Back to Table of Contents
The phenomenon of pictographic language appears vividly in dreams, but also as Donald Meltzer (1984) wrote about visual flashes, or as Sara and Cesar Botella (2013) wrote about figurability. But always in the analytic field, revealing and producing an emotional impact. The pictogram is the body–world figurability. It appears to be a primordial unity necessary for the construction of a framework, a chain of signifiers that may support mental contents, language and significations. As such, the whole of the signifiers is not understood merely as the total sum, but rather as a network able to establish the most diverse connections in every direction. These structures also imply syntactic aspects– that is, a necessary grammar which renders communication possible and makes use of linguistic signs in what we call semiotics; one might think of a chain of reciprocal convertibility among the signifiers, which entails, as a consequence, the possibility of an infinite construction of significations. This pictographic figurability reveals itself capable of expressing affects that haven’t been manifested until that point, possessing a function that surpasses that of denotation– hence the term “affective pictogram ”. To understand better these figurabilities, it is important to grasp not only the conception of the pictograms, but also how they relate to each other constituting ideograms that allow to comprehend the construction of visual representations of affects and abstract concepts. This process is a consequence of an uninterrupted oneiric activity. VII. Bdb. Jose Renato Avzaradel Over the last 20 years, Avzaradel (2005; 2006 a, b; 2011; 2024) has been developing ideas about representation and symbolization, aiming to benefit psychoanalytic work with expanded range of patients with gross impairment of representational symbolic processes. He brings together relevant notions in areas of philosophy and linguistics (classical as well as ‘ordinary language philosophy’, poetry, together with psychoanalysis. He explores formation of thoughts through delving into construction of complex ideograms of Chinese language form simple pictograms. From psychoanalytic authors he draws mainly (but not exclusively) on Freud ’s “Study on Aphasia”, Interpretation of Dreams, Metapsychological papers and papers on technique; Klein ’s theory of Projective Identification, Bion ’s Theory of Thinking and Learning from experience, particularly as it concerns concept Containment, with transformation of beta into alpha elements via reverie; Ogden ’s intersubjectivity of the ‘analytic third’, Barangers ’ and Ferro ’s Field theories, Aulagnier’s, Rocha Barros ’ and his own ‘pictograms’, Busch’s work on transference and creating psychoanalytic mind, and many others (Avzaradel 2011). and ‘translating among’ all the above philosophical, linguistic and psychoanalytic conceptual networks, he proposes a model of psychoanalytic work with patients in whom areas of ‘non thought’: prevail. He uses the ideographic model, which exposes thought's construction of visual images, which he supposes to be the original form of thought. In this model, ideograms express a form of thought similar to what one sees in dreams, generative of free association. They provide an image-based model of thought that helps understand how representations and concepts are constructed and how they can be taken apart
808
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online