II. C. Latin American Contributions and Developments
2.3 拉丁美洲的贡献和发展
M. Klein's ideas had a great acceptance in Argentina in the 1950s and '60 and, from there, spread in Latin America where development continued. They were used in a creative way generating new points of view that enriched the original ideas of M. Klein and her followers.
克莱因的思想在20世纪50年代和60年代在阿根廷得到了广泛的接受,从那里传播到拉丁美洲,并在那里持续发展。他们被创造性地使用,产生了新的观点,丰富了克莱因及其追随者的原始想法。
Contributions by Heinrich Racker (1910-1961), Willy and Madeleine Baranger, Leon Grinberg, Enrique Pichon Riviere, Arminda Aberastury, José Bleger, Angel Garma, Marie Langer, may be considered the main Latin American original contributions in the field of projective identification.
Heinrich Racker(1910-1961)、Willy和Madeleine Baranger、Leon Grinberg、Enrique Pichon Riviere、Arminda Aberastury、JoséBleger、Angel Garma、Marie Langer的贡献可能被认为是拉丁美洲在投射性认同领域的主要原创贡献。
As projective identification is often the only means for patients to communicate mental contents that are too painful to be articulated, the reception and understanding of the patient's projections is a tool par excellence in working with difficult cases. The Argentine analyst Heinrich Racker, in his pivotal work on countertransference, described concordant and complementary identifications as intrinsic parts of the therapeutic relationship. In a concordant identification, the analyst uses aspects of him/herself to find a way to understand the paths and meanings of the patient's internal conflicts, a process often referred to as empathy. Simultaneously, his/her trying to understand his unconscious complementary identifications will allow him/her to find out which internal object of the patient he/she is representing in the transference, in the hic et nunc of the analytic session, often one that has been disavowed and projected in the form of a projective identification. (Racker, 1953, 1957).
由于投射性认同通常是患者沟通精神内容的唯一方法,这些内容太痛苦、难以表达,因此,在处理困难病例时,接收和理解病人的投射就是一个优秀工具。阿根廷分析师Heinrich Racker在其关于反移情的关键著作中,将一致性和互补的认同描述为治疗关系的内在部分。在一致认同中,分析师利用他/她自身的各个方面,找到一种方法来理解患者内部冲突的路径和意义,这一过程通常被称为移情。同时,他/她试图理解自己无意识的互补认同,这将允许他/她找出他/她在移情中代表的是患者的哪个内在客体,在分析会话的此时此地(阿根廷语 hic et nunc)中,这些通常是以投射认同的形式已经被否定和投射了。(Racker, 1953, 1957)。
Within this enlarged view, the countertransference as informed by projective identification becomes an unavoidable tool by which the analyst is able to understand more of the patient's object world. The analyst can then use that experience to help understand the patient's object world and in time to process and return a modified form of the projection much like a mother does for her infant. Bion describes this process as helping the patient develop the capacity for alpha-function, i.e. thinking (see entry COUNTERTRANSFERENCE).
在这个放大的视图中,投射性认同所告发(informed)的反移情成为一个不可避免的工具,通过它,分析师能够更多地理解患者的客体世界。然后,分析师可以利用这种体验来帮助理解患者的客体世界,并及时处理和返回一种修改过的投射性形式,就像母亲对婴儿所做的那样。Bion将这一过程描述为帮助患者发展阿尔法功能的能力,即思考能力。
For Racker, complementary identifications necessarily involved the patient's activating aspects of the analyst's unconscious. His Argentine colleague, Leon Grinberg (1956, 1979) developed the concept of “projective counter-identification” to describe clinical encounters with the aim of defining
对于Racker来说,互补性认同必然涉及患者激活精神分析师的无意识面向。他的阿根廷同事Leon Grinberg(1956, 1979)提出了“投射性反认同(projective counter-identification)”的概念,以描述临床遭遇,定义的目的是:
“… a number of disturbances introduced in the psychoanalytic technique on account of the excessive role played by projective identifications in the analysand, giving rise to a specific response in the analyst [...] whereby he is 'led' to perform, in an unconscious and passive way, the different roles assigned to him or her” (1956, p. 507).
“……精神分析技术中引入的一些干扰,是由于被分析者投射性认同在中扮演(played)了过度的角色,在分析者中引起了特定的反应[…],由此,他被“引导”运行,以无意识和被动的方式扮演分配给他的不同角色。”(1956, p507)
In one of his texts on this subject, Grinberg (1979) discussed the difference between Racker's notion of complementary countertransference (Racker, 1953) and his own idea of projective counter-identification. He considered that Racker's concept derived from the analyst's identification with some of the patient's inner objects felt as objects from his/her own childhood past. The analyst's emotional response was based, then, on his/her own anxieties and conflicts with inner objects similar to those of the analysand. On the other hand, in the projective counter-identification.
情绪反应是基于他/她自己的焦虑。以及与分析师类似的内在客体的冲突。另一方面,在投射性反认同中:
关于这个主题,Grinberg(1979)在一篇文章中讨论了Racker提到的互补反移情概念(Racker, 1953)和他自己的投射反认同概念之间的差异。他认为,Racker的概念来源于分析师对患者的一些内在客体的认同,这些客体被(分析师)认为是他/她自己童年时代的客体。分析师的“The analyst's reaction stems, for the most part, independently of his own conflicts and corresponds in a predominant or exclusive way to the intensity and quality of the patient's projective identification. In this case, the origin of the process comes from the patient and not the analyst. It is the patient who, in an unconscious and regressive manner, and because of the specific functional psychopathic modality of his projective identification, actively provokes a determined emotional response in the analyst, who (1979, p 234)… may have the feeling of being no longer his own self and of unavoidably becoming transformed into the object which the patient, unconsciously, wanted him to be (id, ego, or some internal object), or to experience those affects (anger, depression, anxiety, boredom, etc.) the analysand forced onto him.” (ibid, 231)
“分析师的反应在很大程度上独立于他自己的冲突,并以一种占据优势的、或排他性的方式与患者的投射性认同的强度和质量相对应。在这种情况下,这一过程源头来于自患者,而不是分析师。正是患者以一种无意识和退行的方式,因为他的投射性认同具有的特定功能性的精神病性模式在精神分析师之中主动的激起了一种坚定的情绪反应,精神分析师(1979, p234)……可能会有一种自己不再是自己的感觉,并且不可避免地变成了患者的无意识地想要他成为的那个客体(本我、自我或某种内在客体),或者是被分析者强加给他的那些情感(愤怒、抑郁、焦虑、无聊等)。”(同上,231)
Grinberg's concept can be useful in understanding some enactments that occur between patient and analyst.
Grinberg的概念有助于理解患者和分析师之间发生的一些行为。
Willy and Madeleine Baranger(1961-62, 2008), heavily influenced by Bion, have developed a theory of the analytic field that emphasizes the interdependence of the coparticipants in the analytic dyad and explores the role of the analytic dyad in the formation of “defensive bastions” in the course of the analytic treatment. They assert that every analytic couple is unique and neither member can be understood without the other. They consider the analytic field as being the real object of observation and analysis, as it is a co-creation of projective identifications of both the analyst and the patient. They refer to an analytic session as a co-constituted “fantasy”.
Willy and Madeleine Barange(1961-62,2008)深受比昂的影响,发展了一种分析性场域(analytic field)理论,这个理论强调,分析性二元关系中的合作者彼此相互依赖性,同时探索了分析性二元关系在分析治疗过程中形成的“防御堡垒(defensive bastions)”的作用。他们断言,每一对分析双元都是独一无二的,而且,任何一个成员都无法在缺乏对方的情况下能够被理解。他们认为,分析领域充当了观察和分析的真实客体,因为它是分析师和患者的投射性认同共同创造的。他们把一节分析称为共同构成的“幻觉”。
“The basic phantasy of a session is not the mere understanding of the phantasy of the patient by the analyst, but something that is constructed in a couple relationship”… This phantasy “is constituted by the interplay of processes of projective and introjective identification and of the counteridentifications that act with their different limits, functions and different characteristics in the patient and the analyst”. (W. & M.Baranger, 2008)
“一节分析的基本幻觉不只是分析师理如何解患者的幻觉,而是一些在双方关系中建立的东西”…这种幻觉“是由投射性认同和内摄性认同过程以及projective反认同过程的相互作用构成的,这些过程在患者和分析师中具有不同的局限性、功能和特征”。(W. & M. Baranger, 2008)
II. PROJECTIVE IDENTIFICATION IN THE ANALYTIC WORK
3、 分析工作中的投射性认同