Back to Table of Contents
psychic structure in development and in the psychoanalytic process, Loewald sees symbolization as essentially propelling integration. In “Sublimation: Inquiries into Theoretical Psychoanalysis”, Loewald (1988) lays out an increasingly relevant and useful contemporary integrative perspective that is also diligently in dialogue with Freudian texts. He bridges Freudian Topographic and Structural thought, Post- Freudian Structural instinctual drive-defense Conflict theory and Ego psychology, Kleinian Object Relational theory, and was considered as a father of Relational and Intersubjective theories. His perspective is additionally in tune with French ‘Third Topography’ and with the contemporary use of the plurality of psychoanalytic theories. (See also separate entries on THE UNCONSCIOUS, OBJECT RELATIONS THEORIES and INTERSUBJECTIVITY). In this seminal publication on the subject, he expounded on the limitations of sublimatory processes understood primarily as defensive, or illusory concealments of instinctual- unconscious life. In his view, sublimatory processes often represent more advanced modes of psychic life upon which our culture and civilization depend. In agreement with Klein, he views symbolization as a vital aspect of sublimatory processes. Together with Winnicott and Modell, he views melding object relations as involving the role of the transitional object. Similarly as Gilbert Rose does later (1999), he envisions symbolization in sublimation as driven by dynamic and shifting experiences and processes of archaic unity, mingled with differentiation and individuation, followed by a restoration of unity that is aided by the imaginative act of ‘symbolic linkage’ (See separate entry EGO PSYCHOLOGY). The gratifications in creative productions, including the act of writing, involves experiences of restoration and one-ness, shifting de-differentiations and mourning losses of individuation, and a deep connection to the culture human beings share through symbol-making. The symbol can be defensive – ‘symbolism as disguise’ – and when the meaning of the symbol is inanimate. In this way, its re-animation in clinical work does not mean the symbol ceases to exist for the person, but is enriched. Overall, Loewald sees symbolization as essentially propelling integration. Otto Kernberg In his integration of Ego Psychology/Structural Theory and Object Relations theory, Kernberg (1980’s - 2015) ascribes symbol formation to the ego and stresses that self and object representations are linked by affects and organized by the primary process and splitting (See the separate entries OBJECT RELATIONS THEORIES, SELF, EGO PSYCHOLOGY). Dealing specifically with underlying symbolic meaning of transference- countertransference transgressions in psychoanalytic situation, Kernberg (1999) describes the countertransference acts in the form of a contribution to the eroticization of the psychoanalytic situation or even of a breach of the boundaries of the psychoanalytic setting. In his view, sexual relations with patients are mostly a symptom of the analyst's narcissistic character pathology, which is accompanied by a severe superego pathology. In some cases, however, a purely
877
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online