Search

Over three decades ago, John Bowlby argued for psychoanalysis to seek beyond its own parameters if it was to maintain its claim to be a science. Since then there has been a wealth of relevant research from various fields. While this has been instrumental in the development of my own work, this paper concerns learning from the patient. The paper begins with a premise: interpretative analytic work requires three-dimensionality (self, other and object). Although interpretative work may be ingrained in our professional identity, this triangulation may or may not exist in our patients in any stable way. The paper continues with a brief developmental account of how early archetypally-shaped shifts in the infant's field of interest establish the experiential components of three-dimensionality. From there, observational and clinical material with a toddler and a young boy describe how early relational deficits hindered their capacities for three-dimensionality. Yet both were able to engage with the therapist and to become active in the creation of three-dimensionality within their own minds. Implied in this work are considerations for working with patients for whom interpretations do not work. Michael Fordham's comments on 'working out of the self' are linked with the art of what we do. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper concerns the self as Fordham came to conceive it after a conceptual analysis of Jung's use of the term. Fordham identified a contradiction in Jung's usage, and resolved it by reserving ‘self’ for a definition of the psychosomatic entirety of the individual, and using a separate term for referring to expressions of the self in human experience (e.g. symbols). Fordham tentatively suggested that the latter be termed the ‘central archetype’, although this was neither developed nor dropped. I explore the value of this term from a developmental perspective and, more specifically in terms of the deintegration of psyche out of an early psychosomatic unity. This draws upon infant research and an observation of a 14-month old boy. Finally, further developments are briefly described and illustrated, whereby pre-symbolic expressions of the central archetype become symbolic and come to reflect what was for Jung, the ‘ultimate’, ‘Formation, Transformation, Eternal Mind's eternal recreation’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]