The Perverse Subject of Analysis

Jackson Pollock, Number 1A

In my view, the analysis of perversion necessarily involves the analysis of the perverse transference countertransference as it unfolds in the analytic relationship. (p. 67)[…]

The perverse intersubjective constructions generated in the course of the analysis of perversion are, in my experience, inevitably (to a considerable degree) inaccessible to the analyst’s conscious awareness as they are unfolding. […] The analyst must in a sense come to understand the perverse transference-countertransference “after the fact”, i.e. in the course of his doing the psychological work required to become aware of his own unconscious experience of (and participation in) the perverse transference-countertransference. (p. 68) […]

The perverse subject of analysis is the narrator of the erotized, but ultimately empty drama created on the analytic stage. The drama itself is designed to present the false impression that the narrator is alive in his or her power to excite. The perverse analytic scene and the perverse subject of analysis are jointly constructed by analyst and analysand for the purpose of evading the experience of psychological deadness and the recognition of the emptiness of the analytic discourse/intercourse. In a sense the perverse subject of analysis constitutes a third analytic subject intersubjectively created by, and experienced through, the individual subjectivities of analyst and analysand in the context of their separate but interrelated personality systems. (p.69) […]

Perversity in the transference-countertransference represents a background that presents itself primarily in the form of a well disguised sexual excitement associated with unconscious efforts on the part of the patient to thwart the analysis in fundamental, but difficult to recognize ways (for example, the patient’s unconscious excitement associated with his or her chronic inability/unwillingness to generate a single, original thought in the analysis. (p.70) […]

The perverse individual experiences a sense of inner deadness, a lack of a sense of being alive as a human being (khan 1979, McDougall 1978, 1986); at the same time, there develops a set of concretely symbolized defensive fantasies that life exists in the intercourse (both sexual and non-sexual) between the parents and that the only way to “aquire” life is to enter into that intercourse (the source of life) from which the individual is excluded and left lifeless (Britton, 1989; Klein, 1926, 1928, Meltzer, 1973). Of course, in a literal way, it is the parental intercourse that is the source of the patient’s life, but this biological fact has for the perverse patient failed to become a psychological fact. 

At the same time, the perverse patients fantasize/experience the parental intercourse to be an empty event, and imagine that the lifelessness of the primal scene is the source of his or her own sense of inner deadness. In part, this fantasy is based on the patient’s own envious attack on the parental intercourse. It also reflects the patient’s experience of the emptiness of the bond between the parents […] and leaves these perverse individuals feeling that there is no hope of attaining a sense of vitality of their own internal world and in their relations with external objects. What is particular to perversion of the sort being discussed is the compulsive erotization of the void that is felt at the center of what might have been, and pretends to be, a generative union between the parents. The excitement generated by this erotization is used to substitute for a sense of one’s own human aliveness as well as the recognition of the humanness of other people.  (p.99) […]

There is at the same time a critical act of self-deception that allows the patient to isolate himself from awareness of the reality of the danger to which he is subjecting himself. The individual deludes himself and prides himself in his belief that he is able to “fly closer to the flame” than anybody else without being damaged. He or she believes him or herself to be immune to all danger while at the same time being intensely excited by it. The desperate need to extract life from the empty parenat intercourse that leads the patient to flaunt external reality and unconsciously claim to exist outside of the law  (p.100-101)[..]

The foregoing comments might be briefly stated in the form of the following set of schematic propositions:

• In healthy development a sense of oneself as alive is equated with a generative loving parental intercourse.[…]

• Perversion […] represents an endless, futile effort to extract life form a primal scene that is experienced as dead

• […] These perverse individuals introject a fantasied degraded intercourse and subsequently engage others in a compulsively repeated acting out of this set of internal object relationships.

• A vicious cycle is generated in which the fantasied intercourse of the parents is depicted as loveless, lifeless and non-procreative; the patient attempts in vain to infuse it with pseudo-excitement from which he attempts to extract life. Since the fantasied parental intercourse from which the perverse patient is attempting to extract life is experienced as dead, he or she is attempting to extract life form death, truth form falsehood. Alternatively, the patient may attempt to use the lie as a substitute for truth/life. (Chasseguet-Smirgel, 1984)

• An important method of attempting to infuse the empty primal scene with life is the experience of “flirting with danger” tempting fate by “flying too close to flame”

•  The desire of these perverse individuals is coopted by and confused with the desire of others leading them more deeply into defensive misrecognitions and misnamings of their experience in order to create the illusion of self-generated desire (Ogden, 1998)

• Analysis of perversion […] fundamentally involves recognizing the lie/lifelessness that constitutes the core of transference-countertransference enactment of the perversion. In this way, the patient, perhaps for the first time in his or her life, feels enganged in a discourse that is experience as alive and real.

• The initial feelings of aliveness and realness in the analysis arise form the recognition of the lifelessness/ie of the transference-countertransference and consequently are most often frightening feelings of deadness. (p. 101-103) […]

Ogden, T. H (1999) Reverie and Interpretation; Sensing something human. Karnac: London.

Transference & Countertransference Positions when working with Survivors of Sexual Abuse: 2) The Sadistic Abuser and the Helpless Impotently Enraged Victim

We know that any child who is sexually traumatized over time, especially by a parent, will internalize and identify with those aspects of the perpetrator, who is also a loved and trusted figure in the child’s life. Though this identification, the child attempts to preserve her bond to the perpretator by becoming like him. As an adult, the patient’s unconscious identification with her victimizer allows her to keep at bay experiences of herself as helpless, terrified, violated. Instead, she projects her “weakness” on to another, thus feeling to some extend empowerment.

A)  In the transference, one manifestation of a patient’s abusiveness is her tendency to penetrate and invade the therapist’s personal and psychic boundaries. Some patients, for instance, literally burst on the treatment scene, entering the room in an intrusive and forceful manner.[…] In addition, some patients have a way of staring intently and penetratingly at the therapist as if they are trying to get inside and control him. Other patients persistently notice and comment on many aspects of the clinician’s personal appearance or office. […] Through her invasion of the therapist’s boundaries, the patient betrays her identification with her abuser(s).[…] In doing so, she is replicating in the treatment her perpetrator’s ruthless lack of respect for and greedy smashing of psysical and psychological boundaries.  Countertransferentially the therapist[…] may experience great discomfort at and anticipatory anxiety about being exposed and penetrated. Identified with split-off victimized aspects of the patient, the clinician may find himself dressing differently, straitening up the office, trying to be in the right mood, and avoiding eye contact with the patient in order to stave off episodes of intrusion. The clinician may think about upcoming sessions well in advance with anxiety and dread. At this point of course the therapist is reenacting many of the behaviours and emotional states the patient experienced in relationship with her abuser(s) and tries to protect himself from the inevitable intrusions by guessing what might set off the patient and fixit it ahead of time or by avoiding real engagement with the patient. All this, of course, replicates the kinds of strategies the patient employed to try to protect herself form her victimizer(s).

B)  Another way in which a patient can abuse her therapist is through entitled demands for attention, such as extra sessions, between-session phone contact, lengthened sessions and so on. Often the therapist has set the stage for this by responding to crises with increased availability […]. Gradually however the therapist begins to feel used, furious, but helpless to extricate himself from what has become a regular way of relating to this patient. […] The patient, in this case, exploits the willingness of the clinician to be available and, as her perpetrator did before, develops an insatiable demand for more. In turn, the clinician experiences aspects of the patient’s victimized self; the therapist assumes the blame for the abuse, feels violated and enraged but helpless to do anything else but accede to the patient’s demands. (p. 173)

C) Yet another manifestation of the patient’s identification with her perpetrator(s) is the self-destructive or violent enactments in which the patient often engages[…]. When the patient acts self-destructively and presents the therapist with a fait accomlit, often accompanied by disturbing, visible physical evidence such as cuts or burns, it is, at one level, a vicious attack on the therapist’s holding and containing effectiveness. There is often a sense of the patient saying, “Take this. Don’t think for one minute that you can really have an impact on me because, in the end, I’ll do exactly what I want”. The clinician confronted with a patient’s self-destructive acting out often is shocked and paralyzed by the intense rage and violence inherent in the acts. Frequently, the clinician feels unable to interpret or to intervene in any way, fearing that to do so will provoke an escalation of action. The therapist feels attacked, helpless and fearful about where the acting out might ultimately lead. The therapist also feels trapped by the patient’s acting out; he may search for exactly the right intervention in order to prevent his patient from spinning completely out of control […]. Like her abuser, the patient translates impulses into direct action, action that terrifies and impotently enrages the therapist, who in turn, assumes the role of victim. Identified with the victimized aspects of the patient, the therapist feels trapped paralyzed and intent in somehow, preventing escalation of action. This of course is congruent with what the patient experienced as a child as she struggled to prevent escalation of sexually abusive activities. (p. 173-174)

D)  There is at least one more way in which these patients enact identifications with their abusers and is to destroy hope. In most cases, adult survivors are terrified that good things cannot last, that promises will always ultimately be broken. Rather than waiting for the inevitable disappointment to occur, patients with sexual abuse histories often intervene in the buildup of anxiety that accompanies hope by assuming control of the situation and shattering what they are convinced is only an illusion anyway They do this by threatening premature termination, resuming self-destructive acting out after long period of abstinence, developing new symptoms such as psychosomatic disorders, or sabotaging extra-therapeutic successes in relationships or jobs. Countertranferentially, the therapist feels deflated by these attacks on hope that often occur when things seem to be going particularly well in treatment. The clinician may become depressed and is sometimes tempted to passively accede to hopelessness through relational withdrawal, loss of energy, muted affect.[…] Often the sexually abused child experiences periods of hope, during which the perpetrator stops abusing for one reason or another, presenting himself more consistently as the good object form whom the child yearns. Inevitably, however, the abuse resumes, or a younger sibling begins to be victimized by the same abuser with our patient’s knowledge. In treatment, when things are hopeful, the patient may identify with the perpetrator and seemingly smash to buts progress and hoe. Identifying with the victim, the therapist experiences the despair and deflation once held by the victimized child.

To the extent that they (the therapists) remain locked into a countertransference experience of victimization, they are likely to evoke intense feelings of toxicity and guilt in the patient. These patients perceive themselves to be powerfully toxic anyway and struggle with chronic, free-floating guilt. Why they sense unconsciously that they have victimized the therapist, unbearable states of shame and guilt are engendered. Protecting themselves from conscious awareness of these intolerable affects and self-representations, they project them onto the therapist, who then is perceived as toxic and deserving of attack, and the cycle begins again.

Eventually the transference-countertransference paradigms in play have to be made explicit, so that the patient can begin to tame and integrate currently disowned self-representations and identifications.  This is delicate work when the self-representation or identification that is activated is that of abuser. The thought that she might actually sadistically mistreat another after having been so badly used herself nauseates and enrages her. Premature interpretation, which can be precipitated by the clinician’s desire to extricate himself from the role of victim, can engender defensive denial and rage, along with further splitting off and enactment of the identification. Too early interpretation also can evoke intensified guilt and self-punishment, with concomitant submerging rather than integration of the abusive representation.

Other more subtle ways in which the therapist enacts abusiveness are through premature interpretations, intrusive questioning, or encouraging a patient to stay with a traumatic memory beyond what is therapeutically indicated in order to satisfy voyeuristic fascination with the abusive experience […]. The patient, in turn, may respond with woundedness, or she may passively submit to the victimizing aspects of the therapist while storing up uncommunicated impotent rage.

It is crucial for the treatment for the therapist to experience and enact the role of victim to the patient/abuser. Only this way can the clinician begin to truly appreciate at a visceral level the terror, paralysis, hopelessness, and impotent rage lived by the patient when she was a child.

Davies, J. & Frawley, M (1994) Treating the Adult Survivor of Sexual Abuse: A Psychoanalytic Perspective, United States of America: Basic Books

Transference & Countertransference Positions when working with Survivors of Sexual Abuse: 1) The Unseeing, Uninvolved Parent and The Unseen, Neglected Child.

We have found that there are eight relational positions, expressed within the four relational matrices, alternatively enacted by therapist and survivor in the transference and countertransference that repeatedly recur in psychoanalytic work with adult survivors of sexual abuse (p.167)

The Unseeing, Uninvolved Parent and The Unseen, Neglected Child

Whenever a child is sexually abused, someone’s eyes are closed […] One aspect of the internalized world of the adult survivor, then, is a relationship between a neglectful, unavailable parent and an unseen, neglected child.[..]. Within the transference-countertransference, the patient enacts either side or both sides of the relational matrix sequentially, while the therapist protectively identifies with and enacts the complementary role. 

Manifestations of this paradigm are varied.

A) At times the patient identifies with her parent and enacts the latter’s coldness, unavailability and rejection in the therapy sessions. The patient may be profoundly withholding, remaining silent for long periods, or she may respond minimally to queries or overtures from the clinician. When identified with the uninvolved parent, the patient may appear bored, disdainful, narcissistically preoccupied, hostile to the interpersonal engagement sought by the clinician. During these periods of identification with the neglectful parent, the patient treats her own vulnerability, emotional needs and affect states with the same cold neglect that she heaps on the therapist.[…] The clinician frequently countertransferentially takes on the role of the patient’s disowned self- representation of a neglected, unseen child. The therapist experiences herself as unwanted, unimportant, and utterly bereft of vital connection with the patient. The clinician may begin working very hard to reach the patient and when these efforts fail, as they once did for the child struggling to make contact with her parent, the therapist sequentially may feel frustrated, inadequate, enraged, and ultimately depressed. 

B)   In another enactment, the patient identifies with herself as a child and responds to the clinician as she once did, at least initially, to her parent. Here, the patient denies her own needs and feelings in order to care for the therapist. Certain that the only way to obtain emotional supplies from the clinician is to tend to latter’s perceived needs, the patient is solicitous of and, at least superficially, compliant with the therapist and the demands of the therapeutic situation. Associations may appear to flow freely, but, in fact, the patient “protects” the clinician from her deepest pain, rage and bereavement. She also is quite likely to “protect” the therapist from the memories of her abuse, much as she once shielded her parent from the reality of the sexual victimizations. During this period the therapist may collude with the relational matrix being enacted by not seeing the “false self” (Winnicott, 1960) aspects of the patient’s presentation. If this transference-countertransference configuration extends for some time, the patient is likely to become enraged at once again not being truly seen or heard. As she did when she was a child, the patient may split off rageful responses in order to maintain a tenuous attachment to the therapist/parent. Instead of expressing them in session, the patient may act out her rage in extra-therapeutic relationships or by engaging in self-destructive behaviours such as cutting, substance abuse, or promiscuous sex or she may become increasingly depressed. Within this relational matrix at play, the therapist may feel bored, annoyed, increasingly angry as she senses that the treatment is mired in apparent superficiality. […] 

C)  Finally, an overt to the therapist transference as an unseeing, uninvolved parent may develop, which the patient experiences the clinician as neglectful. Sometimes, the patient angrily and repetitively berates the therapist for somehow “missing” her; for not noticing, hearing, correctly interpreting, remembering feelings, behaviours, facts, dreams, memories the patient considers crucial. Here it seems that nothing the therapist does or does not do is “right” In this case the therapist is once again identified with a hostile parent who expected to be cared for by the child and who berated the patient for her ineptness in meeting the adult’s needs perfectly. […] Countertransferentially, the therapist, much to her or his chagrin may enact stupidity, forgetfulness, inadequacy. It is with such a patient that therapists uncharacteristically double-book a session, miss an “obvious” connection among associations or forget dream material. The clinician, again identified with spit-off aspects of the child feels panicky, stupid, frozen, and inadequate. She may begin to dread sessions with the patient. Once again it is important for the therapist to use the countertransference experience to gradually help make explicit the split-off terror of the patient and to refrain from self-protectively emotionally abandoning the survivor.

 The relational matrix of the uninvolved parent/neglected child is frequently the first transference-countertransference paradigm to emerge in the treatment.

Davies, J. & Frawley, M (1994) Treating the Adult Survivor of Sexual Abuse: A Psychoanalytic Perspective, United States of America: Basic Books