Back to Table of Contents
transformation qualitative changes in at least stable psychic ways of functioning of increasing mental complexity. The influence of the Baranger’s writings was felt throughout the report, in particular in the “Shared Action Experience” of J. Godfrind-Haber and M. Haber (2002), who started out with their interest in the events during analysis. They take into consideration the network of unconscious acts that is woven between analysand and analyst below the deployment of neurotic material; they deepen its participation in psychic transformations. In “To the sources of Interpretation”, Marie-France Dispaux (2002) developed interpretation on the “analytic site”, with reference to the expression used by Jean-Luc Donnet ( 1995). She envisions analytical work built on a type of interpretation that finds its purpose in linking. She advocates the idea of “co-aesthetic” work in which the psychic work of the analyst is a response to the patient’s need for representation. Nicole Carels (Carels, Dispaux, Godfrind-Haber & Haber 2002) leaned on Winnicott’s transitional space, to show, especially in child psychoanalysis, the importance of the psychic work of the analyst to build this space. Transformations are considered from the angle of intra- psychic and inter-psychic limits and according to the hypothetical principle of convergence and divergence. Fabio Herrmann’s (2003) work is not well known in Europe, but his theory of the Multiple Fields and his criticism of overly dogmatic psychoanalytical currents could be echoed by similar critics in Europe. In France, Herrmann’s wish to restore the strength of the unconscious and prioritize the analytic method evoked the work of Donnet (2005) on the method. Donnet highlights that it is the gap between the rule and the game that animates the analytical setting and supports the dynamics of the transference that constitute the ‘analytical situation’. In the European Federation, different working groups applied ‘ the group as psychic whole’ approach to listen to the psychoanalytic material in the session. The first one was the group of Haydée Faimberg’s “Listening to listening”. This method (Faimberg 2005) creates the conditions for understanding of the invisible, inaudible theoreticand clinical basic assumptions that make an analyst work as he works. The second working group one was introduced by B. Salomonsson (2012), using his “Weaving thoughts” i.e., a method for presenting and commenting on psychoanalytic case material in a peer group with a free association method. Finally, the third working group, led by Evelyne Sechaud and Serge Frisch, applied the “Specificity of psychoanalysis today” method. Here, the group of psychoanalysts were listening to a fragment of clinical material and were able to de-condense the many facets and issues of the session thanks to the sharing, by all participants, of the echoes that the presented analysis evoked in them (Lysebeth, Dirkx, Minazio, du Bled, Ducarme, Frisch et al. 2008). These three methods used the strength of the group as a sounding board to listen to the material based on the theories of Bion, Pichon Rivière, the Barangers, Donnet, and Kaës. (See also entries THE UNCONSCIOUS, PROJECTIVE IDENTIFICATION, OBJECT RELATIONS THEORIES and CONTAINMENT)
603
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online