Fear of influence – projective identification in love and work

20th September 2023

My last few blogs have focused on psychoanalytic technique. In them we saw Klein advising colleagues in relation to interpretation and the use of silence, and emphasising the need to be ‘self-critical enough’ and to ‘keep our minds and technique flexible.’ Here, I am changing tack slightly, and in the coming months intend to share a number of clinical vignettes, recorded by Klein, which she clearly felt threw light on various theoretical ideas.

The vignette I share here is from file B.98 of the archive, which is named ‘Theoretical Thoughts 1946’. As readers may know, Klein published her seminal paper on the paranoid-schizoid position in 1946, in which she discussed projective identification. This is the complex mechanism by which, in unconscious phantasy, parts of the self are located in the other for various reasons – such as to control or to harm – and with varying effects both on the self and the object. Klein clearly has this concept in mind as she explains the preoccupations of one her adult patients, ‘M’. Regarding this patient M, she writes:

...the influence the projective identifications have on sexual intercourse are seen quite clearly in somebody whose analysis has not been carried to any length yet.

M, Klein observes, is worried about ‘influencing and moulding’ the women with whom he becomes romantically involved. His specific concern is that he should influence them, ‘in such a way that they are greatly changed and become really like himself.’ Klein notes that M,

…saw with dismay that a girl he likes and who likes him had changed her style of dressing in the way in which he sometimes likes women to be dressed and he called this “the thin end of the wedge”.

Further, she records that,

He speaks with great concern about an earlier relation in which this [his influence] seemed to be one of the factors which made the girl too fond, too dependent on him… [The relationship] finished unsatisfactorily, because he cannot bear too great dependence in the woman.

Klein seems to have in mind here the way in which, in phantasy, M locates aspects of himself (such as his liking for women who dress in a particular way), in the women he is in relationships with. He then finds them changed as a result: more like him because they contain aspects of him. In M’s case, it appears that there is some continuing recognition of the split-off parts – hence his perturbation – although often, if the aim is to entirely disown such parts, one may feel absolutely disconnected from them in the other.

Another effect of projective identification in this case, is that M feels these women to be too dependent on him. One may surmise, however, that M himself felt very dependent on these women because they now contained parts of him. M seemed to respond to this experience by projecting his own feelings of dependency right back into these women.

Klein notes that M’s concern regarding his influence extends beyond romantic relationships, to professional ones. She writes,

Somebody said that he is apt to choose people (in working conditions) who are so receptive to his ideas that they will make a perfect staff. In referring to this influence he said: “They become really too much like myself and then I become very tired because I am not really so fond of myself and don’t want to see so much of myself about.”

Again, when one is projecting parts of oneself into others, one is apt to feel surrounded by these aspects – surrounded by oneself, as patient M observes. Klein notes that, in M’s case, it is relationships with women that are particularly affected, and that he ‘does not seem to feel having [sic] such powers over men.'

I think Klein was using this brief vignette to illustrate one particular impact of projective identification, namely the way in which a phantasy of having located parts of the self in the other can leave one feeling frighteningly powerful; worryingly capable of controlling or influencing the object. This is why M says that the girl dressing in a way that he would like, is just ‘the thin end of the wedge’; i.e., only the beginning. Another response might be that M feels quite trapped by these women into whom he projects. Perhaps this is also what he is getting at when he says that they become too fond of, or too dependent on him.

Klein ends her notes with a ‘Conclusion’ which, though it sounds very definitive, is to my mind more a postulation about what might be going on in M’s case. It’s not clear whether, or how, she put this to her patient, but it is interesting that she suggests M’s projection may lead him to feel rather less powerful, or potent, than he consciously fears himself to be. She notes the possible implications for sexual relations in this connection. She writes,

Conclusion: The penis being used as a controlling object, as an object to be split off, and then the mechanism of splitting is very active. Not only faeces are split off but parts of the body which are entering the body [of the other] and controlling it. Now the penis is then felt to remain inside in a controlling, guiding, et cetera way. That too must have a bearing on difficulties in potency, because if it is too much a sent out part of oneself it impedes the capacity…

The notes tail off at this point, with Klein highlighting the way in which the ego can become depleted by excessive projection. Her remark about the potential impact on sexual potency indicates that one may feel most concretely, the loss of a part of the body, such as the penis, following a projection. Readers interested in this aspect of Klein’s thinking can learn more in the Theory section of the Melanie Klein Trust website.

In April 2024, the British Psychoanalytical Society will host a conference in Edinburgh called ‘The Dynamics of Influence’. The aim of the conference is to provide a space to explore the ways in which analyst and patient can powerfully influence one another. The mechanism of projective identification, and the implications of its use, will likely be central to discussions.

It is supposed to be the teaching of Marxism that art for art’s sake is an illusion and that art must be propaganda. This is, however, making the usual bourgeois simplification of a complex matter. Art is a social function. This is not a Marxist demand, but arises from the very way in which art forms are defined. Only those things are recognised as art forms which have a conscious social function. The phantasies of a dreamer are not art. They only become art when they are given music, forms or words, when they are clothed in socially recognised symbols, and of course in the process there is a modification. The phantasies are modified by the social dress; the language as a whole acquires new associations and context. No chance sounds constitute music, but sounds selected from a socially recognised scale and played on socially developed instruments. It is not for Marxism therefore to demand that art play a social function or to attack the conception of ‘art for art’s sake’, for art only is art, and recognisable as such, in so far as it plays a social function. What is of importance to art, Marxism and society is the question: What social function is art playing? This in turn depends on the type of society in which it is secreted. In bourgeois society social relations are denied in the form of relations between men, and take the form of a relation between man and a thing, a property relation, which, because it is a dominating relation, is believed to make man free. But this is an illusion. The property relation is only a disguise for relations which now become unconscious and therefore anarchic but are still between man and man and in particular between exploiter and exploited. The artist in bourgeois culture is asked to do the same thing. He is asked to regard the art work as a finished commodity and the process of art as a relation between himself and the work, which then disappears into the market. There is a further relation between the art work and the buyer, but with this he can hardly be immediately concerned. The whole pressure of bourgeois society is to make him regard the art work as hypostatised and his relation to it as primarily that of a producer for the market.

- Christopher Caudwell, Studies in a Dying Culture, 1938

Advantages of Working With References You Know Very Little About

(This post cross-posted from my Patreon. Please consider supporting for access to my unreleased game prototypes, devlogs and blog posts just like this one. It helps me pay rent and supports the work I do!)

One of my favourite quotes from one of my Game Design profs was "The best designers are those who either play every kind of game they can get their hands on, or those who play nothing at all".

The implication here is that the former has a huge subset of reference to pull from to create a wide variety of interesting designs across all genres, while those who play nothing don't have any preconceptions about how something "should" be designed and therefore will come up with new and interesting concepts as a result.

From my experience, I think this is largely true in most cases; many designers I know who split the middle and intimately fixate on one specific type of game or genre typically are the ones who tend to pigeon-hole themselves into very same-y designs and struggle to break out of their own mould they make, whereas the most interesting concepts come from folks who barely touch video games or play a huge variety of them.

I think the same general principle apply to making concepts and works informed by a specific theme or genre. Familiarity with a wide amount of media can help you pull pieces of those media into your work in a way that is unique or interesting to your style, and on the other hand having almost no familiarity with a piece of media means you're free to imagine and interpret that genre or media as you see fit without your direction being informed by already understood tropes or assumptions the genre makes, which I think is a huge asset.

When planning direction in a lot of my works I actively try to draw inspiration from media that I have limited experience with but are interested in or would like to emulate to some degree, because I think it incidentally makes the end product more genre-bending.

As an example: one of the biggest things informing the game I'm currently working on (a Mech Arena Survival Shooter) is Neon Genesis Evangelion. I know just almost nothing about Evangelion, and what little I do know is by way of proxy and have never experienced any of it myself. I know there's basically teenage angst, giant robots and evil angel things, and that it's leaven with questions on the human psyche as much as it is about giant robots fighting. I've seen screenshots and stuff, but aside from that I have literally no idea of what it really is or what the heck even happens in it, but thematically I'm just pulling from the vibe I get from it and what others say about it,and not from any working knowledge of the property itself. Another reference point for me visually is Dreamcast games; I never grew up with the Dreamcast and have only played maybe one or two titles from its library personally, but I know just barely enough about how it looks and plays from various sources to pull from it. I've seen footage of stuff like Phantasy Star Online or whatever here and there, but I'd never dare to claim I've internalized enough about it to have any idea about what makes it what it is.

And this isn't a bad thing! I genuinely think that if I knew more about it and committed to learning from these pieces of media more intimately for the sake of this project, there's a very real risk I would start unconsciously (or consciously) pull from them in ways that would push my work in a direction that is more informed by the media than it is myself. I could end up with themes that are less myself being 'inspired by', and more my work being 'derivative towards' that piece of media. It can easily be too tempting to say 'Well the mechs in Evangelion are [x] size large so I should make everything bigger" or "The Dreamcast can't make shadows like [y] so I shouldn't do that". Being healthily divorced from your reference points sounds counter-intuitive but can actually help a lot!

I guess the main idea here is that when it comes to informing your direction and generating concepts, in some cases what you think you know about a property or work can often be more effective directional tool than what you might know you know about it.

Liberal academia discredits freud and lacan precisely because they have no solutions other than behavioralism and medication. They do not confront the unconscious; taking a medication is not a cure, it is precisely the opposite even if taking a pill is preferable to the suffering caused by x aliment/disorder.

So even if what they said was true blah blah mom blah blah stages of sexual development is a lie, even if we regard this as fact the hatred of psychoanalysis is nonetheless still pathological.

Taken directly from lacan, even if what the husband says about his wife is ture, she's no good, she cheats she lazy etc, his jelousy is still pathological in so far as it is indispensable; thats to say without jelously his world would fall apart.

Another; a man has a wife and a mistress, when he removes the veil of fantasy he loses them both, what he desired was to desire, in that he mistook her as fulfillment when she was merely an object of desire, a mere phantasy and when someone flys too close to the sun reality can itself become irreal. So for example when someone says "I want a nose job because it will make me happy" often times even after the procedure they are not more happy than before. I.e. a segway to the idea that language itself is made up of chains of repressed signifiers; words are relative, you know what happy means only because you know what happy is not.

Anxiety is taken today to mean exactly one thing, a disorder blah blah your brian is like a computer this typical sort of nonsense in which you are put on medication. Psychoanalysis understands anxiety as part feeling part disorder part repression of feelings & or memories. It is even accepted that psychoanalysis can and does help patients and if this is true and accepted by the psychological community why then is psychoanalysis not covered by insurance yet Xanax is, you can even be prescribed it via zoom which is almost the ultimate liberal betrayal in that it breaks a cardinal sin of psychoanalysis in which patients would report traumatic repressed memories. I don't know of many people confronting a traumatic anything on Xanax, frankly.

Thinking In The Introverted Attitude

When describing extraverted thinking, I gave a brief characterization of introverted thinking, to which at this stage I must make further reference. Introverted thinking is primarily orientated by the subjective factor. At the least, this subjective factor is represented by a subjective feeling of direction, which, in the last resort, determines judgment. Occasionally, it is a more or less finished image, which to some extent, serves as a standard. This thinking may be conceived either with concrete or with abstract factors, but always at the decisive points it is orientated by subjective data. Hence, it does not lead from concrete experience back again into objective things, but always to the subjective content, External facts are not the aim and origin of this thinking, although the introvert would often like to make it so appear. It begins in the subject, and returns to the subject, although it may undertake the widest flights into the territory of the real and the actual. Hence, in the statement of new facts, its chief value is indirect, because new views rather than the perception of new facts are its main concern. It formulates questions and creates theories; it opens up prospects and yields insight, but in the presence of facts it exhibits a reserved demeanour. As illustrative examples they have their value, but they must not prevail. Facts are collected as evidence or examples for a theory, but never for their own sake. Should this latter ever occur, it is done only as a compliment to the extraverted style. For this kind of thinking facts are of secondary importance; what, apparently, is of absolutely paramount importance is the development and presentation of the subjective idea, that primordial symbolical image standing more or less darkly before the inner vision. Its aim, therefore, is never concerned with an intellectual reconstruction of concrete actuality, but with the shaping of that dim image into a resplendent idea. Its desire is to reach reality; its goal is to see how external facts fit into, and fulfil, the framework of the idea; its actual creative power is proved by the fact that this thinking can also create that idea which, though not present in the external facts, is yet the most suitable, abstract expression of them. Its task is accomplished when the idea it has fashioned seems to emerge so inevitably from the external facts that they actually prove its validity.

But just as little as it is given to extraverted thinking to wrest a really sound inductive idea from concrete facts or ever to create new ones, does it lie in the power of introverted thinking to translate its original image into an idea adequately adapted to the facts. For, as in the former case the purely empirical heaping together of facts paralyses thought and smothers their meaning, so in the latter case introverted thinking shows a dangerous tendency to coerce facts into the shape of its image, or by ignoring them altogether, to unfold its phantasy image in freedom. In such a case, it will be impossible for the presented idea to deny its origin from the dim archaic image. There will cling to it a certain mythological character that we are prone to interpret as ‘originality’, or in more pronounced cases’ as mere whimsicality; since its archaic character is not transparent as such to specialists unfamiliar with mythological motives. The subjective force of conviction inherent in such an idea is usually very great; its power too is the more convincing, the less it is influenced by contact with outer facts. Although to the man who advocates the idea, it may well seem that his scanty store of facts were the actual ground and source of the truth and validity of his idea, yet such is not the case, for the idea derives its convincing power from its unconscious archetype, which, as such, has universal validity and everlasting truth. Its truth, however, is so universal and symbolic, that it must first enter into the recognized and recognizable knowledge of the time, before it can become a practical truth of any real value to life. What sort of a causality would it be, for instance, that never became perceptible in practical causes and practical results?

This thinking easily loses itself in the immense truth of the subjective factor. It creates theories for the sake of theories, apparently with a view to real or at least possible facts, yet always with a distinct tendency to go over from the world of ideas into mere imagery. Accordingly many intuitions of possibilities appear on the scene, none of which however achieve any reality, until finally images are produced which no longer express anything externally real, being ‘merely’ symbols of the simply unknowable. It is now merely a mystical thinking and quite as unfruitful as that empirical thinking whose sole operation is within the framework of objective facts.

Whereas the latter sinks to the level of a mere presentation of facts, the former evaporates into a representation of the unknowable, which is even beyond everything that could be expressed in an image. The presentation of facts has a certain incontestable truth, because the subjective factor is excluded and the facts speak for themselves. Similarly, the representing of the unknowable has also an immediate, subjective, and convincing power, because it is demonstrable from its own existence. The former says ‘Est, ergo est’ (‘It is ; therefore it is’) ; while the latter says ‘Cogito, ergo cogito’ (‘ I think ; therefore I think’). In the last analysis, introverted thinking arrives at the evidence of its own subjective being, while extraverted thinking is driven to the evidence of its complete identity with the objective fact. For, while the extravert really denies himself in his complete dispersion among objects, the introvert, by ridding himself of each and every content, has to content himself with his mere existence. In both cases the further development of life is crowded out of the domain of thought into the region of other psychic functions which had hitherto existed in relative unconsciousness. The extraordinary impoverishment of introverted thinking in relation to objective facts finds compensation in an abundance of unconscious facts. Whenever consciousness, wedded to the function of thought, confines itself within the smallest and emptiest circle possible—though seeming to contain the plenitude of divinity—unconscious phantasy becomes proportionately enriched by a multitude of archaically formed facts, a veritable pandemonium of magical and irrational factors, wearing the particular aspect that accords with the nature of that function which shall next relieve the thought-function as the representative of life. If this should be the intuitive function, the ‘other side’ will be viewed with the eyes of a Kubin or a Meyrink. If it is the feeling-function, there arise quite unheard of and fantastic feeling-relations, coupled with feeling-judgments of a quite contradictory and unintelligible character. If the sensation-function, then the senses discover some new and never-before-experienced possibility, both within and without the body. A closer investigation of such changes can easily demonstrate the reappearance of primitive psychology with all its characteristic features. Naturally, the thing experienced is not merely primitive but also symbolic; in fact, the older and more primeval it appears, the more does it represent the future truth: since everything ancient in our unconscious means the coming possibility.

Under ordinary circumstances, not even the transition to the ‘other side’ succeeds—still less the redeeming journey through the unconscious. The passage across is chiefly prevented by conscious resistance to any subjection of the ego to the unconscious reality and to the determining reality of the unconscious object. The condition is a dissociation—in other words, a neurosis having the character of an inner wastage with increasing brain-exhaustion—a psychoasthenia, in fact.

Source: Psychological Types

Vitae Martini pseudoprophete: A Catholic tradition of polemical Luther biography

The most famous, and in many ways rightly infamous, detractor of Luther's character [was] the Dominican Heinrich Denifle, Sub-Archivar of the Holy See […]. For him such events as the fit in the choir have only an inner cause, which in no way means a decent conflict or even an honest affliction, but solely an abysmal depravity of character. To him, Luther is too much of a psychopath to be credited with honest mental or spiritual suffering. It is only the Bad One who speaks through Luther. It is, it must be, Denifle's primary ideological premise, that nothing, neither mere pathological fits, nor the later revelations that set Luther on the path to reformation, had anything whatsoever to do with divine interference. "Who," Denifle asks, in referencing the thunderstorm, "can prove, for himself, not to speak of others, that the alleged inspiration through the Holy Ghost came from above . . . and that it was not the play of conscious or unconscious self-delusion?" Lutheranism, he fears (and hopes to demonstrate) has tried to lift to the height of dogma the phantasies of a most fallible mind. [...] To [Denifle] he is an Umsturzmensch, the kind of man who wants to turn the world upside down without a plan of his own. To Denifle, Luther's protestant attitude introduced into history a dangerous kind of revolutionary spirit. Luther's special gifts, which the priest does not deny, are those of the demagogue and the false prophet — falseness not only as a matter of bad theology, but as a conscious falsification from base motives. All of this follows from the priest's quite natural thesis that war orders from above, such as the [Protestant apologist] assumes to have been issued to Luther, could only be genuine if they showed the seal and the signature of divinity, namely, signs and miracles. [...] Denifle is only the most extreme representative of a Catholic school of Luther biography, whose representatives try hard to divorce themselves from his method while sharing his basic assumption of a gigantic moral flaw in Luther's personality. The Jesuit [Hartmann] Grisar is cooler and more dissecting in his approach. Yet he too ascribes to Luther a tendency for "egomanic self-delusion" and suggests a connection between his self-centeredness and his medical history; thus Grisar puts himself midway between the approaches of the priest and of the psychiatrist. Among all of Luther's biographers, inimical or friendly, Denifle seems to me to resemble Luther most, at least in his salt-and-pepper honesty, and his one-sided anger. The Jesuit [sic?] is most admirable in his scholarly criticism of Luther's theology; most lovable in his outraged response to Luther's vulgarity. Denifle does not think that a true man of God would ever say "I gorge myself (fresse) like a Bohemian and I get drunk (sauff) like a German. God be praised, Amen" although he neglects the fact that Luther wrote this in one of his humorous letters to his wife at a time when she was worried about his lack of appetite.

- Erik Erikson (Young Man Luther: A Study in Psychoanalysis and History, pages 26, 31, 32). Italics original, bolded emphases added.

The studies coming out on psilocybin inspired me to do some research. I began to be curious particularly about altered states of consciousness and the historical use of psilocybin and other psychedelics. I usually connected these substances to the 1960s and the hippies and all that, but it turns out that humans have been using psychedelics for THOUSANDS of years, like tens of thousands or even millions of years, especially for the ritual purposes of connecting to ~the spirit world~ whatever that means for that culture. This seems to be a universal thing from around the globe. It makes me wonder- what was that like for them? What was it like to be so sure that the gods or spirits existed? what was it like to commune with them? (I’ve never had that experience...) What did they see? What did they hear? Why are altered states of consciousness and animism such widely experienced things for humans?

That research led me to this article which talks about the “evolved psychology of psychedelic set and setting”. A lot of it is anthropology that’s over my head since it’s not a field I’ve ever studied. But there’s a lot in here that’s absolutely fascinating! Here’s some bits I particularly thought were neat. (any emphasis is mine)

The article claims that psychedelics produce animism (which the article defines as “a view that that nature involves sentient entities that interact with humans”). It then talks a bit about how animism is a reflection of our inner selves onto the outer world, it is how we humanized and personalized the natural world “with traits (sentience, relationality) that derive from humans’ innate social and cognitive intelligences”. It was also important for human evolution- “Animism reflects operations of innate processing modules for “animacy detection,” for being hyper-sensitive to the presence of an animate agent. The religious presumption of an unseen agent, a hyperactive sensitivity and automatic tendency to project an active agent responsible for the cause of unexplained phenomena, reflects functions acquired for detection of predators and prey. These tendencies were expanded across human evolution because of survival benefits of detecting predators, and subsequently linked to other capacities to understand the most important and dangerous animals in the environment—other humans. Consequently, our animistic thinking also emphasizes human-like mental, personal and social qualities.” Which is an interesting to answer to the question of why animism is a universally human thing. 

It then talks about what psychedelics do the brain and how that has been useful for human evolution- “Psychedelic-induced visionary phantasy reflects a latent human cognitive capacity underlying all experience that manifests through the visual system used for organizing information in the external world. …[P]sychedelics … are unparalleled tools for examination of the phenomenology and operation of this intrinsic system of the human brain-mind and a source of unconscious cognitive processes. This visual thinking capability involves the innate intelligence of spatial-temporal reasoning, an ability to think though visualizing patterns and performing mental manipulations with them. The visual thinking provides the working space for organizing constructs, assimilating information and creating new ideas by synthesizing spatial information. This capacity was central to human evolution.”

“Early hominins evolved traits from selection pressures for abilities to live in a cognitive niche” (the human adaptation to a knowledge-using, socially interdependent lifestyle) “for functioning and survival. Beginning with the incidental ingestion of psychedelic fungi in an opportunistic diet, and eventually their deliberate inclusion in rituals, our ancestors’ use of psilocybin could have contributed to the evolution of our unique survival mode by imposing a systematic bias on the selective environment via the enhanced visual information processing and integration induced by psychedelics. Psychedelic consumption thus could have had significant consequences on the selective forces that drove hominin cognitive and behavioral evolution.

These adaptations involving construction of new models of the environment were enhanced by psychedelic effects on visual thinking and globally integrated cognition. The enhanced availability of information is a central feature of psychedelic effects, a result of increased global connectivity in the brain that results from psychedelic interference with the integrity of the Default Mode Network (DMN). Disabling the DMN results in increased levels of functional connectivity between normally disconnected brain networks and more communication across the entire brain with very strong links and topologically long-range functional connections and a wider range of connectivity states. Psilocybin produces a new dynamic of coordinated oscillations across brain regions, with overall phase synchronization coordinating EEG across diverse brain areas and producing greater global neural integration.”

The next part is about what the article calls “shamanism” (which I have discovered is a term loaded with racism so I’m going to attempt to avoid using it in my own words). They’re defining that as ritual beliefs and activities which include “healing, divination, clairvoyance, acquiring information about group members, hunting, recovery of lost souls, communication with spirits of the dead, escorting souls of the dead, and protection against spirits and sorcerers.” They also mention that these ritual activities are a social institution to “manage the therapeutic and other adaptive effects that can be obtained by using psychedelics to integrate information in consciousness.“ 

The article then points out that these are universal things- “This complex of ritual activities and beliefs found worldwide in foraging societies establishes shamanism as an empirical reality of the premodern world. The cross-cultural distribution of the shamanic features reflects a cultural universal: all societies have ritual practices involving alterations of consciousness for spirit communication, divination and healing. …These cultural universals of ritual altered states of consciousness, spirit engagement, divination and healing reflect intrinsic aspects of human nature involving innate intelligences.” 

The next part is rather over my head, but it talks about how rituals developed and why- they promote social bonding through the use of song and dance and altered states of consciousness. It also “[increases] status and access to resources, and [provides] psychophysiological benefits from eliciting endogenous healing responses.” Furthermore it “also [represses] strategic reasoning and second-guessing of prosocial intentions of others while encouraging cooperation and positive regard in social relations.” It then goes into further detail about how music and dancing bonds people together. 

After that the article talks about how the use of psychedelics set us apart from other hominids. “A notable gap between hominid and shamanic ritual involves [altered states of consciousness] and spirit world experiences that are at the focus of communal shamanic healing practices. Notably, all three—communal relations, shamanic altered states of consciousness, and healing—are stimulated by psychedelics, exemplified in the concept of entheogens. Cultures around the world have expressed beliefs about the effects of psychedelics that are entheogenic—inherent sources of stimulating internal spiritual experiences. The empirical ability of psychedelics to induce genuine mystical experiences are attested to in double-blind clinical studies, meaning that we have to accept that spiritual experiences occurred when people ingested psilocybin-containing mushrooms.”

The article then talks about the scientific explanations for the altered states of consciousness and how we achieve them- with the psychedelics, the exhaustive drumming and dancing, etc. It’s pretty complex stuff ngl. It had this in particular to say about the unconscious/dreams: “Shamanism exapted an innate mammalian feature, using an adaptation for learning by producing memory associations during sleep and enhancing information consolidation. Shamanic activities accessed these innate dream processes by using ritual to blend waking consciousness (enhanced by extreme excitation) with dream processes to bring unconscious material into waking consciousness and manage unconscious personality dynamics. Shamanic engagement with dreams used its capacities for virtual scenario construction to engage processes for risk-free consideration of possible options.” It also had some interesting things to say on the effects of dopamine on human cognition and how that can lead to out of body experiences, although I didn’t understand most of it. 

The article mentions that death and rebirth experiences are common relative to the rituals and altered states of consciousness, that “a ‘death’ of their current identity (as a ‘normal’ but ill person) permits emergence of a new identity as a healer.” Which I found particularly striking. Idk about you but I see this all the time in the overlap between the witchcraft/new-age and the chronically ill communities. I always found it a bit disturbing honestly, the fact that a person has to suffer or be broken in order to heal others. I always related it to the very christian sentiment that “all suffering is for a reason”. Perhaps that was uncalled for? But also it’s objectively ableist for people to say things like “Lyme is a gift for the strongest of warriors” (a legit thing I heard someone say) or that autistic people are “starseeds” or “indigo children” meant to heal other people. It’s interesting to me that this a very human response to being sick or different. “These reformulations of the self are guided by innate drives toward integration derived from the psychointegration produced by [altered states of consciousness].” I have A Lot of Thoughts on this that I’m not sure how to put into words.

I also thought this explanation of animism and the spirit world was interesting: “Pre-modern psychedelic experience was entheogenic—an experience of spiritual beings activated by the plant and within the self. This encounter with an active social agent exemplifies functions of innate modular cognitive intelligences and cognitive operations that are at the core of shamanism. The animistic worldview reflects an enhanced sociality with a natural world imbued with human qualities. Shamanic relations embody the entheogenic perspective that external entities can enter the person and manifest as spiritual powers, as well as become guides and allies. Shamanism incorporated the influences from these spirits as fundamental to self, producing an ecopsychology based in perceptions of nature as personal, intelligent, spiritual and human-like. Shamanism and entheogenic encounters emphasize a set involving the incorporation of others’ as self, reflecting an extension of the social mind’s inference system beyond normal limitations because spirits are presumed to have fuller access to strategic information.” I’m… I have feelings about how absolutely human it is to perceive nature as human-like. Maybe that’s a bad way to put it just. Thinking of the thought processes of our distant ancestors overwhelms me. Like that’s how they made sense of their world, by reflecting themselves onto it. I like that. I like that a lot.

All in all, I enjoyed reading it. I think using science to uncover the mechanics behind it is neat and I don’t think it takes away any of the magic of it. Like science is just magic we can explain. and magic is just things science can’t yet explain. you know? It certainly answered my questions of why, why do altered states of consciousness work the way they do? why do psychedelics contribute to this? why are psychedelics and altered states of consciousness used for divination? why do the rituals always involve dance and drumming? why is this a universally human thing? I think I need to let this rotate around in my mind for a while before my thoughts on it fully develop. But gods I wish with all my heart psilocybin was more accessible and not illegal.

(the title is ”The Evolved Psychology of Psychedelic Set and Setting: Inferences Regarding the Roles of Shamanism and Entheogenic Ecopsychology” and the DOI number is 10.3389/fphar.2021.619890 if anyone wants to look it up)

female peter pan

in which universe do i live that i consider this to be more alive? that i consider suffering better than feeling nothing. i hate to admit it, but i have to hold myself accountable in order to be better. i unconsciously trigger my boyfriend and then feel alive as heated discussions take place. if i cannot derive happiness then at least i’ll feel some negativity- something that can tell me i’m alive. something that is saying: yes you are breathing, you have the emotions at hand.

16:00 loneliness is a bitch. but apparently i deserve it. i have done enough to deserve such silent treatment. i cannot believe, how much i feel right now. my chest tight and heavy, my eyelids tired and my heart ready to burst in million pieces, only for me to pick up my own pile of shards. there’s no one else doing it for me, even though i want them to. it’s insane how i was called the mature one when i was younger, resilient, tough and understanding. i do not seem to own these attributes anymore. it feels like i am regressing. of course, at least i had performances and achievements only for mommy and daddy to be proud. and now i’m reenacting a child’s behaviour to recover the childhood that was stolen from me. just now, playing catch involves the emotions of another human being, if not more. once i catch the soul, i keep it until it no longer serves the purpose. if its deemed societally sophisticated and cherishable then the soul sticks around only for me resentment to continue growing, as they cannot fulfill little cathi’s phantasy of the perfect person. somebody who feels emotionally just as much as i do, albeit not volatile like me; rather stable, secure and committed. — you’ve forgiven me. i cannot believe i hurt an innocent human being as well. and the problem is that i do not feel that in that moment. all i feel is pure rage and contempt towards you. all i want to do is punch you for being this insensitive towards me. i feel absolutely misunderstood, and there is nothing that can renege my feelings towards you back to my loving homeostasis towards you. what happened overnight from friday-sunday?

23:30 - мир vol. 1

i yearn for your presence and your warmth. what id do is cozy myself under the covers, and put my head on your lap. you’d stroke through my hair, and whisper that i look very pretty in the red light that is radiating from the spotify playlist on the tv. i’d read some economic definitions to you, and you’d be laughing about the fact that i switch around words in the midst of a sentence. i’d practice some calm yoga, while the incense is dissaminating a calming esoteric feeling of eternal peace. we’d fall asleep whilst talking to each other about which fruit we’d rather omit from our life.

Sand Man

Male gaze

The "male gaze" is a concept coined by feminist film theorist Laura Mulvey to describe the way visual arts and literature depict the world and women from a masculine point of view. In this perspective, women are typically portrayed as objects of male pleasure, desire, or fantasy, often emphasizing their physical appearance and sexual attractiveness. The gaze positions women as passive, often inviting voyeuristic or objectifying looks from the viewer. This concept highlights how traditional media and culture have been shaped by and for male audiences, reinforcing gender roles and inequalities. The male gaze can limit women's agency, reducing them to mere objects to be looked at rather than fully realized individuals with their own perspectives and experiences.

Analysis

In Neil Gaiman's "The Sandman: A Game of You," the chapter "Slaughter on Fifth Avenue" opens with a representation of the male gaze. This cover introduces Barbie, sleeping on her bed just wearing underwear.

This cover operates on two key principles of the male gaze. Firstly, it positions the viewer as a voyeur. As Laura Mulvey states in Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, "The determining male gaze projects its phantasy on to the female figure which is styled accordingly. In their traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and displayed..." [1]. By showcasing Barbie in a vulnerable state, asleep and partially undressed, the image invites the viewer to objectify her. Her body becomes the focal point, divorced from any narrative context.

Secondly, the cover reinforces the power dynamic inherent in the male gaze. Barbie's state of unconsciousness strips her of agency, making her a passive object for the viewer's gaze. The choice of revealing sleepwear further amplifies this dynamic, suggesting her body exists for male pleasure, even in a private moment.

In conclusion, this cover prioritizes aestheticized femininity over plot development or relevance to attract a primarily male audience. This approach undermines the potential for a more nuanced narrative and reinforces the dominance of the male perspective in storytelling.

To-be-looked-at-ness

"To-be-looked-at-ness" is a term that complements the concept of the male gaze and was also introduced by Laura Mulvey in her influential essay on visual pleasure and narrative cinema. It refers to the passive role assigned to women in visual media where they exist primarily to be observed and looked at. She states, "In their traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness. Women displayed as sexual object is the leit-motiff of erotic spectacle: from pin-ups to striptease, from Ziegfeld to Busby Berkeley, she holds the look, plays to and signifies male desire." [2]. This concept emphasizes how women are often depicted in a way that prioritizes their visual appeal and objectification, rather than their agency or individuality. In the context of "to-be-looked-at-ness," women become objects of the gaze, serving as passive spectacles for the active male viewer. This term captures the idea that women are often framed and presented in visual media to fulfill a voyeuristic or fetishistic desire, reinforcing traditional gender roles and power dynamics. It underscores the reduction of women to mere visual objects, neglecting their complexity and relegating them to a subordinate position in narrative and representation.

Analysis

The scene of Foxglove waking up naked in bed blatantly illustrates the concept of "to-be-looked-at-ness." Her nudity is gratuitous, adding nothing to the conversation with Judy or the general plot. This prioritizes her physicality over narrative purpose, turning her into a visual spectacle.

Furthermore, Foxglove's startled reaction positions her as a passive subject caught off guard. This aligns with "to-be-looked-at-ness," where women lack agency and exist to be observed. The focus on her breasts further objectifies her, reducing her to a sexual object.

The scene's perspective, positions, us, the readers, as voyeurs. This reinforces the power imbalance of the male gaze, where the reader enjoys the "privilege" of gazing upon a vulnerable, undressed woman.

Ultimately, this scene prioritizes Foxglove's "to-be-looked-at-ness" over her character or story role. It reinforces the idea that female characters are defined by their bodies and exist for the male viewer's pleasure.

Women as spectacles

"Woman as spectacle" refers to the portrayal of women in media and culture primarily as visual objects to be observed and admired. In this representation, women's value is often equated with their physical appearance and how appealing or desirable they are to the viewer, usually from a male perspective. This concept ties closely with the idea of the male gaze and "to-be-looked-at-ness," where women are positioned as passive recipients of the gaze, existing primarily for visual pleasure. When women are presented as spectacle, their agency, emotions, and experiences are often overshadowed or ignored in favor of their visual appeal. Laura Mulvey explains in Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, "The presence of woman is an indispensible element of spectacle in normal narrative film, yet her visual presence tends to workagainst the development of a story line, to freeze the flow of action in moments of erotic contemplation." [3]. This portrayal can perpetuate stereotypes, objectification, and inequality by reducing women to superficial characteristics and limiting their roles to those that cater to or satisfy male desires. The concept critiques the ways in which media and culture prioritize and commodify women's bodies and appearances, often at the expense of their autonomy and individuality.

Analysis

Within The Sandman, the panels showcasing Rose's dream state exemplify the concept of "women as spectacle." There's no narrative justification for her complete nudity. This choice prioritizes the visual display of her body over the dream or plot itself, reducing her to a spectacle within the fictional world, again, likely catering to a presumed male readership.

The scene's focus on her body largely intensifies by depicting Rose's nudity from multiple angles. This excessive focus on her naked body overshadows any potential exploration of her subconscious or the dream narrative. It reinforces the notion that her value lies solely in her physical appearance, feeding into the concept of female objectification. This emphasizes the power imbalances within the male gaze and highlight how female characters primarily serve one purpose in narratives like these, which is to entertain men and function as spectacles. Ultimately, this approach reduces Rose to an object defined by her body rather than her character or role in the narrative.

Gender norms

Gender norms are societal expectations dictating behaviors and roles based on perceived gender. These norms define how men, women, and non-binary individuals should behave, dress, and interact, often reinforcing binary distinctions of masculinity and femininity. Butler in Gender is Burning explains, "Identifying with a gender under contemporary regimes of power involves identifying with a set of norms that are and are not realizable, and whose power and status precede the identifications by which they are insistently approximated" [4]. Traditional norms can be restrictive, enforcing stereotypes and limiting individual expression. Masculine norms might expect men to be strong and unemotional, while feminine norms might prescribe women to be nurturing and appearance-focused. Challenging these norms is crucial for promoting gender equality and inclusivity, recognizing diverse gender identities and expressions beyond traditional categories. Breaking free from rigid gender norms allows for greater self-expression and acceptance, acknowledging the complexity of human identity.

Analysis

The dialogue between Barbie and Little Barbie in "The Sandman: A Game of You" illustrates traditional gender roles and expectations. During Little Barbie's monologue, little boys' fantasies are described as complex and varied, involving power, intelligence, and adventure. They dream of being heroes, facing challenges, and earning admiration through remarkable deeds. These fantasies encourage agency, ambition, and a sense of adventure, reflecting societal expectations for boys to be assertive, strong, and successful. On the other hand, Little Barbie's description of girls' fantasies is more simplistic and limiting. According to her, girls often fantasize about being princesses, awaiting rescue or recognition. This fantasy reinforces traditional gender roles where girls are passive, dependent, and defined by their relationships to others, particularly men. It perpetuates the idea that happiness and fulfillment for girls come from external validation or rescue rather than personal agency or accomplishment. The contrast between these two sets of fantasies highlights the rigid gender roles and expectations imposed on children based on their gender. It underscores how societal norms shape and limit the aspirations, dreams, and self-perceptions of individuals from a young age.

Positive images

Positive images refer to representations in media and culture that promote diversity, inclusivity, and empowerment, challenging traditional stereotypes and biases. These images showcase individuals from diverse backgrounds, abilities, genders, and orientations in a respectful and authentic manner. They highlight strength, resilience, and individuality, celebrating the unique experiences and contributions of each person. Positive images play a vital role in shaping perceptions and attitudes, fostering understanding, empathy, and acceptance. By portraying a range of identities and experiences in a positive light, they help break down barriers, combat discrimination, and promote social justice. Positive representation in media and culture can empower marginalized groups, inspire change, and contribute to building a more inclusive and equitable society.

Analysis

In the graphic novel, this particular panel featuring Wanda's conversation with the old lady offers a refreshing example of positive representation that challenges traditional stereotypes and biases surrounding older people. Wanda's admission about her identity as a trans woman and the old lady's response create a moment of understanding, acceptance, and empathy.

Instead of resorting to ageist stereotypes where older characters might react with bigotry or misunderstanding, the old lady responds with openness and kindness. She shares a personal experience about her "grandson" transitioning and her daughter's supportive perspective, which brings Wanda a sense of validation and happiness. This interaction counters Jack Halberstam's claims in Looking Butch where he argues that, "Positive images... too often depend on thoroughly ideological conceptions of positive (white, middle-class, clean, law-abiding, monogamous, coupled, etc.)..." by portraying a mentally unstable older lady as capable of acceptance, and understanding [5].

In essence, this panel exemplifies positive images by showcasing a respectful interaction between the old lady and Wanda. By presenting this positive representation, the graphic novel contributes to fostering a more inclusive and equitable society that doenst discrimination solely due to older age.

Works cited:

[1] Mulvey, Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, 715.

[2] Mulvey, Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, 715.

[3] Mulvey, Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, 715.

[4] Butler, Gender is Burning, 339.

[5] Halberstam, Looking Butch, 185.

New publication: Melanie Klein’s Narrative of an Adult Analysis

5th June 2023

This month’s post is a bit different from usual, as I am delighted to announce the publication of my new book, the latest – and most substantial – product of my research in the Melanie Klein archive. Melanie Klein’s Narrative of an Adult Analysis brings to light Klein’s work with an adult patient, Mr B, which took place between the years 1934 and 1949. While Klein’s 1961 Narrative of a Child Analysis provided a detailed record of the psychoanalysis of a child patient, Richard, there hasn’t previously been a similarly full account of her work with an adult patient.

My new contribution to Klein scholarship builds on the valuable work that Elizabeth Spillius, Claudia Frank, John Steiner and Jane Milton, among others, have already done to illuminate Klein’s theories and clinical work. This record of Mr B’s analysis provides the reader with detailed clinical evidence in support of Klein’s ideas concerning the combined parental couple, phantasies about the inside of the maternal body, attacks on objects using bodily products as ‘weapons’, and the guilt that follows these attacks – which may go hand in hand with a terror of retribution by damaged objects.

Klein’s work with Mr B also reveals so much about the nature of the fundamental conflict between love and hate, which, as Klein saw it, is first experienced in connection with the breast. In this account of an analysis we can see the terrible implications where such a conflict is not well worked out in development. The book also reveals Klein’s great insights into what may drive a negative therapeutic reaction, and into the dynamics of, and obstacles to, mourning. There is very moving material on the impact of the unexpected arrival of a sibling, and the way in which love can become almost entirely obscured where hatred has instead been nurtured through grievance. Love, however, as Klein’s work with Mr B shows, may in turn be liberated through the rigorous analysis of aggressive impulses and hatred.

The following excerpt, from Chapter 2, gives a flavour of what readers can expect from the book. Here, Klein is describing a difficult but important period in Mr B’s analysis, which begins when he bumps into another patient of hers, a child. Klein writes:

Confidence in me had increased, though this easily changed one day to give place to full distrust and to accusations which we could easily connect with the attitude towards mother and nurse. I had been able to make an arrangement by which Mr B did not meet either the patient before him, or the patient after him. I made a special point not to alter his hour since the definite possession of this special hour meant very much to him, and seemed to be partly a compensation for the great frustration which, in repetition of the old situation, analysis brought to him. But [at some point] I had to alter this arrangement for a child patient who could not come earlier. To begin with Mr B seemed to take it reasonably, but he could not maintain this attitude. He became silent only to break out in accusations about how I had disappointed him and let him down. I had promised him this hour and he asked me to remember how strongly he had felt about this promise. When I pointed out to him that he could still have his hour, but that I could not then help his meeting the child, he seemed to take it fairly reasonably.

The next day he came a few minutes earlier, obviously in order to avoid meeting the child, and he waited in the waiting room until the child had gone. He heard me talk with the child in the hall, since I escorted this child to the door partly to make quite sure that he would leave the house, as he was very reluctant to do so. The child, who had meanwhile developed similar feelings towards the grown-up patient as Mr B had towards him, said before he left, pointing at Mr B’s hat which he saw in the hall, ‘oh, that man has arrived’, a remark which was heard by Mr B in the waiting room. Mr B again tried to take it reasonably and attempted a joke about the child, obviously disliking him, but he then became silent and a very critical part of his analysis began. Near the end of the hour, he broke the silence only to accuse me, full of hate and indignation, of having let him down and broken my promise to keep this particular hour for him. When I pointed out that I understood the difficulties which had arisen out of the presence of the other patient, but that I had actually not altered his hour, Mr B replied that I had actually kept him waiting. It is true [that this was] only for a very short while, actually one minute, but still this waiting occurred in his own hour. It appeared that the old situation, namely the unexpected arrival of the sister, had been reactivated with full strength, and Mr B recognized it himself… He even said that had I announced the child to him before he met him suddenly, it would not have made so much difference, because he would nevertheless have felt the deprivation quite as strongly. It [would] not [have] relieve[d] the feelings roused in him. Analysis had become absolutely bad. Everything that I had ever interpreted was wrong. Mr B felt hopeless and wanted to break off his analysis. When, after my interpretation of the whole situation something seemed to loosen, he said ‘you will not be able to do anything because my army is ready and I am fully on its side’.

Klein’s notes continue:

During the next few days Mr B came very late, nearly at the end of his hour, so that I could see him only for a few minutes. He had repudiated my suggestion to move his hour 10 minutes later so that he would not meet the child because, [he said,] that would mean that he had no more the same hour, [that the hour would be] no more his own. Still, he came every day, although during the day he always made up his mind not to come at all and to break off. But those few minutes we had and to which I was able to add another 10 minutes or so of extra time, gave me the possibility of analysing the situation. I may mention that Mr B felt very guilty for coming so late, for keeping me waiting and for losing so much of his time and accepting extra time, and he watched very anxiously my reaction to all this. He agreed with me that his coming so late was partly to show that he would not keep to time since I had not done so, at least this is how he felt, but I did not stress this point much. I showed him, both in my attitude and in my interpretations, that I quite understood that he could not help staying away since there was too much anxiety connected with the remote possibility of meeting the child, and that altogether he could not bear to be with me for the full time. It certainly relieved some anxiety that I said that we would just have to be patient and do at the moment as much work as we could. I had generally interpreted that the main thing was not his disappointment, but the anxiety aroused in connection with his aggression, [that arose] both against the child and against me. I substantiated this with a few remarks he had made. He had said that even if I happened to abolish this child it would not help now any more. In one of these short sessions, he had spoken of feeling like falling into a well with burning pitch and of disaster all around him. He had not lied down, or if so, had soon got up again and sat further away from me or was even standing. After an interpretation he had quoted a line of Coleridge, ‘if we fall out with those we love it works like poison on the brain.’ He had spoken of the kettle in him which would boil over and which he could not control. I could relate all this to former material in which his words and thoughts were equated to attacks with burning and poisoning, and I interpreted his anxiety of meeting the child on the grounds of his destructive wishes against this child and his anxiety of abolishing the child directly – as well as of the child being destroyed because of his secretive sadistic attacks against it.

Klein quotes this line from Coleridge (which is slightly misquoted by Mr B) in her 1937 paper, ‘Love, Guilt and Reparation’. There, she writes of the concern and guilt one may experience upon feeling hatred, at times, towards a loved one. I think she must have had Mr B in mind when she included this quotation. In the notes above Mr B rages at Klein, whose arrangements have provoked the re-emergence in him of very early, unbearable feelings of displacement and hatred. He now feels ‘on a razor’s edge’ with respect to the analysis, just as he had felt all his life in relation to his mother. Klein’s understanding clearly helps Mr B to cling on until the emotional storm is worked through.

The cover picture of the book was painted by Beccy Kean, and is called Stormy Petrel*. It was inspired by an extremely poignant moment in Mr B’s analysis: his painfully moving description of this tiny seabird which struggles so much to get to its young and Klein’s connecting of this to Mr B’s experience of his mother, whom he felt had struggled so much to feed and nurture him. It is remarkable to understand the ways in which Mr B’s relations with both parents are revised in the course of his analysis with Klein.

* In Klein’s notes, she writes ‘stormy petrel’, though the correct name of the bird is Storm Petrel. Mr B, who was so knowledgeable about the natural world, presumably knew this. We cannot know for certain which term he used. The term ‘stormy petrel’, however, was once used to denote ‘a person who brings or portends trouble’ (Collins English Dictionary), deriving apparently from a belief held by sailors that storm petrels foretold or caused bad weather at sea. One can imagine Mr B may also have used this term, which seems not unconnected with his experience of his mother.

**

Praise for the book:

'This is a formidable work on the source of Melanie Klein’s ideas that provides a fascinating picture of Klein as a clinician, and sheds light on many of the deepest questions raised by psychoanalysis. Aptly entitled Narrative of an Adult Analysis, this book may come to rival the Narrative of a Child Analysis as a means of understanding Klein’s work.' (John Steiner, Training and Supervising Analyst, British Psychoanalytical Society)

'Christine English has produced a book of tremendous interest and major importance. It is also gripping to read. This book is the first and for now the only account of Melanie Klein’s day-to-day psychoanalytic treatment of an adult patient, and it is enthralling.' (Priscilla Roth, Training and Supervising Analyst, British Psychoanalytical Society)

'Christine English has taken a hugely important step forward in Klein studies. Tapping a rich seam in the Klein archive, she shows in detail how Klein worked with an adult patient, Mr B. This rare and moving account of an adult analysis deserves to become as famous as Klein’s analysis of her child patient, Richard.' (Jane Milton, Training and Supervising Analyst, British Psychoanalytical Society)

Patient: Edith “Eddie” Langley, Female, Age 25 Date: November 11, 1935 Session Number: 24

Psycho-sexual Evaluation: The patient presents with marked disturbances in her libidinal economy, manifesting in symptomatic neuroses that include a voyeuristic interest in peep shows, sadistic phantasies of restraint and control, and inversion. The patient’s reluctance to discuss the proximal cause for analysis and resistance to the psycho-analytic process obstruct a detailed anamnesis and diagnosis. Her perverse conduct likely stems from regressive infantile fixations and primal life conflicts. However, sado-masochistic tendencies often represent exposure to early-life adversities, necessitating exploration of both developmental and traumatic aetiologies.

Session Note: Persistent hostility towards the analytic process characterizes the patient’s demeanor. She manifests psychic distress, primarily due to disapproval from authoritative figures, notably her priest and her mother. An evident transference of repressed animosity towards her mother, coupled with an overt idealization, reveals significant ambivalence.

She provided further elaboration on her engagement with restraint, tracing its genesis to paternal influences. Initially a method for managing fear, the act of tying herself became a symbolic mechanism for control and subsequently acquired a sexual attitude.

Although initially contentious, the patient’s interaction with the analytic process has shown gradual shifts towards cooperation. The analytic relationship, however, remains volatile, with phases of rapport intermittently disrupted by the patient’s defensive withdrawals.

Interventions: Introduction to psycho-sexual literature (e.g., Havelock Ellis, Magnus Hirschfeld) aimed at bridging her conscious awareness with unconscious libidinal drives, focusing on her sexual constitution and societal repressions.

A fortuitous disclosure of the analyst’s familiarity with the Velvet Trap and its owner, Miss Vivian Moreau, revealed a potential avenue for deepening trust and openness in the analytic dyad. The patient’s frequent visits to the Velvet Trap, an underground establishment, suggest a compulsive employment of phantasy. Her adoption of the pseudonym “Atalanta” underscores a structured dichotomy that allows her to manage guilt and shame.

Consultations: Post-session, a dialogue with Dr. Victor Stahl was undertaken. He remarked on the problematic countertransference and advocated for increased self-reflection. He advised adherence to orthodox analytic methods and expressed unease with Dr. Sándor Ferenczi’s “active” technique in facilitating deeper patient engagement through a direct and nurturing approach.

Treatment Strategy: Continuation of regular psycho-analytic sessions utilizing free association, dream analysis, and the active technique is planned, as well as an exploration of the patient’s early life and potential traumatic events. Considering the patient’s intellectual engagement and imaginative capacity, the analyst may introduce literature and scholarly works to elucidate the nature of her deviations.

Confidential Notes by: Dr. Eleanor Wentworth, M.D., Psycho-Analyst

¨Philip K. Dick - Schizophrenia and the Book of Changes (Essay)¨ (my own commentary in relation to it)

What has happened will repeat itself again and again, wherever the kid runs head on into the koinos kosmos. And these are the years (fifteen years old to twenty-two) when he can no longer keep from running into it on almost every occasion. (Phone the dentist, Charley, and make an appointment to get that cavity patched, etc.) The idios kosmos is leaking away; he is gradually being thrust out of the postwomb womb. Biological aging is taking place, and he can't hold it back. His efforts to do so, if they continue, will later be called "an attempt to retreat from adult responsibility and reality," and if he is later diagnosed as schizophrenic, it will be said that he has "escaped from the real world into a phantasy one." This, while almost true, is just not quite correct. Because reality has an attribute that, if you'll ponder on't, you'll realize is the attribute that causes us to so designate it as reality: It can't be escaped. As a matter of fact, during his preschizophrenic life, during the schizoid-affective period, he has been somewhat doing this; he is now no longer able to. The deadly appearance, around nineteen, of schizophrenia, is not a retreat from reality, but on the contrary: the breaking out of reality all around him; its presence, not its absence from his vicinity. The lifelong fight to avoid it has ended in failure; he is engulfed in it. Gak!

Kinda interesting, reminds me of the ages of about 18 to 21. Even though in the scheme of adulthood so far (almost a decade), it is a short span of time, I still feel it looming over me like a shadow. No matter where I go, it is giving me a gentle reminder of existence like I was transported back in time.

What distinguishes schizophrenic existence from that which the rest of us like to imagine we enjoy is the element of time. The  schizophrenic is having it all now, whether he wants it or not; the whole can of film has descended on him, whereas we watch it progress frame by frame.

I was 17 and in my living room, I was describing to my mom how my ¨psychic vision¨ worked. I told her to imagine walking across a room. You see where you are, and you see the destination. I imagined repeatedly in my mind´s eye a plane heading toward our house, so I used the example of seeing a plane before it was going to hit. A roar of a plane soared overhead as I finished my sentence. Later, I pondered if "Seeing the future" was really all that mystical, or were you just more in tune with internal signals of unconscious processes, as what we consciously perceive is not even close to what our mind and eyes are actually taking in.

Schizophrenics don't write and mail letters, don't go anywhere, don't make phone calls: They are written to by angry creditors and authority figures such as the San Francisco Police Department; they are phoned up by hostile relatives; every so often they are forcibly hauled off to the barber shop or dentist or funny farm. If, by some miracle, they hoist themselves into an active state, call HI 4-1234 and ask for a cab so they can visit their good friend the pope, a garbage truck will run into the taxi, and if, after getting out of the hospital (vide Horace Gold's experience a few years ago), another taxi is called and they try one more time, another garbage truck will appear and ram them again. They know this. They've had it happen. Synchronicity has been going on all the time; it's only news to us that such coincedences can happen.

It is easy to slip into a state of passivity. Like a frog waiting for an insect to hop by

My dad would take me to the dentist, or run other errands. I followed along. Making a choice for myself felt like a momentous occasion (if I take a walk today, I could lose track of time, get lost, my phone would run out of juice, and I will have to bug a random stranger to use their phone. That´s what happened last time.) The thought of being an independent adult was unthinkable, because I had never done it and I didn´t see why I couldn´t keep going on living like I already was forever. I was opportunistic, if I saw an orange on the ground while I was taking a walk, it was a sign that I should eat it. When I reached adulthood, I didn´t think about the process of what it took to be an adult. I saw signs for adult foster care or walked past inpatient housing and thought ¨that´s me¨. What it was is what it will be.

By being a precog, Jones ultimately lost the power to act entirely; instead of being freed by his talent, he was paralyzed by it. You catchum?

I feel like I have to have mental blinders on, like a horse, to move forward in life. I can´t think about what´s going to happen next, how this or that choice is going to mess up the timeline. It is so tempting to think that the rules are already set, like they already happened, and making the wrong choice will make you at odds with reality. When you are at odds with reality there is friction and the wrong things happen, but when you are in the right with reality, things happen that you don´t even think would happen. Just today, I went to the food bank. One of my bags was ripping as I walked out, and I walked back in and grabbed a larger black garbage bag. It seemed excessive to use when I was carrying grocery bags, and I don´t know why I grabbed a garbage bag than another grocery bag. But I did and I went back home and took out the trash. I reached into the trash bag box to grab another trash bag and it was empty. Disappointed, I grabbed a grocery bag to put on the pantry handle instead, I looked behind me and there was a garbage bag from the food bank! I had to tie up a few holes, but I was like ¨see! This is why I grabbed the garbage bag!¨

Sexuality as a discourse is, like political economy (and every

other discursive system), only a montage or simulacrum which

has always been traversed, thwarted and exceeded by actual

practice . The coherence and transparency of homo sexualis has

no more existence than the coherence and transparency of

homo economicus .

It is a long system), only a montage or simulacrum which

has always been traversed, thwarted and exceeded by actual

practice . The coherence and transparency of homo sexualis has

no more existence than the coherence and transparency of

homo economicus .

It is a long process that simultaneously establishes the psy-

chic and the sexual, that establishes the "other scene," that of

the phantasy and the unconscious, at the same time as the ener-

gy produced therein - a psychic energy that is merely a direct

consequence of the staged hallucination of repression, an energy

hallucinated as sexual substance, which is then metaphorized

and metonymized according to the various instances (topical,

economic, etc.), and according to all the modalities of secon-

dary and tertiary repression . Psychoanalysis, this most admira-

ble edifice, the most beautiful hallucination of the back-world,

as Nietzsche would say. The extraordinary effectiveness of this

model for the simulation of scenes and energies - an extraor-

dinary theoretical psychodrama, this staging of the psyche, this

scenario of sex as a separate instance and insurmountable real-

ity (akin to the hypostatization of production). What does it

matter if the economic, the biological or the psychic bear the

costs of this staging - of what concern is the "scene" or "the

other scene" : it is the entire scenario of sexuality (and psy-

choanalysis) as a model of simulation that should be questioned

Holy Hollywoods Meaningless Transfixions.

_____________________________________

Human Being as Grim Reapers of Ash.

————————————————————

A Plea For The Sterilisation Of All Liars.

————————————————————

Let’s Give Death A Chance, Peace Will Follow.

————————————————————

To Pronounce the Name of God; is to Pronounce that God as (not just) Dead —- but to Pronounce that God, as Usurped, or at least Dethroned — and Not-God; as merely “Thrown” like the rest of Being amongst the all-inclusive contingency of the Named, as Immanently material to us —- and thus paradoxically, all Man’s Naming instincts — which is revealed particularly here by his attempts at naming God —- are the practice effectively of a kind of Taxidermists Practice —- a movement inherently always ‘put-out’ of Theology and unto the sphere of Anthropology.

One can go a step further, in regards to Identity, Power, Naming and here in the idea of Pronouncement —- by also admitting the Murderous, or inherently Suicidal and Ashen act of engaging with Pronouns altogether, in gendering the Godhead, they are in that very moment split of from themselves —- and the possibility of their own ultimate wisdom and benevolence —- and effectively the Revelation of an engagement of the Taxidermists Table of which is effectively Hegels “Sluaghterbench” —- making all Gendering a dissection of the Living, or what could also be seen as a kind of transplant of Death, which may very well identify the inner nature of all identity itself — onto Life — in such a way that, it’s very Livelihood is always-already necessarily Murdered, or killed in what is technically Manslaughter —- by Human Beings, In Life’s very identification *as* Life.

Bare Life, in its truest sense, is merely a foolish Judgment of Dress-Codes and Phantasies made all-too-evident —- in the only truly Bare Life being the Life-form, firstly without our linguistically mediated sense of self-consciousness —— and secondly; as an observed phenomena, one whose Spirit leaves the Visionary or Witness, essentially Speechless —- in an absolute immanence, in apprehension without any a-prior, and in a sensuous experience of that Life-form whose essence is entirely Awesome, technically speaking — in truly inspiring nothing but the Speechless Awe of its Spirits Life left Living — revealing the Gravity which is essential to the nature of Death —- and to unconscious value hierarchies (which themselves are the surgeons structuring of Death, as metaphysically built into the projection of Ontology itself, if not to the spectre of an Absolute Ontic —- whose Impossibility slips into the very Impossibility of Ontology itself.

This Gravity of Death, reveals firstly all Life as appearing in the phenomenology of the Ephemeral and within of Subtlety, whose Sublime nature requires an Apprehension of Awe also, if not to be the Apprehensions of the mere Walking Dead, no matter what Zealousness is present —- showing the inherent Lie in all enactments of Persuasion and the attempts at Convincing, which is always a Conspiracy and a Conniving sort of sordid one at that —- whilst also presenting us here with the basic structural aspect of Creation, necessarily prescribing it’s own necessity as always Self-Creation -- with the very Tabletop Bench inherent to the structure of Man’s Created enactments of Creativities, as especially in relation to the Technical; and thus half of the Spirit of all Scientific endeavours also —- requiring such Bench’s to be supplemented with the most Religious of Reverences, In order for them to functionally produce any “Understanding” whatsoever.

The atheist scientist must always acknowledge his bloody handed white gloves, which are stained always be the Blood of the Murdered Godhead — whom, in a form of cosmic joke; reveals the idiotic impossibility of the strange sterility of which one might guess the Catholics left over as a Hauntological spectre, from their nature, In the Sterility inherent to their fallacious and hysterically repressed attempt at repressing the Crucified Christs Genitalia necessarily inherent to the Gendering of which his enfleshed embodiement seems to really demand for the fullest richness of significance to flow unabated as such.

The Scientist repressed the nature of his Agenda in dealing with the study of Nature —- which inherently exists along with the Gendering inherent to enfleshed embodiment —- as the Scientist hysterically repressed and attempts to sterilise the possibility for his own Agenda — using the same Ideological trickery of which the Church endlessly uses —- it is simply here a manner of realising our Naked Emperor today wears no Labcoat or Gloves, not merely costume and show — and so Science was always a Stillbirth from the beginning, in being born dead or has and always has only dealt thusly with the Dead — with its own Mythologically structured and organised Images, just the same as the hypocritical Religious-Man has long been accused of —- it is merely a game here of musical chairs and changes in outfitted Glamour and in terminological evolutions and advances in the very Language itself, rather ever than with an actual Understanding of anything ‘beyond that language’ or ‘outside of it’ —- and so Language is alike a Vampire, Living on sucked blood, and remaining out of direct sunlights revelatory potential.

Language as Death, may very well be a kind of “Virus from Outer Space” - as William Burroughs humorously put it —- and could well kill the potential of all Awe and Life for Human Beings, if they are not to consciously realise what their Languages do —although Communicationis itself an inscrutable aspect fundamental to Life — it must Communicate Content, of which is always the Dead Carcasses of its Hunted Prey —— necessitating Prayer to any People with the Good Sense of retaining the mysterious phenomenology of Speit and Awe in their Lives even worth any longer Communicating —- as despite of the absurdly Holy nature of the Spritof Communication itself —- Human Beings still require a sense of Authoirty in order to Authenticate the Real provisions of the Enthusiasms by which their most acutely beautiful Comunication and Conversions, or Dispellings and Dissolutions

, may ever occur — and so Communion must always wisely acknowledge the Death within of its Ephemeral Desering of Natures Dissution —- of the delicacy involved in Languages Sublation of Life into the ethereal and essentially immortalised, seemingly as Spectre and as Ghost, however Holy, or merely Hollywood.

I myself, as the writer of this document —— do not formally exist in any way but as the phantom necessity retroactively produced by itself he appearance of all Writting; as inferring to us falsely all SpaceMarks Virtually necessity for the Genie like Virtuoso who Acts *as* the personality of the Writer, who actually engaged in its writing —- as if the Heraclitean River was never crossed at al, and yet neither was it acknowledged as a formal limitation upon all of our Human Affairs and Doings.

🖼 „Hieroglyph from my garden of the unconscious, drawing 2021-22“ Drawings from January 22, 2020 til today. Charcoal on paper. 29.6 x 42 cm. >>>for sale! DM in Bio @curt.walter disegno esterno prodottivo, discorsivo, fantastico/ productive, discursive, fantastic external design / der Extreme Ausdruck der Phantasie #curt.walter.art.research #producersart Artsponsor von „The Secret Painting 2020-22 #curt.walter #kunstforum_international #tekening ‎#رسم #art #buyoriginalart #artlover ‎#طراحی #melukis #duchamps #図 #kalligraphie #drawing #zeichnung #그림 #menggambar #चित्रकारी #dessin ‎#צִיוּר #σχέδιο #desenhando #drawings #disegno @curt.walter #buyoriginalart #artlover #duchamps #hieroglyphen #vision_magazine1 (hier: Monte, Valle di Muggio) https://www.instagram.com/p/CddNA9XoxIf/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

Quotes from Seminar XI about Freud’s Wolfman case:

“What, for the analyst, can confirm in the subject what occurs in the unconscious? In order to locate the truth—I have shown you this in studying the formations of the unconscious—Freud relies on a certain signifying scansion. What justifies this trust is a reference to the real. But to say the least, the real does not come to him easily. Take the example of the Wolf Man. The exceptional importance of this case in Freud’s work is to show that it is in relation to the real that the level of phantasy functions. The real supports the phantasy, the phantasy protects the real.” FFC p. 41

“If you wish to understand what is Freud’s true preoccupation as the function of phantasy is revealed to him, remember the development, which is so essential for us, of the Wolf Man. He applies himself, in a way that can almost be described as anguish, to the question—what is the first encounter, the real, that lies behind the phantasy? We feel this throughout this analysis, this real brings with it the subject, almost by force, so directing the research that, after all, we can today ask ourselves whether this fever, this pressure, this desire of Freud is not that which, in the patient, might have conditioned the belated accident of psychosis.”

FFC p 54

“For the moment, it is our horizon that seems factitious in the fundamental relations to sexuality. In analytic experience, it is a question of setting out from the fact that the primal scene is traumatic; it is not sexual empathy that sustains the modulations of the analyzable, but a factitious fact. A factitious fact, like that which appears in the scene so fiercely tracked down in the experience of the Wolf Man—the strangeness of the disappearance and reappearance of the penis.”[his witnessing of coitus a tergo] FFC p.70

“This is why the butterfly may—if the subject is not Choang-tsu, but the Wolf Man—inspire in him the phobic terror of recognizing that the beating of little wings is not so very far from the beating of causation, of the primal stripe marking his being for the first time with the grid of desire.” FFC p.76

“It is the mapping of the topology proper to our experience as analysts, which may later be taken in a metaphysical perspective. I think Merleau-Ponty was moving in the right direction---se the second part of the book, his reference to the Wolf Man and to the finger of a glove.” FFC p.90

“It is there. then, that Freud intends to set up the bases of love. It is only with activity/passivity that the sexual relations really come into play.

Now is the activity/passivity relation identical with the sexual relation? I would ask you to refer to a passage in the Wolf-Man, for example, or to various others scattered throughout the Five Psycho-analyses. There Freud explains in short that the polar reference to activity/passivity is there in order to name, to cover, to metaphorize that which remains unfathomable in sexual difference. Nowhere does he ever say that, psychologically, the masculine/feminine relation is apprehensible otherwise than by the representation of the activity/passivity opposition. As such, the masculine/feminine opposition is never attained. This is sufficient indication of the importance of what is repeated here, in the form of a verb particularly appropriate in expressing what is at issue—this passivity/activity opposition is poured, moulded, injected. It is an arteriography, and even the masculine/feminine relations to not exhaust it.” FFC p. 190

“This enables us to conceive what is materialized in the experience. I would ask you to take up one of Freud’s great psycho-analytic cases, the greatest of all, the most sensational—because one sees in it, more clearly than anywhere else, where the problem of the conversion of phantasy and reality converge, namely, in something irreducible, non-sensical, that functions as an originally repressed signifier—I mean the case of the Wolf-Man. In the Wolf-Man, I would say, to give you the thread that will guide you through your reading, that the sudden appearance of the wolves in the window in the dream plays the function of the s, as presentative of the loss of the subject.

It is not only that the subject is fascinated by the sight of these wolves, which number seven, and which, in fact, in his drawing of them perched on the tree number only five. It is that their fascinated gaze is the subject himself.

And what does the whole case show? It shows that at each stage in the life of the subject, something always arrived to reshape the value of the determining index represented by this original signifier. Thus the dialectic of the subject’s desire as constituting itself from the desire of the Other is correctly grasped, Remember the adventure of the father, the sister, the mother and the servant-woman Groucha. So many different stages that enrich the unconscious desire of the subject with something that is to put, as signification constituted in the relation to the desire of the Other, in the numerator.

Note what happens then. I would ask you to consider the logical necessity of that moment in which the subject as X can be constituted only from the Urverdrängung, from the necessary fall of the first signifier. He is constituted around the Urverdrängung, but he cannot substitute anything for it as such—since this would require the representation of one signifier for another, whereas here there is only one, the first. In this X, we must consider two sides—that constituent moment that sees the collapse of significance, which we articulate in a place to its function at the level of the unconscious, but also the return effect, which operates from this relation that may be conceived on the basis of the fraction. It must be introduced only with prudence, but it is well indicated for us by the effects of language.” FFC p. 251