Iteration and Homologies of Difference: A Discussion of Veronica Csillag’s “Emmy Grant: Immigration as Repetition of Trauma and as Potential Space”

This discussion of Veronica Csillag’s paper “Emmy Grant: Immigration as Repetition of Trauma and as Potential Space” (this issue) emphasizes the importance of place (rather than the more common psychoanalytic category of space) and the iteration of psychic dynamisms. Playing on the difference between being a subject of one’s own history and being a subject of History, this paper highlights the importance of recognizing the homology of our differences in order to become freer agents, more able to recognize what we have inherited and what we can make of it through creativity.     

Discussion of “Hysteria and Humiliation”: Commentary on Paper by Sam Gerson

This commentary describes certain differences in how Relational and Contemporary Freudian analysts approach both the conceptual dynamics of hysterical functioning and its clinical management. The discussion shows how, despite considerable agreement between these two groups concerning the critical importance of a receptive other for the successful buildup of virtually every aspect of mental life (not to be confused with the concept of co-creation), they also have quite substantial differences; differences that are rooted in contrasting basic assumptions about the ways in which fantasies, unconscious transference displacements, and self-regulating repetitive processes are set up in the mind. The discussion also illustrates how the clinical management of hysteria differs considerably depending on whether what is taking place in the consulting room is conceived of as an autonomous, repetitive process that the patient brings to the treatment and repeats (one way or another) over and over again, or whether it is conceived of as co-created, belonging to the minds of both persons in the room, even if not in equal measure or equal ways.     

Discussion of “Unraveling Whiteness”: Commentary on Paper by Melanie Suchet

In this discussion I consider several influences on the contemporary project of deconstructing racism and the concept of racialized subjectivity. This discussion applauds the turn in Suchet's work toward self-examination in a consideration of the experience of race and racism. Suchet's work moves the debates about racialized subjectivities into a deeper and more complex understanding of all the ways in which identifications and attachments cross race and class lines for many individuals. This discussion focuses on Suchet's treatment of the power of hybridic and biracial identifications, beginning with autobiographical material from Suchet's own childhood in South Africa. In this discussion of “Unraveling Whiteness” I integrate psychoanalytic concepts of enigmatic signification (the work of Laplanche) into a discussion of early attachment, and relational configurations with children and nonparental caretakers. The question of trauma or potential transformation in interracial experience is discussed, and some distinctions between American and South African experience are considered.     

Discussion of “Culturally Imposed Trauma: The Sleeping Dog Has Awakened. Will Psychoanalysis Take Heed?”: Commentary on the Paper by Dorothy Evans Holmes

This commentary expands on the problem of culturally imposed trauma described by Dorothy Evans Holmes. The focus on cultural trauma is both timely and necessary. I applaud Holmes’s attention to this important issue, and her clear articulation of its effects on intrapsychic and interpersonal life and the reluctance of psychoanalysis to engage with cultural trauma. My commentary explores two primary areas in an effort to further elaborate this issue: (a) The problem of defining cultural trauma as a legitimate type of trauma, and recognizing resistance to cultural trauma in psychology and psychoanalysis, and (b) the role of cultural context and narrative in addressing cultural trauma within psychoanalytic work. I aim to extend the range of questions concerning race, culture, and social class that remains to be examined in psychoanalysis.     

Pitfalls on our “New Royal Road”: Commentary on Paper by Joyce Slochower

In discussing Joyce Slochower’s paper “Going Too Far: Relational Heroines and Relational Excess,” (this issue) the author welcomes its self-critical emphasis, suggesting that analysts from all schools of thought benefit more from noticing the risks and pitfalls in their own approach—thus becoming able to improve their own clinical work—than from polemically highlighting what is faulty in other, competing approaches. Such polemics run a risk of their own: turning our theoretical homes into theoretical fortresses, and blocking richer communication among analysts. He shares the concern about some specific attributes of relational and intersubjective clinical work but relates many of the issues raised by Slochower to tensions and dilemmas present in older models of the analytic relationship as well, offering examples from the work of Freud, Ferenczi, Balint, Winnicott, and Racker.     

Commentary on “Night Cries: A Rural Tragedy” by Tracey Moffatt and Discussion of “States of Exile and Marginalization” by Gillian Straker

This is an excerpt of the work that I presented in Sydney last May at the International Association for Relational Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy Conference “From the Margins to the Centre: Contemporary Relational Perspectives” in my capacity as discussant of Gill Straker’s work, which included the viewing of the film Night Cries by Tracey Moffatt. I focused on the relationships that are characterized by abuse of power, by inequalities that define interpersonal relationships, and by the type of trauma that ensues from them and on the ways and possibilities to find a way out, a method to reconcile with the victims.     

Forms of Transformation in the Reflective Space: Clarifying “Mentalization” Theory Through a Clinical Application: Commentary on Paper by Stephen Seligman

In responding to discussions of my paper “Jonah: A Fantasy of Flight” by Fishman, Salberg, and Shulman, I focus on some of my critical assumptions in reading this or any other biblical text. Prominent among these is the need to relinquish the stance of “already knowing” the meaning of the text. This irreducibly enigmatic book demands close, informed, and literary reading. Within the context of a sustained reflection on the methodology and spirit of my enterprise, I discuss the main points of difference or disagreement that arise in the papers of my discussants, as well as celebrating the places of accord and enrichment.     

Object Relationships—Symmetry and Asymmetry: Commentary on Paper by Anthony Bass

Current understanding of the process of therapy and development focuses on the interactions between the partners. The interaction is a negotiation of differences and of change. The equilibrium of the relationship is inevitably subject to frequent destabilizations, by virtue of normal developmental processes, life events such as losses, and the divergence of aims as each process unfolds.

The destabilizations are pivotal to the creation of new states. If a newly emerging state is to be advantageous for the development of the infant or the health of the patient, the associated toxic affects have to be tolerated and dealt with openly. If the analyst defensively hides, opportunities for change will be lost and the old patterns will persist. The therapist and patient, like the parent and child, are engaged together in this mutually altering process.     

In the Nutshell: Gestational Experience as Liminal Space: Commentary on Thomas Cohen’s Paper “Considering Gestational Life”

Cohen (this issue) raises intriguing questions about the impact of gestational experience but asks his readers to suspend disbelief, as he posits links between this liminal, mysterious, and on some level “unknowable” of times and later phenomenological and relational experience. Using the novel Nutshell, by Ian McEwan, narrated by a fetus who is privy to the portentous events happening outside, as well as inside, his mother’s womb as a frame, I explore questions including how much we can know about fetal subjectivity, how to differentiate the impact of prenatal from postnatal experience, and how that translates to later developmental and clinical realms.     

“Generative Co-Constructions”: An Exploration of the Analyst’s Influence and Desire: Commentary on Paper by Richard Almond

In this commentary on Almond’s (this issue) paper, in which he asks us to consider ways in which his personality/history/psychodynamics played a significant role in his younger women patients becoming pregnant, the author questions Almond’s premise that we can know what “real-life effects” we have on our patients, when so much that occurs in psychoanalysis happens in mutually unconscious and procedural realms. In addition, the author critiques Almond’s archaic and reductive conceptions of gender and sexuality, which feel particularly problematic as they interpenetrate with his fantasies of his impact and pivotal role in their pregnancies.     

The Floating “I”—An Experience of Shifting Form: Commentary on Paper by Anne Sweetnam

The author offers a subjective reading of the clinical segment of Annie Sweetnam's paper. For clinical writing to have a lively impact, the form must be effective. This commentary focuses on how shifts in the written form convey shifting internal states of the patient and analyst and how the form then draws the reader into the emotional field within the transference–countertransference.     

Being “Done For” in Analysis: Commentary on Paper by Stuart A. Pizer

Stuart A. Pizer's fascinating article explores through a relational lens analytic impasse, and its manifestation through transference and countertransference love. How this love is demonstrated (or not) and the ways in which we provide for our patients will have profound effect on the process (and progress) of any treatment. But, too often, reluctance to “do for” our patients compromises our ability to provide what may be needed in any given moment. Perhaps an expansion of the “doer—done to” dyadic paradigm into a “doer—done for” model might allow more analytic leeway and more possibility of growth within our patients.     

“I'll Have What She's Having”: Commentary on Paper by Karen E. Starr and Lewis Aron

This discussion utilizes a feminist discourse originating in the 1970s to reconsider Freud's famous question, “What do women want?” and from there explores some hidden dimensions in Starr and Aron's paper concerning female agency, sexuality, and the twists and turns of psychoanalytic theory and social conventions. Highlighting Rachel Maines's researches into the use of vibrators in medical treatment in particular, the discussion illuminates how social conventions function as powerful determinants that legislate what is seen and not seen, what is questioned and what is accepted—and ultimately what is considered psychoanalytic “bedrock.”     

Dysregulated Rhythms and the “Grip” of the Context: A Discussion of the Paper “Poison Cookies” by Katherine Oram

Two moments from the clinical narrative under discussion are used to highlight the critical impact of attention to timing not in terms of when and what to say, but rather as a an ongoing source of emotional meaning emerging on implicit dimensions of rhythm and affective tone occurring in the clinical interaction. Meanings having to do with different forms of power including fear of psychic annihilation, agency, and aggression expressed within sado-masochistic dynamics are demonstrated to be scaffolded and coming into formation on these implicit levels. Alternatively, Merleu-Ponty's concept of Urdoxa as a grip on context is introduced to highlight how the analyst's use of timing to violate an expectation for nonresponsiveness or impingement creates an experience of distance between enactment and reflection, allowing space for re-membering as a form of representation. Here the creation of space through timing serves not just a representational function, but also a way for affective self and interactive regulation to emerge in an interaction as scaffolding for experiences of predictability (i.e., continuity and coherence) and vitality in self and other.     

“There Was a Child Went Forth” Commentary on Paper by Steven Stern

In this discussion of Stern's rich and thoughtful contribution to the dialogue between unified- and multiple-self theories, I refer to his earlier conceptualization of repeated and needed relationships. I thus highlight how his current model strikes me as shifting his emphasis toward identificatory factors, both in development and in clinical process, and away from the working through, or negotiation of, repetitions of relational configurations. Through Stern's clinical examples, I engage dialogue about how his construct of an “intersubjective self” relates to the qualities of multiplicity he accounts for in his theory. And I consider the implications for clinical technique of favoring identificatory influences over the analyst's living through the experience of transference repetitions with the patient and thereby introducing ameliorating responses from within, rather than from a stance more external to, embeddedness in transference–countertransference repetitions.     

The Bright Forms … . .: Commentary on Paper by Vivian Dent

This brief commentary on Vivian Dent's paper about my way of introducing the horizontal axis of siblings engages in a two-way dialogue about what art can tell us of the unconscious psyche and what psychoanalysis can tell us of the art object. It urges us to look at siblings in the transference and countertransference.     

The Potential of Paradox in States of Exile: Discussion of “States of Exile and Marginalization”

This commentary paper engages with Gillian Straker’s “States of Exile and Marginalization,” (this issue) in which she analyzes Tracey Moffatt’s film Night Cries through a Lacanian register. In addition, it surfaces certain aspects of Moffatt’s interpretation of her social world through the representational medium of her film. Tracing Straker’s themes of marginality and continued trauma as exilic consequences of colonization and coloniality, it also suggests that there are generative possibilities in the multiple states of exile that occur under such conditions, where the unknowability and irresolvability of trauma and its many associated states of exile are precisely what paradoxically allow for the emergence of productive alternatives to trauma repetition.     

Compensation in the Service of Individuation—Phenomenological Essentialism and Jungian Dream Interpretation: Commentary on Paper by Hazel Ipp

This reply elucidates the ideas originally presented in “Countertransference: Our New Royal Road to the Unconscious” (PD 9/3, 1999) in acknowledgment of Irwin Hirsch's commentary (this issue). It refutes Hirsch's erroneous conception that my paper suggested that the personality of the analyst could be extricated from the interactional matrix of the psychoanalytic relationship and that persons could be separated from their minds. By drawing these false dichotomies, Hirsch only polemicizes rather than clarifies the complex relationship existing between an analyst's subjectivity and his or her personality.