Transference Part 2 - Appliedjung · 2017-09-19 · Module 1: Transference and Counter Transference Part 2 QUOTE “Among these contents the relation to the parent of the opposite

MAGNUMOPUS:CITRINITAS

Module1:TransferenceandCounterTransferencePart2

QUOTE

“Among these contents the relation to the parent of the opposite sex plays a particularly important part, i.e., the relationship of son to mother, daughter to father, and also that of brother to sister. As a rule this complex cannot be integrated completely, since the doctor is nearly always put in the place of the father, the brother, and even (though naturally more rarely) the mother. Experience has shown that this projection persists with all its original intensity (which Freud regarded as aetiological), thus creating a bond that corresponds in every respect to the initial infantile relationship, with a tendency to recapitulate all the experiences of childhood on the doctor. In other words, the neurotic maladjustment of the patient is now transferred to him.”

“The practice of psychotherapy” C.G. Jung p. 170

TransferenceandCountertransferencePart2CompiledbyTheCentreforAppliedJungianStudies

Magnum Opus Citrinitas

TransferenceandCountertransferencePart2

1http://appliedjung.comCopyright©TheCentreofAppliedJungianStudieshttp://facebook.com/Appliedjung

TableofContents

Application......................................................................................................................44Atooltoidentifyyourtransference:understandingyourunconsciouscommunicationinrelationships.............................................................................................................................44TheTool...................................................................................................................................47

Step1...........................................................................................................................................48Step2...........................................................................................................................................50Step3...........................................................................................................................................53

Conclusion................................................................................................................................58




Transcript

ThisisatranscriptionofaliverecordingofalecturetotheCLPfocusgroup

onTransference–countertransference(part2)

Dialoguekey:

AllplaintextisStephen,

A:Allan,

B:Bernie,

Br:Bruce,

Dh:Dahlia

R:Ryan

G:Gabriel

H:Hanlie

K:Karen

Recapofthetransference-countertransferencemodulepart1

Thisisparttwoofthetransferencecountertransferencemodule.I’mgoingto

recap,briefly,someoftheimportantpointsthatwetouchedoninourlast

class,beforegoingontodiscussthealchemicalmetaphorinthetransference

dynamic.




Alright,sojustsomekeypoints:-theideaisthatwe’retalkingaboutan

unconsciousdynamicwhenwetalkabouttransference,andwhenwetalk

aboutcountertransferencewearetalkingaboutatransferencethatoccursasa

resultofthetransferencethatishappening;Iamtransferringontoyouandas

aconsequenceofthetransferenceIhaveontoyou,youcountertransferonto

me.Itcouldbeasympatheticcountertransferenceoritcouldbean

antipatheticcountertransference,butit’ssomethingthat’sprovokedbymy

transference.

Andthenwearealsotalkingaboutthephenomenaofembodiedtransference.

TheideaofembodiedtransferenceisthatItransfersomethingontoyouandas

aconsequenceofmytransferringitontoyou,youexperienceitinyourself.

Okay,soItransferontoyouthehero,orthevillain,orthefather,orthe

mother,orwhateveritmaybeandyoustarttoexperiencethosefeelingsin

yourself.We’rerelyingtosomedegreeonthefindingsofanalystswho

believethatthey’reabletodifferentiatebetweentheircontentandthe

contentthatbelongstotheclient;sotheystarttoexperiencethings-intheir

innerworld,thattheybelieve-isnottheirproperty,perse.

Thatareasonablycommonexperiencethatwe’veallhadissimplythatyou

oftenfind–ornotoften,butyoumayfindattimes-thatinthecompanyof

certainindividualsyouhaveaverystrongemotionalreaction.Andmaybenot

onlyanemotionalreactionbutyoumayfindthatyouhavesomesortofan

imaginaryreactionaswellifyouareperceptiveenough.Inotherwords,you

mayfindthatcertainfantasymaterial;certainimagesstarttocomeupwhen




youareinthecompanyofaparticularperson.Thatisthisideaofembodied

transference.

Sowe’retalkingaboutunconsciousdynamicsthen,inrelationtotheother,

andwespokeaboutthreelevelsthatthephenomenonhappenson:-It

happensattheleveloffeelingoremotion,sotransferencehasthisemotional

affectivecharacter;ithappensattheleveloffantasyandimagination,sothe

ideaisthat-wedon’tquiteknowhowithappensbuttheideaisthat-

frequentlyimagesthatliveinmyunconsciousmaycometoexistinyour

unconsciouswhenweareindialogueasaconsequenceofthetransference

dynamic.Andwespokeaboutthemundisimaginalisasawayoftryingto

explainthat–andI’lltalkaboutthemundisimaginalisagainbrieflynow.And

thenthethirdthingisbehaviour;thatthetransferencecanincludebehaviour.

SoIbehavetowardsyouinaccordancewithmy…

[Atthispointoneofthestudents,Alan,enterstheclasslateandtakesaseat.

Stephengetsuptoadjustalightthatseemstobe“blinding”Alanashesits

down]

Areyoubeingblinded?

[AlannowgetsupandmovestoStephen’schair]

A:Ja,I’llsithere?

Sorry–you’reinmychair!

A:Oh.




[Alanmovesbacktohisoriginalseat]

Itwasagoodmovethough.Nowthat’sinteresting,intermsofwhatIwasjust

saying.Didyougetthat?

Thatwasthetransferenceinaction!

Didyouseewhatjusthappened?That’sreallyinteresting.Whenwetalkabout

transferenceandbehaviourthatiswhatwe’retalkingabout.Sohe’sblinded

inhischair,Igetuptohelphimandhetakesmychair.Whydidhetakemy

chair?Isitmeaningless?Now,psychoanalytically,it’snevermeaningless.

Thatisthepoint,okay?That’sthekeythingthatwegetfromFreud,isthat

behaviourisneverrandom;behaviourisnevermeaningless;itismeaningful.

Soconsciouslyweareprocessingacertainamountofdata;we’reprocessinga

certainamountofintentionality,butunconsciouslywe’reprocessingalot

more.Andwhenwedosomethingthatdoesn’tfitinwithourconscious

intentionsoritisagainstourconsciousintentions,ithasanunconscious

meaning;fromanunconsciousperspectiveitismeaningful.Thisisthisidea

fromFreudoftheparaprax.

Sothatwassignificant;thatwasverysignificantthathetookmychair.Infer

fromthatwhatyouwill.Sothatiswhatwe’retalkingaboutwhenwetalk

aboutbehaviour;that’stheidea.

Solet’sgobacktotheideaof,“I’mprojectingmyfatherontoyou”okay.I

starttobehavetowardsyouthewayIbehavedtowardsmyfather;Ifeela

similar–maybethere’sasortofasimilar-senseofrespect,buttheremight




alsobeasimilarsenseoffrustration;anger.Andwhenyoustart–let’ssay

you’remyanalystandnowyoustart–to…maybeIperceivethatinthe

analysisyouaresomehowbeingpatronisingoryou’resayingsomethingthat

touchesaparticularvulnerabilityinme,Inowrespondtoyouwiththesame

sortoffrustrationthatIrespondedtomyfather.“Whydoyousaythat?”or

“Why’reyoubehavinglikethat?Whatpointareyoutryingtomake?Ifeel

thatyou’reunderminingme.”It’sthatsamedynamicthatIhadinrelationto

myfatherthatIfeltcastratedby,thatI’mnowexperiencinginrelationtoyou

becauseI’vetransferredthefatherontoyou.

And–sorry,I’mrepeatingfamiliarterritoryhere,butit’sworthsaying,and-

andofcourse,whereitstartsgettingintothisreallyinterestingareais,that

youcanstartfeelinglikethefatherandyoucanstartbehavinglikethefather,

asaconsequenceofmytransference.

B:Howdoanalystscontrolthis?Imeantheymustbesubjecttosomuch

transferencefromvariouspatientsandthat,andImeantheymustbecome

awareofitandthentheyhavetodealwithwhatmustbealmostlikeamultiple

personalitydisorderfromthisconstanttransferencethey’regettingfrom

patients.

Intermsoftheircountertransference?Becauseofwhattheyexperience?

B:Howdotheydealwithit?

Thisgetsquitetechnical,anditgetsalittlebitoutofmydepth–notbeinga

clinician-butthere’retwobroadwaysinwhichitisdealtwith.Theoneisthat




itbecomesaveryusefultoolinthehandsoftheanalyst,becauseiftheanalyst

hassufficientself-knowledgetodifferentiatebetweenherowninnerworld

andwhatshe’sexperiencinginrelationtoherdialoguewithyou,orina

sessionwithyou,forexample,thenshe’sableto–justbyvirtueofwhatshe’s

feelingandbyvirtueofwhatshe’sstartingtosometimesimagineorevento

feelsomatically,okay,she’sableto-understandthingsaboutwhatisgoingon

inyourinnerworldthatyouareeitherunwillingorunabletoexpress.Okay?

Andthatisnotassortofamazingormysteriousasitsounds,becauseactually

wealldothatallthetime.Wedon’tonlygoonwhatyou’resayingbut

typically,ifI’mabletofeelsomethingwhenI’mwithyou,Ihaveasensethat

there’ssomethinggoingonbetweenthetwoofusthatImightevensayto

you,“Idon’tknowwhatitisbutsinceyousatdownI’mfeelinganxious”or,

“I’mfeelingabituneasy.”Soweoften–evenaslaypeopleweareoftenable

topickupthatthere’saresponsetoyou.Butitisatoolinanalysisthathelps

theanalysttothenhaveinsightintounspokenmaterial.

Theotherkeythingisfortheanalystnottoreact.Sobecauseit’syour

analysis,andit’syourstuff,andit’syoursession,essentiallythey’retryingto

beamirror,sothey’rejusttryingtomirrorbacktoyouwhatitisthatyou’re

bringing.HopefullyIdon’tstarttobehave–hopefullyI’mabletoholdmyself

wellenoughsoIdon’tstarttobehave-likeyourcastratingfather.Innormal

socialencounters,typically,ifyouprojectthecastratingfatherontomeI’m

goingtobehavelikehimbecauseIdon’tfeeltheneedtoholdmyselfback;ifI

starttofeellikethecastratingfatherIsimplystarttoactthecastratingfather

out.ButintherapytheideaisthatIcanholdmyself…




B:Assumingthattheanalystisalwaysawareofthetransferencebecauseyou

sayit’sanunconsciousthing.

It’sanunconsciousthingandit’simperfect–Imeanthisisobviouslyavery

imperfectprocess,butthesearetheaspirationalidealsthatanalystsare

aimingat.

A:ThiskindoftiesinwithwhatI’vespokenalotaboutthesynchronicitythat

happensinmylife,andthiskindoftiesinwith–thatI’llbedealingwith

someonewithclocksandthenI’llattractalotofpeoplewhohavealottodo

with–I’musingastupidexample,with-clocksforthattimebeing,sothere’s

anenergythatI’mputtingoutthat’scomingback.Formeitfeelslikethat

synergythathappenstome.

Br:Wouldn’tthatbelike,that–you’vespokenaboutitlastweek,that-there’s

aninneroutertransferencethat’shappening?

We’regettingintoveryopaqueterritoryherewherewe’releftwith

speculationratherthanrigorousunderstanding,butyesfromtheJungian

perspectiveit’saninterestingthingthat’sgoingon.FromtheJungian

perspectivethistakesusintotheideaofthemundisimaginalis,it’snotonlyto

dowithourpersonalcontent;soIhaveacomplex;youhaveacomplex,and

thoseunconsciouscomplexesareincommunicationwitheachother,butthe

Jungiantheoryisthatthereisanarchetypalroottothatpersonalexperience.

Andthatarchetypeissomethingthattranscendsourpersonaldialogue,and

transcendsourpersonalconsciousandunconsciousminds.




AndJunghasthisideaofcourse,ofsynchronicity;thattheeventsintheouter

worldstarttomirror,orstarttomapthemselves,ontotheinnerprocess.So

youare–asyousay,you’re–dealingwithsomeonewithclocks;there’san

awarenessofclocks,andallofasuddenyouseemtoencounterclocksand

peoplewithclocksmuchmore.Nowofcoursethere’saverykindof

reductionistideawhichisjust,wellthisjusthappens;ofcourseyou’realways

dealingwithclocks;you’rejustawareofitnow.There’retoomanyreportsof

this;thereportsaretoowidespread;peopletalkaboutittoomuch,forusto

kindofreduceitinthatway.Itreallydoesseemasifsomehowthearchetype

ofwhatyouaredealingwithisconstellated,anditbecomespresentinyour

life;itisactivated.

Goingbacktothisincident–sorry,Ijustwanttomakethispoint,goingbackto

thisincidentthathappenedwiththechairsnow–itwasverysynchronistic,that

asIgottothepointofspeakingaboutbehaviour,thatparticularthing

happened.Whydidithappenatthatpointintime?Maybeit’srandom.But

you’llnoticethatofteninalecture.I’venoticedthisinstorytellingaswell.I’ve

noticeditofteninalecturethatsomethinghappensinthelectureorinthe

dialoguethatmirrorsthecontentofthedialogue.Sothestorytellerissaying,

“Andthewindblewanddooropened”andthensureenoughthenextthing

youseeistheblindblowingandthedooropeningorit’samomentofhigh

tensionandsomethingdropsontheground.Soit’softenasiftheeventsthat

arehappeningsomehowmapontothecontentoftheconversation.

SorryDahlia?




Dh:Universalconsciousness,that’swhatIwantedtosay;consciousnessofthe

universe;weareconnected;Iattract,whateversuitsme,unconsciously.

Yes,wellonemightsay,youattractwhatyouaredealingwith.Sometimesit

maysuityou;sometimesitmaynotsuityou.

Dh:SomethingthatIwantorsomethingthatIhadtoworkon.

Orsomethingthatyouareawareof,orsomethingthatyou’reunconsciously

dealingwith.

Sookaylet’sgoon.Wespokeaboutthisideaofthemundisimaginalis,and

I’mnotgoingtogothroughitagainingreatdetailbutverybrieflythen,the

ideaofthemundisimaginalisthatcomesfromtheFrenchtheologianand

scholar,HenriCorbin,andhetakesitfromtheSufidoctrines–Islamic

mysticism–,andit’sthisideaofthemundisimaginalis,andJungtalksabout

somethingsimilar,inaway.There’saslightdifferencebetweenJungand

Corbin,buttheideaessentiallyisthatthere’sanotherdimensionofexperience

whichisnotthephysical,materialworldortheabstract,spiritualworld.In

otherwordsitisnotpurerationality.Sowhenwespeakaboutspiritualinthis

sense,youmustn’tthinkaboutspiritualinareligioussense,butwhatismeant

byspirithere,ismind;puremind;pureabstractmind.

Thereisthisdimensionoftheimaginationoroftheimaginal,andthisisa

mediatingdimension,andwereferencedinourlastclasshowJungtalksabout

thismediatingdimension,andCorbinspeaksaboutit,anditwasborrowedby

Hillmanasbeingthelocationofthearchetypal.Makeofthatwhatyouwill,




butwhatwasinterestingfromourperspectivereally,isthatAndrewSamuels

usestheideaasameansoftryingtounderstandthephenomenonof

transferencecountertransferenceandembodiedtransference.Sotherewasa

kindofmechanisticthinkingaroundthetransferencephenomenonwhichsaw

itas,IsortofserveaPing-Pongballtoyouandthenmaybeyouserveitbackto

me.It’sasifsomethingispassingfrommymindintoyourmindandthiskind

ofideaofthephysicalworldthatwehave.

Thisideaofusingthemundisimaginalisisthatatsomelevelweareembedded

inamutualsharedworldofimages,imaginationetc.,andwehaveaccessto

similarimaginarycontent.Andsowhenit’sactivatedformeit’s–Imean,

look,ofcourseSamuelsisunabletoexplainexactlyhowithappens,butthe

ideaisthatsomehowwhenIaccessitintheimaginalworldyouarealsoable

toaccessitifweareincontactwithoneanother.

TheideafromEmanuelSwedenborg,theChristianmystic,issimilar;

Swedenborg’sideaisthat-whenhetalkshedoesn’ttalkabouttheimaginary

realmhetalksaboutthespiritualrealm,buthisideaisthatinthespiritual

realmtherearenolies;thatthereiscompletehonesty.Whateveryouare

feeling,whateveryouareexperiencing,whateveryouarethinkingataspiritual

level–althoughwemightsaysomethingtoeachotherinconversation,we

maynotbeentirelyhonest;wemaykeepthingsfromoneanother,butona

spirituallevel-ourspirits,ifyouwill,communicatecompletelyhonestly.

Andonceagain,notaverydifficultideatoswallowbecauseit’saverycommon

senseortypicalexperiencethatwehave,thatveryoftenwhenyoumeet




someoneyouseetheirmouthmovingbutyoudon’tbelievewhat’scomingout

ofit.They’remakingtherightnoisesbutyoujustdon’tbuyitbecauseatsome

levelitjustdoesn’tresonate.Soit’sthisideaof,onedifferentiatesbetween

thecongruent–whenonebelievesthatsomeoneiscongruentandwhat

they’rebringingiskindof,anauthenticexpression;anhonestexpression,of

whotheyare–andtheincongruent.

Sothatisthat,onthemundisimaginalis.

B:Sothemundisimaginalisissortofuniversalimagination?

Yes.

B:Wouldthatbethesamesortofthingas–Imean,Iswearthatit’shappened

tomeacoupleoftimes–thatwhenyougetanidea,assoonasyoustart

talkingaboutitorbringingittolifeoraswealwayssay,youputitintothe

etherandithappenseverytime;withinaweekortwoyoufindthatsomebody

elsehashadthesameideaandthethingsuddenlyhascometolight.

B:Isthisthekindofthingthatthey’retalkingabout?

Idon’tknow.Imeanthat’sareasonableconnectiontomake.Idon’tthink

thatCorbinspecificallyspeaksaboutthatphenomenonbut…

B:Imean,ishetalkingaboutsomethingthat’sinclosecontactor…

No,no.It’suniversal.We’renottalkingaboutsomethingthat’slocalised.

That’sthewholepoint.AndCorbinmakesthatpoint;youseehetalksabouta




placethat’sgotnotopography;it’sno‘where’;it’severywhereandit’s

nowhere;itcannotbelocatedinthephysicalworld.

B:Soyoucoulddescribeitastheuniversalimagination?

Verymuchso.It’sverymuchtheideaofauniversal,cosmic,imaginaryrealm.

B:It’sthecollectiveunconscious?

Well…

B:It’ssomethingelse?

It’ssomethingelseaswell;it’sanexpressionofthecollectiveunconscious,

wheneverwetalkaboutthemundisimaginalisit’sspecificallytodowith–

imagesandimagination.

Letmeexplainitlikethis,let’stakesomethinglikequantumphysics.Now

you’vegotthisphenomenoncalledquantumphysicsorquantummechanics

anditissupportedbyvariousmathematicalformulae;there’scertainwork

that’sdoneinthelaboratory,there’sacertainphysicalphenomenonthat

occurs.Nowthatphenomenonthatoccurs,occursatascalethatisinvisibleto

thehumaneye.Sowhentheytalkaboutwhataphotonisdoing,noonehas

actuallyseenthephoton;theyareinferringfromcertaineffectsthatthisis

whatthephotonisdoing.Sowhenthescientistortheresearcherisengaging

withthisphenomenon,okay,heorsheisdevelopingcertainimaginaryimages

withwhichtoapprehendandcomprehendwhatisgoingon.There’sa




distinctionbetween,theimages-theimagination-ofthescientist,andwhatis

goingoninthephysicalworld.

Butlet’ssaythat,presumablyifsomeoneisaphysicistandtheirareaof

specialityisquantummechanicsandthey’reworkingwithitonadaytoday

basis,eventheirimaginaryfacultyhasareasonablyclosemappingor

relationshipontothephysicalphenomenon.Butthenwetalkaboutthefact

thatquantummechanicshasnowbecomeapopulist,newageideathatisused

to,let’ssay,supporteverycrazynewagetheory.Sothere’sanimaginaryidea,

“Well,quantummechanics,itdefiesallthelawsofNewtonianphysics,and

quantummechanicsmeansthis,andquantummechanicsmeansthat”.So

thereisanimaginaryrealitythatiswhatwe,aslaypeople,meanwhenwetalk

aboutquantummechanics,thatisvastlydifferentfromtheactualphysical

phenomenonofwhatisgoingonataquantummechanicallevel.Sotheway

thatwedealwithit;thewaythatweengagewithit,isthroughourimaginary

faculties.

Nowtheideaisthatinasense,everythinginlifeismediatedthroughthat

imaginaryfaculty.Thebestexample–wellit’saverygoodexample,butnot

everyonehasthisexperience,butit’saverygoodexample–isthatwhen

somebodyverywell,whathappensisthat,infact,youstopseeingthem

physically.Whatyouseeisanimageofthepersonthatyouholdinyour

mind’seye.HowI’venoticedthispersonallyisthatIhavea–Idon’tknowif

it’ssomesortofaneurologicalproblem,Isuspectitmaybe,butwhathappens

tomesometimesisthatI’llhaveacompletelossofmemoryforasecond,so




sometimesI’llhavetheexperiencewhereI’llencountersomeoneandforafew

secondsI’vegotabsolutelynoideawhoIamlookingat–Icouldknowthe

personvery,verywell.Soit’sinanunexpectedsettingandsoIgetup,it’sthe

lastplaceintheworldthatIexpectedtoseeyouandallofasuddenIbump

intoyou,anditwillhappentome,notoftenbutithappenstomethatI’vegot

noidea-thatI’mlookingatyou.

SonowIseethisperson,okay;IjustseethispersonthatIdon’tknow.And

thenasecondortwolaterIrealise,“OhmyGod!That’sAlan.”Theperson

thatIsaw,beforeIrealiseditwasAlan,lookedcompletelydifferent;

completelydifferent,becauseyourmindworkslikethat.Youdon’tneedto

seethepersonfresheverytime.You’veseenthemenough;you’vegota

compositeimageinyourmind,thateverytimeyouseethem–boom!–You

justseetheimagethere.Andthenifyouseetheminanunexpectedsituation

theimageoftheperson,iscompletelydifferentbecauseit’sun-contextualised.

Sothisimaginarycontextualisation;thewaywemediatecontentallthetime,

atleastfromSamuel’sperspective-ImeanCorbinisreallyinterestedinthe

moremysticalelementofit;Imeanhe’sgoingalittlebitfurtherthan,for

example,Samuelsis.ButSamuelsisusingthemetaphorofthemundis

imaginalistosaythatwe’reliving-weexist-inthisimaginaryrealm.Andthat

isJung’sideaaswell.Andourimaginationmediatesthespacebetween,pure

reason;purespirit,andphysicalreality.Thatspaceisnot–Imean,

unfortunatelyIcan’tquotetheLatinbutasJungputsit,it’snot-physical

realityandit’snotmind;it’ssomethingelse;it’sthethirddimension,andit’s




thisdimensionofthe-whatJungreferstoasthe-imaginary,butCorbinrefers

toastheimaginal.ThereasonCorbinusesthewordimaginalratherthan

imaginaryisthathebelievesthattheimaginalisabsolutelyreal.Hedoesn’t

liketheideaoftheimaginarybecausetheimaginarysuggestsforusthat

there’ssomethingunrealaboutit.He’ssayingno;itisabsolutelyreal.

Goingback–totheexamplethatIwasusingwithAlan:-thisisaninteresting

ideabecauseit’ssomethingthatI’vebeenencounteringaswellinworksof

HegelandŽižek.TheideaisthatIknowAlan,okay;I’vegotarelationshipwith

Alan,andIformanimaginarycompositeofAlan,alright.There’sawayof

thinkingaboutitthatsuggeststhatatsomelevelthatcompositeismorereal

thanthephysical.Inotherwordsonedoesn’thavetodeifyphysicalreality,

andsayno,it’snottheimaginarycompositethat’sreal;thisiswhat’sreal[i.e.

thephysicalbeing].WhatLacansuggestsisthattheimaginaryisoftenmore

realthanthereal.Soifyougowiththat,theideaisthat–thisisCorbin’sidea

that–justbecauseit’sinthefacultyoftheimaginationonemustn’tthink

aboutitasbeingalesserreality.It’sadifferentreality,butpsychicallyina

sense–certainlypsychically–becausethepointisthatthepersonIam

engagingwithwhenImeetyou,istheimaginarycompositethatIhaveofyou.

Let’sleaveasidetheproblemsofprojectionetc.etc.forthetimebeing,okay.

Butit’sthisimaginarycompositethatIaminrelationshipwith.Inotherwords,

inasenseweliveinavirtualrealitythatCorbinisreferringtoasthemundis

imaginalis.Anyway,that’sabittangential,butIjustwantedtomakethat

point.




BeforewegoontothealchemicalmetaphorIwanttoreadyousomething

fromAndrewSamuels;sothisisfromachapterwrittenonthealchemical

metaphorbyAndrewSamuelsinhisbookcalled“ThePluralPsyche”.Ireally

regardAndrewSamuelsveryhighly;hehappenedtobeoneofmyteachers,

buthe’salsooneoftheleadingJungianacademicsintheworldtoday.He’san

academicandananalyst.Okay,sothisiswhathesays,

Howdoesarelationshipbetweentwopeopleleadtointernalchangeinoneor

both?Howdoesinternalchangeaffectrelationships?Toanswerthese

questionsrequiresadeeperunderstandingofJung’salchemicalmetaphor.

Sorry–justsomething;Iknowit’sobviousbutletmejustmakethepoint;

immediatelyyoucanseehetalksabout“Howdoesinternalchangeaffect

relationships?”Soclearlynow,therelationshipisseenasbeingaproductof

theintra-psychicdynamicsofbothpeople,notonlytheinterpersonal

dynamics.

Personswhoappearinanalyticalmaterialhaveasymbolicdimensionthatis

oftenthecrucialfactor.

Andwe’lltalkaboutthat;thesymbolicdimension.

Personswhoappearinanalyticalmaterialhaveasymbolicdimensionthatis

oftenthecrucialfactor.Thatiswhyitisnecessarytochallengeourhabitual

distinctionbetweentheinterpersonalandintrapsychicandwhytheinteraction

ofpatientandanalystmaybeunderstoodasplacedfirmlywithinanimaginal

realm.Aswesawinthepreviouschapter,ourdelineationofwhatis




interpersonalmayalsobeexpandedsothatinternalimagerybecomesthelink

betweenpatientandanalyst(twopersons),fosteringtheirrelationshipand

mediatingtheirexchange.

Sohe’sbuildingonthisuseofthisideahere,ofthemundisimaginalis.

Consciouslywehavethesenseof,there’smeandyou,okay,andwearetwo

independent,integrated,sovereignbeingsandthereissomesortofan

exchange;Ispeaktoyou,orIshakeyourhand–youIgiveahugandakiss,but

there’ssomephysicalinteraction;Ispeak,youspeak,etc.Butwhatisbeing

suggestedhereisthatonanunconsciouslevelthedegreeofinteractionorof–

notinteraction,butof–mixing;theelementsarebecomingmixedonamore

profoundlevelwherebythesovereigntyofthetwopeopleisquestionable.In

otherwords,whatImeanbythatis,thissenseofindependencethatwehave,

fromoneanother,unconsciouslythoselinesblurandthatourpsychesmix

together,andthatourunconsciousimagerymixestogether,andthat’swhyhe

usesthemetaphor“themundisimaginalis”;it’slikewegetembeddedinan

imaginalfieldwherewearecommunicatingwitheachotheronalevelthat

goesbeyondwhatwecansee,andhear,andunderstand,inournormal

consciousdialogue.

Whenwetalkthenabouttransferenceandcountertransference,I’vegot

certainunconsciouscontent,okay,andsomehowyoubecomeawareofit-not

necessarilythroughanythingI’vesaidordone-becausethere’sthismingling.

Ifweacceptthisideathatthere’sthisminglingofwhatI’mcarrying

unconsciously-look,ofcourseonsomelevelconsciouslyyoubecomeawareof




it,typicallyotherpeoplehavegotafarbetterviewonyouthanyouhaveon

yourself,obviously.Sotherearecertainthingsthatyouareunconsciousofbut

I’mconsciousof.Youbringthem;youdon’trealiseyou’rebringingthem;

obviouslyIcanseethem.

Typicallyothersseeusinafarmoreobjectivelightthanweseeourselves;

they’vegotabetterviewonusthanwehaveonourselves.

Butbeyondthat;beyondwhatweseeconsciously,theunconscious,let’ssay,

activityismuchmoreacute,soyes,youseecertainthingsaboutme

consciously,butunconsciouslyyoubecomeawareofstuffthatIambringing.

Nowthisunconsciousawarenessthathappensiswhatwecall–that’swhatwe

meanwhenwetalkabout–transference.It’sthatawareness;you’vebecome

awareofwhatI’mbringingonanunconsciouslevel.Andthenobviouslyyour

reactioniscountertransference-yourunconsciousreaction.Because

unconsciously,youbecomeaware.Soconsciouslyyouareawareofsomeofit

butunconsciouslyyouareawareofotherstuff,andyourespond.Your

unconsciousresponseisthecountertransference.

Thealchemicalmetaphor

Thisisafour-stepprocessthatAndrewoutlines.Heoutlinesit–theseare

Jung’sideasthough;thisisfairlyclassicalJungianstuff.Andwe’regoingto

lookatthealchemicalmetaphorinthissense,verysimplyhe’smaking

suggestionsthatwecananalysearelationshipashavingfourtypicalstages.




ThenumberfourisverysignificantforJungandinJungianpsychology.Jung’s

beliefisthatfouristhenumberofwholenessorcompleteness.

Thisisfromhisanalysisofmythology;fouristhenumberofcompleteness;

threeisthenumberofmovementandfouristhenumberofcompleteness.

There’savery,veryfamousalchemicalsayingfromawomancalledMaria

Prophetessa,

“Onebecomestwo,twobecomesthreeandthreebecomesfourasone”.

I’mnotquitesure,butthebasicideaisthatfourisaunity;it’slikeone.

There’sastrongrelationship–sothisisamovement,andthenwhenyouget

tofouryou’vereachedcompletion.Sothat’saunityonceagain.

Sothestagesare:

1)thefermentio,there’safermentationprocess;somethingisbrewing,okay.

SotheideaisthatwhenI–I’msonarcissistic;Iusemyselfallthetime,letme

trytoavoidthat,solet’ssaythatwhenyoumeetsomeoneandthereissome

sortofattraction;there’ssomethingaboutthispersonthatintriguesyou;that

attractsyou;thatdrawsyoutothem,andtypicallymaybeviceversa.Sowe’re

talkingaboutnotwhereit’spureprojectionbutwherethereissomegenuine

relatedness;somesortoferosgoingon,okay.Sothisistheprocessof

fermentio;thisistheprocessoffermentation.It’stheideathatsomethingis

brewing.There’ssomethingwe’vemet…

Theideaisnotthatthisisjustacasual,Imean,Igoto(Ican’thelpusing

myself,I’msorry)Igoto–Sweat1000;it’sanewgymatNicolwayandIreally




don’thaverovingeye.Youwon’tbelievethatbutIdon’t,butanyway,there

aresomereallyattractivewomenthere.Andasamanobviously,ImeanI’m

notblind.SoobviouslyI’veseenthemandyouknowifyou’reLebaneseand

you’relikemeyoukindofgiveastupidgrin,thiskindofagrin;likevery

lecherousandstupid.Butbasicallywhatit’ssayingis,“Ithinkyou’resexy”.

Andthensometimesofcoursetheyhavetosmilebackbecauseitiskindof

embarrassingifyoudon’trespond.Sothere’samomentthere;obviously

there’saconnection;there’samomentof,there’ssomething;there’slikea

littlesomething,

Butthisisbeyondthat.Sothisisnot[just]thatsmile.Somethingactually

startstotakeplace;weenterintosomesortofconversation-somesortof

dialogue.

R:There’sanattraction.

There’sanattraction,butit’sanattractionthatisactedon.Erostakesplace.

It’sbeyondthatcasualglanceorwhatever.Soyou’reatapickupjointand

there’s…(Imean,I’veneverbeenbutI’veheardabouttheseplaces;Imean

I’vebeenbutitwaslongago),butanyway,sonowyouseesomeone(thisis

sortofaplaceKarenfrequents,okay),youcatchsomeone’seyesontheother

sideofthebar;soit’snotjustthecatchingoftheeyes;sothefermentioisthat

nowthepersoncomesuptoyou,“CanIbuyyouadrink?”.Sonowyoustrike

upaconversation,sonowallofasuddenitdoes–that’saverynicewayof

explainingit–movebeyondthepurephysicalinto,there’sasortofaneros;




there’sarelatedness;there’ssomethinggoingon,okay.Sothat’sverysimply

thesimpleideaofthefirststage,thatofthefermentioorthefermentation.

2)Nownigredo;inalchemyreferstoaveryunrefinedstate;acoarsestate;a

statepriortoanychemicalprocess,inasense,okay.Andusedasametaphor

forpsychology,Jungintendedforittorefertothestateofunconsciousness.

Youmightalsosaythatitcouldrefertoapathologyoraneuroses,sowhen

oneisinthegripsofapathologyorwhenoneisinthegripsofaneurosesora

complexthenigredometaphorwouldapply;thisisthedarknight;

unconsciousnesshasdominance;unconsciousnessisincontrol.

R:Nowintermsofarelationship?

Sointermsofarelationship,okay,Andrewsortofjustteasesusbysaying–he

talksabout“adarkeningofmood”.Nowwecaninterpretthatdifferentways.

Soobviouslyonewaywouldbetosuggestthattheinitialattractionstartsto

wane;thatinitiallywhatcaughtyourattention-whatintriguedyou,madeyou

engagetheperson-startstowaneandinitiallyitwasallsunshine,androses,

andkisses,andchocolates,and–Idon’tknow–alltheromanticstuff;teddy

bearsandstuff,andnowmaybethingsarenotgoingsowellanymore;sonow

itcouldbethatsomesortofconflictcomesin;somesortofdisagreement;

somesortofseeingthepersonnotthroughrose-tintedglasses,thatinitially

yousawtheminthisveryidylliclightandnowyoustarttoperceivethemina

more…

H:Almostlikereality?




WellIdon’twanttosayreality;no,infactdefinitelynotreality.Sometimes

theperceptionisthatit’sreality,butifwe’refollowingthis,thenthisdoesnot

refertorealityperse.

H:Sothisismorelikedoubt?

Yes,it’smorelikethere’sdoubt;theremightbesomeconflict;theremightbe

sometension;theredefinitelymightbesomedisappointment…

G:It’snot‘it’?

No,notyet.You’vejumpedahead.“It’snotit”comesjustnow;we’renotat

the“notit”pointyet.Thisisstillatthepointof,“Everythingwasbeautiful,

andwonderful,andwewereveryhappy,andnowthingsarenotsoperfect.”

H:It’slikehavingsecondthoughts.It’ssomekindofanillusion.Youbeginto

think,“Ja,he’snicebuthe’snotthatnice”.You’remorecriticalofthe

relationship;it’snotthatyou’veleftit.

No,no;you’realsoaheadofthecurve.Thenigredo’sbeforethe

disappointmentanddisillusionment.

H:Isitnotlikehavingsecondthoughts?

No,it’slike...Imeetthisbeautifulwomanalright,andthesoftlightsofthe

nightcluborwhatever,withherhair,andthemake-up,andtheperfume,and

I’vehadafewdrinksandit’sjustallveryromantic.Maybeit’salsosortof

quitephysicalaswell;itcouldbequitelustdrivenbutit’shappeningatavery

specificlevel;maybequiteasuperficiallevel,okay.Andmaybewegohome




andhavesex.AndthenaweeklaterItakeherout,andwegoout,andwe

dance,andblah-blah-blah

Dh:Inthemorning?

Itcouldbethenextmorning,butlet’simaginethat,thatsortofthinghappens

overafewnights;thisabsolutelyidyllic,romantictime.

H:It’sfallinginlove–whatwecallit?

Noteven;noteven,it’sjustsomething–attraction.I’dneversayfallinginlove.

Butnowsomethingelsehappens;it’slikenowthere’samomentofrecognition

–look,there’sanotherhumanbeinghere,yousee;thisisanotherperson;this

isnotjustmyfantasy–there’sactuallyanotherhumanbeinghere.Andthis

humanbeinghasgotfeelings,andhasgotthoughtsandideas,andhasgota

lifeandalifepath,andresponsibilitiesetc.,andsomethingisgoingon

betweenthetwoofusandI’mnotsureifit’sallgood.Ifeelalittlebitanxious;

IfeellikemaybeI’vegoneintoofar;Idon’tknowwherethisisgoing;some

thingsthatshesaystome,I’malittlebitambivalentabout.Sothishasgone

beyondthehoneymoon,thatthere’sadeepening;Andrewreferstoitasa

darkeningofmood.

Butalsowe’retalkingaboutitintermsofsayingthatsomeoftheillusion

wearsaway,oryoustarttobeinadynamicwithapersonthatisnotpurely

joyful[andnaive].ButthepointIwanttomakeisthatIdon’tthinkwemust

mistakethispurelyasanantagonisticelementintherelationship;inother

wordsthedarkeningofmoodcanalsobeadeepeningofpassion.So,itgoes




beyondthecasualflirtationtoarealdeepeningofpassionwherethespirit––

movingbeyondthephysicalintoamuchmoreemotive–spiritualsoundsabit

tritehere…

R:Plane;emotionalplane.

Yes,it’sanemotionalplane;it’smoreofafeelingplane;it’sarelatednessona

moreprofoundlevel.

K:Ofthesoul

Soul;soul!Thankyou.That’sright;notspiritbutsoul.Nowwe’removing

fromthebodytothesoul.That’sverynice,okay.Sothatisthismove;moving

intothelevelofsoul.

R:IknowthatIacceptyou;IknowthatIhavethepotentialtoacceptyou.

No,don’tgothere;notthatIhavethepotentialtoacceptyou;no,it’snotthat.

It’stherecognitionthatthere’sanotherhumanbeingintherelationshipwith

you,withallthat,thatmeans.SowhatImean;inotherwords,initiallyitwas

justprojection;itwasjustlike,Iseeyou–and,Idon’tactuallyseeyou;Isee

myprojections;pureillusion.Butatthisstagethere’sthisdarkening;there’s

thisrecognitionthat,“Look,thisisactuallyanotherhumanbeinghere;I’mina

relationshipwithanotherperson”.

H:It’slessidealised.

Farlessidealisedandit’smoreprofound;it’smorefelt,butit’salsomore

challenging.It’sabitmorescary.Atthestateoffermentioit’snotreally




anotherhumanbeingthatyou’reinarelationshipwith;it’salmostlikeyou’re

inarelationshipjustwitha...

Dh:It’safantasy.

It’safantasy.It’stheobjectificationoftheother.Now,thesexualactispure

carnality;it’slikewehavesexwhereweareliketwoanimals;there’renottwo

humanbeings;it’svery,veryprimitive.Yousee,let’sjusttakeitoutsideofa

sexualmetaphorinasenseaswell,becauseobviouslywe’reusingsexasa

metaphorhere.It’stheideathat,youseethere’sapointofourrelatedness;

there’sapointwherewecanrelate,wherefundamentallyI’mobjectifyingyou.

WhatImeanbythatis,Iperceiveyouashavingacommodityvalue.Iwantto

goforlunchwithyou,orIwanttointeractwithyou,orwhateveritis,because

yourepresentaspecificcommoditytome.

Dh:Iwillgetsomethingfromyou.

I’llgetsomething.Absolutely.It’sallbusiness.

H:Peoplecometotherapyatthatpoint.

Saythatagain.

Peoplecometotherapyatthatpointofwantingacontractualrelationship.

Ofwantingacontractualrelationship,ja.That’sanicewayofputtingit;it’s

verycontractual,okay,andthere’sanobjectificationoftheother,ade-

humanisationoftheother.Nowthenigredo,iswhenthatinitial,veryclean

objectificationorcontractual–butyousee‘contractual’alreadysomehow




suggeststhatthere’salevelof,sortof,sophisticationtothething,soevenif

youjustthinkaboutitaspurelythatIobjectifyorcommoditiseyou.

Butatthepointofthenigredothecommoditisationstartstocrumbleand

there’ssomethingelsegoingon;you’reaffectingmeinwaysthatIdidn’t

previouslyanticipate.

H:Idon’tgetfromyou,whatIwantanymore.

Idon’tgetfromyouwhatIwant,oritcomesataprice,orthingsstartto

deepen.Llet’snotlabourittoomuchbecausesometimesifwelabourittoo

muchtheclaritywillinvertintobecomingmoreopaque.

3)Nowthemortificatio–Idon’tknowifmyLatinpronunciationisquiteright,

butsomethinglikethat–,mortification,obviously.Thisisthepointofthe

deathoftheprojection.Soyouwerespeakingabout–afewofyoumentioned

–disappointment.Sothisisthestageofthedisappointmentnow.Thisis

whentheprojectionreallydies.Weseethisword‘disappointment’alot;

disappointment;disappointment.Boredom;boredom.‘Fizzlesout’,okay.

Beforeyougothere…

Imeandisappointmentobviouslycomesup,butGabeaswell,alwayshasthis

thingofbeingstuck;offeelingstuck,right.That’sthemortificatio;that’sthe

death,okay.Inotherwords,there’stherecognitionnow,thatwhatinitiallyI

projectedontoyou-whenIobjectifiedyouIprojectedsomethingontoyou;I

sawyouashavingaspecificcommodityvalue,okay;Isawyouasanobjectthat




wouldpleasemeinsomefashion,okay.LikeI’mababywithatoy;Iseeyouas

atoy;it’sanewtoy;anewrattleorwhatever.

Nowoncethere’sthisdarkeningofmood,sonowthere’ssortofthedawning

of“Hangonasecond,actuallythere’sanotherhumanbeinghere,it’snotjusta

fantasy”,andasortofadeepeningofawarenessandrelatednessinrelationto

theotherandideahereisthatitleadstothisdeathoftheprojection,orusing

thealchemicalmetaphor,thismortificatiowhichisthedeath,okay?

Mortification.

Br:Alwaysnegative,atthisstage?

Ja,thisisnegative.Thisistheideathat…

H:Disappointment?

Ja,thisisaprofounddisappointment.Sothisistherealisationthat,thatwhich

IperceivedwhenIinitiallyencounteredyouis,infact,anillusion.

G:Whataboutifaperson–he’salreadyfifty–whicheverywomanhehasis…

ThenwecallhimaBatchelor.Confirmed-confirmedBatchelor,ja.Karen’s

metafewofthose;youcanaskheraboutthem–shecantellyou.

Sotheideaisthatthisisnotuntypical,okay.Sowemustn’tthinkofthisas

somehow–itmightseem,onthefaceofit-,slightlypathologicalorneurotic

buttheideaisactuallythatthisiscompletelynormal.WhatJungistryingto

pointouthereisthatthisis,infact,whatarelationshipactuallylookslike;this

isnotjustarelationshipthat’sgonewrong;thisiswhathappensifyoustayina




relationshiplongenough.Thatwhichyouinitiallythought-thatsortoffantasy

thatyouwereinrelationshipto-dies.Andso–Imeangoingbacktothe

romanticmetaphor,that’sprobablytheeasiest,so–initiallywhenthelovers

metshesawinhimtheknightinshiningarmourthatshehaddreamtabout

sinceshewasateenagegirl,andthatwasgoingtocomeandrescueher,and

wasgoingtolookafterher,andwasgoingtomakelovetoher,andwasgoing

toteachher,andwasgoingtoprotecther–definitelyprotecther,andalso-I

wanttosay-sortof,likeidealise;likeholdheruponapedestal,andtreather

inareallyromantickindofbeautifulway.Sotherewasthisidea;this

idealisationofthemasculine,let’ssay,intheclassicalgendersense,okay.

Andofcoursehehadthisideathatheismeetingaprincess;thatshe’spureas

drivensnow;thatshethinksonlythehighestofthoughts;doesn’thaveabad

boneinherbody;beautiful,innocent,virginal(obviously)–evenifheknowsat

somelevelmaybeshe’snotavirgin,inasenseshe’svirginal-shehasn’tmet

himbefore,it’s‘likeavirgin’asMadonnawillletyouknow.Andshe’salmosta

replacementforhismother,obviously-butthat’sonanunconsciouslevel-

butshe’sonebetterbecauseobviouslyhecanhavesexwithher,andshecan

bearhimchildren.Butshe’saspureandgoodashismotherwas.

Sothat’stheidealisation,andthentheideaisthataswemovefromstepsone

tothree,there’sarecognitionthat,“Hangonasec:thispersonisflawed;this

personisnotallgood;thispersonisnotallwise;thispersonisnotallknowing;

thispersonisnotallloving;thispersonisselfish;thispersonleavestheir

fuckingsocksonthebathroomfloor;thisperson–whatever–hasgotalotof




irritatinghabits;thisperson–there’sastrongfeelingofambivalencein

relationtothisperson.”

Sofinallyleadingtothemortificatio;tothemortification,inotherwordsthe

recognitionthat,thatwhichIperceived;thatwhichI“fellinlove”with,isno

longerthere.Itwasanillusion.Itwasallpackaging.There’sapersonthere;

there’sahumanbeingthere.Idon’tknowifIlovethemornot,butit’s

certainlynotwhoIthoughtIwasengagedwithwhenIfellinlovewiththem.

G:Stephen,thatallsoundsvery,veryfamiliar-likemylifestory.I’mjust

wondering,“What’snew?”

Idon’tknow.That’sagoodquestion.We’lltryandgoabitfurther.It’safair

question.Bearwithmeokay,wecantryanddrilldownintoit;hopefully

somethingnewwillemergebutIdon’tguaranteeit,okay.

B:We’retalkingaboutthecourseofeventsinanevengoodrelationship?

Ja,thisisthetypicalcourseofevents.Yes,that’sright.We’renottalkingabout

onlywherethingshavegonewrong;evenwhenthingshaven’tgonewrongthis

iswhathappens.

Now,it’swhathappensnext.Yousee,that’sthekeything.Yousee,that’sthe

point;that’sreallytheanswertoyourquestion.Thatispredictable-thebig

questionis:whathappensnext?

4)Okay,sonowJungtalksabouttheputrefactio–theputrefaction.

B:Ithoughtitwaspurification?




No,it’snotpurification.It’sthatthedeadbodynowdecays.Nowthe

putrefactionistheideathattheoriginalbody–andwecanlookatitobviously

asthebodyoftherelationship,okay–dies;it’sdied.Likeanythingthatdies,it

nowstartstoputrefy;itbreaksdown,okay.Itsphysicalintegrity–existence–

isdestroyed;itbreaksdown;iterodes;itcrumbles,itdecays;itputrefiesand

whenitputrefies–Isupposethishappenswhensomethingputrefiesinthe

physicalworldbutcertainlyintermsofthemetaphorwe’reusinghere–it

givesoffavapour,okay;thatasthatphysicalbodyisdestroyeditgivesoffa

vapour.Sortofaspiritualsubstance,ifyouwill,risesupfromthebody.

Nowjusttotakeastepbackbeforewetalkaboutthis,Ilikethisquotefrom

theBible–I’vealwaystoldyou,I’mreallyafrustratedevangelicalpreacherso

whereIcanputBiblicalquotesinIliketousethem-,sothisisfromRomans

8:13,anditreads,

“…ifyouliveaftertheflesh,youshalldie:butifthroughtheSpirityoumortify

thedeedsoftheflesh,youshalllive.”

Thisistheideahere,thatwhenthephysicalbodyoftheinitialprojectiondies;

whentheillusiondies,alright,inthedeathofthatillusionorinthedeathof

thatbody,andinitsputrefaction,anopportunityexists;anopportunityto

crossathreshold.Andmaybe,comingbackto…Imean-Idon’twhospoke

aboutreality-youmightsay-I’mstillhesitanttousetheword‘real’,butyou

mightsay–astepintothereal,inasense;inasense,okay.Iusethatwith

sometrepidationbutit’stheideacertainlythat,thatinitialillusiondies.




There’stherecognitionthatokay,soyouarenotthisfantasyobjectthatI

perceivedyoutobe;youareahumanbeing,likemeandnotonlythatyou

havevulnerabilitiesandfollieslikeme,butofcourse,thepartofthepainis

thatinrecognisingyourfollies,andyourvulnerabilities,andyour

shortcomings,andyourfinitude,Ihavetobecomeacutelyawareofmyownif

I’mgoingtostayinarelationshipwithyoubecauseImean,ifIreallystill

perceivemyselfasperfect;asimmaculate,thenyou’renottherightpersonfor

me;itjustdoesn’tmakesense;youcan’tbemysoulmate.Imean,you’re

flawed–I’mnotflawed.Maybeatanotherstageofevolutionwemightbe

abletohaverelationship,butrightnowwecan’t.IfI’mgoingtoremainin

relationshipwithyoudespitetherecognitionthatyouareasflawedasyouare,

atsomelevelitmeansthevery,verypainfulrecognitionthatItooamflawed,

andfinite,andimperfect.

Sothere’sthisopportunity;theputrefactionoffersthisopportunity.Soin

alchemicaltermstheytalkaboutthetransubstantiationofelements,soit’sthe

movefromthephysicaltothegenuinelyspiritual;it’sthemovefrombodyto

spiritandinpsychologicaltermsit’sthemovefrombeinginarelationshipwith

aprojectionwith–inFreudiantermsyouspeakaboutapartobjectsoIsee

youas-anobject;anobjectofmysatisfaction.Istillhaven’tseenyouasa

humanbeing.Butatthispoint;atthispointoffour,wheretheputrefaction

happens,Imeanofcourseusuallywhattypicallyhappensisthatthe

relationshipcrumbles.Usuallythat’sthepointoftherelationshipfizzlingout;

that’sthepointoftherelationshipcomingtoanend;that’sthepointof,“Well

wetried.Itseemedlikeagoodideaatthetime”.




Dh:Itdoesn’tmatch.

It’snotamatch.

Andintermsoftheconiunctiothisiswherewewouldjuststartredoingthe

circle.

Absolutelyright.Thisistheconiunctio;thisisgoingbackto“why?”[continue

withtherelationship]Exactly,juststartagain.“Thanks,it’sbeenreal”.

B:IthinkwhatRomansissayingandIthinkhowIfeelaboutthisisthatatthis

point,ifyougobeyondtheworldlythingandyouseekaspiritual–eithera

spiritualrelationshiporaspiritualsomethinginyourlifeifyou’redealingwith

goalsor-

Let’sjust-forthesakeofsimplicitylet’sjust-keepitinthemetaphorofthe

relationshipfornow.

B:Intermsofarelationship,forexample,ifyounowstartactuallygettingwith

eachotheronaspirituallevel,andgoingbeyondjustthephysical,andyourday

today,andthebodies,andblah-blah,Ithinkthat’swhereyoucannowgo

beyondjustgoingbacktosquareoneintherelationship

Yes,that’sabsolutelyright.Andthepsychologicalreading’snodifferenthere

really.Theoneisspeakinginsortofspiritual,biblicalterms;oneisspeakingin

psychologicaltermsbutessentiallythethingandthedynamicisthesame.

Hanlie,youweregoingtosaysomething?




H:Ithinkit’saboutthelevelofcommitmentbutit’snotsomethingyoucan

fake,orsay,“WellnowI’mgoingtoconnectwithyouatthisspirituallevel”.

There’ssomethingthatreallyneedstodie.

Yesthat’saverynicepointyoubroughtthere;that’sright,somethingneedsto

die.Look,somethingdiesintherelationshiphere,okay;atthemortification.I

mean,theprojectiondies,butthat’sright;somethingactuallyneedstodiein

youaswell.Somethingneedstodieinyou;theillusionneedstodie.That’s

verynicebecauseit’snotonlyadeathintheouterbutinordertogetbeyond

thistherehastobeaninnerdeath;therehastobealettinggoofexpectation.

ImeanthenicestwayIcouldputitislike–IrememberatimewhenIwas

young,believeitornot,andIwasneveragreatromanticbutIdidquitelike

romance.Ilikedtheideaofromance,theideaofthefirstdate,andofgetting

toknowaperson,andthatromanticisedandthatwonderfulfeelingof,like

butterfliesinyourstomach,andtheexcitementofanewrelationship,and

there’ssomethingsortofbeautiful,andinnocent,andchild-like,andjoyful

aboutthat.

K:Somepeoplestilllikethat.

Somepeoplestilllikethat?

Someoldpeople.

Ohreally!Idon’tknow,butanyway,inmyowncase,Iremember,therewasa

time.AndthenImetawomanandatsomepointinmylifeIhadtocrossa

thresholdwhereIsaid,“IifIstickaroundwiththiswomananylongerthenmy




romanticencountersaregoingtocometoanabruptandratherviolentend.

AndnowI’mactuallygoingtohavethishumanbeinginmylife,whoisbloody

difficultandwho’sanythingbutromantic.”Imeanthisismyparticularcase

andmywifereallyisn’tromantic.Inordertostay,somethinghadtogenuinely

die,likepartofmyidentitywasrelatedtotheideaofromance;of…

Dh:Chivalry?

No–notchivalry,but‘meeting’;thatfirstencounter,thatfirstkiss,that

wondroussortofunwrappingofanewpresentthat,asaman,ispartofyour

identityandit’sprobablythesameifyou’reawoman,Iguess.Soit’sthatsort

ofthing,yousee;somethingfundamentallyhastodie.It’slikeIhavethis

dreamofwhatarelationshipisandthenyourealisethat,Okaywell–thisis

notthatdream.

G:Soistheillusionnecessary?

Ithinkitis.Idothinkitis.

Doesitneedtogoon[for]bothpeople?

Doesitneedtogoonbothpeople,yousay?

Ja.Fortherelationshiptocontinue?BecauseRyanwassayinghisillusiondies

beforehersdoes,usually.Andthenwhenheleavesshe’sthendancingwiththe

bonesofaskeleton.

No,Idon’tknowifithastohappenatthesametimeorforbothpeople.

There’ssomethingverypersonalaboutit.It’slikethis:Ihavethisdream;I




havethisfantasy;I’mlivinginthisillusion,andthenIrealisethatitisan

illusion.Sonowforme–forme–eithertheillusiondiesortherelationship

diesbuttherelationshipcannolongersustaintheillusion.SoifI’mgoingto

remainintherelationshipthenI’mgoingtohavetoremainintherelationship

withtherecognitionthatthedreamhasdied.

G:Butagain,ifIcan’tcometothestage–andI’vebeeninthisgameformany

times-andnowIsaid,“Idon’twantthisanymore;Iwanttogostraightto

stagefour.SoIdon’twantillusionsanymore.I’mrelatingonthatlevel

straightaway.Isitpossible?Inotherwords,doyouhavetohaveanillusion

firstbeforeyoucancometo…

Youdo,yes.Thattheattractionisanillusion;itseemstonecessitateillusion.

Andalsoanotherthingonemightsayisthatmaybeinarelationshipaswell,I

suspectthatonedoesn’tgothroughthisprocessonlyonceIdon’tthinkit’sa

once-off,soit’sanicebutflawedideathatoncecansortofjumpstraightpast

itandbeinthesortofrealandthespiritual.

Maybewhatyoumightsayisthatwithmaturity,someofthenaivetéandthe

illusionsthatyouhadtwentyyearsago–whenyou’regrownup,you’renota

childanymore;youseethings–you’vegotacapacity,andasensitivity,anda

maturity,butstillIdothinkitisaprocessthat,inasense,thedeeperlevels

onecangothroughagain,andagain,andagain.It’snotlike,“Ohnowwe

knoweachother.Okaysonowwecangetonwiththebusinessof–“.No;it

justdoesn’tworklikethat.There’salevelofknowing,there’salevelof

relatingthat’sgottochangeasitevolves.




R:CanIaskjusttwotechnicalquestions?Pleasethey’retechnical–they’re

importanttome.Isanymentionevermadeofthedifferencebetweenstage

andphase?Becauseformethere’sadifference;aphaseislonger,soyougeta

step–stepone–that’stooshort;stagewhichisastepbutit’snotquitea

phaseandaphasetalksmuchmoretoacontinuum.Iknowit’ssemantic;I

knowit’stechnical,butinyourreadingdoyougetasensethatitismuchmore

phased,orisitstaged,orisitshortsteps?

That’saverysemanticquestionbutifIhadtoIwouldsayastage.

R:Iwouldsayastageisatapointandaphaseismoreprolonged.

Buthavingsaidthat,okay;havingsaidthat,thisissomethingthatcould

happenoveraweekendoritcouldhappenovertwentyyears.Itcouldhappen

BOOM;very,veryquickly,oritcouldbealongprocessofslowdissolution.

H:Ithinkonceyou’vegotyourfirstnotchandyou’repreparedtoactuallygo

andfindsomeotheraspecttoidealisethenitbecomesaphaseinthe

relationship,andit’sthenextphase,andthenext.

Ja,that’squitenice.Sothere’restagesineachphase.Sothatactuallyanice

wayofputtingit;somaybeyoucouldsaythateachphasecontainsthesefour

stages.Actuallythatwouldbequiteanicewayofputtingit,sothiswouldbe

aninitialphaseandthenthere’dbeanotherphase,andeachphasewould

havethosestages.

G:Maybealsowhatyou’reaskingisarethesethingsseparateordotheygo,

together?Dotheybleedintoeachotheroristheresortofadefinitemark?




Definitely,theybleedintoeachother.Thisisjustanattempttotryandtakea

relationshipwhichissounbelievablyconvoluted,andcomplicated,and

involved,andhasforwardandbackwardmovements,andtrytosay,Look

okay–butifwelookatitthere’refourdistinctstages.Yesofcourse,butit’s

neverthatneat.Sothisisverymuchan“asif”.Andthatonecansortofmove

betweenthephasesabitaswell,butitdefinitelyhasadistinctsenseof

progressionfromthefermentiotothenigredotothemortificatio.

Ithinkyou’vesortofansweredmynextquestionwhichis,isthereanyintra-

stagemovement,sothatyoumaymovebacktofermentio,forexample?

No,Idon’treallythinkso.Justthinkaboutit;justthinkaboutyourown

practicalexperience.So,youmeetsomebody,you’reattractedtosomebody;

there’saninitialattraction,okay.Andthenwhenyougettothatdarkening–

thatdarkeningofmood;thatnigredo–youjustcan’tstepbackfromit.You

canneverrecreatethatinitialmoment;theinitialmomentonlyhappens

initially.Onecanneverstepbacktotheinitialmomentsobasically,although

theydefinitelybleedintoeachotherIdon’tthinkonecanreallygoback.

Br:IhaveaquestiononexactlythatIwanttobringup,butinthesedynamics–

Imeanwe’renottalkingaboutmind-sethere,it’snotlikeamind-setthatyou

…thisisactuallygoingrighttothecoreofthenatureofthebeast;ofyourself;

ofyourdynamic.Thesearethedynamicsthathaveruled,likeIsaid,…

Theseareprimarydynamics,yes.Nicelyput.




So,it’saprimaldynamicsoyoucouldsay,I’manelephantandyou’reatigeror

whatever–yougoingtobehavelikethetigerbehavesthroughoutyourwhole

lifeandI’mgoingtobehavelikeanelephant.Andunfortunately,ja–thisis

actuallythepointbecausewecansithereandthensomebodywho’s–I’m

sittinghereasanelephantandI’mlookingatGabrielandhe’satigerandI’m

going,“Noja,Gabriel.Listenman,don’tbesuchaniceguy.Why’reyoubeing

suchaniceguy?”Butyousee,theproblemisthatyouendupinthatparadox

because(ofwhoyouare).Exactly.Yousee,bybeingthepersonwhodoesget

stuck,youhavetogetstucktobeyourself.Ifyoutakemyadvice,andyoutell

“her”toduck–ImeanIdothateasily–thenyou’renotyouanymore,andthen

you’renothappyeither.So,there’stheparadoxthere.

Okay,soIhearexactlywhatyou’resayingwhichisanicepoint.Soinother

wordsthat’sright,yousee,you’retouchingonsomethingveryimportant.So

there’sawayofthinkingaboutthisthatyouhavetheideathatlook,we’re

dealingwithproblemsthatarebehaviouralproblems,orthey’re

developmentalproblems,ortheyareissueswherewe’vesortofgotconfused

orlosttheplotabit,andallweneedtodoistosortofrecalibratethecompass

andthenwecanfindourwayagain.ButthatisdefinitelynotJung’swayof

thinkingaboutit;Jung’swayofthinkingaboutitisexactlywhatyou’retalking

about,soinotherwords,theproblemisessentiallyindicativeoftheperson.

Andinfacttogoevenfurther–intoaLacanianperspective–isthereisno

personindependentlyoftheproblem.Theveryideathatyouareyououtside

oftheproblemistheillusion.Therealityisyouaretheproblem.Butthereis




hope;well,JungbelievesthereishopeandI’dleantowardsthatperspective,

soyoutouchedonitearlieronwhenyousaid,“Look,isitnotmyverynature

tobealiberator?”That’sthepoint,yousee.Soyoucan’tunlearn;ifyouhad

tounlearnbeingaliberatorthennaturally,ofcourse,youcouldnever

individuate,okay.Buttheideaisthattherearewaysofbeingaliberator;

therearesomewaysofbeingaliberatorintheworldthataregoingtoserve

youfarmoremeaningfullyandfarmoreprofoundlythanotherways.

Yousee,that’sthepoint.Soyou’vegotthearchetype;thearchetypecanbuild

orbreakdown.Theideaisthatitdoesn’tnecessarilyneedtobreakdown.

Br:YouseeI’vegotaquestionhererelatingtothat;Ithinkhe,ineffect,

ultimatelydoesbothonacertainlevelthat’syourlife,you’vegotaroletoplay;

you’rethebusdriverandthat’syourtalent;you’regoingtodrivethebus;that’s

yournecessaryrole.Oryou’rethelion;yournecessaryroleistocullthebuck.

Sothat’sthenecessaryrole,butthepainfulsideofit,whereit’sactuallyhurting

youratherthanbuildingyouiswhereyourecogniseconsciousnessofyourrole.

Thensurelythattakesittoanewlevelwhereyoustarttowitnessyourself

operatingintheworld.

Yes,yes,you’rerightokay,butit’snotonlyaboutwitnessing.Soinother

words,youcouldsay,Look,life–wecouldtakelikealmostaBuddhist

approach,ImeannotthatIknowanythingaboutBuddhism,butwecouldtake

theBuddhistapproachinthesensethatwecouldsay,“Look,toliveisto

suffer”okay.Andthere’snothingthatwecandotochangethat,okay.The

veryrecognitionthatwearesufferingis,initself,liberating.It’saccepted;it’s




thenatureofmylifethatI’mgoingtosuffer–Irecognisethat,andin

recognisingitIacceptandthere’sadegreeofliberation,okay.

Butindividuationgoesfurther.Individuationcallsonyoutochangethevery

coordinatesofyourexistenceintheworld.So,it’stheideathatisexpressed

bestfromRudolphSteinerwherehesays,“Manneedstocompletehimself.”

Sothat’sthedifferencebetweenyouandthelion;thelioncanonlyactin

accordwithitsnature–nothingelse.Buttheideaisthatyou’vebeengivena

giftofchoice.

Br:But,Imean,there’sawholethingaboutthatchoiceandthat’sawhole

subjectthatwe’vediscussedbeforeaswell,butareyousayingthatyoucan

changeyournature?

No.

Br:Youcan’t?

Youcan’tchangeyournature,no.Thatwouldbeinauthentic.Butthewayyou

choosetoactualiseyournatureintheworldisachoice.So,there’sawayin

whichyoucanliberatesothat,thatliberationservesyourindividuation

project,andservestheworld.Andthere’sawaythatyoucanliberatethatjust

causeschaos.Andthere’sachoice;that’sthechoice.You’vegotthesecards,

buthow’reyougoingtoplaythem?

D:ButcanIjustaskonething?

Who’reyouasking?Bruce?




D:Gabriel.Ireallythinkhepresentedsomethingthatiscommontoallofus.

Notalionoraleopardorwhatever,butamammal,okay.Andit’sthejourney;

andwe’reonthejourney–wecangetdistractedhereandthere,andit’snotit;

that’snotit.Wehavetodothat.There’ssomethingpullingusforward,that’s

whowereallyare.Wedon’twanttowasteourtime.Andalotofwhat’s

behinditisIthinkourgenerationsaregeneticmurmursthataresaying“You’ve

gotachance,likemygrandmother’stellingmethatIdon’thavetohaveababy

everyninemonths;Ihaveanopportunity.Goforit,goforit,beyourself,be

better,progressinsociety–orwhateveritis.AndIfeelthesepushingsand

urgings,andIdodropthingsifIfeelthatI’mgoingoff-itdoesn’tservemein

someway.Andawholelotoftimeit’sjustfeelings,soIthinkthatwhathe

describediscommontoallofus.

It’scommonbutitcanbehorriblypathological.

Ohabsolutely.

Okayja.Iagreewithyou;it’sauniversalimpulse,butit’smanagingthat

bloodyimpulsethatis…

G:Whatdoyoumeanhorriblypathological?

Wellit’sjusttheideathatyoucan’tbuildhorizontally;youneedtobuild

verticallysoIputabrickhereandthenacoupleofbricksandthenofcourseI

moveandIputafewbricksandofcourse,you’regoingtoendupwithalineof

veryshortstructures.Buttocreatevalue,tocreatemeaning,tocreate

excellence,there’sonlyonewayandthat’scommitment.




Dh:Youhavetodothework.

Youhavetodothework,butnotonlydoyouhavetodothework,youhave

makeaterriblechoiceandyouhavetosay,I’mgoingtodotheworkhere;I’m

goingtodotheworkwiththisperson;I’mgoingtodotheworkthisway.That

isanunbelievablypainfulchoicebecause,it’sarecognitionofourfinitude;it’s

arecognitionofourmortality.It’sadreadful,dreadfulchoice,butlifeisso

shortthatifwedon’tmakeit–it’sgone.




Application

Pleasereadtheblogbelowtofamiliariseyourselfwiththetransferenceand

countertransferenceidentificationtool.Pleasenotethatthereisavideoseries

aswelltohelpyouidentifyyourtransference.Thelinktothatseriesisatthe

endoftheblogpost.

Atooltoidentifyyourtransference:understandingyourunconsciouscommunicationinrelationships

Transference-countertransference,Lacan,Jung

Transferenceasatechnicaltermindepthpsychologydescribestheprocess

wherebyunconsciouscontentissharedbetweenpatient(analysand)and

analystinthecontextoftheirtherapeuticrelationship(analysis).Although

usedtorefertothisspecificrelationshipdynamicinanalysis,transferenceisa

veryrealdimensionofallsocialinteraction,itisbynomeanslimitedtothe

analyticalcouple(analystandanalysand).

ThisisthethirdinaseriesofthreeshortarticlesIhavewrittenontransference

–countertransference.Theothertwocanbefoundbyfollowingtheselinks:




Transference:TheSaviour,TheMadonnaandtheSlut

Countertransference:TheObsceneOther

InthisarticleIwanttoshareatoolwithyouthatyoucanusetoidentifywhat

yourtransferenceis,i.e.whatitisyouaretransferring(unconsciously

communicating)inyourrelationships.Thisissomethingworthknowingasit

providesaveryclearinsightintowhypeoplerespondtoyouastheydoinyour

relationships.Thetransferenceisavirtualinstructionmanualtotheotherasto

howyoushouldbetreated.Thereisanoldaphorismthatsayssomethinglike,

“Don’twearyourheartonyoursleeve.”Theratheruncomfortabletruth

thoughisthatisexactlywhatwealldoandthereisabsolutelynothingwecan

dotoavoidthis.Beforeyousayasingleword,ordoasinglethinginfact

beforeyouhaveevenmettheotheryouhavealreadyexposedyourheartto

them.Yourheartisfullytransparentinallitsbeautifulhuesandugly

blemishes.

Notonlyisittransparenttotheother,butfarmoresothanitistoyou.Whatis

opaquetoyourinnergazeisclearlyvisibletothegazeoftheother.Sobefore

webeginthenpleaseunderstandthatthisisthesimple(ifawful)truththat

everypsychoanalysthasknownforthelastcenturyorso;andmanymystics

beforethem.ThereisnothingIcanofferyouthatwillchangethat.WhatIcan

offeryouissomethingthatalthoughmoremodestcanbeneverthelessquite

useful–theabilitytoseeinyourselfwhattheothersees,tounderstandthe

contentofyourunconsciouscommunication.Continuingdownthispathoffull




disclosureletmeaddthatknowingwhatyourtransferenceismostdefinitely

doesnotimplybeingabletomagicallychangeit.Icanalsoalmostguarantee

youthatyouwillnotlikemuchofwhatthistoolwillshowyou–assumingyou

applyitwithhonestyandsomeimagination.

Whatyoutransfer,accordingtothereamsofresearchdoneinpsychoanalysis,

istypicallyaprimalrelationshipdynamic.Thatistherelationshipwithyour

primarycaregiver’s(usuallyyourparentsofcourse);andthisisnotsubjectto

changebypureforceofwill.Itisnotgovernedbyyourconsciouswillorself,it

israther,inthespiritofdepthpsychologyanunconsciousdynamicandone

verydeeplyrootedinyourpsychology.SoIcansaywithafairdegreeof

certaintythatthiswillresistthebesttransformationalintentionsofthe

weekendworkshopindustryinitsvariousguisesandaffiliations.

Youmayreasonablyenquirewhatthepointofsuchanexerciseisexactly,if

whatisdiscoveredisnotsubjecttochangebyyour(conscious)willing.Thisisa

fairquestionandletmeattemptafairanswer.Whilsttherecalcitrantnature

ofthetransferenceisundoubtedlytrue,therearebothimmediatebenefitsin

identifyingitandalsoitissubjecttointentionalevolutionifyouarewillingto

dotheworkofintenseself-reflectionoveranextendedperiodoftime.It

wouldbetruetosayherethatmanyroadsleadtoRome;anysystemof

rigorousandintensiveself-reflectioninanopenandself-criticalsystemcan

enableanevolutionofthisprimarywound.Thetypicalway,andstillpossibly

thebest,toapproachthis,istoenteranalysis–andinthisrespectIamnon-




partisan,itdoesn’tmatterwhetheryouendupwithaprincipallyFreudianor

Jungiananalyst.We,TheCentreforAppliedJungianStudies,offeranonline

programmecalledTheConsciousLivingProgramme.

Beyondthat,asmentioned,thereisanimmediatebenefitinknowingwhat

yourtransferenceis:

1. Knowingwhatitiswillhelpyoutobetternavigateyourrelationships,

bothintermsofmanagingyourselfandinmanagingyourexpectationof

theotherandtherelationship’soutcomeorTelos(itsdestination,target

trajectoryetc.).

2. Alsoyoucannotovervaluetheimmensityofconsciousness,being

consciousevenwhenitisnotofaPrometheannature(themagical

abilitytouseconsciousnesstochangereality)isanimmeasurablybetter

positiontobeinthantheoriginalunconsciousstate.Thatistosay

consciousnesshasinfinitevalueinitself,independentofanypractical

utilitarianvaluethatitmayoffer.

TheTool

ThetoolIamgoingtosharewithyouisonewedevelopedattheCentre;itis

anadaptationofaLacanianidea.AlthoughourprimaryinfluenceisJungian1

1 Carl Gustav Jung (1875 – 1961) founder of analytical psychology.




wearealsoutilisetheworkofFreud2andLacan3tocreateasystemofapplied

psychodynamics.InthiscaseweareapplyingamodeldevelopedbyLacanin

hisworkonTheFourDiscourses4.Wewillproceedinthreesteps,step1

introducestheoriginalLacanianmodelthathasbeenadaptedtocreatethe

tool;step2showsthefirstpartoftheadaptationandjustifieswhysuchan

adaptationcanbemade;part3revealsthetoolitselfandtheguidelineson

howtousethetool.Mysuggestionisthatyoureadallthreestepsvery

carefullybeforeattemptingtoapplythetooltoyourowncase.

Step1

ThemodelwasdevelopedbyLacanasawayofrepresentingcertaintypical

formsofsocialinteraction,specificallythediscourses(organisationof

communication)oftheMaster,theUniversity,TheAnalyst,andtheHysteric5.

Thismodelthatveryusefullyasksthequestion:whatisthe“truth”ofeachof

thesecommunications,whatdesire(primarymotivation)drivesthese

discourses.

ThemodelfromLacanlookslikethis:

2 Sigmund Freud (1856 – 1939) father of psychoanalysis. 3JacqueLacan(1901–1981)theFrenchpsychiatristandpsychoanalyst

4 Lacan, Seminar XVII, 1969 5 Lionel Bailly, (2009), ‘Lacan’, pp. 153 - 162




Explicitcommunication

Subject Other↓

Truth Implicitcommunication Production

• Thesubjectistheprotagonistinthediscourse;inthiscaseitservesasa

placeholderforyou.Youarethesubject.

• Thetruthistheactualreasonyouareinthediscourse;itcashesoutas

yourdesire,whatyoudesirefromtheother.

• Theotherissimplythepersonyouareinthediscourse(relationship)

with.

• Theproductioniswhatisproducedbythediscourse,wheredoesthe

discourselead?Howisyourdesiremetornotmet.Itisproducedbythe

combinedeffectoftheexplicitandimplicitcommunicationsbythe

subjecton(directedtowards)theother.

• Theexplicitcommunication(representedbythehorizontalarrow

betweenthesubjectandtheother)iswhatyousayyou

want/mean/intendetc.Yourconsciouscommunication.

• Theimplicitcommunication(representedbythebottomarrowbetween

theTruthandtheother)istheactualreasonyouareinthediscourse–

whatyoureallywant.




Soasanexamplewhen“themaster”isplacedintheplaceofthesubjecthe

addressestheotherasa“slave”andhisdiscourse,irrespectiveofitsexplicit

content,isdesignedfulfilhisdesire.Theotherisdehumanisedinasfarasthey

areseenstrictlyintheirfunctionalrole,notasaperson.Thedesire“thetruth”

hastodowiththeother(thefunctionary)fulfillingtheirfunctionwhichisthe

productionofsomeserviceforthemaster.Hereofcourseanyoneina

hierarchicalcontractualoremploymentsituationindiscoursewithan

employeeisaneasywayofunderstandingthis.

Iasmasterretainyourservicesasslave(functionary)tofulfilmydesire,thejob

Ihaveemployedyoufor;butsocialprotocoloftendisguisesthisveryclear

hierarchicalsituation.Soinotherwordsfrequentlytheexplicitdiscourseisnot:

“doyourjobandtherebyfulfilmydesire”,butsomethingalongthelinesof:

“takeprideinyourwork”;“youaredoingsowell....”;“youcando

better/more/fasteretc.”;“thisisanimportantjob”,andsoon.

Nowintheexampleofthemaster’sdiscourseitisimportanttounderstand

thatthepresenceofthe“truth”doesnotdenythesignificanceoftheexplicit

communication.Sojustbecausethemaster’simplicitcommunicationisthe

fulfilmentofhisdesirebyvirtueoftheproductionofthefunctionary(the

other),doesnotinvalidatethesignificanceofthespokenexplicitcontent-

botharevalidandbothservetofurtherthedesireofthesubjectinthiscase

themaster.

Step2




Wehaveadaptedthismodelasameansofgettingatthetransferenceinany

socialencounter.Thelogicbehindthisadaptationisquitesimple:

• The“truth”isalwaysanimplicit(unspoken)formofcommunicationthat

needstobearrivedatinferentially.Whenoneisinadiscoursewiththe

Masterforexamplethereisanimplicit(orinferential)understandingof

theMaster’sdesire,irrespectiveoftheexactcontentofhis

communication.Thisisthesameasthetransferenceinthatthe

transferencehastobeinferreditisnotexplicit,itisanintuitingor

inferenceofthedesire(ortruth)ofthesubjectinrelationtotheother.

• ThetruthisoccupiedintheLacanianmodelbydesire;thetransference

mirrorsthisinthatthetransferenceisalsoanexpressionofunconscious

desire.

• Thetruthmayormaynotbeunconscious(thetransferenceistypically,

althoughnotalways,unconscious).Howeverthereisstrongresonance

betweentheunspokenimplicitdesirecontainedinthe“truth”andthe

transference.The“truth”issociallyandinstitutionallyrepressedinthat

itremainsunspoken(itbecomeasilenttruth)thisisverymuchthe

natureofthetransference.

• Thereisfrequentlycompensatoryrelationshipbetweentheexplicitand

implicitcommunicationsintheLacanianmodel.Thereisaformof

compensationintheexplicitcommunicationoftheMasterthatdisguises

his(avaricious)desire,itmaybefriendliness,politeness,orevenanger

butallofthesedisguise(compensate)insomeformhisdesire.The

transferencesharesthisfeature;consciouscommunicationistypicallya




compensationforthecontentsoftheunconsciouswhicharepopulating

thetransference.

TheadaptationthenoftheLacanianmodeltoreflectthetransference-

countertransferencedynamiclookssomethinglikethis.

Explicitcommunication

Subject Other

Truth Unspokencommunication Production(CounterTransference)

/Transference

Soverysimplywhatweseehereis:

• The“Truth”becomesasynonymforthetransference,

• Thereactionbytheother(theProduction)isthecountertransference.

Thecountertransferenceistheresponsebytheothertothecontentsof

yourcombinedexplicitandimplicitcommunication,whatyousayand

whatyoutransfer.

• Theabovebeingnoted,inpsychoanalysiswetypicallybelievethatthe

transferenceactsasunconsciouscommunicationwhichspeakswithfar

moreauthorityintermsofyourrelationalexpectationsthanwhatyou

actuallysay.Hencetheword“truth”thereistelling–thetransference




tellstheotherthe“truth”ofyourdesiresirrespectiveofwhatyouare

saying.6

Step3Thewayinwhichweusethismodeltoconstructourtoolisthrougha

triangulationoftwoknown’sandoneunknown.Whatweknowistheexplicit

spokencommunicationandtheproduction(wheretherelationshipleads)

whichisthecountertransference.Whatwedonotknowbutwanttogetat

usingthistoolisthetransference–ourunconsciouscommunication.

Thetoolthenlookslikethis:

6 Obviously this does not grant any right per se (or certainly not any legal right) to the other to ignore your explicit communication. Although, as we all know, typically what happens people do not listen as much to what we say as what we really feel (the proverbial content of our heart).

truth/transference

production/countertransference

explicitcommunication




Thefirstthingyoudoispopulatetheproduction/countertransferencefield.

Thenonceyouhavedonethisyouneedtopopulatetheexplicit

communicationfield.Thesearethetwoknown’sthatyouhavetoworkwith

andfromwhichyouwillinferthethirdfieldwhichisthetruth/transference

field.Sothisisa3stepprocess:

Step1)describeinafewclearandconcisesentenceswhattheresultofthe

relatednessis,whereitleads,whichis(inthismodelatleast)the

countertransferencee.g.letusimagineadiscoursetakingplacebetweena

marriedcouplewheretheproductionisoneofdiscord,conflict,unhappiness,

criticismandagenerallackofloveandkindnessbytheothertowardsthe

subject.

Step2)asbeforedescribeinafewclearandunambiguousstatementswhatis

explicitlycommunicated.Goingbacktoourexamplein1)letusimaginethat

hersubjectexplicitlycommunicatestoherpartner,herdesireforasksforlove,

kindness,andapeacefulcoexistence.

Step3)istopopulatethelastfield,thetruth/transferencefield.Thisisdone

throughaprocessofcombinedlogicalinferenceandcreativeimagination7.The

7 Psychology being both an art and a science.




creativeimaginationyouwillneedtobringtotheparty,Icanhelpyoudraw

outtheinferences.Theprincipalcluesthemodelprovidesare:

• Thecontrastbetweenyourexplicitcommunicationandthe

productionorcountertransference.Assumingyouareconsidering

achallengingrelationshipdynamicthechancesarethatthe

reasonitischallengingisthatthereisastarkcontrastbetween

yourexpressed(explicit)desireintherelationshipandwhat

actuallyhappens(theproductionorcountertransference).Using

theexampleofthemarriedcoupleinanunhappyrelationship.

Seeminglythereissomethingcounterintuitiveinthecontrast

betweentheexpresseddesireofthesubject(let’ssayinthe

examplethewife)andwhatactuallyhappens.Inthiscasethe

productistheoppositeofherstateddesiresandintentions.This

suggestsimmediatelythatthetransferenceisfundamentally

differentfromtheexplicitcommunication.Wedon’tyetknow

whatitis,butthatcontrastisstronglysuggestiveofitbeingquite

distinctandpossiblyoppositetotheexplicitcommunication.

• Thesecondclueisthatthetransferenceistypicallyafarmore

authoritativevoicewhenitcomestotellingtheotherwhatthe

natureofyourdesirereallyis.OnceagainIdonotmeantodismiss

theauthorityandsignificanceoftheexplicitcommunication,but

notonlypsychoanalysisbuteverydayexperienceteachesusthat

wepayfarmoreattentiontotheauthorityofthetransference

(theunconsciouscommunication)thanwedowhatissaid.




Imagineforexamplesomeoneistryingtosellyouaproduct,

considerhowyouevaluatethesalespitch.Isitwhatthe

salespersonsaysorisitwhatyoufeel,sense,intuit,whilstyouare

listeningtotheirsalespitch.Twosalespeoplecouldapproachyou

sellingtheexactsameproductandusenotdissimilarsalespitches

andyetyouarefarmoreinclinedtobuyfromtheonethanthe

other-thatistheauthorityofthetransference.Sointermsofthe

applyingthistoolyoucanreasonablyinferthatyourtransference

willmapontotheproduct(thecountertransference)witha

greaterdegreeofcongruencethananyotherpairinginthe

triangulationi.e.explicitcommunication-product;orexplicit

communication-transference.

• Anotherclueistheprinciplefrompsychoanalysisof

compensation.Whatweknowfrompsychoanalysisisthatthe

unconscious–consciousmindsshareacompensatoryrelationship

witheachother.Thishastheimplicationthatmuchofwhatwe

sayanddoisdoneinordertocompensateforanunconsciously

experiencedopposite.Thisisseeminglyquiteperversebutitisa

cornerstoneofpsychoanalytictheory.AjokethatFreudwouldtell

wasofthepatientwhoarrivedatherfirstsessionandblurtedout,

“Wecandiscussanythingbutmymother!”Oneneedhardlybea

psychoanalysttorecognisethatshehasidentifiedexactlywhere

theanalyticalconversationneedstogo,whichquiteobviouslyis

theexactoppositeofwhatshehassaid.Intermsofthe




applicationthenyoucanreasonablyassumethatthereisa

relationshipofcompensationbetweenyourexplicit

communicationandyourunconsciousdesirethatpopulatesyour

transference.Nowitisnotanexactonetooneopposite.The

compensationcanbequitesubtle,sothisiswhereacertain

degreeofimaginationandsensitivityisrequiredtoidentifyexactly

whatitcompensatesforinyou.Inourhypotheticalexampleof

themarriedcouplewemightspeculatethatalthoughthewife

claimedshedesiredlove,kindnessandpeacefulcoexistencean

unconsciousimpulseinheractuallydesiredtheoppositewhich

was(atleastpartly)responsiblefortheproductofdiscordand

unhappiness.This“wound”wouldtypicallyhaveadevelopmental

originbeingtraceablebacktooneormoreofherprimary

relationshipsasachild.

• Thetransferencetypicallyexpressesadesire,sobearthatinmind

inyouranalysisofyourowntransference.Desireherethoughcan

besubtleinthatonecanwelldesiremiseryasmuchasonemay

desirehappiness,unconsciousdesireshavethisperverseelement

aboutthem.

• Thelanguageoftheunconsciousdoesnotsharethesophistication

ofyourconsciousspokencommunicationitexpressesitselfin

simpleoftenquitecrudeterms.Sowhentryingtoindentifyyour

transferenceavoidsubtle“clever”phrasingsandfavourblunt

expressions.




Conclusion

IhopethatIhaveprovidedyouwithenoughtoapplythisverypowerfultoolto

yourownsituationandrelationshipchallenges.ItisnotImustadmitthe

easiestofapplicationsbutIassureyouthatitisoneworthputtingsomeeffort

into.Theinsightsitcanprovidecanquiteliterallychangeyourlifeandhelpyou

betternavigaterelationshipchallengesthathavebeenfrustratingyoufor

years.Ifyoufindyourselfsimplyunabletoeffectivelypenetrateintothe

transferencemysuggestionistorecruitpartnerfortheexercise;andevenif

theexercisecomesquiteeasilyforyouthereisalwaysabenefitindoingitwith

oneortwoothers.

AsIsaidatthebeginningofthisarticlerecognisingthetransferencedoesnot

entailitstransformation.Ifyouwanttochangethetransferencethisrequires

seriousreflectionandworkonthenatureofthetransference.Itishoweverthe

criticalfirststepontheroadtomoremeaningfulandsatisfyingrelationships.

Hereisthelinktothefirstvideointhetransferenceandcountertransference

videoseries.Fromthisvideopagetherearelinkstoprogresstothenextphase.

http://appliedjung.com/video-1/

Documents

Transference Part 2 - Appliedjung · 2017-09-19 · Module 1: Transference and Counter Transference Part 2 QUOTE “Among these contents the relation to the parent of the opposite