| Abstract: | I have attempted to articulate a means of incorporating representational world concepts firmly within the structural theory, while still maintaining their clarity, a view which I believe can be useful both clinically and theoretically. It can facilitate an analyst's working with complex clinical material that reflects conflicts at multiple developmental levels, without forcing a premature commitment to restrictive conceptualizations which could impede his listening to the full richness of the material. In addition, I have argued that the perpetual resurgences of representational world psychologies may be understood as an indication of the need for the inclusion of those phenomena in our theory in a clear and integrated way. Finally, I have presented some basis for suggesting that the drive-defense and the representational world models represent coordinate aspects of the structural theory, each with its vantage points for highlighting and clarifying certain phenomena, but best used complementarily in our observations of psychopathology at all levels of development. I do not believe this represents a totally new view or departure within psychoanalytic thinking. On the contrary, I have assembled, organized, and attempted to make explicit certain understandings which I believe we often apply naturally through the use of empathy and intuitive gifts. In an analysis which is going well, an analyst operating within a drive-defense framework is almost certainly finding some natural way of dealing with self and object issues, even if he does not formulate them explicitly to himself. To set down and make explicit, however, the functions we may much of the time perform without awareness is worthwhile preparation against times of difficulty in understanding a particular case. At those times we need at our disposal as specific, as inclusive, and as illuminating a theory as we can find to assist us. It is that clinical need which has guided me in these attempts at theoretical clarification. |
