The Analytic Present in Psychoanalytic Reconstructions of the Historical Past

Abstract

The psychoanalytic reconstruction of specific influential past events has been a regular feature of psychoanalytic practice from its inception. More recently, as reconstructions of incestuous sexual abuse have become more frequent, the reconstructive process has attracted attention, and doubts have been expressed about the validity of the analytic evidence used to substantiate their inference. Over the years, psychoanalytic discourse about the adequacy of this evidence has moved from Freud's uneasy confidence to a rather sharply divided debate between advocates and skeptics. From beyond psychoanalysis, memory research raises questions about the validity of this evidence, and research on influence raises questions about the procedures by which it has been collected. A reexamination of several cases in which reconstructions emerged from unstable therapeutic circumstances leads to the conjecture that dynamics located in the analytic present may have been displaced to the historical past. Although logically "truth in the past" need not foreclose on "truth in the present," in practice, once a reconstruction surfaces, the latter seems to disappear behind the former.

Remembrance, trauma and collective memory: The battle for memory in psychoanalysis

“…9 There is, as yet, no empirical confi rmation for the opposite premise, namely that a massive outfl ow of stress hormones generated by the traumatic event results in a deactivation of the hippocampus and that traumatic memories are therefore not encoded at all at fi rst, but only preserved through other emotional memory systems. 10 I cannot agree with Brenneis (1999), who classifi es the re-emergence of traumatic memories after a reconstruction as an artefact that originates from the emotionally charged therapeutic dynamics of the present but, rather than being interpreted as such, is shifted as a reconstruction into the past with suggestive effect. Although Brenneis goes on to restrict the scope of this line of argument, on the whole I agree with Kluft's (1999)…”

Dissociation and the question of history: "What, precisely, are the facts?"

“…There has been a strong positivist tradition in psychoanalysis, following Freud, that sees the recovery of repressed memories and reconstruction of the actual past as no less than the field's raison d'e ˆtre (May, 1990). Where this positivist tradition in psychoanalysis had been increasingly called into question over the last generation from a variety of perspectives (Arlow, 1985;Aron, 1996;Blum, 1994;Brenneis, 1994Brenneis, , 1996Brenneis, , 1999Brenneis, , 2000Levenson, 1972;Mitchell, 1998;Renik, 1998;Schafer, 1983;Schimek, 1983;Spence, 1982;Stannard, 1980), the foregoing discussion underscores how this tradition has now been revitalized by neo-Janetians who write about traumatogenic dissociation and the enduring stability of implicit memories of childhood sexual abuse (Davies, 1996;Davies & Frawley, 1992Hoppenwasser, 1998;Kluft, 1986Kluft, , 1996, as cited in Gottlieb, 1997;Schwartz, 1994;van der Kolk, 1994). Given this view of dissociated memory, they believe that the highest calling of psychoanalysis is the search for the buried, if ultimately unknowable, past.…”

“…In a series of articles, Brenneis (1994Brenneis ( , 1996Brenneis ( , 1999Brenneis ( , 2000 has surveyed a variety of case reports of recovered memories, as well as psychoanalytic reconstructions of past events, in order to evaluate their supporting evidence. He repeatedly reaches the conclusion that these data are at best dubious, and calls into serious question the historical authenticity of memories recovered in the course of psychoanalysis.…”

“…Similarly, in their influential critiques of the historical veracity of memories, Spence (1982) and Brenneis (1994Brenneis ( , 1996Brenneis ( , 1999Brenneis ( , 2000 have denied with equally forceful certainty that the recovery of the actual past is ever possible in psychoanalysis. Yet are we to understand certain clinical phenomena-dissociation in vivo, characteristic transferencecountertransference paradigms, dreams, particularly lucid memories, sexualized ways of relating-with minimal reference to actual abuse in childhood?…”

Between Memory and Desire: From History to Psychoanalysis and Back

“…As the analytic process evolves, the perception of the patient's past changes. The past is said to exhibit a greater degree of freedom; it can be imagined, recounted and narrated from various perspectives and in different ways (Stern 1997;Brenneis 1999).…”