CECILIA Think MOSQUERA
transfer leads me to believe in those things ...
make the possibility of analysis, the obstacles, to breaks, to continue walking paths and retrace, to repeat no difference, to make a difference, to seek answers, to get questions, understand nothing, feel everything, to shut up fantasies, that deceptive practices, blame others, to take responsibility in something, be angry with truths that the other has to say at the time that I can listen, to lose the object look like a jump drive to attach symbolic to the symbolic, where logic takes a significant role , where history itself becomes proper for appropriation, where the crop miseries, impossibilities are run, the possibilities are sometimes, repeat for him (the analyst), to tell him to suffer me to enjoy a suffering, to feel the guilt of feeling love and hate.
And when I think about the transfer and the death drive, do not know if they help, if rejection, do not know if one is cause or consequence of the other ... theorizing about transferring connects me with an experience, difficult but nameable, but often unintelligible. Theorizing about the death instinct leads me to the total abstraction and entangle and interspersed between senses, questioning, understanding and ignorance ... to talk about both, the unconscious emerges, breaks suddenly, without warning ... and let myself go ... the only way to bring forth something beyond. The sense of theorizing is that someone from there will read a clinic and will implement it.
I venture to theorize a possible clinical thinking but I'm sure that the clinic is not without theory and theory is not without symptoms. Therefore, this is adventure.
When I started thinking about the question that arose from work on the poster, I wanted to delve into the relationship of the transfer with the death instinct. My trigger was the access anecdotally, to hear the case of Sabina Spielrein and the importance of his theories for psychoanalysis. Therefore, I read an article entitled "Destruction as cause of becoming (1912)", which puts the death drive in close relation with the evolution of life. I thought about titling this writing "The death drive as the cause of transfer" but I hesitated to get to be clear enough to sustain it, so I stopped.
In theorizing about the dual drives of Freud, there are enough items to get lost and not understand too. Against the hypothesis of a single drive (of death) and other drive-turned it (life) I have a doubt whether or not respecting the duality that in the beginning, Freud was fighting with some scholars of psychoanalysis. But if the theory is part of the clinic and return to it, perhaps the practice is
refuting the theory. And, as Freud said, the theory comes from clinical practice and should not be forcibly set theory.
There is a reading that Rabinovich Norberto which states that Lacan does not preserve the duality of drives: "... that [Lacan] has developed a formula only [the mathema of the drive] to the drive shows that rejects the Freudian dualism drive " [1] . And this issue goes back even further: the Project for a psychology for neurologists, Freud would speak of a drive and over-turned in the first.
points between the drive and transfer to repeat play, the negative therapeutic reaction, the enjoyment and the neurotic symptom. The question I would like to address, then, put it this way: Why being in analysis, speaking of the desire to feel guilt? Do you act the death drive there, I say, behind that feeling of guilt?
Finally, I think, how to approach the same drive if not doing what she does: go around the object? "The satisfaction is not obtained achieving the object but in the journey itself" [2] .
Freud in The Ego and the Id (1923) ", talks about the negative therapeutic reaction as the most powerful resistance to healing, from the patient. In those moments that made a difference or shifting subjective implication, if you will, something comes along that pushes back a few steps. There is a feeling of guilt that feels like illness and the patient seems to want to perpetuate that feeling of illness ("helplessness?). Freud also said that the alliance entered the ego and the superego where most resistance to the termination of analytic treatment. And if Freud located in the superego to the death drive, the question remains whether the death instinct acts when, speaking of desire, he feels guilt. Death drive
us a route to death, because the hours pass and stretches are shorter, but is this just cause of this discomfort or may be acting also in the relentless pursuit that leads one to live ? Returning
the question posed, I intend to travel around the concepts of repetition and repetition compulsion, then, to place something of joy in repetition, failure to register does not cease, the development of anxiety need to link the a representative free energy, the ratio of the death instinct with desire, with the evolution and destruction.
In the introductory note to the text "beyond the pleasure principle 1920 ', Strachey quoted text" The ominous "where Freud would speak of a repetition compulsion as a phenomenon manifested in the behavior of children and in psychoanalytic treatment . Suggests that drift more intimate nature of drives and declares that it is powerful enough to overrule the pleasure principle. It seems important to address this point
because it is an approach from beyond the pleasure principle, Freud theorized about the death drive and its opposition to the life instinct. Freud puts a traumatic dreams beyond the pleasure principle. Presenting feature of the repetition compulsion, has the character of a drive. There Eros dichotomy raises the death instinct. It therefore presents the problem of destructiveness ("destructiveness as a cause of becoming?).
Freud speaks of is incorrect to speak of an empire of the pleasure principle over the course of mental processes. Still, not all sources of displeasure contradict the pleasure principle. He starts to analyze the psychic reaction against external danger. Speaks of two sources that contradict each other: 1) the dreams of traumatic neurosis, in which would affect the function or sleep or have a masochistic tendency of the self, and 2) children's play, where he observed the play of his grandson, he did disappear for a reel and returned to appear, but the first act was repeated itself endlessly, but the greatest pleasure appropriate the second act.
then adds that in transferring the patient may not remember the repressed, and in fact do not remember. Therefore, it is forced to repeat it as an experience this. This reproduction faithfully emerging unwanted content is a fragment of infantile sexual life, the Oedipal complex and plays in the field of transfer of the installation of the transference neurosis. The resistances that arise, then, from the unconscious, he wants to be revealed, but the unconscious core of the self. The compulsion to repeat would be beyond the beginning of the pacer. This would be more instinctual than the pleasure principle and you are looking for the development of anxiety to try to link the energy that has been cleared of representative and therefore could not be processed.
The repetition compulsion, then, would have a drive and demonic nature. The drive that effort would be inherent in the living organism, reproduction of an earlier state that the living had to resign under the influence of external disturbing forces. The drive would be a conservative, on the one hand, and the creation and progress, on the other. Although the distinction of life-drive death drive, both are conservative. The road to the satisfaction of the drive is blocked by the resistance under which the repressions still standing. No choice but to move the other direction of development, with no prospect of closing the progress or reach the goal. I wonder if this will not have to do with having to give enjoyment to recover some of the same by the law of desire ...
There is an interesting point, raised by Norberto Rabinovich, I would like to return to think about the death instinct. "The drive, as he [Freud] said, is a specific trend of a subject and not to be confused with a tendency of the body. Therefore, when death is raised as to enjoy the drive, such death must be devised in the field of subjectivity. What the features not supported by the cessation of vital signs, but a traumatic subjective experience fainting or order of dissolution of the boundaries of self, that is, an experience that involves loss of self or imaginary consistency as a equivalent, the subjective loss of the integrity of bodily being.
(...) It must then apply at the root of the repetition of the drive called 'death' by Freud, trauma, trauma of the structure itself and not the living subject. What is a drive seeks to reissue original trauma and, therefore, screening the field of automatic repetition (Wiederholungszwang) in the re- a subjective event order castration [3] . The death drive, designed from the start, could be taken as the transformation of one's death to introduce the special action of the experience of satisfaction. This drive comes to the pursuit of specific action to satisfy a [loss], it would be a desire to another, which is presented as a demand. The action performed by another, that of covering with his wish, enter the life instinct. In the transfer can be understood that the drive to seek the other, once lost the need to satisfy a desire. May try to think the drive and death drive that has become in life drive the introduction of the Other's desire.
In the aforementioned letter of Sabina Spielrein, she begs to be fruitful means destroyed, but if this destruction is at the service of the new creature, then the individual's wishes. Would have us instinctual forces, indifferent to the welfare or discomfort I begin to move our mental life. The pleasure would be simply a reaction of acceptance of self to these demands that arise from deep, and we can directly experience pleasure in pain. There would be something in us that wants this self-injury. He goes further saying that the specific desires that we live in does not correspond at all with the desires of the self, and with the desire of inertia exists in us a desire for transformation. We look for what looks to us, that in which the particle can dissolve the ego. And what does this solution but death? Only we ourselves become the object of our own libido, with self-destruction that entails. There would be a destructive component in the reproductive instinct. Gradually, the instinct of destruction content unsatisfied instinct of reproduction increases the tension, while producing more specific thoughts of death or more sublimated. Finally I am interested in the reference to what happens in neurosis, she said that it dominates the destructive component, which manifests itself in all the symptoms of resistance to natural life and destiny. This resistance occurs to me that can oppose the death drive in the transfer, resistance to healing, something in coordination with the negative therapeutic reaction.
to start thinking about the death drive in the transfer, I will begin the journey that synthetically by Lacan's concept. He stands, in relation to the transfer, something of a transfer of powers from the subject to another (instead of the word, virtually, rather than the truth.) However, more carefully, one finds that the transfer occur most considerable resistance: "That moment, in Freud, is not simply the time limit that corresponds to what it designates as the time of closing of the unconscious, temporary press that it disappears at some point in his statement. Freud, when he introduces the transfer function, takes pains to point out that time to cause what we call transfer. The Other, latent or not, is this from earlier in the subjective revelation. Already present when he started to poke some of the unconscious. "This means that the big Other is already present whenever the unconscious opens. And later he says: "(...) the transfer is essentially resistant. It is the means by communication is interrupted the unconscious, by which the unconscious is closed again. Far from being the time of the transfer of powers to the unconscious, transference is, unlike its close " [4] . So Lacan says you must take the transfer as a knot. A knot that is going to have to do with the time of interpretation and analysis of the transfer. Analyze the desires at play in the transfer. Since the transfer is, for Lacan, the enactment of the reality of the unconscious. And the reality of the unconscious is nothing but sexuality and death. Life brings with it death. The life of the species survives in its individuals but they must die. This perceived link sex with death. The desire to be put into play in the transfer will be the analyst's desire. The desire to hold the position of the analyst and to introduce an ethical dimension: do what needs to be done. Avoid the analysis of transference can lead to a false final analysis, related to the id to the analyst.
Why Lacan, Seminar XI concerned about and not confuse differentiate repeating transfer? Perhaps, it has been read in any translation of the works of Freud, which transfer the patient repeats. Is required reading in every repetition is a shift that introduces the death drive, to get closer to death. But also: “(…) la transferencia no es por sí sola un modo operatorio suficiente si se la confunde con la eficacia de la repetición, con la restauración de lo que está escondido en el inconciente y aun con la catarsis de los elementos inconcientes” [5] . Es interesante la idea de Lacan de hacer una revisión crítica de los conceptos y de su utilización en la clínica, ya que de eso parte la fundamentación y la lectura de dicha clínica. Por eso, al ir analizando los que considera como conceptos fundamentales- transferencia, pulsión, repetición e inconciente- está intentando una reflexión ética: implica el hecho de reflexionar acerca de la práctica y no solamente aplicar concepts and techniques.
As for making it possible to transfer and seals, Lacan will talk about love, deception on the stage of love (as the most suitable scenario for the emergence of deception) and hatred. The structure of the dimension of love is that the transfer gives us the opportunity to illustrate "(...) persuading the other that's what you can complete each other, just make sure that we continue to ignore what we lack" [6] . This would be misleading to the circle of love that at some point, does not cease to ask ourselves not by desire.
And, when we finally asked about the desire, what we feel is guilt, resistance, reps who do not stop harassing us but we did not perform. Repeat ad nauseam so as not to open a question of desire. I wonder if it is put into play some of the enjoyment of that I use to try Rabinovich text of a joint. The subject is deeply divided over the enjoyment, seeks to achieve and protect the area. So when you reach it, is through an act which is usually commanded by an unconscious impulse, not controllable, as in the symptom. In these cases, the impulse does not avoid danger, but that violates the security barriers and, therefore, the enjoyment is achieved in unison with the consummation of the danger. The subject is the enjoyment the place where the trauma occurs.
The enjoyment and his contract displeasure, usually not displayed simultaneously. The subject feels unhappy or guilty for having enjoyed and has, on the enjoyment experienced a mantle of oblivion. Other times, consciousness ignores the painful situation is the disguise of a pleasure achieved visible. As shown in the structure of symptoms, the subject has with his symptoms without realizing that there has.
Freud discovered a general principle which guides and regulates the behavior of the subject in their quest for satisfaction, the "pleasure principle." The most significant of this principle is that cuts and discards a field where the pleasure would be excessive, and that the subject can not access result in distressing, impossible or prohibited. That rest beyond the pleasure principle adheres precisely the central field of enjoyment [7] .
Later, talking about resistance to the cure and said that the alienation of the subject of language is woven through the concrete discourse expressed loudly by the Other. The voice of conscience, imperative, which demands obedience and subjugation. The more unquestioned and sometedora is this the voice of the mandate, the subject is more firmly attached to the Other, the Other's enjoyment. Therefore, in times of fall of this object, the gap is revealed in the place of the Other confronts the subject with the deepest feeling of helplessness. In his last works, Freud stressed that the alliance between the ego and the superego lies the most significant resistance to the completion of the analytical treatment. Lacan said that the final is only possible insofar as it made the final disposal of the voice function as a stopper of castration on the Other [8] .
understand that the transfer come into play regarding modes leading to possible further working some traumatic life of the subject as to hinder the word, to close the unconscious by that very relationship of love and hate established with the Other. Repetition appears in the field transfer, and this is not a concept I am replacing the other, simply, to transfer the subject can get to read some of that repetition of analysis might be unnoticed. In a repeated game is the drive, and more specifically, the death instinct. One that aims to reach the enjoyment beyond the pleasure principle, condemning the guilty and subject to clogging of the castration of the Other. The question of desire can only be sustained after castration and income taken by the laws of desire. Still, the drives could not be neutralized, the drives push to life and death simultaneously. With the introduction of the symbolic, a signifier can reach dimensioned distress. The analyst can donate space for the subject to emerge as a significant effect.
To conclude: from the journey undertaken by the poster Transfer, I could find yourself in relationships that made a common work, shared interests, to dissent in opinions and points of view, a unique brand within the group. The meetings continued at the beginning and then sporadic, were conducive to raise questions among the various members and also some controversies that do to how each one might with a void that often costs to appropriate it, to be truly an enabler. We were involved in transfer relationships: with its possibilities and obstacles.
What is repeated, meeting after meeting, was an interest in the vicissitudes of Freud's personal life as well as Lacan. It was really appellant, but my question was perhaps not so much on that side.
As said earlier, what moved me was the theorizing of the death drive in relation to the transfer: thinking of those events that an analysand can repeat ad nauseam, first without the notion of repetition itself, and more late pure compulsion, can not cease to do so.
believe that a theoretical I propose to address my questions Cotado may seem, and indeed it is, but I intend to make way with him. One way to begin to walk around here with these questions, but that will be doing while you are walking. Bibliography
* Freud, Sigmund: "Project for a Psychology for Neurologists (1895)" New Library Works, Volume I. Madrid, 1996.
* Freud, Sigmund, "The dynamics of transference (1912)" New Library Works Volume II. Madrid, 1996.
* Freud, Sigmund: "Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1920)" Complete Works Volume III New Library. Madrid, 1996.
* Freud, Sigmund: "The Ego and the Id (1923)" Complete Works Volume III New Library. Madrid, 1996.
* KAIT, Graciela: "Subject and Ghost. An introduction to its structure. " Ed Ross Foundation. Rosario. 2000
* Lacan, Jacques: Seminar XI. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. " Polity Press. 13 th reprint, BA 2006.
* Rabinovich, Norberto: "Tears of the real. A study of enjoyment "Homo Sapiens Ed. Rosario. 2007
* Spielrein, Sabina: "Destruction as cause of becoming" (Jb. Psychoanal Psychopath. Forsch., 4, 465, 1912). Original title: "Die Destruktion als Ursache des Werdens. " Translation from German into Italian Nico Di, 1977. Translation from Italian to English Inés Arteaga. We thank Carolina Hermo the possibility of publishing this very interesting material.
[1] Rabinovich, N. "Tears of the real. A study of enjoyment "Homo Sapiens. Rosario. 2007. P. 59.
[2] Kait, G.: "Subject and phantom. An introduction to its structure. " Ed Ross Foundation. Rosario. 2000. Pág.78.
[3] Rabinovich, N.: "Tears of the real. A study of enjoyment "Homo Sapiens. Rosario. 2007. Pp. 25 and 26.
[4] Idem. P. 136.
[5] Lacan, J.: "Seminar XI."
p. 135 [6] Idem. P. 139.
[7] Rabinovich, N. P. 13.
[8] Idem. P. 52.
0 comments:
Post a Comment