An interview with Allan Shore
2. If I had any use for some kind of analysis, my fundamental use for it would be to know what had came from me and what had came from another, to avoid being collapsed into the psychical processes of those around me. One aims for individuation through self-knowledge. Otherwise, one is collapsed into the psychical processes of those others, and becomes part of the gluggly conglomeration of their unclear ideas and emotions. That is not for me -- and I hope it is not for you, either.
You need to be able to hinge the imagination onto something, and the ideal thing to hinge it to is reality. Otherwise, any ape can come along and hypnotise you into believing that something is true, and why the hell not? Let us all join a cult and be done with it.
I'm not at all comfortable with the idea that imagination and reality ought not to be separated when considering developmental processes. I understand that information that is processed by an undeveloped brain could have a huge impact on it, even whilst the facts are distorted by that immature brain. No doubt this can occur, although perhaps the distortions of an adult's acculturated brain are often more extreme that those of a perceptive infant. The literature I've read seems not to take that into account.
But, certainly, on the interpretation side, the separation of what is real from what is not real is the necessary process of what I think should be psychoanalysis, if it has not lost its way.
QUOTE:1. This is precisely what I was interested in studying when I wrote my memoir!
His training as a psychoanalyst was critical in highlighting the importance of the relationship between the mother and the infant. But there was a struggle within psychoanalysis - in particular between Anna Freud and Melanie Klein - about how much was really a creation of the infants mind., a phantasy. Bowlby began to fervently argue and bring in data from other disciplines to show that the real relationship, that the real events, not only were there but they were indelibly and permanently shaped there in a way that would affect the way that the personality would develop over the lifespan. [EMPHASIS MINE]
2. If I had any use for some kind of analysis, my fundamental use for it would be to know what had came from me and what had came from another, to avoid being collapsed into the psychical processes of those around me. One aims for individuation through self-knowledge. Otherwise, one is collapsed into the psychical processes of those others, and becomes part of the gluggly conglomeration of their unclear ideas and emotions. That is not for me -- and I hope it is not for you, either.
You need to be able to hinge the imagination onto something, and the ideal thing to hinge it to is reality. Otherwise, any ape can come along and hypnotise you into believing that something is true, and why the hell not? Let us all join a cult and be done with it.
I'm not at all comfortable with the idea that imagination and reality ought not to be separated when considering developmental processes. I understand that information that is processed by an undeveloped brain could have a huge impact on it, even whilst the facts are distorted by that immature brain. No doubt this can occur, although perhaps the distortions of an adult's acculturated brain are often more extreme that those of a perceptive infant. The literature I've read seems not to take that into account.
But, certainly, on the interpretation side, the separation of what is real from what is not real is the necessary process of what I think should be psychoanalysis, if it has not lost its way.
No comments:
Post a Comment