The analyst's trust and therapeutic action

The analyst's trust, a neglected topic in psychoanalytic discourse, participates in therapeutic action--through the analyst's emotional openness, "unobjectionable positive counter-transference" (see Fox 1998), the holding environment, and the promoting of adaptive internalizations, among other ways. When the analyst's trust--in the patient, in the analyst's self, and/or in the psychoanalytic process--fails, crucial interactions may occur, capable of destroying treatment, or alternatively, of restoring mutual regulatory functions and potentially leading to important mutative processes. Patients benefit from analysts' becoming sensitive to, having useful ways of thinking about, and working with their states of trust and distrust. The author presents clinical examples to illustrate these points.     

Psychoanalytic goals,therapeutic action,and the analyst's tension

The author draws a distinction between the goals of psychoanalysis and its therapeutic action. Goals are consciously (or at least preconsciously) held by the analyst, and can be clearly articulated. Ideas about the mechanism of therapeutic action, in contrast, are hypothetical constructs, and cannot be completely spelled out. This is bound to leave analysts in a state of tension; we are certain about what we are trying to do, but what we are actually accomplishing is elusive. This tension may be optimal for the analyst, because attention must be paid simultaneously to the idiosyncratic relationship in the dyad and to the broader purposes of the analytic engagement.     

Thoughts on medication and psychoanalysis: a lay analyst's view

The issues involved in split analytic treatments-where a second person manages the patient's medication-are discussed from the point of view of a developmentalist and lay analyst. Case material is presented to illustrate the interplay of medication with other elements of the psychoanalytic situation. Medication and its effects, it is argued, should be accorded no special status apart from other interventions and enactments in an analysis. Some see medication and psychoanalysis as parallel processes, two separate and unintegrated theoretical systems, and recommend shifting back and forth between models of the mind or becoming "bilingual"; against this view, it is argued that anything the analyst does will affect the patient's thoughts, fantasies, and even physiology in individual ways, and only attention to analytic material can reveal what an intervention means in a specific case. Success in split treatment depends on a collaborative therapeutic alliance among patient, analyst, and consultant. Because there is as yet no theory that bridges psychoanalysis and psychopharmacology, analysts must talk of these matters as incompletely synthesized and regard them as part of the challenges that make psychoanalysis the exciting, impossible profession it is.     

The therapeutic action of psychoanalysis

Psychoanalysis does not seek to get rid of symptoms but to question them as witnesses of psychic functioning and as formations of the unconscious. Whatever their nature may be, it is a question of analysing their causes and their functions as they appear and develop during the course of the analytic process. The latter is activated by the transference relationship induced by the method within a specific setting. The aim is to bring about liberating psychic transformations. The extension of the indications and modifications in the expression of psychic suffering have led to the development of psychotherapies. Their relations with psychoanalysis proper have been evolving constantly since the first advances by Ferenczi. This long historical evolution has resulted in their redefinition. Psychoanalytic practices are currently considered to require, depending on the case, different settings and different modes of psychic involvement from the analyst. Contemporary psychoanalysis places emphasis on the internal setting of the analyst (thus his training), analysis of the countertransference, and the risk of anti-analytic aberrations.     

The analyst's knowledge and authority: a critique of the "new view" in psychoanalysis

A critical assessment is presented of positions recently taken by Mitchell and Renik, who are taken as representatives of a "new view" in psychoanalysis. One article by Mitchell and two by Renik are examined as paradigmatic of certain ways of construing the nature of mind, the analyst's knowledge and authority, and the analytic process that are unduly influenced by the postmodern turn in psychoanalysis. Although "new view" theorists have made valid criticisms of traditional psychoanalytic theory and practice, they wind up taking untenable positions. Specifically called into question are their views on the relation between language and interpretation, on the one hand, and the mental contents of the patient on the other. A disjunction is noted between their discussion of clinical material and their conceptual stance, and their idiosyncratic redefinitions of truth and objectivity are criticized. Finally, a "humble realism" is suggested as the most appropriate philosophical position for psychoanalysts to adopt.     

The nature of therapeutic action in psychoanalysis

The nature of therapeutic action varies not only with each patient's psychological predilection for utilizing opportunities for change, but also with the manner in which the analyst or therapist presents opportunity for change. Ideally, the therapist bases the latter on personally identifiable theoretical concepts and aims. This inquiry focuses on a relatively narrow field of clinical material in order to provide as close as possible an examination of therapeutic action. The technical approach provides opportunities for change, minimizing alterations resulting from internalizing processes or suggestion. The therapeutic actions arise from analyst and patient sharing observations of the patient's intrapsychic activities of resistance to drive derivatives the patient briefly allowed into consciousness, and represent processes of ego maturation set in motion by intellectually gained and experientially exercised insights.     

Affect and the therapeutic action of psychoanalysis1

In connection with controversial IJP articles by Stern et al. and Fonagy on the interpretation of the repressed and the recovery of past memories, the author maintains that the affect that is inherent in positive transference is at the heart of therapeutic action. Points of view put forward in the controversy (based on neurobiological knowledge) are related to Freudian metapsychology, as well as to their precursors whose scope was necessarily limited by a lack of access to more recent scientific discoveries. The author demonstrates metapsychological elements of therapeutic action inherent in the intersubjective relationship, especially identification, manifested in introjection and empathy. He describes cognitive development as spontaneously blossoming from the affective nucleus, and he explains the neuroscientic bases of this step forward. The classic (interpretative) psychoanalytic method makes up the cognitive superstructure necessary for the organisation of the mind that has sprung from the affective substructure. As a primary factor in psychic change, interpretation is limited in effectiveness to pathologies arising from the verbal phase, related to explicit memories, with no effect in the pre‐verbal phase where implicit memories are to be found. Interpretation the method used to the exclusion of all others for a century is only partial; when used in isolation it does not meet the demands of modern broad‐spectrum psychoanalysis, as the clinical material presented illustrates.     

Leonardo's phantasy and the importance of Freud's slip: The role of the analyst's phantasies in applied psychoanalysis and in the analytic relation

In his paper on Leonardo, Freud made a slip. Referring to the bird which, according to one of Leonardo's memories, tossed its tail into the painter's mouth many times when he was a child, Freud replaced 'kite' with 'vulture'. It is widely accepted that this slip doesn't signifi cantly damage the whole of Freud's constructions on the paper, nevertheless, the part of his considerations relating to the meaning of 'vulture' should be discounted. In the author's view, this part of the Leonardo paper is necessary. Thanks to the slip Freud was able to reach a comprehension which otherwise would have been unattainable. Interpretation based on the vulture made possible the confi guration of a mother as 'daughter of the wind', as was the case not only with Leonardo's mother but also with Freud's. Interpretation of Leonardo's phantasy was achieved through Freud's unconscious identifi cation with Leonardo and the slip adequately interpreted becomes the evidence of this. Through identifi cation, Freud succeeded in making sense of Leonardo's memory but also in realising an indirect virile possession of his own 'winged' mother. Freud's position as interpreting subject in his paper on Leonardo also has more general value: the analyst's knowledge about the 'other' has a very important basis in the indirect expression of his unconscious wishes within the fi eld of sense. The author uses clinical material in order to show how the analyst's phantasies play an important role in analytical interpretive work.     

The quality of the analyst's attention

Compiled and edited from lectures on psychoanalytic technique given by the late Karen Horney at the American Institute for Psychoanalysis during the years 1946, 1950, 1951, and 1952. Further lectures in this series will appear in subsequent issues of the Journal.     

The analyst's witnessing and otherness

The analyst's active though silent witnessing of the patient's self-inquiry is presented as an essential aspect of the analytic process. Witnessing, though rooted in the analyst's empathy and holding, represents a more advanced development of those functions based on relational muturation from union to self-other differentiation. Self-definition and regard for otherness are seen as intrinsically unitary. Psychoanalytic witnessing is first illustrated and defined, then located as a derivative of negation in the unfolding of the analytic process, next considered in relation to current concerns for intersubjectivity, and finally linked to current shifts in philosophical thought.     

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.