by a radical focus on egalitarianism and inclusivity and a renewed interest in interdisciplinary communication. Geographically, it is spreading to uncharted territories.

How will the Manhattan Institute further unfold? The institute needs to adjust to an analytic landscape that has shifted. The Interpersonal tradition has mostly been absorbed into Relational theory, in no small part thanks to the extraordinary efforts and accomplishments of one of the founders of our institute, Irwin Hirsch, and his peers. Endless gratitude – you know who you are.

We also need to bend to make accommodations for the candidates coming to us without any prior clinical experience. They may need additional guidance, but they also need to be appreciated for who they are: often highly accomplished people in their own right, willing to take a chance and leave the safety of their former position to immerse themselves in psychoanalysis and pursue a challenging professional future.

Finally and, perhaps most importantly, we need to move decisively in the direction of transparency and intersectional diversity, including but yet again not limited to economic status, race, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality. I also wish to see more of our candidates and recent graduates welcomed into leadership positions at the institute.

 

BC & JD: On a lighter note, what books are you currently reading?

 

VC: An excellent book by André Green, Illusions and Disillusions of Psychoanalytic Work. I’m usually reading about nine books at any given time!

 

BC & JD: Can you tell us about one or two of them? Any fiction?

 

VC: The last novel I read is Less by Andrew Sean Greer, light and engaging. Also Richard Flanagan’s The Narrow Road to the Deep North, which is the exact opposite. A very powerful book if you have the stomach for it – there are a lot of gruesome details!

 

SK: I’m reading two novels: Transit by Rachel Cusk and Fates and Furies by Lauren Groff. Also reading Moments of Meeting in Psychoanalysis edited by Susan Lord. Over the summer I finally read Moby Dick.

 

BC & JD: How was it?

 

SK: A profound book, but he really needed a better editor!

 

 

Share this post!

 

If you enjoyed this post, we recommend:
The Psychoanalytic Community: MIP Candidates Speak by Justine Duhr, MFA