The capacity to symbolise: Ideas and implications

Through a literature review and clinical examples of session material and dreams, this paper explores aspects of the origin and development of the capacity to symbolise. The literature review considers Freud’s thinking on symbols in dreams, hysteria and obsessional neurosis, Klein’s discovery of the importance of unconscious phantasy, Bion’s ideas on the psychotic part of the mind and Bick’s seminal ideas on skin as an important symbolic boundary between psyche and soma. The clinical material in this paper is used to demonstrate the capacity to symbolise, reasons for the impairment of this capacity, and how the translation of symbols through interpretation in a therapeutic setting can enable the symbols to acquire meaning. It includes examples both of the author’s work with adults and of other clinicians’ work with a child and an adolescent in a psychotic state of mind. The paper’s aim is to consolidate the idea that the capacity to symbolise grows out of an optimal early parent/child relationship and that the awareness of the significance of the symbols when they have been interpreted is of crucial importance.     

The Incongruity of Congruence

SUMMARY

This paper examines Satires concept of congruence and the possibility of a “Tao of communication” in historical, social, and cultural context. The author then suggests alternative strategies for facilitating mutual understanding among couples     

The Red Book and clinical practice

Jung's work is fundamentally an experience, not an idea. From this perspective, I attempt to bridge conference, consulting room and living psyche by considering the influence of the 'Red Book' on clinical practice through the subtle and imaginal. Jung's journey as a man broadens out to have relevance for women. His story is individual but its archetypal foundation finds parallel expression in analytic practice today.     

Julie's museum: The evolution of thinking, dreaming and historicization in the treatment of traumatized patients

The author contends that, following Freud, trauma may be viewed as a disruption of the ego's 'protective shield' and that a central factor of this shield is an internalized relationship to a thinking-containing mother. Severe trauma destroy this inner connection, resulting in the reversal of a-function and the establishment of a rigid traumatic organization (ß-screen) that brings coherence to the shattered psyche. However, this is an 'organized chaos' in which concrete forms of thinking predominate. The patient's ability to think, dream and imagine is signifi cantly curtailed and she is consequently locked in a traumatic world from which she is unable to evolve. He offers a detailed case history to illustrate these points and the vital role the analyst's imaginative capacities play in the analysis of such individuals. Finally, he addresses the development of the capacity to represent the trauma, starting with primitive, often somatically encoded experiences, and evolving toward the capacity for historicization.     

Postponing trauma: The dangers of telling

Surviving a major historical trauma has consequences that are difficult to live with. Survivors who remain silent are often condemned to a desiccated existence, a dried‐out life, a death in life. Survivors who speak out run an even greater risk. Telling their ghastly tale may trigger somatic consequences, psychotic episodes, or even suicide. As to the psychoanalytic cure, the free association it requires carries its own danger: negative therapeutic reaction in sometimes extreme forms. Avoidance of horror may turn into avoidance of life itself. Awful as it may seem, this avoidance of life may represent a victory over a menacing chaos. Should we as analysts accept the risk of endangering such a victory, no matter how unsatisfactory? The psychoanalytical injunction to speak out may trigger an upsurge of shame and terror. Is subjectivation always possible? This paper is about what happens when denial and splitting strategies are suspended, when ‘crypts’ are opened. Is there an analytic ‘poros’ allowing for a controlled return of affects? Is there a therapeutic solution to the problem of telling a wreckage without being caught in it? The dangers of ‘telling’ will be discussed in regard to new analytic strategies and new interpretive registers. When the ‘silent psychic sharing’ proves insufficient, some analysts go so far as to take part in the shame, share the grief, ‘lend their own psyche’, become a ‘double’ of the analysand, accept the existence of ‘sanctuaries’. To what effect?     

On talking-as-dreaming

Many patients are unable to engage in waking-dreaming in the analytic setting in the form of free association or in any other form. The author has found that 'talking-as-dreaming' has served as a form of waking-dreaming in which such patients have been able to begin to dream formerly undreamable experience. Such talking is a loosely structured form of conversation between patient and analyst that is often marked by primary process thinking and apparent non sequiturs. Talking-as-dreaming superficially appears to be 'unanalytic' in that it may seem to consist 'merely' of talking about such topics as books, films, etymology, baseball, the taste of chocolate, the structure of light, and so on. When an analysis is 'a going concern,' talking-as-dreaming moves unobtrusively into and out of talking about dreaming. The author provides two detailed clinical examples of analytic work with patients who had very little capacity to dream in the analytic setting. In the first clinical example, talking-as-dreaming served as a form of thinking and relating in which the patient was able for the first time to dream her own (and, in a sense, her father's) formerly unthinkable, undreamable experience. The second clinical example involves the use of talking-as-dreaming as an emotional experience in which the formerly 'invisible' patient was able to begin to dream himself into existence. The analyst, while engaging with a patient in talking-as-dreaming, must remain keenly aware that it is critical that the difference in roles of patient and analyst be a continuously felt presence; that the therapeutic goals of analysis be firmly held in mind; and that the patient be given the opportunity to dream himself into existence (as opposed to being dreamt up by the analyst).     

Freud,Bion and Kant: Epistemology and anthropology in The Interpretation of Dreams

This interdisciplinary article takes a philosophical approach to The Interpretation of Dreams, connecting Freud to one of the few philosophers with whom he sometimes identified – Immanuel Kant. It aims to show that Freud's theory of dreams has more in common with Bion's later thoughts on dreaming than is usually recognized. Distinguishing, via a discussion of Kant, between the conflicting ‘epistemological’ and ‘anthropological’ aspects of The Interpretation of Dreams, it shows that one specific contradiction in the book – concerning the relation between dream‐work and waking thought – can be understood in terms of the tension between these conflicting aspects. Freud reaches the explicit conclusion that the dream‐work and waking thought differ from each other absolutely; but the implicit conclusion of The Interpretation of Dreams is quite the opposite. This article argues that the explicit conclusion is the result of the epistemological aspects of the book; the implicit conclusion, which brings Freud much closer to Bion, the result of the anthropological approach. Bringing philosophy and psychoanalysis together this paper thus argues for an interpretation of The Interpretation of Dreams that is in some ways at odds with the standard view of the book, while also suggesting that aspects of Kant's ‘anthropological’ works might legitimately be seen as a precursor of psychoanalysis.     

AFFECT,SYMPTOM, FANTASY,DREAM: CLINICAL AND THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS

A symptom being studied in the process of analysis can be seen as not unlike the unconscious affect it sprang from. The author presents a case in which a symptom, premature ejaculation, was analogous to the unconscious affect of guilt, which itself seemed to be a premature defensive transformation of a deeper current of anger. Guilt was interpreted as if it were a psychic premature ejaculation, a defensive derailment of anger. Fantasy and dream seemed to be engaged in similar transformations, with a fantasy of “premature incarceration” not unlike the symptom itself in its analogous functioning. Analysis of affect, symptom, fantasy, and dream in complex, integrative analytic process led not only to resolution of the symptom itself, but also to a deeper understanding of the mind's complex functioning in general.     

The canary in the mind: on the fate of dreams in psychoanalysis and in contemporary culture

Dreams have been central in the birth and evolution of psychoanalysis. This paper explores the remarkable story of the relationship between dreams and psychoanalysis as a modern version of the long history of dreams in most healing traditions. But psychoanalysis seems to have turned away from dreams as central inspiration in a way parallel to the general culture’s turn away from dreams and the reality of inner life. Yet modern postindustrial culture is transfixed by a version of “dream life” in ways just beginning to be understood (e.g., in the transformation of ancient interest in the inner screen to the external screen). Working with dreams in psychoanalytic psychotherapy was a creative and revolutionary act for our forebears. It is even more so today, in ways that are discussed in this paper.Dr. Paul Lippmann is training and supervising analyst and faculty member at the William Alanson White Institute and faculty member of the NYU Postdoctoral Program in Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis. He is also Director of the Stockbridge Dream Society.