Integrating the relevant psychoanalytic literature with clinical examples, the author explores the meaning of love triangles interpersonally as well as intra-psychically. Alternatively, they can create instability, even destruction. The author provides a clinical vignette demonstrating how framing, presence, and engagement describe psychoanalytic work, and concludes by discussing how such nomenclature could enhance psychoanalysts’ capacity to communicate with one another while also making the field more accessible to the general public.įormally known as triangulation processes, love triangles feature prominently in relationships-sometimes providing stability, sometimes vibrancy. 510), and Summers (2014) “narcissistic encapsulation” (p. 1), Kernberg (2007) the “narcissistic spectrum” (p. They also disrupt patients’ internalization processes-phenomena synonymous with what Fairbairn (1941) called the “schizoid background” (p. These methods facilitate transformation most commonly by bringing features of the unconscious into consciousness. Specifically, he suggests psychoanalysts, regardless of theoretical orientation, frame psychoanalytic relationships, bring presence to their patients, and engage them. Finally, the author’s concluding remarks synthesize the theses presented and further validate how such analogies contribute to achieving a more integrative, cohesive vision for the psychoanalysis of the 21st century.Īfter noting how psychoanalysis has fragmented into theoretical and methodological clusters lacking a common language, the author proposes a unifying nomenclature for clinical psychoanalysis. The author discusses how frequently psychoanalytic scholars, even of differing theoretical orientations, make consistent references to “internal dramas.” She presents 3 clinical examples to illustrate the theoretical and clinical usefulness of theatrical analogies. They add flesh to the bones of experience-distant concepts like recurring intersubjective patterns or nonlinear dynamic systems.
These theatrical analogies invite disparate perspectives on unconscious-structure, process, dynamism, or even primitive, disorganized components-into integrative tales or stories. After comprehensively reviewing models of unconscious structure from Freud to Mitchell, the author explores how using analogies to theater or drama for explaining the unconscious benefits the psychoanalytic project in 2 distinct ways: They offer metaphors that transcend differences between longconflicting theoretical models they allow for comprehensive methods of interpretation encompassing myriad perspectives on the unconscious.
0 kommentar(er)
