Abstract
Should the analyst do anything else besides interpret? What constitutes an act within the analytic setting? And what signifies an act as analytic? The author reviews previous contributions to this literature, putting forward the idea that the analyst’s act is never isolated from the context of the analysis and the whole of the transference-countertransference relationship. Yet, under certain circumstances, it is not interpretation or the understanding of something that facilitates the transformation, but the experiencing of something that the analyst does. Through the careful 10 examination of previous conceptualizations (enactment, interpretive act), the author proposes that the analyst’s transformative act is a conscious-spontaneous act, not a reenactment of past. This idea will be discussed in light of the idea of playing and some recent thinking concerning ontological psychoanalysis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
