Volume 4, No. 2, Art. 36 – May 2003

The Analysis of Counter-Transference Reactions Is a Means to Discern Latent Interview-Contents

Stephan Marks & Heidi Mönnich-Marks

Abstract: Counter-transference reactions may help to discern latent interview-contents. This will be described with an example from the research project Geschichte und Erinnerung [History and Memory]. In this project interviews with men and women, who agreed to and actively supported Hitler and National Socialism (ordinary bystanders and perpetrators) have been conducted and evaluated.

Key words: counter-transference, National Socialism, interviews, supervision, hermeneutics, interpretation, unconscious contents, latent content

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

2. The Research Project

3. Counter-Transference

4. An Interview-Section and its First Interpretation

5. A Specific Counter-Transference

6. Methodological Implications: Organisation

7. Methodological Implications: Theory—and Second Interpretation of the Interview Section

8. Concluding Remarks

Acknowledgements

Notes

References

Authors

Citation

 

1. Introduction

What had motivated millions of Germans to join the Nazi-movement? What made Hitler and National Socialism possible? How could they manage to win the hearts of so many ordinary, intelligent and, as it seemed, well-educated people? The renowned German historian Joachim FEST recently was asked this question. He admitted: "I have to say that I'm still not finished with this question. I still haven't found the really convincing answer. No historian has found it, it is still a mystery" (FEST, 2001, p.79, our translation). Similarly, social psychologist Harald WELZER wrote: "Until today, National Socialism is the most explored and the least understood phenomena of historical research and no approach has managed to get hold of what happened" (WELZER 1997, p.9, our translation). These statements may contain some exaggeration. Nevertheless, there is a certain imbalance or deficit in research on the subject of National Socialism and Holocaust. Looking at the numerous literature, several observations can be made: [1]

There is a high number of publications about Hitler and other Nazi-leaders, but comparatively few about those millions of Germans, who had agreed to and supported Hitler and the Nazi-regime, the millions of bystanders and perpetrators.1) What were their motives? What moved them to join, to voluntarily enlist, to over-fulfil the orders, to work towards Hitler, as Ian KERSHAW (1998) had called it? What excited and fascinated them? Daniel GOLDHAGEN (1996) pointed out, that these questions have seldom been asked and worked out so far. Only few studies are based on interviews with Nazi-bystanders and perpetrators (for ex. STEINBACH 1995; SCHNEIDER, STILLKE & LEINEWEBER 1996; WELZER, MONTAU & PLASS 1997; PAUL 1999). Even though Theodor ADORNO (1997) had called to intensely explore these men and women and their motives, because the roots of Auschwitz are to be found in the perpetrators, not in the victims. [2]

Opposite to this call, research on National Socialism was often distant to the persons of the bystanders and perpetrators. Often researchers focussed on super-individual institutions and structures, data, numbers etc. This was necessary—let alone considering the efforts to deny or belittle the Holocaust. Yet, this may not suffice to explain the basic question mentioned above. Because institutions and structures are empty and without effect without the people; facts are always created by people. Again: What motivated those millions of Germans who wanted and actively supported Hitler and National Socialism? [3]

2. The Research Project

These reflections were the starting point for the research project Geschichte und Erinnerung [History and Memory], founded in 1998 (MARKS 1999, 2001). It is connected with the University of Education in Freiburg, Germany; financed by the Ertomis foundation. Our research team is made up of professional from the fields of social science, history, social work, social education, psychology, psychoanalysis and education. All team members were born after WWII, i.e. all belong to the first post-war generation.2) [4]

We conducted interviews with 43 men and women who had agreed to and actively supported Hitler and the Nazi-movement. We were mainly interested in ordinary people, not so much in prominent Nazi-leaders or extraordinary mass-murders. In addition and for purpose of comparison, 11 additional interviews were conducted by students (i.e. members of the second post-war generation) as well as several intergenerational discussion- and sharing-groups. These interviews are being transcribed and evaluated using depth psychological-hermeneutic [tiefenhermeneutische] (LORENZER 1986; H.D. KOENIG 1997a, 1997b) and linguistic methods (DEPPERMANN 1999). In doing so, we pursue the following questions: [5]

a) What motives are expressed in the interviews? What made the Nazi movement attractive to the interviewees? b) In what way is the experience of the Nazi years still present, cognitively and emotionally, in the interviewees today? c) What happens when people, who had been actively involved in National Socialism, and members of the following (first post-war) generation communicate about National Socialism? [6]

The findings are transferred into the relevant fields of practice, especially: a) school teaching on the topic of National Socialism and Holocaust and its prevention, Holocaust education, (SCHWENDEMANN & MARKS 2003) and b) geriatrics and hospice care for senior citizens (SEHRIG, MARKS, NICKOLAI & STEINEBACH 2002). Following some of our experiences and findings. [7]

3. Counter-Transference

A methodological problem arose when we made, over and over again, the following observations: Most of the manifest interview-texts appeared to be relatively banal—compared to the powerful latent (unconscious) emotional messages between the lines, occurring during the interviews: Most of the interviewees took the floor in most dominating and self-opinionated ways. In the course of the interviews we, the interviewers, often felt overrun, bulldozed, emptied, saddened, confused, sickened, abused or knocked down. During the nights following an interview we were often haunted by nightmares about war or persecution. In order to cushion, understand and work through these injuries occurring during the interviews we integrated intervision (i.e. peer supervision) and supervision,3) team and individual, in our research (MARKS 2001; MARKS & MÖNNICH-MARKS 2002a). [8]

The reactions of the interviewers on the interview interaction are regarded as counter-transferences. In the course of the 20th century, depth psychology changed its perception of counter-transference reactions. Sigmund FREUD had been identified with the traditional (pre-HEISENBERG) natural scientific understanding of research: the analyst = researcher should be neutral, distanced, objective, antiseptic without any subjective responses. So when FREUD observed to have emotional reactions towards clients (such as anger or falling in love), he became frightened, was embarrassed and tried to control the situation. Not before the 1950s psychoanalysts began to discover, that: yes, such reactions do happen and they indicate something4) in the analyst. But even more than that, they are a most precious instrument (via regia) to recognise those aspects in the client that he has forgotten, repressed or denied: latent contents, that the client has not to his conscious avail, and therefore, cannot speak out consciously. Those contents inevitably are being re-enacted (FREUD 1914) and projected (transference) on the analyst, who in this way is being forced to experience them (counter-transference). This process is called projective identification (K. KOENIG 1998). [9]

Correspondingly, the interviewer's counter-transference reactions indicate those emotions and contents, that interviewees have not to their conscious avail. Such contents are hard to discern in the transcript (JUREIT 1998, 2000). In order to fully understand the interview, we need to look at and analyse the manifest text as well as the latent messages during interviews: The messages "between the lines", its atmosphere and scenery, the way how something is being said as well as counter-transferences. Georges DEVEREUX has established the method of counter-transference analysis in his book "From Anxiety to Method in the Behavioural Sciences", 1967. In order to comprehend those latent messages, we established an elaborate procedure of evaluating the interviews, including intervision and supervision, individual and team (see below). [10]

4. An Interview-Section and its First Interpretation

Following the translation of a section from the interview with Mr. Plessner, born in 1918, taken from the beginning (abbreviated by 50 percent):

"... Remember 1932, Hitler's visit (...) We went there and took part. And we, the Jungvolk and Hitler-Youth leaders formed a lane and then he passed us, the horse whip in his hand, the dog whip in his hand, bareheaded, his hair fell down over his brow, he looked at each one, I saw him pass, pass, I mean, I saw him pass from a distance of five feet and he looks each one in the eyes. And that was impressive ... Imagine the youth of the village was simple, modest. The boys as well as the girls were busy in agriculture from morning till night (...) When we came home from school, there was a note on the table: you go to such and such a place and take the hoe with you or take that and late in the evening the boys were so tired, they fell asleep on the slate and the girls. And laid down and the mother took, took the, took up the boys, the children and said: now, you go to bed and early tomorrow morning you'll quickly do your homework so that the teacher is content. Everything was in a bad state. And then the Third Reich came. And we experienced camping out, we experienced the nation's youth day, no school on Saturdays, just sports (...) The youth was in motion. The youth was incited. The youth suddenly had a meaning. Coming from the monotony of the rural, the rural family and from the, from all that where nothing happened that caught the boy, no idealism, no book, nothing, suddenly the young man is addressed. He is motivated. Without knowing and without realizing that it might have a political background. Not at all. For us, the background was a liberation, and that suddenly one could, pathetically spoken, be proud to be a German boy (...) Here in the frontier area, 4 kilometres from the Rhine river, in H., right by the Maginot-line.5) And when I was at school in R., we have the essay and the dictation to the sounds of the trumpets, the attacking trumpet of the French. And on the cupola of the Maginot-line the Senegal-Negroes were standing with their tribal marks, with their scars and looked over at us. Blue-grey uniforms, like ghosts and like evil spirits and that impressed us very much. And naturally we, as young Germans, had other feelings than the young French or thing. We were from the pariah of the people, we knew that we had to experience much much much evil because of the Versailles dictation. And that we were indebted with x-billion gold-marks, payments and things like that (...) Germany had to be reintegrated into the family of European peoples because that, being the heart of Europe, couldn't be a starving country, which was always to be supported and restrained by the other peoples (...) One demanded that Germany should become great. And Hitler was the incarnation of this idea ..." [11]

Mr. Plessner expressed a number of reasons that motivated him to join Hitler and the Nazis: He experienced the Nazi movement as liberation from the monotony of rural life, its poverty and hard labour. The movement gave meaning to his life, allowed him to travel, meet new people and experience community. He was impressed by Hitler, who allowed him to be proud to be a German etc. However, in addition to these manifest interview-contents, there may be more. Following we will inform you about the counter-transference reaction of the interviewer and from there will try to make more sense of the interview. [12]

5. A Specific Counter-Transference

The counter-transference to this interview—as well as many of our interviews—consisted in: shame. In the following some basic information about social and psychological aspects of shame, based mainly on the standard work by Leon WURMSER The Mask of Shame (1994); as well as HILGERS 1997; BASTIAN & HILGERS 1990; SEIDLER 1997; ASSMANN 1999; NECKEL 1991; LETHEN 1994: [13]

Numerous cultures condemn certain traits or behaviours as shameful, especially: weakness (for example soft, shy or homosexual boys, or those who fear aggression; weaklings); social weakness (such as poverty, dependency, accepting charity, debts, losing, being uneducated, making mistakes); cowardliness, treason. Expressing emotions, tenderness or kindness is regarded unmanly especially in cultures and subcultures of Germanic origin (WURMSER 1994). In shame-cultures (LETHEN 1994), fear of disgrace and shame is a major mechanism of social control that protects the existing order more than laws and prohibitions ever could. In so-called primitive societies, any deviance from the commonly shared opinion, any individuality, or any individual and subjective interpretation may cause being ridiculed that may lead to suicide (WURMSER 1994). Achilles, for example, feared disgrace more than peril and death. Ethics of feudal and militaristic societies (ASSMANN 1999) are based on the polarity of honour and shame. [14]

Shame is a social affect (NECKEL 1991; WURMSER 1994). While all emotions are somewhat contagious (GOLEMAN 1995), even more so this is true for shame: People are not only ashamed of themselves, but also, for example, of their children, parents, ethnic group or nation. [15]

Shame, in its positive aspect, protects the individual's integrity, its borders. Psychologically, shame goes back to earliest childhood: The child is hungrily seeking with its eyes for responding, mirroring eyes. From earliest age, the child has the following basic double-desire: The desire to look and watch, to admire and be fascinated and impressed and, at the same time, the desire to express and show himself or herself, to impress and fascinate others. The early stages of shame are created in the eye contact between mother and early child, when looking and being seen, fascinating and being fascinated are still one and are the major form of communication. This way, love/not-being-loved and power/powerlessness are expressed. [16]

If this communication is disturbed, the child's later life will be impaired by low self-esteem and pathological shame: Even newborn babies already turn away their face or body. At the age of 2 or 3 months, babies turn away their eyes, face or body consistently, when the mother is unreliable in her closeness/distance or if she is obtrusive. At the age of 8 months these reactions of withdrawal develop into fear of strangers and, from the 18th month and on, into shame. Pathological shame is the child's response to traumatic exposure, humiliation or rejection: The child, hungrily seeking with its eyes, finds no responding (mirroring) eyes, it meets cold or obtrusive (evil) eyes. [17]

The emotions that come with shame are: being nothing, empty, freezing, wanting to disappear. Consequently, in order to disappear, someone may become expression-less. The emotional life is frozen under the ice of denial. Therefore the face is tense, petrified. The experience of life is being derealised and depersonalised: one6) (!) doesn't talk about him- or herself. One doesn't show emotions, since emotions are the most private and vulnerable aspects of oneself. Therefore tenderness, love, soft moods, emotions of dependency (perceived as weakness) are being repulsed. Humanistic values and ideals are disdained, that is: cynicism. Further strategies to defend shame consist in disdain, the flip side of shame: Passive is turned into active; instead of oneself, others are humiliated, ridiculed, despised, treated like nonexistent, eradicated, done away with them as if they were dirt; especially those that are regarded as weak (vulnerable, helpless). People are depreciated to objects, quantified to mere numbers and parts of a mass. Another defence strategy consists in efforts to restore one's honour. Grandiose claims and idealisations have the purpose to compensate the feeling of unworthiness. [18]

6. Methodological Implications: Organisation

In the following two chapters we will sketch methodological implication. Even though there is probably no technique to unerringly pin down counter-transference reactions and their meanings, there are nevertheless several steps we can take: [19]

It took some time to discern this specific counter-transference reaction, since each interviewer kept this emotion to him-/herself for a while. First it was experienced as an individual failure and discrepancy from the pre-HEISENBERG scientific ideal of the objective, neutral, distanced researcher. Since shame is such painful emotion, "one" tends to hide oneself and not disclose what appeared to be failures—unless the team is a safe place to share. Therefore trust had to be build in our research team before its members were able to disclose the shame—and subsequently learn, that colleagues felt the same. In a hierarchical organised research team with highly competitive and dependent members the aspect of shame hardly could have been discerned; the organisational structure of a research project and the relations between team members do matter: [20]

In general, social manners in universities are depersonalised (for example, BREUER, MRUCK & ROTH 2002, paragraph 1] observed "the rhetorical strategy of avoiding the use of the first person pronouns in scientific texts"). Often university interactions are "soaked" (AMATI 19907)) with disdain and cynicism (SLOTERDIJK 1983)8), turning human beings into numbers and parts of a mass. Since shame is contagious and since defence of shame is destructive to honest sharing in groups, it maybe not be easy, but crucial to protect the research team from such influences—in order to allow trust within the research team to grow. [21]

Ideally, sharing and discourses (intervision, team supervision and evaluating groups) should to be dialogical, symmetric and cooperative. Therefore differences in status, economic or vocational dependencies etc. should be avoided. Also, team members need to have specific qualifications, that normally are not part of universities' curricula, but rather basic for professions such as psychotherapy, counselling or supervision (even though research certainly is not psychotherapy and team supervision is not a Selbsterfahrungs-Gruppe [experiential group]: communicative and cooperative qualifications, awareness, psycho-social competence, ability to be aware of, deal with and express emotions (TIETEL 2000, note 8), however we want to call it. [22]

Also, the kind of insights we are dealing with here cannot be produced in the input-output way a computer program works. They occur in moments of kairos (Greek term for favourable, decisive moment), therefore they require quality time. [23]

Supervision through external supervisors is crucial as well when dealing with violent topics such as National Socialism. Counter-transference reactions are unavoidable; not being aware of them may destroy the team (SCHNEIDER, STILLKE & LEINEWEBER 1996) and is a loss of important data. In our research supervision and analysis are interwoven in the following way: [24]

In addition to the field notes (project journal) written down, intervision discourses are conducted and tape recorded. We found these discourses to be necessary not only for the psychological hygiene of the interviewers, but also in order to document and work through their cognitive, emotional and physical counter-transference reactions. Intervision (dialoguing) proved to be more productive than mere (monologuing) reflections and the taking of notes (just as, for example, psychotherapy allows for different learning processes to be made rather than just self reflection or written reflections in a journal). [25]

Each interview is evaluated by at least two different small groups. Group members listen to the interview-tape, stop (if necessary: rewind and re-listen, re-rewind etc.) and express all their cognitive, emotional or physical reactions, all fantasies, images, observations about the interview, such as ear-catching breaks, peculiar statements, interruptions, corrections, subtle undertones or timbre of the voice etc. These evaluations too are recorded—as well as team supervision sessions, moderated by an external supervisor, in which selected interview passages and team processes are evaluated and worked through. In addition and whenever necessary, each team member undergoes individual supervision with further external supervisors (these sessions were not recorded). With these different stages of evaluation, we aim at gathering as many observations as possible. Carefully, these observations are formulated into hypothesises. Finally these hypotheses are substantiated, qualified or defeated through the linguistic analysis of the text and its mechanics (DEPPERMANN 2001). Provisional results are being presented and discussed in a research colloquia open to team members, interested faculty members and students. [26]

Analysis of the interviews are based primarily on tapes, not transcripts. Not because of their "reality" or superiority (ASHMORE & REED 2000), rather because emotions can be more clearly identified through voices rather than transcripts (FLESSNER 2001). The close connection between voice and emotion is expressed in German language with the close relation of the terms Stimme [voice] and Stimmung [mood]. Acoustic physician Gerald FLEISCHER (1990) regards the voice as a carrier of emotions: the soul is connected with the ear. However, this carriage of emotions from speaker to listener/evaluator is not identical with, for example, transporting documents from one computer to another by disc. Misinterpretations are possible, caused for example by age, individual experience, education, social background etc. of the listener (DEVEREUX 1967). Therefore, reactions and observations need to be shared and discussed in group discourses (see above) in order to find intersubjective consensus. [27]

7. Methodological Implications: Theory—and Second Interpretation of the Interview Section

As mentioned above, we pursue the following questions: a) What motives are expressed in the interviews? We will return to this question later. b) In what way is the experience of the Nazi years still present, cognitively and emotionally, in the interviewees today? c) What happens when people, who had been actively involved in National Socialism, and members of the following generation communicate about National Socialism? The second and third questions serve the purpose to systematise our search for counter-transference reactions: [28]

Regarding the second question, we observed the following: Interviewees at times spoke disdainfully about the Holocaust and its victims; for example one of them called the Holocaust Judenkäs [Jewish rubbish]. This caused shame in the interviewer if s/he failed to protest against this defamation: because s/he wanted to be a "good" interviewer; because s/he didn't notice right away after hours of most confusing monologues (MARKS 2003b); or because s/he didn't have the courage to protest. This way, the interviewer is being affected by the interviewee's shame (which has contagious quality). The cycle of victimisation (shame being transplanted from the perpetrator into the victim) is repeated in the interview-interaction. [29]

In general interviewees spoke about National Socialism and Holocaust in derealising and depersonalising ways. They didn't talk about themselves ("I"), rather about "we" or "one". One doesn't show emotions. One talks without being involved, like an outsider, even about war crimes and mass murder. One speaks about "these things" as if they belong to a distant past. As mentioned before, those aspects, that interviewees have forgotten, repressed or denied are being re-enacted and projected on the interviewer (transference) who this way is being forced to experience them (counter-transference). In this case: The interviewer becomes the object of the interviewee's defence of shame. [30]

This leads to the third question: Re-listening to the interviews and the tapes of the intervision-discourses we found a multitude of (mostly subtle) means used9) by the interviewees to shame the interviewers; just a few examples from different interviews: a) Once an interviewer right away at the door was called a bungler. b) At the end of an interview, a (51 year old) interviewer was given a chocolate bar which in Germany is named Kinderschokolade [children's chocolate]. c) Frequently interviewers are quizzed about most detailed knowledge, for example about movements of troops in far away areas of Russia. In the case they don't know the correct answer, they are reproached: "You don't know that?!" and, later: "Oh, you don't know that either?!" Interviewers were put in the role of ignorant. d) Often interviewers were depreciated to objects; their questions done away with in non-dialogical, disrespectful ways, treated like nonexistent. [31]

Reflecting on these experiences in evaluation- and supervision-discourses, we became aware of the ways interviews triggered shame in the interviewers, touching painful personal experiences. Thereby each interviewer experienced individual aspects of shame: shame for having been manipulated or used by the interviewee, for having been too naïve, "weak", "coward" or "inferior" when with the interviewee, or for not having known enough details about that time etc. As we worked through the interviewers' reactions it became clear, that the counter-transference reactions have to do with us, the interviewers' history: Members of the first post-war generation, we all had been socialised by parents, teachers etc. of the interviewee's generation. During our childhood and youth, shame had been an essential part of education ("Shame on you!"), some of which came up again in the interview situation. The specific interview introduced here had triggered painful memories of the interviewer (such as having been shamed and humiliated by his teachers). [32]

However, it was the interview with Mr. Plessner that had triggered those memories: in the way he interacted with the interviewer ("you don't know that either?!") and in the way he talked about others. For example, Mr. Plessner spoke with a disdainful tone of voice about today's "younger people" who "don't know the first thing" about National Socialism, "smart alecks", "wiseacres" and about "weaklings" in his Nazi youth group. So listening to the interviewees' words and voices it became plausible, that shame also has to do with him and (in combination with numerous other interviews) with the topic addressed: National Socialism. Therefore being aware of and analysing counter-transference reactions was a helpful tool to recognise latent interview contents: [33]

Several aspects of shame and its defence are expressed by the interviewee. He mentions several reasons that are linked with shame: the poverty, hard labour, lack of education and "bad state" of village life. Also his country, Germany, was poor, in debts, was "pariah" (i.e.: excluded, outside the caste-system), was restrained by other peoples, was not a valuable state. For the interviewee, Hitler was "the incarnation" of the idea to restore Germany's honour and to compensate it's shameful defeat in WWI and its debts. [34]

Notice how often eyes are mentioned by the interviewee: His parents were too busy to look at him when he came home from school; more precisely: "the" mother, as the interviewee expresses in a depersonalised way (his father is not mentioned at all). From beyond the "border" African-French soldiers were looking down on him "like evil ghosts and like evil spirits", i.e. with evil eyes. His hungrily seeking eyes finally were mirrored by Hitler, who (supposedly) was looking in his eyes—which is reported quite often in different interviews. This moment is present to him: notice him switch from past to present when he speaks about this very moment. [35]

So what motivated millions of Germans to join the Nazi movement? Based on our interviews and their evaluations one of the answers seems to be as follows: Parts of the German population experienced defeat of WWI, Versailles treaty10), poverty, economic crisis, unemployment and weakness (i.e. inner strife) of the Weimar Republic as shameful. National socialism managed to utilise the wide spread shame (LETHEN 1994) for their purposes by offering and legitimating opportunities to defend shame: with a cynical ideology of toughness and thereby defence against weakness and humanistic values; with opportunities to humiliate others, especially Jewish fellow citizen11), discriminating, ridiculing and deriding them, doing away with them as if they were dirt; dehumanising them to objects and mere numbers12) and eradicating them with efforts to restore Germany's honour; with idealisations of Hitler and Germany ("master race") and grandiose claims to world domination (MARKS & MÖNNICH-MARKS 2002b). [36]

8. Concluding Remarks

In the beginning of our research, we were taken by surprise by counter-transference reactions which we had not expected to be so powerful. Obviously, important yet latent contents were expressed in this way—so we introduced intervision and supervision in our work. However, one of these counter-transference reactions was yet another ball game. Since shame is such a painful emotion, one tends to not disclose it—unless the team is a safe place to share. Therefore a lot of trust had to be build in our team before team members were able to share this specific reaction. However, trust doesn't appear from nowhere, it requires specific qualifications and organisational conditions. [37]

The different counter-transferences we observed during our research allowed us to become aware of latent aspect of the interview-texts and, subsequently, of National Socialism. So we learned to appreciate counter-transference reactions; the "subjectivity" of the researchers turned out to be the sounding-board that allowed unconscious contents of the interviewee to manifest. [38]

Acknowledgements

We want to thank the Ertomis Stiftung for funding the research project and the team-members, who all contributed to the results presented here: Simone ADAMS, Johannes HÖCHNER, Jutta HEPPEKAUSEN, Margrit KAMBACH, Annette KRINGS, Doris LÄER, Jürgen SEHRIG, Detlef VOGEL, Hildegard WENZLER-CREMER. Also thank you Erika KITTLER, Ludwig BRUEGGEMANN, Herbert UHL, Anja SCHÜLER, Peter NIEMANN and the interviewees.

Notes

1) The terms perpetrator and bystander are written in quotation marks because they seem too narrow respectively vague in order to comprehend the wide range of Nazi's activities. Also both terms are concerned with people's actions, while our research is concerned with people's emotions and motives. <back>

2) The term generation is imprecise, even dubious, yet it expresses the transgenerational quality of unresolved Nazi-past, which is transmitted in unconscious ways (BOHLEBER 1997). In some regards this transmittance is being repeated in the interview interaction. <back>

3) Supervisors not in the sense of superiors as in the business world, but in the sense of psychoanalytical Balint-groups or counselling. <back>

4) Counter-transference reactions have to do with the analyst's personality, life story, attitude, relations, gender etc. (K. KOENIG 1998). <back>

5) French fortification along the German boarder. <back>

6) In German: man. <back>

7) AMATI (1990) uses the term "soaking" to describe the continuing psychological effects of a torture system, as it manifests in gestures, modes of speaking and cynical defensive attitudes. <back>

8) WELZER (1997, p.9) suggests to reflect on the connections between scientific thinking and National Socialism (MARKS 2003a). <back>

9) We doubt that interviewees use these means consciously as the term "used" suggests. <back>

10) Schandvertrag [disgrace treaty] as it is often called. <back>

11) As well as homosexuals, who, in Nazi-ideology, were regarded as weak and handicapped people. <back>

12) This was literally carried out with the tattooed numbers of concentration camp prisoners. <back>

References

Adorno, Theodor (1997). Education after Auschwitz. In Helmut Schreier & Matthias Heyl (Eds.), Never again! The Holocaust's challenge for educators (pp.11-20). Hamburg: Krämer.

Amati, Silvia (1990). Die Rückgewinnung des Schamgefühls. Psyche, 44, 724-740.

Ashmore, Malcolm & Reed, Darren (2000, December). Innocence and Nostalgia in Conversation Analysis: The Dynamic Relations of Tape and Transcript [45 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [Online Journal], 1(3). Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-00/3-00ashmorereed-e.htm [Date of Access: February 12, 2001]

Assmann, Aleida (1999). Teil I. In Aleida Assmann & Ute Frevert, Geschichtsvergessenheit Geschichtsversessenheit. Vom Umgang mit deutschen Vergangenheiten nach 1945 (pp.17-147). Stuttgart: DVA.

Bastian, Till & Hilgers, Micha (1990). Kain. Die Trennung von Scham und Schuld am Beispiel der Genesis. Psyche, 44, 1100-1112.

Bohleber, Werner (1997). Trauma, Identifizierung und historischer Kontext. Über die Notwendigkeit, die NS-Vergangenheit in den psychoanalytischen Deutungsprozeß einzubeziehen. Psyche, 51, 958-995.

Breuer, Franz; Mruck, Katja & Roth, Wolff-Michael (2002, September). Subjectivity and Reflexivity: An Introduction. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 3(3). Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-02/3-02hrsg-e.htm [Date of Access: February 5, 2003].

Deppermann, Arnulf (1999). Gespräche analysieren. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

Devereux, Georges (1967). From Anxiety to Method in Behavioral Sciences. The Hague: Mouton.

Fest, Joachim (2001). Die Verkörperung des Bösen. Der Spiegel, 19, 76-80.

Fleßner, Alfred (2001). Hören statt lesen. Zur Auswertung offener Interviews im Wege einfühlenden Nachvollziehens. Sozialer Sinn. Zeitschrift für hermeneutische Sozialforschung, 2, 349-358.

Fleischer, Gerald (1990). Lärm—der tägliche Terror. Stuttgart: Trias.

Freud, Sigmund (1914). Remembering, repeating, working-through. In James Strachy (Eds.), The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Vol. 12 (pp.147-156). London: Hogarth.

Goldhagen, Daniel (1996). Hitler's willing Executioners. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Goleman, Daniel (1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam.

Gysling, Andrea (1995). Die analytische Antwort. Eine Geschichte der Gegenübertragung in Form von Autorenporträts. Tübingen: Discord.

Hilgers, Micha (1997). Scham. Gesichter eines Affekts. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Jureit, Ulrike (1998). Flucht und Ergreifung. Übertragung und Gegenübertragung in einem lebensgeschichtlichen Interview. BIOS, 11, 229-241.

Jureit, Ulrike (2000). Patterns of repetition: dimensions of biographical memory. Trauma Research Newsletter 1, Hamburg Institute for Social Research, July 2000. Available at: http://www.TraumaResearch.net/focus1/jureit.htm.

Kershaw, Ian (1998). Adolf Hitler 1889-1945. London: Allen Lane.

König, Hans-Dieter (1997a). Unfreiwillige Vorurteilsproduktion im politischen Unterricht. In welche Falle eine Lehrerin trotz guter Absichten aufgrund einer uneingestandenen Gefühlsambivalenz tappte. Gegenwartskunde, 46, 73-82.

König, Hans-Dieter (1997b). Tiefenhermeneutik als Methode kultursoziologischer Forschung. In Ronald Hitzler & Anne Honer (Eds.), Sozialwissenschaftliche Hermeneutik (pp.213-241). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

König, Karl (1998). Gegenübertragungsanalyse. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Lethen, Helmut (1994). Verhaltenslehren der Kälte. Lebensversuche zwischen den Kriegen. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Lorenzer, Alfred (1986). Tiefenhermeneutische Kulturanalyse. In Alfred Lorenzer (Ed.), Kultur-Analysen. Psychoanalytische Studien zur Kultur (pp.11-98). Frankfurt: Fischer.

Marks, Stephan (1999). Geschichte und Erinnerung. Täter und Mitläufer im Nationalsozialismus. Sozialwissenschaftliche Information, 4, 297-298.

Marks, Stephan (2001). Research Project History and Memory. In Mechthild Kiegelmann (Ed.), Qualitative Research in Psychology (pp.150-154). Schwangau: Ingeborg Huber.

Marks, Stephan (2003a). Wissenschaft nach Auschwitz. In Wilhelm Schwendemann & Stephan Marks (Eds.), Aus der Geschichte lernen?—Nationalsozialismus und Antisemitismus als Unterrichtsthema. Vol.1: Grundsätzliche Überlegungen (pp.172-176). Münster: LIT-Verlag.

Marks, Stephan (2003b). War der Nationalsozialismus ein Phänomen der Hypnose? In Wilhelm Schwendemann & Stephan Marks (Eds.), Aus der Geschichte lernen?—Nationalsozialismus und Antisemitismus als Unterrichtsthema. Bd. 1: Grundsätzliche Überlegungen (pp.211-230). Münster: LIT-Verlag.

Marks, Stephan & Mönnich-Marks, Heidi (2002a). The researcher is the instrument. In Mechthild Kiegelmann (Ed.), The role of the Researcher in Qualitative Psychology (pp.131-138). Tübingen: Ingeborg Huber.

Marks, Stephan & Mönnich-Marks, Heidi (2002b). Scham und Schamabwehr. Zur psychosozialen Dynamik des Nationalsozialismus und der Perpetuierung traumatischer Erfahrungen. Psychologie & Gesellschaftskritik, 26, 57-72.

Neckel, Sighard (1991). Status und Scham. Zur symbolischen Reproduktion sozialer Ungleichheit. Frankfurt: Campus.

Paul, Hinrich (1999). Brücken der Erinnerung. Von den Schwierigkeiten, mit der nationalsozialistischen Vergangenheit umzugehen. Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus.

Schneider, Christian; Stillke, Cordelia & Leineweber, Bernd (1996). Das Erbe der Napola. Hamburg: Hamburger Edition.

Schwendemann, Wilhelm & Marks, Stephan (Eds.) (2003). Aus der Geschichte lernen?—Nationalsozialismus und Antisemitismus als Unterrichtsthema. Vol. 1: Grundsätzliche Überlegungen. Münster: LIT-Verlag.

Sehrig, Jürgen; Marks, Stephan; Nickolai, Werner & Steinebach, Christoph (Eds.) (2002). Mit alten Menschen über den Nationalsozialismus sprechen. Hockenheim: Larimar.

Seidler, Günter (1997). From Object-Relations Theory to the Theory of Alterity: Shame as an Intermediary between the Interpersonal World and the Inner World of Psychic Structure. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 51, 343-356.

Sloterdijk, Peter (1983). Kritik der zynischen Vernunft. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Steinbach, Lothar (1995). Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Glaube? Ehemalige Nationalsozialisten und Zeitzeugen berichten über ihr Leben im Dritten Reich. Bonn: Dietz.

Tietel, Erhard (2000). Das Interview als Beziehungsraum. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [Online Journal], 1(3). Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/2-00/2-00tietel-e.htm[Date of Access: July 6, 2000].

Welzer, Harald (1997). Verweilen beim Grauen. Essays zum wissenschaftlichen Umgang mit dem Holocaust, Tübingen: Discord.

Welzer, Harald, Montau, Robert & Plaß, Christine (1997). "Was wir für böse Menschen sind!" Tübingen: Discord.

Leon Wurmser (1994). The Mask of Shame. Northvale: Aronson.

Authors

Dr. Stephan MARKS holds a MA in political science, psychology and modern history and a doctorate in social science, from University of Giessen, Germany. He is supervisor; founder (1998) and director of the research project Geschichte und Erinnerung [History and Memory], University of Education in Freiburg, Germany.

Contact:

Dr. Stephan Marks

Geschichte und Erinnerung
Pädagogische Hochschule Freiburg
Marienstr. 10
D-79098 Freiburg

Tel. & Fax: 0761-386 97 95

E-mail: marks@ph-freiburg.de
URL: http://www.geschichte-erinnerung.de

 

Heidi MÖNNICH-MARKS, holds a diploma in psychology from Technical University in Berlin. She is a psychoanalyst and group therapist, practicing in Freiburg, and lecturer at University of Freiburg. Member of the research team Geschichte und Erinnerung.

Contact:

Heidi Mönnich-Marks

Geschichte und Erinnerung
Pädagogische Hochschule Freiburg
Marienstr. 10
D-79098 Freiburg

Tel. & Fax: 0761-386 97 95

E-mail: marks@ph-freiburg.de
URL: http://www.geschichte-erinnerung.de

Citation

Marks, Stephan & Mönnich-Marks, Heidi (2003). The Analysis of Counter-Transference Reactions Is a Means to Discern Latent Interview-Contents [38 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 4(2), Art. 36, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0302361.



Copyright (c) 2003 Stephan Marks, Heidi Mönnich-Marks

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.