Back to Table of Contents
Roosevelt Cassorla (2017b) studied the ‘ subfields’ of interpretation , in addition to the Uncanny in the analytic field (Cassorla 2019).
II. Cba. Luis Kancyper According to Luis Kancyper (1998, 1999), clarification of the basic unconscious fantasy demands a complex and detailed working-through on the part of the analyst. That is, the concept of field implies a ‘second look’ (‘dual vision’) by the analyst in order to dismantle the ‘phantom assemblage’ of intersubjective dynamics and to infer, if possible, his/her own intrasubjective history. The aim is to highlight which ‘badly-bound pages’ of his/her own history are hooked onto the other’s ‘badly-bound pages’, and in what way that collusion between the unconscious fantasies, identifications, myths and pacts of both gave rise eventually to a shared phantom assemblage, where each keeps a stereotyped and repetitive role. It follows that through the unconscious fantasy of the field, one can begin to unravel each participant’s psychic functioning and intrasubjective history [going from] intersubjectivity to intrasubjectivity, from the hic et nun to the past and the future, from this seemingly timeless precipitate to the temporality of the past and the future (Kancyper, 1998). In Kancyper’s view, the Barangers’ field concept can be viewed as a macro-concept in complex thinking, a crucial place for questioning. From this vantage point, all references to the Gordian knot of the relations among the intrapsychic, the intersubjective and the trans- subjective are linked. This is in line with Edgar Morin’s (2007) advocating for macro-concepts, analogous to an atom as a constellation of particles, and the solar system as a constellation around a star. In this way, he emphasized the need to think in terms of a solidarity of concepts, whereby complexity does not lead to the suppression of simplicity. Rather, it integrates in the greatest degree the simplifying ways of thinking while rejecting the reductionist, mutilating, one-dimensional and eventually blinding consequences of simplification as the living image of that which is real. In Kancyper’s view, the Barangers’ concept of the analytic field opened new ways to regard selfhood concomitant with the consolidation of otherness, allowing for the review of one’s own history and the other’s while recognizing the linkages and their points of similarity, difference and complementarity. Another aspect that Kancyper underlined is the relation between the analytic field and the affective climate. The field is characterized by its dynamic character and its moves are simultaneously registered in two levels: the thinking content and the circulation of affect, as well as in the inter-crossing of both. Kancyper has written that analysts must perceive the Stimmung , the climate or atmosphere of a session and minutely auscultate with their “countertransference stethoscope” the different feelings and affects that present themselves in the analytic situation. The Stimmung reveals that which is ineffable in the dynamic field. In accurately detecting the weight of feelings and affects prevailing in each moment of the session, as well as their nuances and fluctuations, the analyst is able to make an instrumental use of the
679
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online