Back to Table of Contents
René Roussillon (2004a,b) argues in favor of the integration of the concept of intersubjectivity in psychoanalysis. Though he considers that the way it is used in the North American (US) intersubjective school is reductive, he states that this notion can become a psychoanalytic concept through a metapsychological approach based on a sound psychoanalytic understanding of the subject, in other words, on a conception of the subject that includes the unconscious dimension of subjectivity. Drawing on the work of Winnicott, but also on Trevarthen’s developments about primary intersubjectivity, he defines intersubjectivity as the meeting between a subject moved by drives and endowed with an unconscious life, with an object who is also another subject endowed with drives and unconscious life as well. He emphasizes the need to address the role of the drives and of sexuality in intersubjectivity: according to him the drive serves as a message (la pulsion messagère ), inasmuch as it seeks for recognition by an object. For Roussillon, intersubjectivity eventually coincides with inter- intentionality (Roussillon, 2014). Other authors also expressed a qualified acceptance of the concept of intersubjectivity in French psychoanalysis. In his Rapport to the Congrès des psychanalystes de langue française, Bernard Brusset (2005) emphasizes the need to refrain from opposing object relation theory to drive theory. He underlines that the integration of the two paradigms sheds light on new possibilities of symbolization and ‘ subjectivization’ . In the field of child analysis, Bernard Golse (Golse and Roussillon, 2010) also uses the concept of intersubjectivity as a tool for understanding articulation between two heterogeneous psychic spaces and their ensuing recognition. Daniel Widlöcher (2004) is more reserved about the use of the terms “subject” and “subjectivity” in psychoanalysis. Though he reaffirms that intersubjectivity in psychoanalysis should not lead to the ‘banalization’ of the analytic relation between analyst and patient and to its conceptualization as a mere interaction between two persons, he emphasizes the need to move away from a neutral observer status in psychoanalysis, and to acknowledge that knowledge in the field is gained through access to the subjective experience of another . Such a situation implies psychic interactivity , a concept, which he summarizes by using the expression “ co-thinking ” (2004, 2014a, 2014b). III. Cd. View from France: Intersubjectivity in French Psychoanalysis in Europe In Europe, the specific use of the term intersubjectivity in French psychoanalysis is relatively recent, and frequently linked with the question of the treatment of borderline, narcissistic and psychotic patients. Intersubjectivity was in the past used as a descriptive word mainly in psychology and not fully recognized in psychoanalysis. The French conception of intersubjectivity is quite different from the American conceptions regarding ego psychology (H. Hartmann, E. Kris, R. Loewenstein) or the theory of the self (H. Kohut school) or the theory of objects relations (Edith Jacobson, O. Kernberg). Many French authors give preference to the word interpsychic rather than intersubjectivity and the conception of intersubjectivity is coming from the study of the transference counter-transference situation during the session. The great interest in metapsychology in French psychoanalysis prompted most French psychoanalysts to keep the concept of drives and to think about the articulation of the drive with the object. Their
479
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online