Back to Table of Contents
integrationist version of intersubjectivity, based on unconscious communication and a dual- track development, manifesting in psychoanalytic discourse. His intra-subjective, inter- subjective and trans-subjective conceptualizations are metapsychologically rooted in the alterity of ‘the other’ subject, but also of the unconscious and primary process; and phenomenologically clinically observed, present and experienced. Example is his concept of ‘projective transidentification’. Here, taking off from Freud’s “It is a very remarkable thing that the Ucs of one human being can react upon that of another, without passing through the Cs.” (Freud, 1915, p. 194), and reinterpreting Bion and Klein’s conceptualizations, he hypothesizes that “intersubjective projective identification constitutes both the operation of an unconscious phantasy of omnipotent intrapsychic projective identification solely within the internal world of the projecting subject—in addition to two other processes: conscious and/or preconscious modes of sensorimotor induction, which would include signaling and/or evocation or prompting gestures or techniques (mental, physical, verbal, posturing or priming) on the part of the projecting subject; followed by spontaneous empathic simulation in the receptive object of the subject’s experience in which the receptive object is already inherently ‘hard-wired’ to be empathic with the prompting subject” (Grotstein, 2005, p. 2051). Overall, analogically to Bion extending Klein’s pathological projective identification into the realm of communicative projective identification, Grotstein extends Bion’s conceptualizations, communicative projective identification among them, into the intersubjective realm. Another theoretician who concerns himself with the intersubjective dimension of unconscious communication is Lawrence Brown (2011). He integrates historical contributions of Freud, Klein and Bion to explore how together patient and analyst co-create narratives of unconscious configurations as tools to analyze the patient’s traumatic and psychic history. In his system, waking and night dreams are of central importance. Both Grotstein (1999) and Brown (2011) state that countertransference has thankfully been transformed into intersubjectivity, and Brown adds “Furthermore, intersubjectivity is a process of unconscious communication , receptivity, and meaning making within each member of the dyad to bring idiosyncratic signification to the shared emotional field that interacts with an analogous function in the partner” (Brown, 2011, p 7). The analytic field concept used here by Brown had its main source in the work of the couple Baranger: “The Analytic Situation as a Dynamic Field” (1961/2008). With the translational lag, this fundamental theoretical innovation was thus unknown to most of the psychoanalytic community until recently. The Barangers described unconscious phantasy of the analytic couple and emphasize the contribution of phenomena of projective and introjective identification in its structure. About the concept of such co-created unconscious phantasy, they argued: “It is something created between the two, within the unit that they form in the moment of the session, something radically different from what each of them is separately . . . We define phantasy in analysis as the dynamic structure that at every moment gives meaning to the bi-personal field ” (ibid, p. 806-7).
465
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online