Coming to terms with being left out can sometimes
predominate in an analysis. As children, we do not simply internalize objects
(mother, father) but also relationships or patterns of relationships (systems) –
including the perceived relationships of our parents, observed or imagined— and
exclusion from it can be a narcissistic injury. Aron writes, “The child’s wish
to be included represents both a wish for relationship…and an attempt to
maintain self esteem.” In finding ourselves excluded from the parental
relationship and parental interaction (the primal scene as exclusion of the
child from the parental dyad), this exclusion, with its blow to a child’s
grandiosity, becomes an organizer which links narcissism and object relations.
Trauma can disrupt the capacity to pretend, play, and
move freely between identity and multiplicity, between discontinuity and
integration. One cannot enjoy being the object of desire without also having
established one’s own subjectivity and agency. When unable to experience self as
subject with agency, the analysand or the child operating in the
paranoid-schizoid position, in psychic equivalence, fears loss of self and
identity.
The up side of recognition of this exclusion is the
opportunity to experience the self as both subject and an object, which leads
to the possibility of developing the capacity to hold two contrasting ideas
simultaneously – that of being both a subject and object—and, ala Winnicott, the
ability to allow for paradox to be sustained without the need to push for its resolution.
Aron says this capacity for toleration
of contradiction becomes another nidus for regulation of self and object
relations, for creativity, mentalization, symbolization, and even multiplicity of
gender. The capacity to be both subject and object, participant and observer, allows
one to be both subject who desires and object who is desired.
Moreover, experiencing oneself as both subject and object
allows for intersubjectivity and, in the treatment situation, the creation of
an analytic third. Aron writes that the child first lives in a dyadic world, relating
to only one parent a time, until it discovers (in the Oedipal stage) that
parents have a relationship of their own from which the child is excluded. In utilizing
Britton’s ‘triangular space,’ Aron notes it “allows for the possibility of
being a participant in a [dyadic] relationship and observed by a third person
and of being an observer of a relationship between two other people.” The child
is able to identify with self as object and self as subject, and to identify
with other as both subject and object, that is the development of
intersubjectivity. Aron asserts that the
experience with this alternating between participation and observation is what
allows for becoming an analysand.
Aron,
L. (1995). The Internalized Primal Scene. Psychoanal. Dial., 5:195-237.
1 comment:
I've always liked Bob Dylan's "I'll let you be in my dream if you let me be in yours." Given that we don't really have a clue about our own consciousness other than its undeniability, I like to remember the Delphic oracle: Always BE TRYING to know yourself. When such a mutual effort is made, as in analysis, the effects are transforming.
Post a Comment