IN MEMORIAM HAN GROEN-PRAKKEN

Board of the Han Groen- Prakken IPA & EPF Psychoanalytical Institute for Eastern Europe

Amsterdam, November 14, 2003

Han always surprised us with that rare combination of a great heart and great brains. She had so to speak a heart in her head, a special and creative endowment which of course had its darker sides too. I just pick out these two gifts in their combination, close to the experience I know many of us had, and I will end with a personal memory.

She was a good listener, interested in personal fate and moved by individual suffering. She could easily find a place for everybody in that great heart of hers. I believe that she had fundamentally developed into the person able to embrace humankind, and in the last fifteen years of her life this was especially directed to the people in Eastern Europe. However, this did not mean that she liked everybody: she could be selective and did not hide personal disapproval. And she was wavering: on the contrary, she was very determined and knew quite well what she wanted. I may remind you that in her days she ruled the Dutch Society by means of a book she called 'my American military handbook'.

At the same time she was very tolerant and understanding and she quickly grasped the core of a problem. Her thinking and also her experiences in functions outside our country had led to an inner position in which she easily framed questions and she was able to concentrate on essential aspects. Being undogmatic and in touch with opposition and also averse of self-importance she could help many by relevant and utterly practical suggestions. In the same vein she did not care much about clothing or furniture, she was much more interested in what was behind appearance. All this mixed and spiced with a relieving and relaxing laughter in which she also expressed her sense of self-relativity.

I had the privilege to know her for quite a long time and to work with her for about twenty-five years. In all those years we got on very well, the last five years were especially intensive. Hardly any week passed without some contact about Eastern Europe and her so-called Amsterdam School for which she spent so much time, energy and even personal money. These encounters continued during her several admissions to hospital, even in the last and decisive one we shortly discussed this weekend.

Everybody has seen how in these few years she rapidly deteriorated and how the once robust woman gradually became thin. In the end she was only a shadow of the imposing person she used to be and hope for recovery diminished. I would like to remember her as the woman in her fifties and sixties, seeing those memories on my retina like photographic images. Han in a scientific meeting, or behind a microphone, Han on that ship at the Maritime Museum, Han smoking and coughing, Han in a plane with all sorts of bags around her, in the opposite chair at a dinner table, or at the Hilton in Budapest in 87, or Han giving comments in our monthly clinical group in her home, and so on.

There is one special image I want to share with you tonight and it is intimately connected with holidays and with the piece she later wrote about queen Wilhelmina, the grandmother of our present queen. In these former days she had a body posture resembling this famous queen and I do not exclude that there were other congenialities, at least in her mind. My family and I used to spend the mid-term autumn vacation on Texel, long before I knew her. Han was born on this island and she and her family had a house there. It must have been in the early eighties that on a stormy day my wife, our children and I took a day's stroll along the beach. The sea was pretty rough, it was cold and there were beautiful fast floating clouds. After some time on a very deserted beach I saw a figure in the distance, bending and making gestures. I remember that this puzzled me and as we had seen practically nobody till then it was a bit strange too. Approaching we saw this figure throwing sticks and a dog fetching and carrying. From that distance it was not clear whether it was a man or a woman, apparently heavily clothed, and this figure stood out against a grey turbulent sky, lonely but not alone. Only when we were at a distance of some ten meters I suddenly recognized her, at that moment also realizing that her house was not far off. Han, being outlined against the sky on that beach on that day in autumn is a powerful image that has never left me. I am inclined to say that in our Dutch psychoanalytical landscape she really stood out as an impressive character. We miss the experienced and very dedicated analyst and we lost a beloved friend and colleague.        

Ton Stufkens

We had hoped that we had scheduled this meeting of colleagues working on the development of psychoanalysis in East Europe soon enough that we could still get Han’s view sand share with her our problems and also good news of ongoing progress. Instead we are here, at a memorial for Han. While I know that it is often hard to think of someone with whom one had close contact, as no longer living, the vividness with which Han is alive in my mind, and I am sure in the minds of others assembled here, is unbelievably intense. The strength of her presence, her attentive, fully absorbed facial expression with a touch of slightly humorous skepticism, is present before my eyes as I speak.

The force of her involvement with the East European project has been witnessed by so many who are here, that it is superfluous to emphasize it. It has not only been witnessed by many who are here, but it has shaped their lives, careers and opportunities. I do not know all the sources of her involvement and commitment to the work in Eastern Europe, but I am sure that her personal need for freedom and opportunity for independent thought and action, played a big part in it. She could not tolerate the injustice done to those whose freedom and opportunity of individual expression was denied.

My chance to work with Han on the development of psychoanalysis in East Europe began in the late 80's. She, of course, had become involved earlier. Before I say more about our work, I want to mention that I had met her earlier at a middle European congress in Bad Ischl in Austria. I was struck by the fact that in one way or another the history of World War II, of the holocaust, the active or passive involvement of patients or their family members, played a role in the cases that were discussed. I attended one or two case presentations and discussions chaired by Han. I thus first met Han in a setting that for me, an Austrian refugee returning for this congress in a town close to my home town, was emotionally especially charged.. I talked to her about that. I saw her functioning in a calm, unsentimental, but deeply understanding way. Later, however, she confided to me that she had been quite nervous and wondered what others and I thought of her. She had become a training analyst not long before this congress, she told me. So I can say that she seemed extremely self-possessed on an occasion when she did not feel quite so self-possessed. It is hard for me to believe that this could have also been the case later on occasionally after we started working together as the co-chairs of the IPA’s East European Committee.

A previous attempt to have a well functioning joint European and IPA East European committee had apparently failed.. So, when we started working together, we both wanted to stay far away from politics. The idea of evaluating people and paying less attention to their formal previous training, was obviously a practical way to go about it in Eastern Europe, but it also fitted pretty well with her and my personal style. I will not here go over the history of the work that was accomplished in the more than twenty years, a work that I had the privilege to share with her. We disagreed rarely. Sometimes, when Han felt very strongly about something, she worried - at times with some justification - that she might sound, shall we say "too forceful." "John", she would say, "why don’t you write this letter. You have more tact." "Han", I said, "you have a very special and unique tact."

How much we will miss her special tact, her special touch, her directness, her clarity, her forcefulness, honesty and deep loving concern and passion.

John Kafka

15 years ago there happened a sudden fall in love between Han Groen Prakken and the East Europeans. Both were very happy with each other and there started a long and rich relationship, which has fulfilled the Eastern part of Europe with a lot of children. Some are now already analysts, others are on the way to become it soon. All of us, who have the great privilege to participate to this marvellous story, have enjoyed the enthusiastic atmosphere and the great sympathy always present on both sides.

When 2 years ago the growth of this pioneer work required establishing an Institute and it was proposed to name it The Han Groen Prakken PIEE, I felt a bit of ambivalence, as in my culture it is not used to name institutions by still alive people. But I was told that in Holland it was not so and that Han didn’t dislike it. I was honoured and happy, but also sad, knowing Han’s bad health. It was a sort of announced death, which then happened sooner than we expected. In fact we have planned this Institute’s meeting in Amsterdam to meet her still alive, and maybe to say her goodbye. But here we are already to commemorate her.

As I said, an extremely good relationship developed between Han and the East Europeans, so as with all of us, who have the great opportunity to work with her in this enthusiastic Eastern adventure.

When such good relationships are interiorised, then the loss of the object is sad, of course, but the mourning, though long, is not only painful: it is also full of a sweet nostalgia. There are so many good memories, so many pleasant moments to remind! But what is still more important, is that, while the person is dead, the inner object we bear inside ourselves remains alive and may be fruitfully transferred onto further objects. Such a transfer has also a certain power, as it induces the new objects to resemble to the inner one. At the same time, it would be unnatural if we would not identify with such a good object, like Han was. And so, as you see, there are many ways in which Han will be still present and active among us and all over Eastern Europe forever.

Dear Han,

It will be nice to work with you in our hearts still for many years.

Paolo Fonda

I had first met Han in 1987 in Budapest at the meeting of the EPF Executive, some VIP IPA officials with a handful of potential candidates from various parts of former Eastern Europe. At that time Han was the President of the EPF. For me it was first in the row of official analytic meetings, definitely one of the most exasperating ones. Yet, in the years to come it was to be proven as one of the most productive ones as well. On it we were told that our groups are far behind well developed educational structures of Western societies-completely true; we were also told that we had developed in complete isolation-partially true; that there is no potential for development of analysis in Eastern Europe-completely false. As one of the youngest I was among the last speakers, quite upset, pointing out that as if we were writing of half of the European continent, pretending to know what is unknown, as we have seen that which has not been, without even bothering to investigate, all in all approaching the matter utterly unanalytically. After the break there was to be meeting of the EPF Executive and we were to be told about the reached decisions the next morning. While I was standing in the corner drinking coffee Han approached me with a: »Hello Tamara« surprising me that she has remembered the name. I was told that I was not to polite last evening with which I agreed and confessed that I do not feel a bit sorry about it. That was the first time I heard her hearth worming laughter. Han commented that some rather stupid things were said at that meeting. The EPF Executive has decided to go and to see what is the situation for themselves and that they would like to start with Belgrade, adding laughingly, if we want them. We smoked our first cigarette together which was to become a ritual.

There are many memories, easy times and far less easy ones. I distinctly remember the two of us sitting in Han's apartment during the EPF Conference in Stockholm (1991) drinking our white wine and wondering what to do. Han being Han, non pompous, it never occurred to me until years later that it is not a usual situation for an EPF President to share with an unanimous candidate. At that point in time revival of analysis in Eastern Europe was the black sheep for many structures both of the IPA and the EPF. There was little support, Han being more or less on her own, feeling that it is fruitless to continue, on the verge of deciding not to attend the ING meeting in New Orleans. I was trying to convince her to give it one more chance, I had a »hunch« for which she teased me for years to come. Some weeks later I got Han's first phone call. The meeting went well, the support came from the least expected places, from the Vice-president of the IPA, John Kafka. Laughingly, I was asked what had happened in Belgrade she knew nothing of. I had met with John Kafka during the EEC Conference in Belgrade in 1990 and was firmly convinced that various information of him wishing to stop the development of analysis in Eastern Europe was wrong- so there was a hunch and hope. After New Orleans Han and John as Co-Chairs of IPA EEC became a creative team, support systems developed: conferences, seminars and schools, first IPA direct members were elected and first non-established groups became established IPA groups.

 But what was in 1987 one of the most promising groups that has developed for EE in most favourable circumstances was in serious trouble, trapped in a senseless, bestial war with many of its members and candidates known to be against regime. After Han and myself toasted over phones to the first seven IPA direct members of Belgrade I asked Han to consider the possibility of being the member of the Sponsoring Committee of the Belgrade Study Group. The first answer was no, conflict of interests Han being the Co-Chair of the IPA EEC. I explained that the Group needed somebody they knew and trusted, that the usual mistakes like »have you heard about the Oedipus conflict« and »do you know the libretto of Tosca?« should be kept at the minimum. There were consultations and then the mail came in which Han wrote that as the situation is specific if proposed she will accept. Han's capability not to abide by, to distance herself and modify the rules when they are counterproductive has helped development of analysis in whole Eastern Europe. In the case of Belgrade Group it made it possible for it to survive. I remember well how proud and terrified she was when I told her that our Assembly was held at the headquarters of the Students' Opposition behind the cordons with students running down the corridors shouting »the analysts have come«. I also remember how scared we got when on the SC visit that same year with the demonstrations still going on she insisted on joining them.

On the occasion of her 70th birthday I said that life sometimes could be generous. One of its precious gifts was when it brought such special person as Han in to my life.  A friend in need is the real friend. We were both at the EPF conference in Berlin when the bombing of Belgrade started. The last day Han invited me to move to the same hotel she was staying at. She suggested that if I wish to be of any use for the Group somebody should be out of Belgrade I should think about a decision to come either with her to Amsterdam or to go to my son to Israel. While in previous years it was usually me phoning the next three months Han was in contact regularly once or twice per week eager to know how the members and myself are, deeply moved that seminars in Belgrade are continuing. On one of these occasions I shared with her my idea of sending an appeal to the EPF Societies supported by the EPF Executive asking for one year financial aid for the Belgrade Group. Evidently, it was not only about finances but about the feeling of belonging to the analytic community. Han's first response was negative, as she is IPA. But by that time we knew each other quite well. I said that I would be sending the appeal anyway. A long conversation ensued about all the dangers of signing an appeal circulated through NATO countries and afterwards returning to Belgrade ruled by Milosevic. I tried to explain that it would have been very dangerous in the beginning of the 90's but that by now so many people hate Milosevic that I will be in no peril. So, Han asked me to send her the draft of the appeal and we worked on it together.

Due to the internal situation in the country the plan that Aleksandar Vuco and myself go for a study stay to Amsterdam was being postponed for years. When in 2000 Milosevic fell and we learned that Han was to be hospitalised we decided to go. The meeting that started as an official updating of the Chair of the Sponsoring Committee for Belgrade finished in Han's hospital room with quite a lovely dinner, white wine ending with Alek and myself hiding in the bathroom during the nurse' s visit. One thing that has not been mentioned about Han is that at least for me among other things she was a warm, giving enfant terrible. I do not think either one of the three of us took seriously the sombre decision not to misbehave again. Of course a similar episode repeated itself just a few days later.

As years went we met and parted with our cigarettes and white wine, saving time for ourselves, sitting in back rows at lectures and running away from the too »sophisticated« ones. I learned more about her family and watched her grandchildren grow over the photos. My reports about my son became regular.

 Han's first visit to Eastern Europe was Belgrade. The last two ones were again in Serbia, as the Chair of the Belgrade Sponsoring Committee in spring, 2002 and as the Advisor of the PIEE Board at the Candidate's Seminar in autumn, 2002. One of our last phone conversations was her congratulations on the probable promotion of the Belgrade Group to a Provisional Society.

When I phoned Han in mid September, after the PIEE Summer School in Kiev Han told me she felt »fed up”, and that she would like us to make an appointment for a longer conversation. At the appointed time there were guests cooking dinner for her, she sounded quite well. We decided to talk after the School in Dubrovnik at the beginning of October. Sjirk, her husband answered the phone telling me Han is unwell. Some days later a message from Ton Stufkens arrived that he is writing on Han's request as to send me her warm regards. I felt like packing and leaving for Amsterdam immediately at the same time realizing that Han and her family should have their time for themselves.  That I needed to say my farewells was not so. Though aware that chances for recovery this time were almost none still I did hope, wanting Han alive, unprepared for goodbyes. I miss you Han.

Tamara Štajner- Popović