Realities in Dialogue: Commentary on Paper by Stephen Hartman

Stephen Hartman's paper is a very stimulating contribution to the psychoanalytic debate on the interpretation of cyber reality. In my commentary I address some of the conceptualizations introduced by Hartman: different realities (conventional, psychoanalytic, internal, external, Reality 1.0, 2.0, 1.1,1.2. … etc.), infinite access, cybermourning, and loss. Starting from the personal and clinical histories presented by Hartman (I refer to them as “names”), I discuss some more or less embodied aspects of virtual life, such as gender, online romances, betrayal, privacy, multiple settings. Leaning on the concepts of psychic retreat, transitional area, and psycho(patho)logical use of the object I try to put realities in dialogue, persuaded that different realities are always connected or embedded.     

Psychoanalytic Healing,Love, Life,and Death: Commentary on Paper by Sheldon Bach

In his seminal clinical writings on psychoanalysis, Sheldon Bach transcends the limiting confines of individual and parochial schools of psychoanalysis. Both in “On Digital Consciousness” and in his 2006 Getting From There to Here: Analytic Love, Analytic Process, we see a strong relational dimension in Bach's work (see also Bach 1985 Bach, S. 1985. Narcissistic states and the therapeutic process, Northvale, NJ: Aronson.  [Google Scholar] and 1994), though he comes from firmly within the psychoanalytic mainstream. Bach's writings speak to clinicians across schools of thought, are clinically near to experience and are often moving. While he makes occasional mention of his contemporaries, Bach is grounded in more traditional references and only hints at his intellectual connection to relational and intersubjective theorists. One purpose of this commentary is to reflect on Bach's contribution to contemporary psychoanalysis and to draw out the connections between his work and the work of those within the broader relational and intersubjective community of psychoanalysis.     

Working in the Metaphor Commentary on Paper by Stephen Seligman

This paper expands on Seligman's ideas about mentalization and the challenges of working with patients who cannot mentalize. Seligman's clinical presentation demonstrates that much valuable analytic work takes place without explicit reference to the transference. Drawing on Britton's notion of the triangular internal space that allows for reflective thought, we propose that analytic interest in an external object, discovered through the relationship and meaningful to both patient and analyst, helps create the same kind of space. The difference-within-sameness of shared contemplation can increase receptivity to divergent perspectives. Likewise, the “third object” can become a therapeutic metaphor, open to various meanings without being limited to any one interpretation. We trace how Seligman and his patient use a series of third objects in their work together. In this process, the patient moves from a transitional relationship of minimal differentiation to an increasingly secure sense of her own separateness, beginning to accept, and even enjoy, having a motivated mind of her own. Finally, we discuss how Ferro's concept of the analytic field offers a theoretical rationale for the effectiveness of this process.     

Thinking Relationally About Forgiveness: Commentary on Paper by Stephen Wangh

This author examines the concept of forgiveness as a psychological construct. He argues that it is an error to conceive of the capacity to forgive in exclusively intrapsychic terms, pointing to the mutual influence of psychic and interpersonal experience in the struggle to forgive. He suggests that we can meaningfully consider the psychic challenges involved in any instance of forgiving only when we can fully understand the relational context in which the wrongdoing has taken place. The author then considers the concept of forgiveness when applied to hate crimes in general and Matthew Shepard's murder in particular, exploring some psychic alternatives to forgiveness that may be useful in thinking about the human struggle to resolve the mental anguish and desire for revenge that can threaten to undo us. He argues against an agenda-based approach to psychotherapeutic treatment that is biased toward encouraging forgiveness and seeing it as an indispensable component of psychological health. If forgiveness is to function as a viable psychological construct with real healing potential in human relationships, psychoanalysts must work to free it from its moralistic and religious moorings.     

The Psychoanalytic Other: Commentary on Paper by Helen K. Gediman

Dr. Gediman locates the intersection of modern Freudian and relational theory in the arena of what she calls the “disclosures of everyday analysis” (p. 242). She suggests that because Freudian analysts, like their relational colleagues, work intersubjectively, relational theory does not itself embody a paradigm shift away from the Freudian model. I disagree. Relational theories assume that the analyst's work is inevitably informed by the relational context in a way that precludes clinical certainty. Gediman, however, believes that the analyst is capable of separating her countertransference response from her subjectivity and thus can interpret from a position of clinical certainty. Each set of theoretical assumptions is associated with a somewhat different analytic stance and analytic ideal. Freudian analysts aim for a position of “methodological neutrality” that relies on considerable certainty in the countertransference while giving the analyst plenty of room within which to use her subjectivity. The relational ideal concerns the analyst's capacity to enter into an asymmetrical treatment relationship and to tolerate the uncertainty generated therein.     

Intersubjectivity and the Many Faces of Forgiveness: Commentary on Paper by Stephen Wangh

Stephen Wangh's insightful article, “Revenge and Forgiveness in Laramie, Wyoming” invites a psychoanalytic contribution to interdisciplinary dialogue on violence, revenge, and forgiveness. This author suggests that one strength of Wangh's perspective is his attention to the interplay of systemic and intrapsychic dynamics, which offers a needed corrective to dominant individualistic perspective in psychological and clinical literatures on forgiveness. He notes that Wangh does not clarify a particular definition of forgiveness or an approach to interdisciplinary dialogue. This commentary outlines a linguistic approach to the definition of forgiveness by drawing on three semantic domains of meaning (forensic, therapeutic, and redemptive or sacred). The author suggests some areas of rapprochement between the construct of forgiveness and psychoanalytical theory across each of these semantic domains and briefly illustrates the role of hermeneutics in interdisciplinary dialogue.     

Organizational Structure and the Establishment of Psychoanalytic Identification: Commentary on Paper by Randall Lehmann Sorenson

This commentary addresses two themes: parallels between religious and psychoanalytic education and the question of group survival in a world of competitive groups, whether religious (“strict” vs. “weak”) or psychoanalytic (differing psychoanalytic approaches). “Strict” religious education involves teaching both critical thinking and identification with the particular religion. This blend of critical thinking and identification with psychoanalysis is crucial in psychoanalytic education. We want to graduate students who see themselves as psychoanalysts rather than as being “interested” in psychoanalysis. This goal is accomplished when students have close, positive experience with personal analysts, supervisors, and teachers who are strongly committed to psychoanalysis but in a manner that encourages students to think critically and find their own psychoanalytic perspective. With regard to the second theme, I discuss how our narcissistic commitment to one or another psychoanalytic model interferes with open integration of new insights. Individual analysts privately integrate competing ideas in their own idiosyncratic ways. When these individuals publicly represent competing psychoanalytic groups, however, they tend to emphasize differences among these groups. They then find ways to appropriate new ideas as extensions of their own evolving tradition. In this way, a theoretical school is able to integrate new developments while preserving its own identity.     

How to Help a Thin-Skinned Person: Commentary on Paper by Stephen Seligman

Stephen Seligman's treatment of Harriet illustrates the typical challenges and basic technical principles in working with narcissistically sensitive people. Often, with such patients there are struggles around the frame, especially issues of payment and cancellation policies. Sometimes the therapist must be flexible in negotiations with the patient. In the early phases of therapy interpretations of defense, especially the interpretation of projected aggression, are not helpful. Interventions that recognize the patient's response to something the therapist has done or failed to do are more effective and set the stage for later work focused on the patient's recognition of her self-states. A willingness to respect Harriet's identification with Joan of Arc, and to work in displacement, rather than pathologizing her preoccupation was also essential. Finally, Seligman utilized the concept of mentalization in actively discussing with Harriet the mental processes of other people in her life. All these techniques enabled Harriet to move from being dominated by a sense of grievance to becoming capable of experiencing grief.     

Fertile Ground at the Edge of Difference: Self,Other, and Potential Space: Commentary on Paper by Gillian Straker

Juliet Mitchell's wide-ranging theory of lateral dynamics proposes that displacement by a sibling, real or potential, upends a small child's identity and position as “the baby.” This trauma gives rise to the complex process of forming a personal identity in a world of similar others. The impact of lateral relationships should therefore have major implications for analytic practice. Traditionally, however, psychoanalysis has treated siblings mainly as rivals for parental love and attention, not as unconsciously meaningful beings in their own right. This paper describes some ways that Mitchell's theory has inspired clinical interventions that would not have come into focus through a lens of parent–child relatedness.     

The Relational Use of Self and Space in Creation: Commentary on Paper by Frank Summers

In this discussion I address some of the ways in which psychoanalytic theory and technique have advanced, taking as my starting point Dr. Summers' chosen schools of thought. I then go on to elaborate what I see as a difference in our understanding of Philip Bromberg's and Donnel Stern's ideas about therapeutic action, suggesting that they actually contribute in bolstering Summers' argument.     

The Interplay of Subsymbolic and Symbolic Processess in Psychoanalytic Treatment: Commentary on Paper by Steven H. Knoblauch

Bucci's model of emotional communication, developed in the context of her theory of multiple coding and the referential process, is applied to Knoblauch's microanalytic report of his experience of the patient and himself and their interactions during a single session of an ongoing treatment. The referential process is a bidirectional function connecting the diverse sensory, somatic, and motoric representations of the subsymbolic system with imagery and words. The process operates partially and to varying degrees within both participants; in the case presented here, the dissociation among systems is severe, and emotional communication within the dyad occurs at first primarily in subsymbolic, bodily forms. Where gaps in the referential process exist for the patient, the analyst's own experience and associations operate to evoke new connections for her; we see this process in moment-by-moment glimpses of the analyst's experience and his interactions with the patient. Gaps in the reader's knowledge, and possibly the analyst's knowledge, of the patient are discussed.     

Sadism,Penetration, and the Negotiation of Desire: Commentary on Paper by Csillag

The author takes up Csillag’s idea of sadism as the wish to penetrate in the context of a patient who withholds from his analyst. With such a patient, the analyst has to bear the strain stemming from a lack of both satisfaction and recognition–the feeling of not having an impact. The defenses against sadism are examined along with the absence of intentionality in both clinical cases presented, an absence that places sadism in the realm of something that is unconscious or preconscious. Alternative views are offered on the enactment between Csillag and her patient with a focus on the unspoken negotiation of desire and (drawing on Fairbairn) the analyst’s attempt to breach her patient’s closed system of internal objects.     

Need,Paradox, and Surrender: Commentary on Paper by Adam Phillips

Despite its centrality in the lives of many people, psychoanalysis, with its traditional emphasis on psychosexuality and rationalism, has generally undervalued the importance of love and romance. This essay explores this devaluation within psychoanalytic theorizing and the parallel widespread degradation of love in everyday life. Whereas common wisdom claims that familiarity extinguishes love, I argue that the illusory security that familiarity often masks is endangered by genuine love, with all its accompanying risks.     

Shakespeare,Psychoanalysis and Creativity: Commentary on Paper by Lauren Levine

This discussion speaks to the creative dimension in the clinical encounter described by Levine in her paper. In particular, it addresses the creativity necessary to move beyond impasses in the treatment. The positive and negative associations to enactments are discussed as well as the creative possibilities offered in dreamwork and the analytic relationship.     

Suffering Passion,Together: Commentary on Paper by Peter Shabad

In this appreciative discussion of Shabad's paper, the author suggests an expanded role for intrapsychic conflict around the passionate drive to grow and change. At the same time, he suggests that the parent or analyst may need to “suffer passion” him or herself in order to help the patient or child evolve in this way.     

Murakami,Connoisseur of Uncertainty: Commentary on Paper by Thomas Rosbrow

My discussion embroiders around Thomas Rosbrow's view of Murakami as a “trauma analyst.” I highlight the ways in which Murakami's writing reflects his keen sensitivity to existential uncertainty and how he seems to understand trauma, much as I do, as a shattering experience that destroys the certainties that organize psychological life and generates efforts at self restoration. Although I share Rosbrow's view that “After the Quake” depicts a character's awakening from the dissociative manifestations of trauma, I spell out how my perspective on this process differs from his.