Response to cigarette deprivation as a function of oral fantasy.

The role of oral fantasy in reactions of heavy smokers to smoking deprivation was studied. Experimental subjects were first evaluated with the Holtzman Inkblot Test to measure amount of oral fantasy. They also evaluated themselves on a number of Semantic Differential continua. Smoking deprivation followed. Retest Holtzman blots and Semantic Differential rating scales were then administered. Subjects also indicated number of somatic symptoms and body image distortions produced by deprivation. Control subjects followed the same paradigm except they smoked throughout the procedure. It was found that the greater the orality of experimental subjects the greater the number of somatic symptoms and body distortions they experienced following deprivation; and the more they viewed self as having shifted in a less favorable and less potent direction. Such relationships were absent in the control group.     

The screen function of unconscious fantasy

Although being a fundamental concept in psychoanalysis, fantasy is an ambiguous term. It covers a vast field of conscious and unconscious phenomena, from daydreaming, the manifest narration of the patient’s world of imagination to unconscious fantasy and primal fantasy. Further, it introduces the delicate alternatives of imaginary versus real, subject versus object and internal versus external. Following Freud’s reflections on the ambiguity of fantasy, we arrive at an idea introduced by Freud himself, but elaborated years later by Lacan. Fantasy, accordingly, is seen as a screen which both reveals and conceals. Our aim is to demonstrate, theoretical as well as clinical, how unconscious fantasy serves as a window into not only repressed wishes and conflicts, but also the most primary scenes where the subject may not even have a specific place. Simultaneously, it is the site of protection and defence, including projection and denial, but also repetition of what we will call the identical. A clinical case will be presented to illustrate our theoretical ideas and their clinical implications.     

Unconscious fantasy (or phantasy) as clinical concept

A clinical phenomenology of the concept ‘unconscious fantasy’ attempts to describe it from a ‘bottom‐up’ perspective, that is, from the immediate experience of the analyst working in session. Articles of psychoanalytic authors from different persuasions are reviewed, which taken as a whole would shed some light on how the concept of unconscious fantasy takes shape in the analyst's mind during the session with the patient. A clinical phenomenology in three steps is described. Each step is illustrated by clinical material. Current controversies around the concept of unconscious fantasy (or phantasy) are still trapped in the discussion about if and how they are really unconscious. The strategy to describe from a ‘bottom‐up’ perspective the process of how the analyst's mind embraces the idea that an emerging phenomenon in the relationship with the patient can be defined as ‘unconscious fantasy’, allows us to elude the question as to whether or not we believe that unconscious fantasies exist at all, since we are neither required to assert or deny such a prior existence in order to describe the process of elaboration which, in the end, does formulate a fantasy as fantasy.     

The curative fantasy in group psychotherapy

The concept of a curative fantasy includes patient's conscious and unconscious hopes and expectations of what is necessary for their relief of suffering. On entering group psychotherapy these elements emerge in the treatment matrix. This paper describes how patients with significant deficits in their intrapsychic organization express their curative fantasies through the development of selfobject transferences. The concept illuminates aspects of patients entering and forming a group as well as some elements in unanticipated terminations.     

Rorschach object relations and fantasy themes incorrectly scored as determinants

Determinants are perceptual features of inkblots, but movement, reflections, pairs, and subdivisions of shading, scored as determinants, actually represent associative elaborations. Such misclassification of determinants obfuscates the response process and makes it difficult to evaluate the validity of inferences. To the extent that these scores are useful, they can be improved upon by fully developed content analysis. Movement, reflections, and pairs can best be understood as manifestations of object relations content themes, as scored in systems developed by Blatt, Krohn & Mayman, and Urist. Determinant scores for reflections and pairs should be eliminated. Shading should not be subdivided into texture, vista, and diffuse shading, since these are content themes without clear psychological significance or clear empirical support.