projident31308

[Adam Blatner]

Hi Neil, thanks for playing with me! My responses interspersed with my initials: (This is also a systematic way I reflect carefully on your words): Neil Hucker    eddy1 at labyrinth.net    writes: 3/12/08  
    Dear Adam I have decided to continue with the discusion. Unfortunatelty I deleted your piece which I planned to include in my response. I am in the process of writing on my exploration of projective identification as well.
       AB: great!

 NH: comments. 1, Yes the focus is on a projective type of identificaton. This is compared with introjective identification. In role terms, the child sees the parent in the role of the creative writer. He uses this as a role model takes the role inside by taking on the role and playing it out and then indentifies himself with it.   ab: okay

      NH With projective identification the child/adult like arnold disowns angry feelings projects them into betty and identifies her as an angry person. These angry feelings are only part of his feelings for Betty.
  AB: Excellent point! Why I like role theory is that we play many roles simultaneously.
   NH: In role terms, instead of arnold identifying with his role/relationship of the angry partner attacking the innocent Betty he identifies with the role/relationship of the protesting victim being attacked by the angry Betty. 
      ab: yes

   NH  Using your relationship example of Arnold and Betty, projective identication is about what Arnold does not about what Betty does if she identifies with the part,feeling, role that Arnold perceives her as or in.
        Identifying with the transference, counter transference, counter roles, role reciprocity as I understand them are to do with betty's response to Arnolds role and or the role relationship he experiences himself in with Betty.
        AB: Here's where I've encountered two different interpretations of the term: Before around 1980 the Kleinian psychoanalysts and textbooks placed the dynamic very close to the projector and some said that it is hardly discernable from projection itself.
       However, more recent articles accessible via googling projective identification seem to be agreeing that the degree to which the recipient of the projection buys into it, identifies with it, makes the dynamic more or less a factor in the relationship. 

   AB continues:: I think that knowing about the dynamic liberates an alternative response: stepping into the meta-role or observing ego role and commenting on the feeling without having to plunge in and react, seems to be something that not only analysts can do, but ordinary folks in relationships. 
      (I do this with my wife... notice when I'm tempted to react and wonder aloud about these imagined interchanges and their sources. Sometimes it brings out a transference of my own, sometimes it's just a response to her cues. She does this with me, too, on occasion.)


2, NH I did not find your idea of de-jargonizing the concept helpful. Firstly I think of we are going to reframe it in another jargon be it psychodramatic or Berne-ism let's accept that is what we are doing.Secondly as you are doing i think it is really important to understand what the analysts mean before we reframe it.

       AB 31308: Well, I am still not clear about this, nor am I fixed about my hypothesis. So I'm open to your points and will think about them, or we'll discuss it in this forum. You are especially qualified because of your familiarity with role theory. 
       So I didn't understand what you meant by "let's accept that is what we're doing." Do you mean that talking about it in terms of roles is not really de-jargonizing it but rather just using a different jargon--that of role theory?  (Because my point is that I think role theory is more user-friendly, and that ordinary folks can pick up on it as a more practical language of psychology.) 
       So why isn't (relative) de-jargonization helpful? Is it because we have to use some terminology, and you recognize that talking in terms of role is also a kind of jargon?   

3, NH In terms of the recipient identifying with the projection I agree that this is important to know about. Often when patients come to me after failing to change someone elses behaviour I say the easiest way to change someone else behavour/role is to change your own role. This influences role reciprosity and the effects of unconscous projective identication.
         ab: okay

3, NH I agree that when anything distorts adequate role reversal like in your generously provided marriage example,stepping outside of the role relationship into into the mirror position jointly and metacommunicating  changes the warm up in a spontaneous direction.  
       ab: yes

4, I also agree with you that with the advent of email cyber relationship communication employing all of our psychodramatic method is just as applicable as in enacted life.
               ab: Here you seem to be shifting the topic slightly. 
     Hearing you say it, I find that I'd like to modify it a bit: I don't think we can employ ALL of our method because there are so many dynamics that require propinquity (being in the same physical space), the exchange of micro-nonverbal communications, etc. Plus all the little lubricating elements of murmurs of appreciation, tactful gestures, supportive actions, etc.  -- or on occasion, scowls.. 

    but yes, I like the idea of wondering together what we can learn to include in email, to thicken the discourse, so to speak. 

    This issue is explored in my thesis which focuses on how to direct imaginary psychodramas. I had not thought of it before but it may be relevent to how we psychodramatists encounter each other via email and what we are going to role model for the world as we demonstrate the psychodrama method.   well my goodness I have gone.  Looking forward to the replies  neil
           ab: how can I read your thesis, then?

   Thank you for playing thoughtfully with me!   Warmly, Adam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20080313/ee59d242/attachment.html