Back to Table of Contents
in North America, working from an interpersonal/relational perspective have come to view projective identification as a bi-directional process that is not merely a phantasy (Klein’s view) but involve real interaction between patient and analyst. Along these lines, projective identification is seen as a normal form of communication between patient and analyst that can become more or less pathological in nature depending on the nature of the mental contents extruded. Projective identification thus provides a bridge between the intrapsychic and the interpersonal and the focus of study shifts from either the patient or the analyst to the field they co-constitute. In Latin America Melanie Klein’s ideas had a great acceptance, first in Argentina in the 1950s and ‘60s and, from there, spread to psychoanalytic societies in other Latin America countries, where development continued. Latin American analysts have developed sophisticated theories about the analyst’s countertransference in relation to projective identifications – his/her reception and understanding of the patient’s projective identifications. The analyst’s concordant or complementary identifications become unavoidable tools by which the analyst is able to understand more of the patient’s object world. Also, Bion’s work has been and still is important in Latin American psychoanalysis – he visited both Argentina and Brazil. Not least have his theories been influential in the formulations of the “analytic field” as a co-creation of projective identifications of both the analyst and the patient. Since Melanie Klein in 1946 formulated her theories about projective identification, the concept has been developed and elaborated in rich, complex and sophisticated ways in all of the three IPA regions and this development is still proceeding.
See also: CONTAINMENT: CONTAINER-CONTAINED COUNTERTRANSFERENCE OBJECT RELATIONS THEORIES THE UNCONSCIOUS
REFERENCES
Apprey, M. (1987). Projective identification and maternal misperception in disturbed mothers. British Journal of Psychotherapy .Volume 4, pp.5-22. Baranger, M. & Baranger, W. (1961-62). La situación analítica como campo dinámico. Revista uruguaya de psicoanálisis , IV, 1. English version: (2008) The analytic situation as a dynamic field. Int. J Psychoanal. , 89: 795–826
558
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online