As Lobban explains, Austin thought of jurisprudence as the study of concepts, principles and distinctions that are common to various, possibly only mature, legal systems. He considers Austin’s command theory and concept of a sovereign and Austin’s thoughts on the relation between law and morality and on legal reasoning and judge-made law. On Austin’s analysis, laws properly so-called, as distinguished from rules of positive morality, are commands issued by the sovereign to the subjects, and that something is a command only if there is a sanction behind it. Lobban considers the objection that the idea of a habit of obedience cannot account for the legal authority of the lawmaker, for the idea of a succession of lawmakers or for the idea of a legally limited lawmaker. Austin argued that there is no necessary connection between law and morality, defended a version of rule-utilitarianism and held that the principle of utility is a good index to divine law. He advocated a textual approach to the interpretation of statutes, holding that the law in a precedent is to be found in its ratio decidendi and that customary rules do not become legal rules until they are recognised by courts.

If law and legal systems may be said to grow and develop in a way analogous to natural organisms, the shape into which they grow is not predetermined, but is fashioned by the choices and actions of individuals who present questions for lawyers to resolve, and by the intellectual choices made by lawyers, lawmakers, and judges, when faced with how to deal with new problems. In recent years, historians have become increasingly interested in exploring how legal development has been shaped by networks of particular individuals and groups, and by the connections are made between different ideas and concepts. Whether law changes as a result of litigation initiated in the courtroom or through legislation, the form which it takes may be shaped by the groups of people initiating the change, by the networks of legal intermediaries – whether lawyers or legislators – who are tasked with implementing it, and by the wider community networks with whose expectations the law must cohere.

Apart from the fact that the meaning of “fusion” is debated today in relation to law and equity, its meaning was contested by the participants in the debates that led to the reforms which “fused” the courts of common law and of equity – and others – in England in 1875. The understandings of fusion among these people differed for various reasons. Where some lawyers thought equity inherently different to common law, fusion concerned the substance of the law. Some saw fusion as relating only to differing procedures used in courts of equity and courts of common law, while others again treated fusion as a necessary change of the legal profession: the specialisation and mutual ignorance by equity and common lawyers of one another had to be overcome. The legal reforms pursued to achieve these conflicting ends also changed, ultimately becoming reforms of the entire judicature not merely of law and equity.

Many of the chapters in this volume address a common theme: the need for a new kind of psychoanalytic theory and practice in South Africa which is relevant to its unique problems. The authors are attempting to develop a new form of psychoanalytically oriented psychotherapy which is inflected by, appropriate for and relevant to post-colonial South Africans. They are trying to develop a new hybrid theoretical framework which interrogates the assumptions of current psychoanalytic theory and expands its scope to include non-Western collectivist notions of self and community. Taken together, the chapters are a clarion call for a radical transformation of psychoanalytic praxis, an invitation for the heretofore invisible African, non-Western third to be acknowledged and welcomed into the analytic consulting room. These chapters are part of a new wave in psychoanalytic thinking which interrogates the implicit, hidden assumptions about class, gender, race, sexual orientation, culture and Western standards which are embedded in psychoanalytic theories (see Cushman, 2012; Dimen, 2011; Layton et al., 2006; Lobban, 2011). In our opinion psychoanalysis needs an infusion of such thinking if it is to remain a viable option for people from a variety of classes and cultures.

Addressing the decline of psychoanalysis in the United States, Paul Stepansky (2009) noted in Psychoanalysis at the Margins that it is vital that the field shed its elitism and make a commitment to technical pluralism and to encouraging psychoanalysts to develop applications that demonstrate that psychoanalysis has something useful to offer to society. As Stepansky noted, psychoanalysis has often cloaked itself in elitism and snobbery and in doing so has reinforced the perception that it is only a bourgeois therapy for bourgeois problems. This is unfortunate, as psychoanalysis had a long history of social activism, particularly in its earliest days, that has continued into the present (Altman, 1995; Danto, 2005; Moskowitz, 1996; O'Loughlin, 2010, 2012; Watkins & Shulman, 2008). Particularly now, with increasing pressure from market-based and evidence-based reforms, it is essential that psychoanalysis make the case for the utility and even efficiency of psychoanalytic and psychodynamic approaches to addressing particular societal problems.

With this book we hope to broaden knowledge about how psychodynamic psychotherapy, as well as psychoanalytic concepts and theories are practised and applied in the context of contemporary South Africa. The chapters include a wide range of psychodynamic work undertaken by clinical psychologists working in university settings, state hospitals, community projects, private practice and research. The aim is to provide the reader with an experience of the current debates, clinical issues, therapeutic practice and nature of research that is representative of the work being done in South Africa.

There are a handful of qualified psychoanalysts practising in South Africa at present. Although the South African Psychoanalytic Association was accredited as an official International Psychoanalytical Association study group in 2009, with the ultimate aim of training psychoanalysts in accordance with international standards, only a very few privileged South Africans will be able to pursue such training or afford to undergo the experience of psychoanalysis. The vast majority of South Africans will only have access to briefer forms of psychotherapy, some of which is psychodynamically informed. Most of the psychoanalytically oriented psychotherapy conducted in South Africa is done by clinical psychologists who have been trained at a university offering a psychodynamically oriented Master's degree in Clinical Psychology.

It is within this context of psychodynamic applications that the contributors to this book have written about their work and experience. The approaches described draw on several theoretical models, reflecting the pluralism in the field today. The book is a collective effort by experienced therapists, clinicians, trainers, teachers, clinical supervisors, consultants and researchers working in the field of diversity as it applies to the South African context.

The work described in this volume is situated within the context of post-apartheid South Africa, with all the complexities, hopes, dreams and even disillusionments that have emerged in our fledgling and fragile democracy. With this sociopolitical history in mind, it is important for clinicians to understand that issues of race, disparity, inequality, complicity, reparation, reconciliation, cultural diversity, difference and trauma permeate our practice of psychodynamic interventions. These issues require personal reflection, academic debate, theoretical interrogation and sensitive adaptation in clinical practice.