Prologue

The discussant begins by describing her British Object-Relations perspective. She emphasizes the difference between obstructive or critical forces within the personality which are best described as a part of the self and those which are felt by the patient to have a quality of otherness about them: the latter are better conceptualized as internal objects since this is closer to the patient's subjective experience. The author stresses the importance—in Scharff's patient's inner world—of the useless maternal—and impotent paternal—object. ‘Stupid’ rather than ‘bad’ objects can affect introjective processes and limit the patient's intellectual functioning because, where the world is seen as uninteresting and unstimulating, it is therefore not worth attending to nor learning from. The author also made a further point. She saw the patient's repetitive bitter self-criticisms, although partly arising out of deprivation, depression, and abuse, as also possibly containing an element of masochistic pleasure in suffering and failure. This would raise delicate technical issues in balancing a sensitive approach to the real suffering with a clearly stated recognition of the addictive repetitive masochistic quality which accompanies it and which may be blocking recovery.     

Primary Process Communication

An unorthodox view of the function of primary process is presented with a view to enlarge, rather than diminish Freudian assumptions. One of the basic tenets of Freudian hypothesis was the supposed lack of influence of outside experience upon primary process functions. Yet we see demonstrated on a daily basis that primary process cognition is at work in any human interaction or experience. The mental structures of the self in interaction with the nonself is constantly monitored, added to, or subtracted from during contact with others. It is a prereflective mode that does not immediately rise into awareness. We give meaning to all interactions without necessarily reflecting upon them or even clarifying them to ourselves. Without allowing for such meaning to be integrated, we would lose or misinterpret large portions of our daily interactions. Flaws in communication occur every day and are demonstrable particularly in therapy when therapists are not attuned to their patients' emotional needs. It is demonstrated that nonverbal avoidance behavior of disturbed infants is the precursor for disturbed object relations of adults. Therefore, it makes no sense to interpret unconscious meanings—there are none. The difficulty lies in the inter-subjective realm and serves defensive modes. However, if patients present an inauthentic self, it is often difficult to decide if one is indeed in the presence of such a maimed self. The therapist's countertransference aids in detecting inaulhenticity. Ever-present, unconscious meaning analysis must be brought into consciousness by the therapist in order to further the therapeutic process.