Back to Table of Contents
the dynamics of counter-transference, the consideration of which allows the analyst a fuller understanding of transference. He takes into account not only the repetitive aspects, but also all that is new within the exchange between the analyst and the analysand. Racker developed certain concepts at a time when, in his opinion, not enough attention was being paid to resistance to transference and to the interpretation of dreams. There was a tendency to interpret conflicts but the profound motivations, such as wish-fulfilment in dreams, which are in fact their essence, seemed to be ignored (Racker, 1954). He attributed these technical differences to oscillations in the Freudian thought itself. In “Estudios sobre técnica psicoanalítica” [Studies on Psychoanalytic Technique], Racker (1958a) remarked that Freud perhaps wanted to spare patients from the intensity and the violence of repetition and therefore he sometimes seemed to want to limit his tendency to give transference neurosis a central role in the treatment. Racker’s contribution to transference has mainly been to emphasise certain unconscious processes that take place in the analyst, that inhibit him and prevent him from offering the appropriate interpretations throughout the treatment: he termed them counter-resistances to the task of interpretation (Racker, 1958b). Counter-transference is the actual response to transference. In consequence, he applied the Freudian methodology of transforming what has become an obstacle (that is, counter-transference) into an instrument that broadens the understanding of ‘making the unconscious conscious’ (see separate entry COUNTERTRANSFERENCE). Although he applied Freudian methodology, Racker’s suggestions may need to be differentiated from what at the time was sometimes termed ‘classical’ (but in fact, would be rather ‘orthodox’) psychoanalysis, which could result in a simplified rigidly sanitized notions of ‘analyst as a blank screen of a mirror’ and ‘analyst as a surgeon’ in order to achieve an ideal asepsis. By contrast, Racker adhered to a more active technique in facing the analysand’s clinical production, something that can be attributed to the influence of Melanie Klein and, in particular, of Paula Heimann. He took up an active aspect of the Freudian statements by becoming aware of the processes of identification with the patient that entail empathy and the careful attention to the patient’s associations. He tended both to a microscopic and macroscopic approach to the patient’s activity, in the Siedehitze (intense heat) of transference. Such heat is attained, according to Racker, only if the analyst contributes enough heat (enough positive countertransference while carrying on with his task) to the analytic situation. Certain asepsis, he remarked, should not prevent analysts from showing interest and affection towards the analysand, because only Eros can create Eros. Certain defences of the analyst against aspects of his own unconscious hinder his task when he faces the analysand’s unconscious. These defences manifest themselves as excessive aloofness, inflexibility, coldness, and inhibited behaviour in the presence of the analysand.
1084
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online