In this paper the question is considered to what extent the patient's and analyst's perception and tolerance of both aggressive and destructive elements of the analytic relationship can be increased. Successful interpretation enables the patient to feel, enact and comprehend animosity in the transference and experience that the relationship can continue. The concept of primary aggression developed in Freud's speculation on death instinct is discussed in its clinical function of relief. The metapsychological concept of primary aggression facilitates work on aggressive and especially destructive developments of the relationship. Freud's and subsequently Eissler's examination of the reciprocity of destructiveness and narcissism opened plausible clinical avenues to explain the compensation of defence mechanisms against mankind's vulnerability in the face of mortality. The concept of primary aggression is obviously of greater relevance than frustration/aggession models since the former does not view the patient as mere victim of his biography, but as a subject with the potential to enact his own destructiveness. Since aggressiveness is often concomitant with fear and suppressed guilt, interpretation plays a decisive role in relieving the superego strain; more confrontation may involve the analyst in the role of the persecutor. Sudden and violent feelings of hate towards the analyst require careful treatment of the patient's irritation. Interpretation of genetic causes of animosity often prove to be countertransference resistance; interpretation in transference, however, is viewed as profitable. Finally, those dangerous and destructive phases of treatments are discussed, which compel the analyst to protect the setting.
