Session 11: April 3rd
Action, Affect, and Mutuality
Instructor:
Peter Schou, Ph.D. is a Training and Supervising Psychoanalyst at ICP.
Class Description:
The term enactment was coined in 1986 by Theodore Jacob. It was based on his exquisite description of moments with his patients when he felt involved emotionally in ways that he had not anticipated and did not understand and, significantly, seemed to be a derailment of proper clinical process. Since Jacob’s initial launching of the term, enactment has become an increasingly important motif in contemporary theory and practice.
There are several reasons for this. First, enactment as a clinical term can be extraordinarily useful in enduring and understanding moments and phases in clinical work that are characterized by affective turmoil, polarization of perspectives and loss of empathic connection with a patient. From this clinical perspective, the term enactment refers not only to the seeming closing down of therapeutic openness, curiosity and forward movement but also to the potential for a deepening of understanding and mutuality.
Second, as a theoretical concept enactment becomes the clinical phenomenon, par excellence, that illustrates key relational themes of mutuality, dissociation, complementarity and multiplicity. From this theoretical perspective, enactment is at the heart of a relational understanding of clinical process and is seen within the relational tradition as inevitable and ubiquitous.
In this class, we will use clinical material to illuminate the notion of enactment. The class will focus primarily on the clinical use of enactment, and we will review some common variants of enactment, including typical experiences in the analyst that alert us that we are involved in an enactment. While the focus will be primarily clinical, we will touch on some of the important theoretical issues that extend beyond the clinical level. These include: Do we make a distinction between enactment and the always present and active but mostly unconscious aspects of clinical interaction. Or is the clinical process best understood as a continuous stream of enactments, as has been suggested by some? What is the relationship between enactment and dissociation? Are there viable theoretical alternatives to the concept of enactment?
Readings:
Black, M.J. (2003). Enactment: Analytic Musings on Energy, Language, and Personal Growth. Psychoanal. Dial., 13:633-655. (PDF)
Levenkron, H. (2006). Love (and Hate) with the Proper Stranger: Affective Honesty and Enactmen... Psychoanal. Inq., 26:157-181. (PDF)
Stern, D.B. (2006). “Affective Honesty” as Example and Metaphor: Discussion of Holly Levenkron's “Love (and Hate) With the Proper Stranger: Affective Honesty and Enactment”. Psychoanal. Inq., 26:254-262. (PDF)
POST TEST: (PDF)