Abstract

This paper on Benjamin is part 1 of a series presenting the wor of three contemporary theorists whose ideas are associated with the intersubjective turn in psychoanalysis. Part 2, on Bollas, and part 3, on Ehrenberg, will appear in subsequent issues of Psychoanalytic Dialogues. Although we have made a minimal attempt to critically review the different theories, we have allowed ourselves the fiction of trying to produce a representational text in which the different arguments of the different theorists are presented, more or less, in their own terms. While this version of textual production on our part may be troubling, as it obscures as much as it reveals, insofar as our own position is never quite declared, our intent is to try to minimize our own mediating voice and focus on the different theorists in their own right by giving clinical examples to demonstrate their claims. The irony, even folly, of attempting to eliminate our own presence from this series on intersubjectivity is not lost on us—and neither is our plea for special circumstances. However, given the growing interest in the intersubjective turn, in order that it not be construed as privileging the emotional authenticity of the two-person exchange, we believe it is absolutely essential to understand the theorists' self-articulated arguments and to keep alive their differences rather than to assimilate the intersubjective perspective as a unified or hegemonic approach. It is in the spirit of keeping alive these differences—itself a crucial commitment of the intersubjective approach—that our somewhat exegetical text should be understood.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call