TRANSFERENCE BEFORE TRANSFERENCE

This paper is predominantly a clinical presentation that describes the transmigration of one patient's transference to another, with the analyst functioning as a sort of transponder. It involves an apparently accidental episode in which there was an unconscious intersection between two patients. The author's aim is to show how transference from one case may affect transference in another, a phenomenon the author calls transference before transference. The author believes that this idea may serve as a tool for understanding the unconscious work that takes place in the clinical situation. In a clinical example, the analyst finds himself caught up in an enactment involving two patients in which he becomes the medium of what happens in session.     

The body of the analyst and the analytic setting: Reflections on the embodied setting and the symbiotic transference

In this paper the author questions whether the body of the analyst may be helpfully conceptualized as an embodied feature of the setting and suggests that this may be especially helpful for understanding patients who develop a symbiotic transference and for whom any variance in the analyst's body is felt to be profoundly destabilizing. In such cases the patient needs to relate to the body of the analyst concretely and exclusively as a setting ‘constant’ and its meaning for the patient may thus remain inaccessible to analysis for a long time. When the separateness of the body of the analyst reaches the patient's awareness because of changes in the analyst's appearance or bodily state, it then mobilizes primitive anxieties in the patient. It is only when the body of the analyst can become a dynamic variable between them (i.e. part of the process) that it can be used by the patient to further the exploration of their own mind.     

THE VALUE OF UNCERTAINTY

The author discusses some of the characteristics of Roy Schafer's contributions to psychoanalysis that he finds most valuable, such as his openness to uncertainty, his anti‐reductive view of analytic constructions, his unique formulation of the analyst's role, and his close attention to how the patient engenders particular emotional reactions in the analyst. The author also presents a clinical vignette illustrating the value of the analyst's tolerance of uncertainty in the face of the patient's push for interpretations, explanations, and reassurance.     

Self-Disclosure and Vulnerability

Abstract

Based on the theoretical assumption and clinical observation that projective identification is a natural, constant element in human psychology, clinical material is used to illustrate how projective identification centered transference states create situations where acting out of the patient's phantasies and conflicts by both patient and therapist is both common and unavoidable. Because they are more obvious, some forms of projective identification encountered in clinical practice are easier for the analyst to notice and interpret. Other forms are more subtle and therefore difficult to figure out. Finally, some forms, whether subtle or obvious, seem to create a stronger pull on the analyst to blindly act out.

In some psychoanalytic treatments, one form of projective identification might embody the core transference. In other cases, the patient might shift or evolve from one level of this mechanism to another. Some patients attempt to permanently discharge their projective anxiety, phantasy, or conflict into the analyst. There is a patent resistance to re-own, examine, or recognize this projection. Some of these patients are narcissistic in functioning, others are borderline, and many attempt to find refuge behind a psychic barricade or retreat (Steiner 1993). In other forms of projective identification, the patient enlists the analyst to master their internal struggles for them. This occurs through the combination of interpersonal and intra-psychic object relational dynamics. This “do my dirty work for me” approach within the transference can evoke various degrees of counter-transference enactments and transference/counter-transference acting out.

Another form of projective identification, common in the clinical setting, is when a patient wants to expand the way of relating internally, but is convinced the analyst needs to validate or coach the patient along. This is why such a patient may stimulate transference/counter-transference tests and conduct practice runs of new object relational phantasies within the therapeutic relationship. Over and over, the patient may gently engage the analyst in a test, to see if it is ok to change their core view of reality. Depending on how the analyst reacts or interprets, the patient may feel encouraged to or discouraged from continuing the new method of relating to self and object. The patient's view of the analyst's reactions is, of course, distorted by transference phantasies, so the analyst must be careful to investigate the patient's reasoning and feelings about the so-called encouragement or discouragement. This does not negate the possible counter-transference by the analyst in which he or she may indeed be seduced into becoming a discouraging or encouraging parental figure who actually voices suggestions and judgment.

All these forms of projective identification surface with patients across the diagnostic spectrum, from higher functioning depressive persons to those who are more disturbed paranoid-schizoid cases. Whether immediately obvious or more submerged in the therapeutic relationship, projective identification almost always leads to some degree of acting out on the part of the analyst. Therefore, it is critical to monitor or use the analyst's counter-transference as a map towards understanding the patient's phantasies and conflicts that push them to engage in a particular form of projective identification.     

IRREDUCIBLE SUBJECTIVITY AND INTERACTIONISM: A CRITIQUE1

The authors offer a critique of the privileging of subjectivity in psychoanalysis characteristic of what Hanly has called interactionism, with specific reference to the work of Renik. First, Renik's argument for the irreducible subjectivity of the analyst is explored and critiqued from a philosophical perspective. The need for and plausibility of a subtler notion of objectivity that takes into account the limitations of human subjectivity and that analysts can meaningfully pursue is defended. Second, Renik's ‘re‐visioning’ of psychoanalysis, which follows from his notion of irreducible subjectivity, is explored and critiqued. Renik's view of enactments is contrasted with a ‘totalistic’ perspective of countertransference that allows for important, finer conceptual distinctions. Renik's conceptualisation of countertransference enactments is characterised as a ‘special case’ of countertransference as a vice. Next, Renik's view of transference is critiqued for privileging the adaptive dimensions of transference, and for potentially sidelining archaic dimensions. Finally, Renik's conclusions and ‘revisioning’ of psychoanalysis are shown to follow from his modifying or jettisoning certain features of the analytic situation and process. These features and their implications are elaborated on. The conclusion outlines the extent to which the arguments presented can be extended to other advocates of interactionism.     

Fire at the theatre: (Un)reality of/in the transference and interpretation1

Only in Bion's extended idea of ‘waking dream thought’ is the oneiric paradigm of the cure (already an obvious Freudian principle) completely applicable. The author's basic hypothesis is that, by adopting this paradigm thoroughly, one can combine the radical antirealism which is expressed in the postulate by which all the patient's communications are transference‐connected (here meaning ‘false connection’‐i.e. as projection/displacement of elements of the patient's inner psychic world) with the ‘reality’ of the transference, that is to say with the conviction that the facts of the analysis are co‐determined by the patient‐analyst dyad and actually rooted in how they interact. The Freudian metaphor of the fi re at the theatre is reintroduced here to suggest the crisis of the therapist's internal setting and capacity for reverie, which occurs when the irreducible ambiguity of the transference is resolved defensively, either in the patient's external reality or in his unconscious fantasy constellation. The author gives three clinical examples. The fi rst shows some of the not necessarily negative effects of this temporary crisis. The other two vignettes show a way of listening to the traumatic events of the patient's life from a perspective (that of the ‘analytic fi eld’) which is thought to be potentially the most transformative and vital to the analytical relationship.     

Collusive induction in perverse relating: Perverse enactments and bastions as a camouflage for death anxiety

The author argues that one of the main functions of perverse relatedness is to induce the analyst into becoming the patient's unconscious accomplice in a “perverse pact” against the analytic work aimed at disavowing intolerable aspects of reality. The intense power of collusive induction in perverse relating leads the analyst to participate in transference‐countertransference enactments and to the crystallization of a silent and chronic unconscious collusion between the patient and analyst in the analytic field, stagnating the process (bastion; Baranger and Baranger). The author claims that analysis of perverse pathology should not be limited to interpretation of the patient's intrapsychic functioning but should also focus on the information obtained by the analyst through his participation in collusive enactments; the analyst should also take a “second look” at the analytic “field” to detect underlying bastions. The author reviews the main psychoanalytic contributions that have clarified the phenomenon of collusive induction in perverse relating and as an illustration, describes the analysis of a man with a perverse character; in this patient, one of the main functions of his perverse relatedness was to induce the analyst to become an accomplice in his disavowal of his terror of death. The author highlights the influence of death anxiety in the bastions that develop in the treatment of perverse patients.     

MAPPING THE LANDSCAPE: LEVELS OF TRANSFERENCE INTERPRETATION3

The author argues that there are distinctly different kinds of transference interpretation, each of which might be valid in particular circumstances in analysis, but which contain and imply different understandings of what is meant by a ‘transference interpretation’. She suggests that transference interpretations may be at any one of four different levels, and she describes these levels as ranging from interpretations that point to links between current events in the analysis and events from the patient's history, through interpretations that link events in the patient's external life to the patient's often unconscious phantasies about the analyst and the analysis, to interpretations that focus on the use of the analyst and the analytic situation to enact unconscious phantasy configurations, sometimes pulling the analyst into the enactment. Material from four consecutive sessions of an analysis is presented to illustrate how all levels of transference interpretation may be part of a lively and meaningful analysis, but how the level of interpretation may change as the level of understanding deepens within a session and from one session to the next.     

Analytic process and dreaming about analysis

Dreams about the analytic session feature a manifest content in which the analytic setting is subject to distortion while the analyst appears undisguised. Such dreams are a consistent yet infrequent occurrence in most analyses. Their specificity consists in never reproducing the material conditions of the analysis as such. This paper puts forward the following hypothesis: dreams about the session relate to some aspects of the analyst's activity. In this sense, such dreams are indicative of the transference neurosis, prefiguring transference resistances to the analytic elaboration of key conflicts. The parts taken by the patient and by the analyst are discussed in terms of their ability to signal a deepening of the analysis.     

THE PATIENT'S OBJECTS IN THE ANALYST'S MIND

In every analysis, the analyst develops an internal relationship with the patient's objects—that is, the people in the patient's life and mind. Sometimes these figures can inhabit the analyst's mind as a source of data, but at other times, the analyst may feel preoccupied with or even invaded by them. The author presents two clinical cases: one in which the seeming absence of a good object in the patient's mind made the analyst hesitate to proceed with an analysis, and another in which the patient's preoccupation with a “bad” object was shared and mirrored by the analyst's own inner preoccupation with the object. The use and experience of these two objects by the analyst are discussed with particular attention to the countertransference.     

Stumbling along in the Countertransference: Following Up Enactments with Balanced Therapeutic Interpretations

In the course of a psychoanalytic treatment, many clinical situations create countertransference pulls or invitations to participate in enactments of various degrees. In these projective identification-based transferences, the patient is often successful in drawing the analyst into archaic object relational patterns of acting out. During these moments, the analyst must struggle to find a way to stay therapeutically balanced. The urge to rush to judgment with punitive, seductive, rejecting, controlling, or manipulative comments rationalized as interpretations must be managed. If these unavoidable countertransference enactments are managed and studied, they can provide useful information about the patient's internal struggles and can show the way to making more helpful and more therapeutic interpretations. Case material is used for illustration.     

More Metaphor: Commentary on Paper by Ken Corbett

Beyond the inevitability of countertransference feelings is the question of countertransference enactments. From a two‐person, participant‐observer or observing‐participant perspective, enactments are inevitable. The analyst becomes influenced by the patient (and influences the patient as well) and enmeshed in the patient's internalized interpersonal configurations. Analysis works not by avoiding such action but by analyzing from within the interactional system. Analysts who are different from one another become engaged in different ways, since the person of the analyst is a significant variable. This article, using case examples, explores two analyst‐related variables, age and family configuration, to expand the examination of countertransference enactments and some effects on the analytic process.     

Projective identification,containment and sojourn in the psyche: Clinical notes on a specific type of transference-countertransference interaction

Abstract

This paper suggests that the interplay between transference and countertransference is considered to be a valuable channel of communication. The author puts an emphasis on the containing function of the analyst. The patient strives for an experience of an object (analyst) that tolerates and copes with the patient's projections. There are some moments when analysts feel themselves to be invaded, controlled or abused by their patient's products. As Bion has postulated, this situation takes the form of a sojourn in the analyst's psyche. Clinical vignettes are given to provide support for the ways in which the analyst contains and elaborates the projections of the patients in his or her own mind and the therapeutic role that these processes have.     

Transferences in parent–infant psychoanalytic treatments

In parent–infant treatments, babies sometimes exhibit symptoms such as screaming, clinging, and fearful gaze avoidance of the analyst. The paper investigates if such phenomena may be regarded as transference manifestations, and if so, if they appear both in younger and older infants. Based on three case presentations, it is concluded that some babies are capable of forming both brief and enduring transferences. The term “indirect infant transference” refers to when a baby reacts emotionally to the analyst as long as the parent's transference remains unresolved. “Direct transference” refers to when a baby reacts in a non‐mediated way to the analyst. The necessary tool of investigation for discovering these phenomena is a psychoanalytic method with an explicit, though not exclusive, focus on the baby. Discerning them in the clinical encounter may help us understand the baby's predicament and when and how to address the baby or the parent. These treatments constitute an empirical field awaiting more extensive clinical and theoretical investigation. Already now, they suggest that transference may be rooted in, and may appear during, very early developmental stages. The paper's positions are compared with those put forward by other parent‐infant clinicians.     

Neutrality,tenderness and the analyst's subjectivity

Addressing the rôle of the analyst in the psychoanalytic relationship, the author takes issue with the emphasis on acknowledging the analyst's subjectivity and the critique of concepts like neutrality and abstinence as these issues are presented in the relational tradition. He advocates a better articulation and emphasis of these concepts in the service of understanding the impact of the analyst's subjectivity, and demonstrates how the mere loosening up of analytic neutrality and abstinence and an acceptance of the analyst's self-disclosure make transference analysis more difficult to handle. Such an attitude also increases the risk for ethically dubious conduct, since there is a close link between clinical methods and ethical standards in psychoanalysis. In conclusion, the author points to the importance of the analyst's continuous self-reflection and countertransference analysis.     

Working in the countertransference

Ferenczi (1988) described the procedure of mutual analysis, in which the patient and analyst switch roles for part of the time in the analysis. This procedure allowed patients in stalled analyses to make progress and enabled the analyst to overcome certain countertransference blocks but was ultimately rejected for certain drawbacks. Working in the countertransference is a modification of mutual analysis that retains some of its benefits and eliminates some of its drawbacks. In such work, the psychoanalyst's personality and psychodynamics become the center stage of the manifest content of the session; the analyst avoids interpretations of the transference and, instead, elicits the patient's detailed understanding of the analyst's psychodynamics. The analyst does not, however, generally volunteer his free associations or facts about his own life. This process allows deep work with patients with a predominance of projective identification. Working in the countertransference may be preferred in cases of severe psychopathology to other procedures for its lessening of the frequency, severity, and persistence of transference psychoses. The procedure is also a useful supplement to transference analysis with neurotic patients, for whom it can break through blocks caused by anxiety‐laden issues or countertransference impediments.     

Contemporary transference work and the analytic attitude: aims and methods--a clinical workshop

There are various ways of working as an analyst, and there are various ways of utilizing the concept and the phenomena of transference‐countertransference. I hope to draw an adequate picture of a way of working that is called ‘working‐in‐the‐transference’ as distinct from ways of working that ‘analyse transference’. The former has long been practised by many Jungians as well as by many psychoanalysts. As a method, it has aroused controversy in both groups, and is frequently both misunderstood and imitated. It can arouse strong anxiety. It can appear narrow and restrictive. It famously precludes a gamut of activities in which many analysts engage. Is working‐in‐the‐transference old fashioned, or does it deserve to be increasingly appreciated? Can it offer support and validation whilst remaining true to its conception? It was hoped that these questions would be addressed in the clinical material brought to the workshop. The emphasis in the workshop was on active participation and it was hoped that those attending would bring their clinical concerns for discussion.     

Bridging the reductive and the synthetic: some reflections on the clinical implications of synchronicity

When Jung introduced the concepts of synchronicity and the psychoid unconscious, he expanded analytical psychology into decidedly uncanny territory. Despite the early interest shown by Freud, anomalous phenomena such as telepathy have become a taboo subject in psychoanalysis. Today, however, there is an increasing interest in thought transference and synchronicity, thus opening the way for a fruitful exchange between different psychoanalytical schools on their clinical implications. I propose to examine some of the ambiguities of Jung's thinking, to clarify how we define synchronicity, the relationship between synchronicities and parapsychological events, and their clinical significance. At the present moment, we are still unsure if such events should be considered as normal and a way of facilitating individuation, or as an indication of psychopathology in the patient or in the analyst, just as we are uncertain about the particular characteristics of the intersubjective field that can lead to synchronicities. Making use of the typology of mind‐matter correlations presented by Atmanspacher and Fach, and the distinction they draw between acategorial and non‐categorial states of mind, I will use two clinical vignettes to illustrate the different states of mind in analyst and analysand that can lead to synchronicities. In particular I will focus on the relationship between analytical reverie and synchronicity.