Relational Psychoanalysis and the Inner Life: Commentary on Cooper,Corbett, and Seligman

Relational analysts know that their experience feels private and contemplative during a significant portion of their working hours. A consideration of the inner life, both the analyst’s and the patient’s, is part of relational praxis. Yet relational analysts also recognize that they are continuously involved with their patients, even at those very same quiet moments. Cooper, Corbett, and Seligman recognize both these parts of relational clinical work and argue that both are necessary. Making this argument explicit is important for its own sake, but also because analysts from other schools sometimes write as if there is no place in relational clinical practice for a quiet consideration of the inner life. Two examples of such criticism are offered, in both of which relational analysts are described as being too focused on social interaction and too little on the inner life. I offer my own version of the kinds of arguments about privacy and contemplation offered by Cooper, Corbett, and Seligman. I then make the case that all psychoanalytic theories come with risks of excess. Relational and interpersonal theories come with the risk of an overenthusiastic embrace of clinical interaction, whereas more intrapsychic theories carry the risk of attending too little to the impact on their patients of present-day relatedness—which is just as likely to have unconscious roots as the inner life.     

Three Pleas for a Measure of Uncertainty,Reverie, and Private Contemplation in the Chaotic,Interactive, Nonlinear Dynamic Field of Interpersonal/Intersubjective Relational Psychoanalysis

This discussion of essays by Cooper, Corbett, and Seligman explores some of the compatibilities, complementarities, strains, and challenges that have emerged in the synthetic and integrative efforts of relational psychoanalysis to apply both interpersonal/intersubjective ideas and those derived from a range of object relations theories in the development of a theory of technique of its own.     

Introduction

This introduction outlines a paper by Rina Lazar and discussions by Anthony Bass, Sam Gerson, and Stephen Seligman. The target paper, an extensive clinical case, is described: a case where regression, countertransference dilemmas and opportunities, and intergenerational trauma are all in play. I consider the contribution of the discussants: their unique interpretations of relational work, the distinct focus on intersubjectivity, shifting self states (Bass), intergenerational trauma (Gerson), and regression and the role and status of development (Seligman).     

Relational Trouble: Reply to Commentaries

This reply to the commentaries by Corbett, Hansell, and Stern explores whether Lacan's concept of the real can—or should—be translated into more readily recognizable terms. It extends our previous discussion of impossibility by arguing that not all ideas and experiences can be brought within the realm of the known and familiar. We suggest that impossibilities of meaning should not be understood primarily in phenomenological terms, and we demur from the assessment that our concept of impossibility offers nothing for clinical work. Claiming that what resists meaning also impedes relationality, we encourage relational theorists to address the nonrelational processes that subtend relationality, including the relation between analyst and patient. We acknowledge that the theory of impossibility—or what we now call “negative mediation”—raises a fundamental challenge to relational theory, but we insist that disruptions of relationality need not be considered pathological. Taking into account the nonrelational may enhance rather than impoverish relational psychoanalysis.     

A Discussion of “Disorders of Temporality and The Subjective Experience of Time: Unresponsive Objects and the Vacuity of the Future” by Stephen Seligman

In this review of Stephen Seligman’s contribution to the literature on disorders of temporality, the patient’s ordinary and extraordinary experiences of time in the clinical situation, the reviewer provides both theoretical confirmation and clinical illustration in support of the author’s arguments. Infant research, nonlinear dynamic systems theory, and especially a brain-based psychoanalytic perspective taken from the work of Gerald Edelman are introduced to facilitate understanding of memory in general and the second of Seligman’s disorders of temporality in particular. Edelman’s formulation on the biological evolution of consciousness affords a means to comprehend how the phenomenon of dissociation emerges spontaneously in the clinical situation that matches and offers an explanation Seligman’s own understanding.     

Introduction: The Difficult-to-Reach Patient and the Difficult-to-Find Dyad

In this brief introductory paper, Cooper introduces a panel by four analysts who consider their work with particularly challenging patients. This introduction emphasizes the dyadic nature of difficulty in initiating therapeutic work with the patients described here. The author refers to the genre employed in these papers as a less heroic genre than is sometimes used in psychoanalytic papers—a welcome development, as these authors courageously describe the fraught and sometimes failed attempt to engage their patients.     

A Window in Time: A Response to “Disorders of Temporality and The Subjective Experience of Time: Unresponsive Objects and the Vacuity of the Future” by Stephen Seligman

This response to Stephen Seligman’s “Disorders of Temporality and The Subjective Experience of Time: Unresponsive Objects and the Vacuity of the Future” considers Seligman’s ideas in the context of field theory. Seligman’s notion of becoming a self in time is elaborated through the concept, derived from field theory, of how time assumes an “essential ambiguity” that may facilitate analytic change and psychological development. This response suggests further that such “essential ambiguity” in relation to time opens both the patient and analyst up to a variety of complex, bidirectional influences, such as unconsciously mediated intergenerational transmissions of trauma. In addition, this response explores Seligman’s ideas associated with an analyst’s moment-to-moment recognitions and a patient’s corresponding development of a self in time in terms of their implications for analytic participation and analytic self-care.     

At the verge of unthinkable anxiety: On the relevance of a neurophysiologically informed relational perspective on meaning-making in psychosis

Abstract

This article examines the relevance of relationally oriented psychoanalytic phenomenology as a frame of reference for understanding psychotic states in schizophrenia. The etiology and structural characteristics of such states are examined from both a neurophysiological, and a relational and interpersonal point of view. Many findings indicate organic abnormalities in schizophrenia, acquired through an exposure to physical risk factors and genetic predisposition, but relational traumas also seem to have an impact on the form and content of psychotic states. This may happen through interruptions in the “use-dependent” maturation of the brain in a relational milieu. In addition, at the level of meaning-making, we find that the emotional and relational contexts—both past and present—give the substance or “raw material” for hallucinations and delusions. In a psychotic state, the person also tries to handle basic affects and relational needs, and to make meaning in states of overwhelming chaos and anxiety. Donald W. Winnicott's theory of “a holding environment”, Stephen Mitchell's theory of the relational matrix, and Stolorow, Atwood, and Orange's concepts of a “shattered world” and annihilation anxiety are used as a framework in the analysis of the phenomenology of psychosis. Two case illustrations, one from child psychotherapy and one from therapy with an adult patient, are used to illuminate the theoretical points of view.     

Having the will,finding the ways,and wishes for the future: A model of relational hope and well-being

Hope is a ubiquitous experience in daily life and acts as a force to help individuals attain desired future outcomes. In the current paper, we review existing research on hope and its benefits. Building on this work, we propose a new model of hope in romantic relationships. Our model seeks to expand the study of hope, addressing limitations of past research by bringing hope into the interpersonal domain and adding a future-oriented perspective. More specifically, we argue that relational hope encompasses three facets, including relational agency, relational pathways, and relational aspirations, or what we call the wills, ways, and wishes people have in their relationship. We outline specific ways that these three facets may promote well-being in romantic relationships. First, we propose that relational agency—the motivation to achieve relational goals—fuels approach-motivated goals, which in turn promotes higher quality relationships. Additionally, we posit that relational pathways—the perception of sufficient strategies to pursue relational goals—enhance self-regulation to support effective communication and conflict management with a romantic partner. Finally, we propose that relational aspirations—the positive emotions felt in anticipation of future relationship outcomes—foster growth beliefs which in turn promote relationship maintenance and commitment over time. While our model posits that relational hope has many potential benefits for relationships, we also discuss key contexts in which hope may undermine relationships and well-being. Overall, our proposed model of relational hope offers a new area of insight into how hope may shape well-being in romantic relationships.     

Toward a relational perspective of the psychology of careers and working: A social constructionist analysis

This article explores the contributions of social constructionist thought to the development of a relational approach to careers. In this article, the term “careers” is defined as encompassing the working lives of all individuals. Using a social constructionist perspective to critique existing assumptions about careers, work, and relationships, the authors develop a conceptual framework that expands the theoretical opportunities inherent in a relational approach to the study of careers. The article concludes by highlighting implications of a social constructionist analysis of a relational approach to careers for theory development, research, practice, and public policy,     

Thinking Sexual Difference with (and against) Adriana Cavarero: On the Ethics and Politics of Care

This article engages with Adriana Cavarero's framing of sexual difference, specifically in terms of how this displaces “bodies that queer” (Volcano 2013). For Cavarero, the narratable self is inescapably relational and characterized by vulnerability, which is how ethics arises in the form of a decision between caring and wounding. At the same time, Cavarero's deconstructive method of appropriating stereotypes restricts the scope of sexual difference to dimorphism. In examining the implications of this, I build on the work of Michel Foucault and Judith Butler by looking to the intersexed life of Adélaïde Herculine Barbin, whose suicide in 1868 at the age of twenty‐nine was precipitated not through malice or cruelty, but through concerted care. This mode of care is anchored in the apparent self‐evidence of how we see and how we think with and through narratives that sediment in orders of power/knowledge. While agreeing with Cavarero's critique of the autonomous “I,” the article nevertheless argues for authorial audacity—the courage to name oneself—as a way of subverting asymmetrical power relations, including those that make it possible to inadvertently generate suffering through care.     

The analyst's participation: a new look

Over the past fifteen years or so, advocates of a relational theory of psychoanalytic process have developed a compelling challenge to the classical approach to clinical work. Their critique of a fixed "standard technique," applicable across the board to all analyzable patients, has been particularly effective. The new approach opens the possibility of tailoring technique to individual analysands, negotiating the best way of working within each unique analytic dyad. But despite the openness of relational theory, many of the most influential clinical vignettes in the recent literature emphasize the analyst's risk-taking, engaging patients in a highly personal way that breaks the traditional analytic frame. Various implications of the tendency of relational analysts to emphasize this sort of intervention are discussed, and questions raised about the way this may affect how relational thinking is received.     

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.     

The relational tradition: landscape and canon

This essay charts the origins, influences, and evolution of the relational tradition in contemporary psychoanalysis. Considering the theoretical and philosophical influences from nineteenth-century Americans like William James and C. S Pierce, and noting the seminal modern work of Steven Mitchell and Jay Greenberg in opening a critique of one-person focused drive theory, the essay follows developments over a quarter century. Hallmarks of the relational approach-social construction, two-person psychologies, multiple self-states, social regulation and construction of identities like gender and sexual orientation, and an evolving theory of clinical practice-are reviewed. New developments in clinical theory, in the study of identity categories, in the work on embodiment and enactment, and in developmental models are also reviewed.     

Counseling in a Complex World: Advancing Relational Well-Being

In a globalized world, people's attempts at living a good life interfere with one another in complex ways. In particular, tension and conflict are inevitable. This confronts counselors/therapists with the ethical question of how to take into account (global) interdependence and relational complexity. In this article, I explore what moral visions—assumptions of what a person is and should be—help counselors shift their focus from individual to relational well-being. First, I examine the moral vision of narrative therapy, as an alternative to more traditional, individualistic moral visions. Then, I construct a moral vision of relational being, based on the relational being perspective of Kenneth Gergen. This vision represents an ethical stance that may, using work by philosopher Judith Butler, be understood as an ethic of recognition and nonviolence. Finally, implications of the moral vision of relational being for counseling/therapeutic practice are explored.     

Relational Psychoanalysis: A Review

Relational psychoanalysis, a relatively new and evolving school of psychoanalytic thought, is considered by its founders to represent a “paradigm shift” in psychoanalysis. The relational approach, initiated by the publication of Jay Greenberg and Stephen Mitchell's book, Object Relations in Psychoanalytic Theory in 1983, has developed into a movement with its own substantially separate literature. This paper reviews both the history and theoretical origins of the relational movement, as well as important theoretical premises and viewpoints now associated with the relational school.     

Forms in Motion: A Personal View of Object Relations

Seligman presents personal imagery and theoretical resonances about “internal object relations.” Listening to patients, he is often imagining presences in motion, in choreography, spatialization, and sometimes pictorialization of bodies experiencing and acting with people, places, things, and other environmental features. Emotions are typically engaged. He describes “shapey, blobby forms” that might organize into more specific images or narratives, which may be quite fantastical, quite realistic, or in varied blends of these and other modes. These experiences are linked to Freudian and Kleinian conceptions of phantasy and contemporary relational theories of implicit schemas, representations of relationships, and the like. Case illustrations are offered.     

It is All Personal: Further Thoughts on Therapeutic Action: Commentary on Paper by Noelle Burton

This paper evolved from an earlier panel presentation on conceptual tributaries to relational thinking at the 2015 International Association for Relational Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy Conference in Toronto. Representing the place of Object Relations theory in the DNA from which Relational Psychoanalysis emerged, I emphasized—and provide here an abbreviated review of—the contributions of Fairbairn, Klein, and Winnicott. Then, as now, believing in the communicative power of clinical examples, I offer an extended clinical narrative in which the medium is the message and clinical phenomena such as multiple self-states, enactments, negotiation, play, and the residue of internal object relations (in both patient and analyst) are brought to life. Also, as the Toronto Plenary overview paper by Jody Davies has developed into its current substantial elaboration of distinctly relational issues (multiple self-states, co-creation, and the interplay of process and insight) and serves as the capstone paper for this published version of our panel, I respond to Jody’s conceptual contributions and her perspective on Relational thinking.