Click here to download

Bringing it All Back Home: How I Became a Relational Analyst
Journal Title: STUDI JUNGHIANI 
Author/s: Warren Colman 
Year:  2013 Issue: 37-38 Language: Italian 
Pages:  24 Pg. 81-104 FullText PDF:  658 KB
DOI:  10.3280/JUN2013-037005
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


This paper traces the similarities between the cluster of influences that informed my own training and practice as a British developmental Jungian analyst and those that led to the creation of intersubjective and relational analysis in America. Having outlined five main themes of relational analysis, I show how these were anticipated by several trends in British analysis, especially the work of R.D. Laing and the theory of couple interaction developed by the Institute of Marital Studies at the Tavistock Centre in London. I then show the paralels between relational thinking and Jung’s approach to clinical practice and discuss some of the dilemmas around the analyst’s subjectivity and personal participation in the analystic relationship that are common to both traditions. My aim is to show that a relational approach to the practice of Jungian analysis is both "traditional" and "radical2, being rooted in the traditions of the past while opening up pathways towards future development and clinical innovation.
Keywords: Interaction, interpretation, intersubjectivity, mutuality, patterns of relationg, recognition

  1. Aron L. (1996). A Meeting of Minds. Mutuality in Psychoanalysis. New Jersey: The Analytic Press. Reprinted, New York: Routledge, 2009.
  2. Astor J. (1995). Michael Fordham. Innovations in Analytical Psychology. London, New York: Routledge.
  3. Balint M. (1968). The Basic Fault. Therapeutic Aspects of Regression. London: Tavistock (trad. it. La regressione. Milano: Cortina, 1983).
  4. Bannister K., Pincus L. (1965). Shared Phantasy in Marital Problems: Therapy in a Four-Person Relationship. Hitchin: Codicote Press. Reprinted, London: Institute of Marital
  5. Studies, 1971.
  6. Beebe B., Lachmann F. (2002). Infant Research and Adult Treatment. Co-Constructing Interactions. New Jersey: The Analytic Press (trad. it.: Infant research e trattamento degli adulti: un modello sistemico-diadico delle interazioni. Milano: R. Cortina, 2003)
  7. Beebe B., Lachmann F. (2003). The relational turn in psychoanalysis: A dyadic systems view from infant research. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 39, 3: 379-409., DOI: 10.1080/00107530.2003.10747213
  8. Benjamin J. (1990). An outline of intersubjectivity: the development of recognition. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 7: 33-46., DOI: 10.1037/h0085258
  9. Benjamin J. (1995). Recognition and destruction: an outline of intersubjectivity. In: Like Subjects, Love Objects: Essays on Recognition and Sexual Difference. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  10. Bromberg P.M. (1991). Artist and analyst. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 27: 289-299., DOI: 10.1080/00107530.1991.10747166
  11. Byng-Hall J., Campbell D. (1981). Resolving conflicts in family distance regulation: An integrative approach. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 7, 3: 321-330., DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-0606.1981.tb01384.x
  12. Caper R. (1992). Does psychoanalysis heal? A contribution to the theory of psychoanalytic technique. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 73: 283-292.
  13. Caper R. (2003). Response to Colman. In: Withers R., ed., Controversies in Analytical Psychology and Psychoanalysis. Hove and New York: Brunner-Routledge.
  14. Carmeli Z., Blass R.B. (2010). The relational turn in psychoanalysis: revolution or regression? European Journal of Psychotherapy and Counselling, 12, 3: 217-224.
  15. Colman W. (1985). Self and other in marital interaction. Unpublished Colman W. (1993). Marriage as a psychological container. In: Ruszczynski S., ed., Psychotherapy with Couples: Theory and Practice at the Tavistock Institute of Marital Studies. London: Karnac Books.
  16. Colman W. (1995). Gesture and recognition: An alternative model to projective identification as a basis for couple relationships. In: Ruszczynski S., Fisher J., eds., Intrusiveness and Intimacy in the Couple. London: Karnac Books.
  17. Colman W. (2003). Interpretation and relationship: ends or means? A commentary on Robert Caper's “Does Psychoanalysis Heal?”. In: Withers R., ed., Controversies in Analytical Psychology and Psychoanalysis. Hove and New York: Brunner-Routledge.
  18. Colman W. (2010). The analyst in action: an individual account of what Jungian analysts do and why they do it. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 91: 287-303., DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-8315.2009.00226.x
  19. Corrigan E.G. (1992). J.D. Sutherland in Memoriam. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 2: 277., DOI: 10.1080/1048188920953893
  20. Fordham M. (1957). Notes on the transference. In: Fordham M., Gordon R., Hubback J., Lambert K., eds., Technique in Jungian Analysis. London: Heinemann (trad. it. La tecnica nell’analisi junghiana. Roma: Ma.gi, 2003).
  21. Fordham M. (1969). Technique and counter-transference. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 14, 2: 95-118. Reprinted in: Technique in Jungian Analysis. London: Heinemann (trad. it. La tecnica nell’analisi junghiana. Roma: Ma.gi, 2003).
  22. Fosshage J. L., Davies J.M. (2000). Analytical psychology after Jung with clinical case material from Stephen Mitchell’s Influence and Autonomy in Psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 10: 377-88., DOI: 10.1080/10481881009348553
  23. Greenberg J. (2001). The analyst’s participation: A new look. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 49: 359-81., DOI: 10.1177/00030651010490020801
  24. Hamilton V. (1996). The Analyst’s Pre-conscious. Hillsdale, New Jersey: The Analytic Press.
  25. Hoffman I. (1994). Dialectical thinking and therapeutic action in the psychoanalytic process. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 63: 187-218.
  26. Jacoby M. (2000). The growing convergence of contemporary psychoanalysis and Jungian analysis. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 10: 489-503., DOI: 10.1080/1048188100934856
  27. Jung C.G. (1925). Die Ehe als psychologische Beziehung (trad. it. Il matrimonio come relazione psicologica. In: Opere, vol. 17. Torino: Boringhieri, 1991).
  28. Jung C.G. (1929). Die Probleme der modernen Psychotherapie (trad. it. I problemi della psicoterapia moderna. In: Opere, vol. 16. Torino: Boringhieri, 1981).
  29. Jung C.G. (1935). Grundsätzliches zur praktischen Psychotherapie (trad. it. Principi di psicoterapia pratica. In: Opere, vol. 16. Torino: Boringhieri, 1981).
  30. Jung C.G. (1946). Die Psychologie der Übertragung erläutert anhand einer alchemistischen Bildserie (trad. it. La psicologia del transfert. In: Opere, vol. 16. Torino: Boringhieri, 1981).
  31. Knox J. (1997). Internal objects: a theoretical analysis of Jungian and Kleinian models. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 42, 4: 653-66., DOI: 10.1111/j.1465-5922.1997.00653.
  32. Knox J. (1999). The relevance of attachment theory to a contemporary Jungian view of the internal world: Internal working models, implicit memory and internal objects. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 44, 4: 511-30., DOI: 10.1111/1465-5922.0011
  33. Knox J. (2003). Archetype, Attachment, Analysis. Jungian Psychology and the Emergent Mind. Hove and New York: Brunner-Routledge (trad. it. Archetipo, attaccamento, analisi: la psicologia junghiana e la mente emergente. Roma: Ma.gi, 2007).
  34. Laing R.D. (1959). The Divided Self. An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness. London: Tavistock (trad. it. L’Io diviso. Studio di psichiatria esistenziale. Torino: Einaudi 1969). Laing R.D. (1967). The Politics of Experience and the Bird of Paradise. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books (trad. it. La politica dell'esperienza e L’uccello del paradiso. Milano: Feltrinelli, 1980).
  35. Levenson E. (1989). Whatever happened to the cat? Interpersonal perspectives on the self. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 25: 537-53., DOI: 10.1080/00107530.1989.1074631
  36. Mattinson J., Sinclair I. (1982). Mate and Stalemate. Working with Marital Problems in a Social Services Department. Oxford: Blackwell.
  37. Miller G. (2004). R.D. Laing. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  38. Mitchell S. A. (1997). Influence and Autonomy in Psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press (trad. it.: Influenza e autonomia in psicoanalisi. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri, 1999).
  39. Pincus L., ed. (1960). Marriage: Studies in Emotional Conflict and Growth. London: Methuen. Reprinted, London: Institute of Marital Studies, 1973.
  40. Sander L. (1977). The regulation of exchange in the infant-caretaker system and some aspects of the context-content relationship. In: Lewis M., Rosenblum L., eds., Interaction, Conversation, and the Development of Language. New York: Wiley.
  41. Sedgwick D. (2000). Answers to nine questions about Jungian psychology. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 10: 457–72., DOI: 10.1080/1048188100934855
  42. Stern D.N. (1985). The Interpersonal World of the Infant. New York: Basic Books (trad. it.: Il mondo interpersonale del bambino. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri, 1987).
  43. Stern D.N., Sander L., Nahum J., Harrison A., Lyons-Ruth K., Morgan A., Bruschweiler-
  44. Stern N., Tronick E. (1998). Non-interpretive mechanisms in psychoanalytic therapy. The ‘something more’ than interpretation. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 79: 903-921.
  45. Stolorow R.D. (2004). Autobiographical reflections on the intersubjective history of an intersubjective perspective in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 24: 542-557., DOI: 10.1080/0735169240934910
  46. Stolorow R.D., Atwood G.E. (1992). Contexts of Being. The Intersubjective Foundations of Psychological Life. New Jersey: Analytic Press (trad. it. I contesti dell’essere: le basi intersoggettive della vita psichica. Torino: Boringhieri, 1995).
  47. Sullivan H.S. (1940). Conceptions of Modern Psychiatry. New York: Norton (trad. it.: La moderna concezione della psichiatria. Milano: Feltrinelli, 1981).
  48. Winnicott D. W. (1968). Playing and Reality. London: Tavistock (trad. it. Gioco e realtà. Roma: Armando, 1985).
  49. Zinkin L. (1969). Flexibility in analytic technique. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 14: 119-132., DOI: 10.1111/j.1465-5922.1969.00119.xReprintedin:FordhamM.,GordonR.,HubbackJ.,LambertK.,eds.,TechniqueinJungianAnalysis.London:Heinemann(trad.it.Latecnicanell’analisijunghiana.Roma:Ma.gi,2003)
  50. Zinkin L. (1991/2008). Your self: did you find it or did you make it. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 53, 3: 389-406., DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5922.2008.00733.

Warren Colman, Bringing it All Back Home: How I Became a Relational Analyst in "STUDI JUNGHIANI" 37-38/2013, pp. 81-104, DOI:10.3280/JUN2013-037005

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content