It Is Important Not Only To Do, But Also Not To Do

2024 Author: Harry Day | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 15:43

"… we must give the psychoanalyst his due that he does not try, playing on the trust of the so-called patient, to inspire him with something or somehow guide him. If this were so, psychoanalysis would have left the scene long ago, as happened with many others. technicians relying on similar tactics. " (Jacques Lacan "Tokyo Speech")

This article is about impulsivity, willingness to help, and quality of presence.

There are forms of behavior that, due to the frequency of occurrence in a particular society and the approval of this very society, seem obvious (in certain situations, of course). For example:

• What if a person complains endlessly? He does not ask for help directly, but the listener gets the feeling that something is expected of him - that he will intervene, for example.
• How to react if in front of your eyes a person tries and tries to achieve something (sometimes for years), but he does not succeed? Now there are obstacles, then frank excuses are formulated, then inspiration is lost, then something else. If this person is also important to you, is it possible to react in any other way than with participation?

I would single out two diametrically opposite poles of forms of behavior in such situations. Of course, these are abstractions, also exaggerated for clarity. This is a loose generalization of what in the psychoanalyst's office often sounds like referring to the cause of suffering in any social relationship.

1) attempts to shut up. These are phrases like "Stop doing nonsense", "These are trifles", "Many are even worse than you" and other forms of devaluation of feelings, denial of the authenticity of feelings. These are actions for themselves - hitting, running away, etc. The common thing is that it is unbearable for the listener for some reason to be near a person who complains and who systematically fails to do something; but not getting involved too. Involvement occurs at the expense of one's own - unconscious - painful points, and in order not to hear your pain, you have to shut up another person … Straightaway. On the machine. To be sure.

2) attempts to help, and in case of refusal - to catch up and do good. It's like the already anecdotal "mother / boss / tsar" knows better, and therefore in such and such a situation do as the covenants consecrated by time or personal experience tell, this is elementary, and what is the general question. And, of course, an enchanting offense if the proposed "well-meaning" is rejected. So is the most active participation in solving the problem: calling for someone, agreeing, going, doing, etc. The mechanism of the second pole is similar to the first: what a person hears and observes echoes inside, and it is impossible to endure and "digest", it is only possible to "urgently do something about it" … When such experiences are not realized at all, they are not appropriated, they are not "ours." Experiences are not simply induced by others, but as if belong another, and in order not to face their own pain and not to solve their own problems (and for this, first they must be admitted, that is, they still have to face the pain), they have to solve others.

And we all know perfectly well what intentions and where many roads are paved.

(I emphasize once again, although the forms of experience described above are taken from life and analytical practice, I still generalized them).

In contrast to these frequent and culturally accepted behaviors: what does the analyst do?

On the verbal level, of course, draws the analysand's attention to such repetitive forms of behavior, questioning their obviousness and finding out real, and not fantasized, comfort and benefits - for a particular subject.

But there is another level, let's call it client-therapy relationship level … What the analyst does not do (and this is also important): he does not choose the position of one of the poles, that is, he does not devalue the emotional experience and does not give advice and concrete plans of action. What the analyst does can be called "doing" rather conditionally. The analyst listens and speaks. What happens at the same time is about quality of presence … The analyst can withstand being close to the analysand in the state in which he is. Withstands without plugging or pushing … This quality of presence is often new to the analysand, but it is also healing. Paradoxically, it is precisely this kind of "being close" plus "non-interference" that allows the analysand to live a lot, to understand, to make a choice and, if desired, to change.

(Note that there are inevitable exceptions to this demeanor, for example, in the provision of crisis assistance, but this is a completely separate topic).

So that's what I mean. It is not that attempts to distract, cheer, and help are necessarily dictated by a conscious malevolent intent. No. This may be quite sincere. Even more - often it really helps if it is done according to the desire of the subject and by the person whose help and participation the subject is ready to accept.

And yet, the phenomenon takes place - a phenomenon described in the form of two poles above, when attempts to shut up or do good proceed from the inability of a person to cope with own emotions aroused stranger experience. And if a person noticed this about himself, there are already options for how to deal with it (before he noticed, there were no options, there were automatisms). When something clings, even clings to another person (and this, by the way, works with works of art), it is useful to listen to yourself. As well as leaving the responsibility of the other - to another, to give him a chance to cope with his own challenge and at our own pace, as each of us copes with something of our own. Of course, this is not a panacea; and care, sincere concern is priceless.

Psychoanalysts choose the "analytic position" because of their profession. While this is ethically justified, it may not seem obvious from an outside observer's point of view. Especially if in culture some forms of behavior are accepted as unambiguously good, and what goes beyond these forms - as unambiguously bad. All that remains is to reflect, ask yourself again, build and rebuild the value system. The first decision is not always the best, but taking a break before making a decision is a skill that also has to be learned separately. What I wanted to show in this essay is that the client-therapeutic relationship is different from friendships, family relationships, and any other. Every relationship has its own time and place.