The Controversial Discussions and après-coup

This paper recovers the notion of the sacrifice of sexuality as the central, tragic, element of the oedipal structure. This notion has been largely abandoned in the psychoanalytic literature that has tended to reduce the oedipal structure to processes of exclusion. The paper traces the development of the theoretical and clinical transformations of Freud 's ideas on the role of the father and suggests that they allow us to more fully comprehend the Oedipus complex proposed by Freud. A paradox is explored: the killing of the father is, in Freud 's view, the requirement for the creation of the social order which, from then on, prohibits all killings. The father, however, has to be killed metaphorically only, as the actual exclusion of the father lies at the origin of so many psychopathologies from violence to the psychoses and perversions. The paper analyses the fundamental asymmetry that is present in the Oedipal structure and suggests that the three elements of the oedipal triangle constitute the law (of the dead father, that institutes the sacrifice of sexuality), desire (for the lost object) and identification (with both father and mother). Two clinical examples are discussed. In the first, one can identify a perverse structure in which the father has been murdered; in the second, there is a progressive construction of the dead (symbolic) father in the analytic process.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Murdered father; dead father: Revisiting the Oedipus complex1

Perelberg¹

2009

“…These authors’ thesis leads us directly to a nodal point, which pertains to the evolution and diverse interpretations towards which the concept of Nachträglichkeit has headed, and, more generally, the matter of temporality, in the psychoanalytic families since Freud. Perelberg (2006) identifies, from the time of the Controversial Discussions, a question around temporality that flows through the debate surreptitiously and can be aptly summarized by Hoffer’s statement: “For Freud the neuroses are particular illnesses of the sexual function, and for Kleinian theory the neuroses are particular illnesses of the destructive/aggressive function” (King and Steiner, 1991, p. 723). We are dealing here with the comparative role assigned to early experiences versus subsequent events in the shaping of unconscious fantasy, of the notion of ‘genetic continuity’, and of the oedipal complex.…”

Section: After Freudmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Perelberg (2006, 2009), distinguishing between the ‘descriptive’ formulation of the concept and the ‘dynamic’ one, tries to recover the unique meaning of Nachträglichkeit in its interweaving of trauma and sexuality. For this author, the ‘dynamic’ conception is included in Freudian metapsychology.…”

Section: Trauma and Sexualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Some reflections on the unique time of Nachträglichkeit in theory and clinical practice

Marion¹

2012

Of the various forms that the matter of time assumes in analysis, Nachträglichkeit represents Freud's first intuition on the subject. The focus of this article is directed toward the specific temporal dimension that the concept of Nachträglichkeit expresses, and how that dimension, which overturns linear time, is expressed in clinical work. The concept of Nachträglichkeit is approached from a theoretical point of view, tracing back the role and development that this notion has had in psychoanalytic Freudian and post-Freudian thinking. The goal of this article is to demonstrate how Nachträglichkeit represents the unique temporal movement of the analytic session and the characteristic positioning of the mind of the analyst at work. Three clinical examples are presented. The analytic scene is formulated as occurring in two times, and through the working through that takes place, patients can recover the enigmatic 'remainder', which is consequently traumatic and which has compulsively accompanied them through the various times of their existence. Nachträglichkeit, as a non-linear temporality, introduces a unique dimension into the clinical work that influences listening to and interpretation of the material. The recognition of that (trauma, infantile sexuality, non-linear temporality) has consequences for the analyst's way of working in session and on the interpretation of clinical material, as I will try to show through my theoretical exposition and clinical examples.

“…The difference is in the proportions . Freud has both archaeological and teleological aspects, as shown, for example, in his conception of Nachträglichkeit (in which he, however, puts greatest strength on the retrogressive après‐coup movement [Eickhoff, 2006; Faimberg, 2005;Perelberg, 2006;Sodré, 2005). Freud, however, is primarily an archaeologist while Winnicott is mainly a teleologist.…”

Section: Psychoanalysis: Archaeology or Teleology?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflection in psychoanalysis: On symbols and metaphors

Enckell¹

2010

Psychoanalysis is an art of reflection, i.e. it tries to facilitate the subject's retrieval of his own self. The 'material' to be reflected upon consists of the products of human symbolization. But there are two views of reflection. In one, the self is searched in a temporal, structural and procedural 'anterior' (the model of archaeology). In the other the self is to be found in a still evolving meaning process, i.e. it resides in a 'future' (the model of teleology). Both these pictures are common in psychoanalysis. The aim of this paper is to study the figures of symbolization through the archaeology/teleology reflection model. The author tries to show that 'symbol' leans on archaeology while 'metaphor' comprises a teleological conception. In order to show the relevance of this finding, the author draws the outlines of both an archaeological and a teleological model in psychoanalysis. It is stated that the former builds on an inherent symbol model while the figure for the latter is metaphor.