Back to Table of Contents
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, Loewald expounded on the limitations of a view that understands sublimatory processes 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’, serving as a protective layer, concealing deeper emotional truths. It allows individuals to express complex feelings indirectly, avoiding vulnerability. Disguise in symbolism can facilitate communication of taboo or painful subjects. Loewald emphasizes the therapeutic value of recognizing these hidden meanings. In this way, its re-animation in clinical work does not mean the Otto Kernberg In his integration of Ego Psychology/Structural Theory and Object Relations theory, delineated in numerous publications since the 1970s, Kernberg 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 acting out 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 symbol ceases to exist for the person, but is enriched and revitalised. Overall, Loewald sees symbolization as essentially propelling integration.
880
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online