Back to Table of Contents
in the patient-analyst session-to-session functioning, like free association, and evenly floating attention. In difference from Bleger, they posit that compliance with the overall frame/setting cannot be considered an addiction or an institutional submission, since the analytic situation and process depend on its stability. In addition, a double message would be sent to the patient: asking him to comply with it and at the same time communicating that he is addicted or submissive to it. In any case, it is to be expected that even a patient who is extremely compliant with the fundamental rule, will at some point not comply, which would generate anguish, panic, guilt, feelings of depersonalization, etc., and then the analyst would intervene to work through the unconscious fantasies in the face of the rupture. Laverde and Bayona do not consider an overt compliance with the framework to be a simple result of submission to an institutional power, since, under optimal conditions, the technique is based on other theoretical concepts: Free associations, revelatory of the unconscious contents and processes are occurring in the context of transference, countertransference, resistance, and variously conceptualized conflicts. Jaime Marcos Lutenberg (2015) writes about ‘Corporeal Free Associations’: "In a session we have access to an observational universe that is far beyond the patient's verbal associations. What meaning is attributable to a gurgling, a tachycardia, a sudden headache or a choking that emerges parallel to a silence or phonic utterance?" (p. 1). Overall, Lutenberg’s Corporeal Free Association is especially relevant in relation to conversion “hysteria and psychosomatic afflictions. Corporeal ‘free association’ is Lutenberg's term for "The muscular movements not directed by the conscious that occur during analytic regression" (p. 5). Writing on the analyst's listening, following Green and Bion, Lutenberg proposes that, in patients with pathologies of a wider range (beyond neurosis), the traditional listening to the patient's free association is different and is not sufficient. "The constant and complex ‘giving up’ in the free association of such patients offers a transferential testimony of the ‘mental abortions’ they experienced during their history", which are represented in the analytic process by means of countertransference, negative transference, lapses, enacting "their timeless mental catastrophes” (p. 2). Lutenberg proposes that in addition to the traditional listening, analysts develop the capacity to imagine, in a reverie-like fashion, the “semantic figurations” (p.2) that the patient cannot create, to conceive of what might determine the associative silence. For Lutenberg, this is the way to listen and understand a ‘mental void’ behind the silence (all that the patient unconsciously tries to exclude from the analytical dialogue). Lutenberg’s significant contemporary contribution is the approach where ‘in parallel’ to the ‘verbal free association’, attention is paid to the ‘associative silence’ which hides the mental voids, and ‘corporeal free association’ of the body movements, employed as a useful tool to investigate the link and the difference between hysterical and psychosomatic phenomena.
415
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online