Back to Table of Contents
memories in order to make room for the ‘hollowed out space’ of the analytic setting (see also Scarfone, 2015). This form of transference requires the analyst not to know , not to fill in the space , and instead to have a receptive, diffuse attentional set ready to receive unconscious emanations.
IV. CONCLUSION/SUMMARY
In Latin America , the ideas about the analytical field – a space-time where nothing happens to one of the members of the analytical dyad that does not resonate in the other – has been part of psychoanalytic culture long before the concept has been fully articulated and theorized by the Barangers. Greatly influenced by theories and ideas on c omplexity , contemporary Latin American theorists enrich and expand the field conceptualizations in many directions. Through the lens of complexity, the field’s emotional flow that manifests and hides together in words, actions and discharges, comes into prominence and reveals transient, unpredictable and constantly transforming configurations. In the context of the field’s complexity, the participant is part of the field, modifies it, and is modified by it. Latin American ideas influenced European and North American psychoanalysis, e.g., Antonino Ferro, Thomas Ogden and intersubjective authors. These same authors, in turn, enriched Latin American contributions. The concepts of field affective holography, and the analytical third, despite dissimilarities, have a common root with the ‘dreams-for- two’ and the unconscious fantasy of the dyad. Similarly, field paralysis, the bastions described by the Barangers come close to the concepts of a ‘subjugated third’, ‘non-dream-for-two’ and chronic enactment. All field concepts, theories and their derivations contribute to the deepening of the study of areas with deficit of symbolization, one of the challenges of contemporary psychoanalysis. In Europe , variously envisioned field configurations highlight the antidogmatic aspect of analytic thought, openness and creative potentiality, applied to the analytic dyad as well as to groups. European analysts emphasize Freud’s work as extensive and open. They also acknowledge that he never hesitated to question concepts based on his clinical discoveries throughout his life. There is always a risk of freezing psychoanalysis in a reductionist theory instead of keeping Freudian open-mindedness. The English Middle Group, French André Green, Jean-Luc Donnet and René Kaës, and Italians Francesco Corrao and Antonino Ferro represent this open current in Europe. In this respect, European field theorists draw on Latin American Willy and Madeleine Barangers and Fabio Herrmann who, in admittedly different ways, have contributed greatly to this contemporary, open and anti-dogmatic psychoanalytical current, while maintaining a Freudian but pluralistic anchor, particularly necessary for non- neurotic psychic structures.
718
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online