This context statement provides a critical overview of my work on D.W. Winnicott, as seen in the submitted works, and demonstrates that my critical orientation develops the field, and thus justifies my claim for the award of PhD by published works. To provide a background to my work, I begin with an outline of the context in which my work on Winnicott emerged. This is followed by a brief presentation of the publications of D.W.Winnicott to illustrate the nature of my task in organising his work. I introduce a summary of the submitted works and show how they relate to each other. I begin the second section with a concise account of the evolution of psychoanalysis that results in a Freudian paradigm, in order to illustrate the context out of which Winnicotfs work evolved. This is followed by a résumé of the principal theories in Winnicott’s work to show that my comprehensive organisation of the themes and concepts provides a demonstration that Winnicott’s theoretical matrix extends psychoanalytic thought and proves him to be one of the most significant innovators in psychoanalysis since Freud. This section is an exemplification that my work on Winnicott, as seen in the main volume of the submitted works - The Language of Winnicott- and
elaborated by the other submitted works - constitutes an original contribution to knowledge.
I further my claim for a PhD by published works by showing that in addition to my organisation of Winnicott’s work I make a step towards extending Winnicott’s theory through my introduction of the notion of a "surviving object. In The Lanauaae of Winnicott I lay stress on two fundamental concepts at the heart of Winnicott’s theoretical matrix - 'the use of an object and violation of the self. In my clinical paper, Squiggles, clowns and Catherine Wheels, I discuss further these core concepts and show how they allude to the beginning of a new concept - "the surviving object”. Here I elaborate this concept with reference to my clinical work. This section offers further evidence that my original contribution to knowledge, as seen in the submitted works and underpinned by this statement, advances the field for future research in Winnicott’s theories.
In the third section I explore my development as a researcher and describe my methodology in writing the submitted works. I discuss my style of learning and the value of my trainings in psychoanalytic psychotherapy and psychoanalysis, and comment on the distinction between the psychoanalytic paradigm I carry with me in my clinical practice and the research paradigm I make use of in my research. This is followed by a reflection on the limitations of my research and I conclude this context statement with an outline of the consequences of my work. Thus the submitted works, in conjunction with this statement, affirm that my work on Winnicott provides a way of thinking through the question concerning a Wìnnicottian paradigm shift in psychoanalysis
