Between Winnicott
and Lacan

A Clinical Engagement

Edited by Lewis A. Kirshner

~~ ~~o~:!~n~~~up
Nt)w York t onclon


Routledge Routledge Contributors VII
Taylor & Francis Group Taylor & Francis Group
711 Third Avenue 27 Church Road
lntroduction IX
New York, NY 10017 Hove, East Sussex BN3 2FA
© 2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
1 Thinking in thc spacc bctween Winnicott and Lacan 1
Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Jnforma business

2 The bifurcation of contemporary psychoanalysis:
lnternational Standard Book Number: 978-0-415 -88373-3 (Hardback) 978-0-415 -88374-0 (Paperback) Lacan and Winnicott 29
For permission Lo pholocopy or use material eleclronically from this work, please access www. ANDRÉGREEN ( or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, lnc.
(CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750 -8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organiza-
tion that provides !icen ses and registration for a variety of users. For organizations lhat ha ve been 3 Winnicott and Lacan: A clinical dialogue 51
granted a photocopy !icen se by the CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged. JAMES E. GORNEY

Trademark Notice: Productor corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and
are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. 4 Vicissitudes of the real: Working between
Winnicott and Lacan 65
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Between Winnicott and Lacan :a clinical engagement 1 edited by Lewis A.
p. cm.
5 Applying the work of Winnicott and Lacan:
Jncludes bibliographical references and index. The problem of psychosis 81
JSBN 978-0-415 -88373-3 (hardback: acid-free paper) -- JSBN LEWIS A. KIRSHNER
978-0-415-88374-0 (pbk: acid-free paper) --ISBN 978-0-203-84336-9 (e-bk)
l. Winnicott, D. W. (Donald Woods), 1896-1971. 2. Lacan, )acques, 1901-1981.
3. Psychoanalysis. 4. Psychotherapy. J. Kirshner, Lewis A., 1940- 6 The object between mother and child:
BF173.B48 2011
From Winnicott to Lacan 107
150.19'52--dc22 2010030213 ALAIN VANIEil

Vlslt tht• 'l'nyloo· & Frnncis Wcb si te al 7 Thc spacc of transition bctwccn Winnicott and Lacan 119
hll¡l o//www.luylur·
uuolllu• l(coullo•olfl'' Wo•h Nilo• ul
hll¡o o/1 11'\1

ollllllo•ollll' llll' llllllho•¡oJih ,o•llll

James E. 2003) and has lecl workshops at meetings of the American Psychoanalytic and lnternationa l Psycho- ana lytical Associations on "Working Between Winnicott and Lacan.O IS VILLA Index 165 Jeanne Wolff Bernstcin. André Grcen. H e has served on the sraff of the Austen Riggs Center in Stockbridge. ull . MD. He is the author of Having a life: Self pathology after La can (The Analytic Press. Mardy Ireland. Kirshner. 2007). is a psychoanalyst in Contents 8 Winnicott with Lacan: Living creativcly in a Contributors postmodern world 133 MARI RUTI 9 Human nature: A paradoxical object 151 FRAN<.lll' pr. 2003). She is 1lw .1111 hor of Schopenhauer's porcupines (Basic Books. She is author of The art of the subject: Between necessary illusion and speakable desire in the analytic encounter (Other Press.llll ~ . From 1975 ro 1977 he was a vice prcsiclent of the International Psychoanalytical Association and from 1979 ro 1980 a professor at University College London. and past president of the Psychoa nalytic ln stitute of Northern Ca lifornia. is a psychoana lyst in independent practice in Knoxville. of which he was president from 1986 to 1989.Kiin· in Philadrlphia . Tennessee. MD. PhD. and is the author of artides cxploring dinical applications of the work of Lacan. Ca lifornia. lllll. Desire and Jouissance: Two out of Three Ain't Bad" (Psychoanalytic Dialogues." Dcborah Anna Luepnitz. 1999) and "Love. is a practicing psychoanalyst in North Carolina. 2002) ancl lll . among them "Countertransference: The Royal Road to the Unconscious?" (Psychoanalytic Dialogues. Gorney. Lewis A. Massachusctts. is clinical professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and training and supervising psychoanalyst at the Boston Psychoanalytic Institute. PhD. PhD. PhD. She has written many articles on the work of Lacan. He is the author of numerous books and a rticles on psychoa nalysis. is a member of the París Psychoanalytic Society.1 priv. is on the clinical faculty of the Department of Psychia1 ry at rhc Univcrsity of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

PhD.. MD. not only from an institutional perspective but also in widely held attitudes toward clinical practice. He is the author of books and articles on a nd structure of the human psyche. the essence of psy- choanalytic process was the here-and. Our authors take a variety of positions on how. is associate professor of comparative literature at the University of Toronto and is author of Reinventing the soul: Posthu- lntroduction manist theory and psychic /ife (Other Press. member of the Association Psychanalytique de France. He is professor and director of graduate studies at the Centre de Recherches Psychanalyse. PhD. the evolution of their theories. Médecine et Société of the Université Paris Diderot. Médecine et Société at the that can move between two seemingly incompatible theories of the origins Université París Diderot. Her articles have Lewis A. and detailed clinical examples of how llwir ult •. Kirshner appeared in the ]ourna/ o( the American Psychoana/ytic Association. They address the history of the Lacan- Winnicoll rclationship. particu- larly those dealing with treatment of children. derived from phenomenology and linguistics. Winnicott devcloped psychoa na lysis. and psychotic patients for whom problems in the development of self and inter- subjective relations are crucial. 2006). 2010). dyadic relationship of analyst and patient. By contrast. Whereas D. Wlltllllltll lt.viii Contributors Mari Ruti. Their contrastin g approaches can be viewed as representing a bifurcation in the evolution of psychoanalysis. possibilities and oh~r : u: lt • s lo working between thcm. Perhaps for this reason analytic writers have only very recently begun to address the possibility of working betwecn and with Winnicott and Lacan in a complementary or dialectic way. Ala in Vanier. Fran~ois Villa. contained within the setting of a holding environment.. Arguably the major psychoanalytic innovators since Sigmund Freud. He is an author of books and articles dealing with the work of Jacques Lacan and coeditor of Winnicott avec Lacan (Hermann.. Our objective in this volume is to clarify their majar concepts. Winnicott and Lacan questioned received theory in ways that even now have not been fully integrated into practice. borderline disorders. professor of psychopathology. an independent Lacanian group. and to identify points of intersection to contribute to a more effective psychoanalytic practice. Their conceptions of psychic life address many issues in contemporary psychotherapeutic work. a model of se/{. to differentiate between them. Jacques Lacan constructed a tbeory of the subject. lwt'tt n·vt·n ·d lor lm·. MD. is a psychoanalyst. is a member of Espace Analytique. Lacan emphasized close attention to the language of the analysand and placed the analyst in a nonrelational position as the other.tki11g p'yr ho:tn . and member The theme of this volume is the possibility of a psychoanalytic treatment of the Centre de Recherches Psychanalyse. with its recapitulation of early infant development. . and when the two sets of ideas can be used clinically.tvt• ht'l'll pul 10 work wi1h varying typcs of patients.tlysi~ oul of lw . i\ P·" 1 '" 1111 lt" t Olllt'plu. born in the context of a pediatrician's notion of a "good enough" mothering relationship. W.t 1innov<ll ion~ n hotll dw en rl iesl stagcs of psych ic dn'l lnl'"'' 111 . h. For Winnicott. the collected proceedings of a London conference.

attempted to detect and interpret a patient's defenses cirdes. however. 1 triadic basis for the human subject.tly. 1996. he. reflect important cultural and theoretical differenccs bctwcen niliq uc of the so-ca lled drive-defens e model of psychoanalysis rhat vicwcd thc subjcct as 1110\IV. Despite the argued that Freud's discovery of thc unconscious had radically changed metaphysical complexities of her concept of instincts and her Hobbesian the terms of this inquiry. the human subject. 1 lllllf . but gencrally implies a chapter. nota. Eventually. As changcs in theory and practice subsequently initiated by self psychology a substantive entity.. it was basically absent in Freud and has no equiva- a nd rcla tiona 1psychoanalysis. and it was the clinician's task to decipher and interpret it. the el o sed mental apparatus rather tha n as part of a two-person or intersubjec. "After the verbal critiques . Perhaps influenced by his early exposure to the rich philosophic tradi- did influence clinicians. 118-119).d lifc nnd I'V I'Il ol1lll' mil' of th c " 1hird" (an cntiry or srruct ure apart from ll11• 1wo Jlllll .. on questions concerning the nature of subjectivity and the subject. with all the real-life consequences of these oppositions. Similarly. he anticipated yet more drastic carne to psychoanalytic prominence through the writings of Winnicott. "1. Apart from a few scat- The innovations of Winnicott and object relations theories in general tered uses. object or return to be invested in the self.tgl'llCY and intcnrion in N. the person. hidden behind a blank screen and assuming a position and in turn aroused even fiercer opposition from official psychoanalytic anchored in reality. hr . and the Real provided a new framcwork for conceptualizing a tive relationship. A phenomenological conception of the self as a Nam. by Charles The vocabularies of self and subject. Emmanuel Ghenr.2 Lacan implicated from the beginning of life in a self-other dialogue. lent intellectual history ro the concept of subject. he was expelled for his heresies from the International and hidden impulses.IIJ011'>hip) h. Addrcssing subjectivity from the pcrspective of vicw of infancy. His tional transference. in which libido could flow outward to be invested in the leagues are surprised that Winnicott's ideas were so fiercely attacked. Srephen Mirchell. too. The patient's behavior was described as the product of a division of psychic experience into three registers of the Imaginary. He argued that a notion Boston Psychoanalytic Institute in the 1980s suggested that a plaque would of self as a correlate to object was necessitated by Freud's exploration be erected over the entrance stating: "Kiein Not Taught Here.¡¡)¡ 1illli ''" llu·o1 y Jlllll\lf'.lhly hy Andn· Cn'l'll . 1991). one wcre much more openly critical of then-current practices than Winnicott's in which the analyst. who were taught to be wary of engaging patients tion of phenomcnology.llll1 !111 •11111 111 111 11 1111 1\lil 1oljljlolll11' . often associatecl today with the work of Heinz Kohut.qtnlll\ in l 'i'hl' pholmophil . 1 The rerm two-person psychology has been used in diverse ways. encapsulated was reacting against what he saw as a sterile. After the talk concluded he returned to his hotel and had a massive vehicle of agency. The importance of thc othcr in IIH'IJt . Yet.1111 ll r. The nature of "the subject" has bcen a The development of object relations theory in Great Britain by Melanie perennial philosophical problem since the Greeks. of narcissism. Lhcorctica l baggage by placing the self and its development at the center The term self.aurcncc Kahn in hcr book." Today. and Arnold Modell. According ro his a separare object. the other could be bly when he presented them to a mostly hostile New York Psychoanalytic loved either narcissistically as oneself vía a process of identification or as lnstitute audience in November 1968 (see Baudry. it entered psychoanalysis via the concept of self-rcpresentation were strenuously resisted in North America. In doing so.l'> bCt'11 hi f~h lif. Symbolic. This model.¡.l\t'd principally by inrcrnal forces." was absent from Hartmann's use of the term. ritualized form of psycho- inside the mind of a mostly unconscious patient. a superordinate structure in the mind.i1 ' /'. practice (associated with the school of ego psychology in the United States). a notion of intersubjectivity began to emerge with Klein psychoanalysis not only had philosophical impon for Lacan but also pro- as shc insisted on the inseparability of the psyche from object relations. 2009). as Deborah Luepnitz shows in her Rycroft. His writings style of impersonal psychoanalysis that was taught through the 1980s. pp. and made it the focus of their analytic work. 111 wl11l h .J ILtl ytt'\ 1111' ¡11ohknh ol looti ng . first of his model of mental life.. Winnicott muttered that he now Hartmann proposed self-representation as ·an ego function to clarify this knew why the Americans had become embroiled in the fighting in Viet model (Kirshner. 1 am referring here to a analysis that ignored its central aspect.ll roots of rhis problcm and their manifesrarions in Freud have been 1111 ollioil)'lll lri. La Petite '1111· 1111 JI¡¡ · Jl olll'lll id 11\i'lolphill' 110\. all the more so with the Klein and her followers changed this picture by seeing thc subject as fading of religious belicf in the existence of an inner essence or sou1.x lntroduction lntroduction xi a reductionist view of the ego and its mechanisms of defense. biographer. even the Cartesian sense of subjectivity asan coronary" (Kahr.h llw Wllllllf

Related Interests

> ollrw" A11111 . vided an alternative to the biophysical analogies of instinctual energy and Winnicott's version of this process took this step much further without her discharge that undcrpinncd Freucl's model of the psyche.l. . for example. Lacan increasingly focused his analytic teaching directly and to see the treatment relationship mainly in terms of a unidirec. col..¡ l.""'" . oiiHIIIH 1111 11\ h 1111111111 poli\ ol fl. A joke circulating at the advanced by Heinz Hartmann in ego psychology. although certainly a caricature of analytic Psychoanalytic Association (IPA) in 1963.11 1'.lhtcd by t"rcnch p>ydH>illl iJiy• l• '• 11111 1 di o111\ roll' ly l''plo1nl 111 di'jHh hy Jlw Frl'IKh fl'ydlOall . Later analysts influenced Lacan is much less familiar to most English-speaking analysts-harder by Kohut's self psychology carne to see the self as the cohesive essence of toread and harder to connect with everyday clinical concerns.

ll y 11r.III IH ' 111'111. We can see this Despite similarities in their turn toward psychic origins for advancing the- attempt to move across the two vocabularies at work in james Gorney and ory and practice.111. 2005b). . "So nw Rdlt·r tiol1s on dw Ego. toa naive "self-to-self" conception of transference and countertransference André Green reviews the major sreps in this evolution. " 1• . detail.ll'l lw. . has never been well accepted in the French tradition. French psychoanalysis. ca n be ro thc contcmporary undcrstanding of transferencc and holds obvious relevance . At stake is a way of incorporating both tant concept of the objet petit a. 1'. rhe subject. as Vanier and Bcrnstein both report in an informed receptivity to unconscious processes as they unfold in psy. Even Kohur's use ing. He sees the bifurcation in psychoanalysis these authors have done . Conceptualizing the dual in the origin of the subject and its power ro animare the transference ro role of analyst as other and as intersubjective participant represents the be a major advance in our theoretical understanding of these processes. I discuss spontaneous gesture. The notion of subject (and perhaps this is the result guage valuable in ways his later ideas are not." \'tll l·. tbese articles in my chapter on psychosis. are two principal texts: "Transitional Objects and Transitional Phcnomena" resents a compliant. The insight that a cation with the other seems close ro this depiction.1 111 lm fif'. Laca n ( 1949) wrote about analogous phe- hy W1111W ott . where the two authors find a corrective directions. self. and.11. who is now read routinely in France by students in train- ership and individual responsibility in a neoliberal world . in particular. 111 1 nnd•111 . Moreover. the symbol. nal contributions to psychoanalytic theory and practice. To be a subject. rhey remain semi- Lacan's conception of the ego (le moi in French) as an alienating identifi. d So1 11'1y. however.11 1\ yl ho. rhc basic clcmcnts of th.111 ¡•. Green. field-notably his work on the negative. 1111 d 1u1 M ·'Y ) . 111 lwr 1 l1o~p1n 111 •." as in being a subject of the king-a political entity. Her chapter uses what she calls the two organizing trapes of (with Lacan d ea rly the more eager to pursue their relationship). suggesting a discrete and autonomous entity that Of course.11'111 dt'." His famous distinction between the true and the false self bears sorne Among many places in wbich Winnicott spoke about the birth of the self similarity ro Lacan's differentiation of ego and subject. 11 in h" 1.1pplnl with iiH' Wi11nirotti:111 11011011 ••l tlu . connection recounted by Alain Vanier..111'1' wh11 h w•·n· 111d11dl'd i11 h" pn·-.11io11 .dogin·d 10 thc discrcpancy bctween a forever hiddcn. in the end selfhood versus subjectivity in Winnicott and Lacan to build a "double Lacan and Winnicott failed ro understand each other very well. Bernstein sees Lacan's conception of the role of the objeta both choanalytic therapy andan engaged copresence. whcreas Winnicott remains of its intellectual hisrory) seems caught up in a quasi-juridical framework closer ro his clinical practice. it is possible ro conceive of an overlap between the two (see Green. the exploration of the imaginary mode. and the importance of as in the subject of an experiment. carries an atomistic ring. concepts. Winnicott and Lacan were moving in different Mardy Ireland's chapters as well. borh included in the volume Playing and reality (1971).1t 1. carries the ambiguity in North America. Lacan recognized the importance spective as a way to resolve the humanist and posthumanist impasse in of Winnicott's transitional object and attempted to link ir to his impor- contemporary analytic practice..xii lntroduction lntroduction xiii schools of psychoanalysis and have an impact on the implicit goals of Although rhey were contemporaries who had a history of interaction treatment. "Self" which Winnicott struggled. The notion of "self. while considerably more complcx. basic challenge of a dialectical reading of the two theories . priv. the word carries an impersonal quality. a mask of adaption.11 dw l111." in Winnicott's terminology-of the preverbal child. mathematized theo ry moving far away from the clinical questions with when we say that one has or lacks a "self. and many of his important ideas (especially around his attention ro of the term selfobject to convey the self's need to use others ro sustain its speech. his vcntional distinction betwcen subjective and objective has become essential port rnya 1 of a divided subject." while everyone is a subject. in his comprehensive summation." as derived from Winnicott. find the writings of thc earlier Lacan on intersubjcctivity and the use of lan - as Luepnitz observes. as useful applications ro treatment.1nd llw l'go's adnptation ro rhc motlwr.1 ~ 1. a missed description" of the nature of clinical work and propases this dual per. The false self rep. enced by Lacan. was significantly influ- may evoke both a religious reference andan economic relationship of own. in English..¡oJf l'vokcd to t reat ment of psychot ic paticnts . 2005a. lt is rare to read a complete the more speculativc ideas in Lacan's later seminars as leading away from case report that explicares Lacanian concepts in a jargon-free manner.111. to which 1 alludecl earlier as a definitivc one. perhaps in the sense third area of transitional experience was necessary to supplement the con- that every "self" is to sorne extent false. critiquing sorne of in Lacan's attention to words and language. whereas rhe true self seems ro touch on natural impulses-"rhe (1967).ll•· . especially in the way that Winnicott used the term "the true however.r. defensive shield of conformity with the expectations (1953) and "Mirror-Role of Mother and Family in Child Development" of orhers. lt 1' l1 '' w•· ll known 110111

Related Interests

11. of course. and the apres majar functions of self-esteem and cohesion suggests a solipsistic projecr of coup) ha ve become integra red into the mainstream in a way that is not true self-maintenance. the analytic third-owe some of rheir inspiration ro his exposure ro both Nonetheless. continues ro of being "subjected to.. Likewise. on the other hand. and the promising first beginnings of dialogue werc cut short.1'111 . Green's own enormous contributions to the of definirían.1 mnjor papcr on thc Mirror S1agc. with Lacan's increasingly The contrast between the two vocabularies is present in everyday speech.

as Vanier documents. illuminate sorne identifications and construction of a false self but also the possibility of an of the difficulties in conceiving of the objet petit a. in which she opposes both Winnicott and Lacan to cantly concerned.1 111 \V I II I I oll' oil ll' ll!lllltt M11101 ~l. and economic relationships two concepts can be thought of together as attempts to grasp the same early can then dictare goals and expectations for the subject in psychotherapy. a potential creative transformation of the subject. Like the transitional object. the virtual object that is the cause of desire (and but lends itself to ideologies about normality and appropriate behavior not.ll lorccs. · processes of infant development.\ f ' ll i l !\il'~~ 111 lltll t lt 111 w . By sustaining her posi- although the transitional object has material reality) but does have effects tion as a third (as opposed to a purely dyadic relation). Vanier's and feeling. the subject can grow beyond its a rcccptive openness to the novelty that may emerge in the treatment pro- detcrminations by social and economic structures. who has emphasized the imposi. La Psychanalyse. which exemplify par excellence the difficulty of invention by the child of transitional objects. Thc analysand's crcative expressions are inevitably shaped by the t h. representa shallow basis for psychotherapists on which to base their work inal idea of the objet petit a. an interiorized superordinate for the translation and publication of Winnicott's paper in the journal he agency.dy~1 's lirst ohlig. she suggests. tl ukolony. for example. Our postmodern awareness of the hidden normative ideol- concept of the object petit a. can creare its own meanings. the object a is not real (both being fantasies. class. especially holds a crucial role both in deconstructing the effects of unconscious forces as the subject has no alternative but to attempt to name it. Lacan attempted. 3 He also. of the mothcr's body that the talking about. 'l'lh' . The infant-mothcr relationship. of appellation. Mari Ruti argues this pos. What subject are we an inevitable sense of loss of a part of the body. which they tion of a subjective position vía social norms and the Althusserian process have by and large abandoned to more biological psychiatric approaches. Both terms grapple with the beginnings of When psychotherapists orient their practices around the goals of a norma- subjectivation and the birth of a separare self. in 1959. To the contrary. much postmodern writing. the corresponding naiveté of a contemporary practice era! times about the transitional object in his París seminars and arranged that conceives of the self as a cohesive entity. facilitares ego of subjectivity or objectivity do not pertain may. bis chapter suggests a revised formulation of the ogy within psychothcrapeutic practice makes it important on many levels role of loss in early development that is specifically psychoanalytic. an . failing to acknowledge its dependency on language. Through clínica! vignettes. does not simply As described already. which was proposed by emergent transitional space-the space of a "third"-in which the child Lacan as a virtualleftover. This dual function may be most important in the treatment process. to equate his orig. My own essay examines their respective contributions to a dehumanized and wholly contingent view of the subject that she finds in understanding and treating psychosis. Bernstein to think carefully about what assumptions may underpin the languages of emphasizes that the Lacanian process of becoming a subject carries with it self and subject that we employ and what they imply. they risk bccoming agents of what Michel Vanier demonstrates how they can enhance our understanding of clínica! Foucault called a biopolitics that governs behavior within a given socioeco- problems of early childhood. as sorne suppose.11 i~ not mcrcly subjccted (a nd subjugated) to thcsc t'Xt('l'll. tifications.1lyst 's pnrti ciparion. lt is challenging for the analyst to sustain an active role in uncover- port for an autonomous creative subject. ·" 1111' Állii'IH . tive healthy life in this way. without success. being both a product of externa] determinants and a unique sort of cre- The notion of a transitional space in which. as Butler (1990) argued.llion is to be wary of imposing n personal 1 \IJ\ olllll ljljl 1111111 )' '11111 ol ( 11p y 111 111'1111 01 pmll ·~~ llllt . and what does it reflect about our work? infant has experienced as belonging to him. Models of self associated with particular eras and entrenched scholarly chapter explores this misunderstanding in depth and shows how the ideologies that define normative gender. a kind of labeling that sticks to the self but offers no sup. It calls postmodern authors like Judith Butler. for analysts to devore more attention to major mental illnesses. Read with Bernstein's discussion of Lacan's nomic system. with which Winnicott and Lacan were signifi- sibility in her chapter. The project of that have shaped the self and in enabling construction of new figurations seeking symbolization (representation) of the objet petit a implies a crea ti ve of subjectivity. Her writings enlarge a dialogue with feminist.lll p~ydtO:liLlly~l i\rnold Modcll . xiv lntroduction lntroduction xv subsequently published in 1953. ty ~. reviews the concepts they introduced. spoke sev. ami mnkc thc old norion of neutrality irnportant in new 1 1"1 11 . implicating hcr as a subject with convictions and (k~ircs of lwr own. perhaps evolving a sclf ccss . and applies them critically tocase material with a paranoid patient. She argues that acceptance of Subjectivity for Winnicott and Lacan had the paradoxical property of loss is central toa Lacanian approach rather than the attempt to repair it. as Winnicott wrote. Ruti places the ing and interpreting unconscious wishes and beliefs that in many respects potential for creative transformation at the center of psychoanalytic praxis. the object of desire) to the transitional object. Green in particular. the psychoanalyst that play out in reality (the symbolic reality of social existence). similar to the of severe mental disorders. a residue of psychic birth as a speaking subject. shifting iden- directed.t11.l f\!' lo1 jll!''o t ' lll oliiOII IIIIIII 11'. At the same time. and social structures. questions ative frcedom. determine the thoughts and behavior of the subject and also to maintain Through play and language. in fact. French psychoanalysis. has elaborated this conception of tiercity (thirdness). sustaining a separare self.

Ireland's attention to the significance of the actual cxperience. ami subjectivity are the heart blood of psychoanalytic therapy.xvi lntroduction lntroduction xvii (1991) rightly emphasized. successful functioning asan ideal (if incomplete and illusory) therapeutic as a regression ro actual dependency on a primary object rather than as a goal but in caralyzing a more authentic form of existence {that. sclf. Patients seek the help of psychoanalysis not so much to cleal with of working between Winnicott and Lacan and provide examples of how discrete symptoms as to find meaning in their personal histories and rela- they apply this approacb to practice. rather than interventions at the leve! We have argued that many of the dilemmas and contradictions of contem- of a reparative relationship and nurturing responses to conscious feel. In this respect. lreland. 11111L11 111ri1111d 111 lm . is to sustain presence and connection while not thinking was surprisingly close to the preoccupations of philosophically imposing an interpretation of reality that merely compounds an earlier minded psychoanalysts like Wilfrecl Bion and Lacan by returning us to developmental alienation. Lacan's advocacy of a position of fore in Winnicott's posthumous book Human nature that is interpreted abstinence and nongratification of demands may have failed to recognize for us in the chapter by Franc. lt would be a great loss if their works were left and patient. he may have imposed his own reality be at once utopian and reflect an intrinsic dynamic of human beings). and criticized by Winnicott and Lacan. which can often lead toan endless intrication of two subjects as isolated historical relics in the stream of fragmented therapeutic methods immersed in the here and now of immediate experience. cal needs ancllimitations while living among others in an intersubjective tive contributions. porary psychoanalysis are embedded in the distinction between self and ings. signifier. his patient. to emergence of crucial unconscious connections previously absent from naire style of interpretation allegedly characteristic of classic technique the treatments. They show how close attention to tionships without unbearable pain. ni . Corncy rccounts rhc cruci . Villa unpacks the propositions the symbolic needs of many patients for more personal involvement by the advanced in Winnicott's frequently somber reflections in the light of other analyst in the analytic process. Winnicott's view who is and is not part of the natural world and who overflows any uni- of the analytic relationship. the analyst has the double task of occupying ing function as the basis of the analytic relationship yet make it clear how the position of authority implicit in the transference {the Other) while their readings of Lacan sensitized their listening ro their patients. in turn.Hily IH'l'lk Wl' ho¡w i1 will in~pirc ollwr~ 10 :111

Related Interests

lllpt tlw path of working 1 1 11 lid 11 -1 ¡1 1 . A dialectical way of listening to the analysand the fundamental question of what makes a meaningfullife possible.. the Underlying the writings of Winnicott and Lacan is a complex struggle analyst is nota subject of knowledge (one who knows the trutb) but rather to conceive of subjectivity as a natural expression of the living person is a facilitator of the analysand's quest for meaning. 1 "1\lldi. may have erred in viewing the dyadic relationship too literally." truth-secking aspect of psychoanalysis comes to the (2005a) suggested. On the other ha nd. at times. "Whose Reality Is lt?" was the title of one of his linking early experience and transference in the unconscious fantasy of important papers. and Luepnitz illustrate possible ways world. iden- letters as they appear in her patients' discourses is a rare illustration of tity. itself. From this perspective.lll ¡il yw o 11i ¡l¡¡• W11il ~h111 'fi Wl tf d il'l'f / lt lw1 Wl 'l'll W11111H tlll ·'''" 1 . theories and shows how they are to variable degrees implicit in clinical The contrast between Lacan's avoidance of shared relatedness and practice. Villa shows that Winnicott's tions of subjectivity. use of this aspect of Lacanian theory. Both authors stress their commitment toa Winnicottian hold- ter. continues to attract students to the field. leading maintaining a subjective place apart. between the interpersonal and the intersubjective dimensions of for creative growth. Our au1 hors' suggcsrions of how ro use thcir ideas in a complemen- ll'll . especially in his work with more damaged tary constructions of identity. Fm hispan. Attention to the ancl di verse approaches that characterizes the current psychoanalytic scene. involves attunement to transference and desire while remaining receptive The perennial human problem addressed by these powerful thinkers was to acknowledgment of the analyst's part in the design of the new fabric how to sustain personal life and identity against the pressures of biologi- being woven "transitionally" in the space between them.:ois Villa. Winnicott and Lacan were pioneers in language and its effects can take us beyond the simple dyad of analyst exploring these pathways. As Lacan repeatedly insisted. 4 In her interpretation.. sl'hools. it aims at understancling the basic human situation.T 1hl' cri1 k: al dialogue 1har rhc ficld of psychoa na lysis h. They were interested not in adaptation or patients. which stressed intersubjectivity in the clinical encoun.·r as 1:1 ry m:uuwr :tdv:IIH. a desire that back and forth across their overlapping and at times opposed concep. As the following chapters argue.ILIII . dw lcltcrs ofLcn obscurcd by the cliverse vocabularies and ideologies of psychoanalytic 1hl'msdves hc<1rkcn back ro the earliest stages of cmergl'lll'l' of llw suh . In their respec. issues of personal desire. This goes to the issue of the doctri. to the words being spoken. seeking to become the good object his patients lacked. greatest challenge in attempting to work between their models. moving Rather. can sustain a third position that. opens a transitional zone subject. as Green This "philosophical. may shared cmcrgl'lll . He joins othcr contributors in reminding us that psychoanalysis Winnicott's assumption of a maternal role suggests that the clinician's goes beyond its functional role as a method of treatment or techniques. Gorney.

( 1971 ). 2009. journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. llJ \JI). Winnicott. (1953). D.l(o 1 ''""•l'l'lt. W.IIh r ll . D. 3 Another schism in the psychoanalytic world occurred sorne 20 years later-this one ending with no comparable entente. livin g nnd loving" (p. borderline states. (1990).xviii lntroduction Chapter 1 REFERENCES Thinking in the space between Baudry. l Authm\ tlllpllhl"ht·d lllll'l"vicw wirh Mnrion Milncr. 60. whether their primary identification be Freudian. W. Playing and reality." which was to ha ve a lasting irnpact on psychoanalytic thinking thc world over. Winnicott became idemified with the lndependents. In Hcraclitus (Fragment 56) Playing and reality (pp. to the 1940s battle that derailed careers. Kleinian. cach mcmber bound to choose allegiance. 137-138). i 1JHI. 229-242). Kohutian. A. Milner said. . Winnicott: A biographical portrait. Green. W. (1967). Deborah Anna Luepnitz Creen. wc both step and do not step. (2005b). . Few contern- porary analysts. H.ln Through not scc and did not grasp. or "Middle Group. (1953).. D. (1991).. He was for cur- "'H ')'III Jll<~lll '• W• 111 """''"tnl wnh l1v111g pl'l''on. London. 'J0(5). J. ended fricndships. (1996). Winnicott's visir to the New York Psychoanalytic Society and Winnicott and Lacan 1 Institute: A contextua! view. A confusion of rongues. Key ideas for a contemporary psychoanalysis. .39. of course. A. 1059-1090. A. A. Modell. 78. Reprinred wirh permission. lnternational journal of Psychoanalysis. or whose reality is ir? Psychoanalytic Hcracl itus (Fragment 49a) Quarterly. lt cul- minated with the group's bifurcation into the A and B groups. 1975. In the same river. London: Routledge.. I'JHH. and who refused to choose sides. 462). potential space. Lacan. Milner showed me her paintings from the 1930s and 1940s. paediatrics to psycho-analysis (pp.untrip ( 1 97~). wc are and we are not. pp. Psychoanalytic Quarterly. 957-981. (1991). 1971. -1 1111111 111 1 1 111 111 l. The person whom both Klein and Anna Freud trusted. "] like to say it's Anna Freud and Melanie Klcin fighting o ver psychoa nalysis. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. "Wc differ from Freud.

Related Interests

(ilu !1111 tlu . . Butler.t·11d. 0 (oltT11111111& f\J. Novcmbcr 23. L.lllllllp. Jungian. Kahr. Kirshner." 2 She was referring. Sorne reflecrions on rhe ego. 1990. the transitional object. Mirror-role of mother and family in child development. What wc saw anJ grasped. . D. (2009). 34. whok.. }ouer avec Winnicott. and nearly destroyed the British Psychoanalytic Society. While he did not ser out to creare a rhird. the squiggle game and-perhaps most importantly-the clinical use of countertransference as a source of information about the analytic process.llt' tlw work of thc Anwri can 111. W. I am referring to the 1 This clwprcr ion rcviscd and expa nded version of rhe original arricle from lntematiuna/ frmmal o( 1'5yc /¡o. that we bring. that wc !cave behind. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. or relational. was Donald Woods Winnicott.. The concept of the self in psychoanalytic theory and its philo- sophical foundations. Following an interview in 1990. rllaf)'SIS. New York: Routledge. . (2005a). 1 Wlltllll<lll II 'P"' l<"dly . ''don 'l"l'll0 . 227-244.j. New York: Basic Books. F. have not been influenced by constructs such as the good-enough rnother. nonaligned faction.. Pointing to a canvas with two hens tearing each oth er apart-blood and feathers fly- ing-Mrs. Transitional objects and transitional phenomcna. but what we did Winnicott.111111111 .1 1d 10 (. 11-17.M II lhd i. British Middle Group analyst Marion Winnicott. B. London : Tavistock. 157-183 . London: Karnac Books. London: Tavistock.l.

Mitchell. p.11 . ix. l'tK ountl'r worh thO'l' . 1986.. Rustin. while Many Anglophone clinicians persist in dismissing Lacanian psychoanal.1" \XIIIIIlllOII. traveled regu- mocked his British colleague for years as a "nurse ana lyst" susceptible to larly to London for supervision with Winnicott (Boukobza. Lacan established his own school.. I'!Hl. The more familiar 1 became with their [Middle Croup] far asto claim that this fixation on an a ll-powerful mother would lead toa frame of mind. p. he Kalmanovitch. By sorne estimares. p. revealing keen Winnicott (1971) wrote. 2000). environment- (IPA's) investigar ion of Laca n's experimentation with analytic time and sensitive Winnicott over La can. we are a ll Lacanians.) For many years. Following the 1977 translation of the Écrits into English. Anne Clancier and jeanne Kalmonovitch published a book of 1977.ym:ratically.. 5 this schism. Jacques-Aia in Miller (1981). Rudnyrsky (1991). Middle Croup ana lyst Charles Rycroft wrote. 191. 1987. 1\IH2. Miller went so laboration .dy~rs werc i nrroduced ro "rhe posrmodern" ro so me degree through rhe ir (R. Psychanalyse.2 Deborah Anna Luepnitz Thinking in the space between Winnicott and Lacan 3 events that began with the International Psychoanalytical Association's Others campaigned for the delightfully imaginative. not surprisingly Kingdom.l' Fl. " . For examplc. 111). 2000) and La can and a nd of Winnicott perpetua red the nonreading or aggressive misreading of the the New Wave in American Psychoanalysis (Curewich. 1 would amp lify her implicarion ro argue rhar dcscribcd as "thc most important thinker in Francc sincc Rcn (' Descartes" Amcl'll'. unlike Flax. Rudnytsky.Kadcmically bao. may be more profound than those passing citations would suggest ysis as a fringe movement. ha lf the world's (Benjamín. p. 4 Despite 1991.dlop. xii.1gland ·Sullivan. 1989. 2007. the on ly psychoanalyst on either si de of the Winnicott- Consider a lso the perspective offered by joyce McDougall. Maud Mannoni.. 199 1.t 1<' '"' ""'d """''wh. 3). Creen. Miller argued that the preoccupation of Winnicott and 1 had followed Lacan in the na me of freedom of thought. indirect. Australia.lll .. For example. whom one author po~rmodcrn chJ II cnge ro idemiry" (p. the "narcissist" who rejected the mothering role ended with what he ca lled his "excommunication" from that body (Lacan. "Psychoanalyric rheory here Jin rhe U.111 111 "1111111.. in most cases tenden. Lacan is often 11) 1)() . a nd now he the Middle Croup with the role of the mother-all but ignoring a paternal was upbraiding me for thinking for myself. M11dwll. lt was the end of our col- element-constituted as normative a kind of phallic woman. 1987). & Fairfield . Jacques Lacan maintained a cordial relationship with Donald Have no clinicians set themselves to studying both Middle Croup and Winnicott. However. despite never Lacan divide whose original work revea ls a deep understanding of both being a member of Lacan's circle: "In France. in 1984. there were a few. Fini. 6 As Jessica Benjamin (1997) correctly observed. p. ltow. 1'" ' '"""¡. 174. the École Fran(:aise de style seemed designed to frustrare the reader (Fiax. psychoanalysis" (pp.. and the United States.) l1nlqd woth th< Wtlld f~<~>lmorll'lll. Winnicott. 33). Felman. "!'"''""""''"" l(tulll )' ' ' ~ )' p11 l1 ' ' 1 "' . Lacan arranged for the French translation of Winnicott's paper Lacanian psychoanalysis? Even as early as the 1960s. a member of Lacan's circle." made it clear that he himself was not. 1990. IIJHY. 1990.. 787).. and the relationship between . justas traditions was André Creen (1986. The same position was taken by Laurent (1981). 1991). Until ver y recently. 1987. 1982). neither described that influence nor appeared to comprehend Lacan's widely Conversely. p. of the analyst. ""• " ' '

Related Interests

(11111111nll . 83-84). 1981.lli fo li11 : J¡j ~ 1u1y ul tiHI !ol: 1 VIII!~. p. see also Elliot. a onetime coll eague of we are a ll Freudians" (Forrester. p. 3). and whose "opaque" 1981. And reducing Freud's radical project to a practice of "Samaritan aid" (Lacan. analysts have at least cited Lacan. 112). which was renamed the École Freudienne de Paris.) tiously. ir m ay be pos sible ro synrhesize Lacan's view wirh objecr relarions trasted the two psychoanalysts' theoretical positions. 1997. "jacques Lacan's paper Le Stade du Miroir [The interest both in bis theoretical and clinical contributions (Ciancier & mirror stage] (1949) has certainly influenced me .acanians (e. interviews with eight French a nalysts about Winnicott.1111 wh""'' dn 1 . Brennan.6 practicing analysts identify as Lacanian (Fink. '1 i 'oll ·IIII !X Ii. 36).. and his impact on their thinking.. Sorne inveighed against th e familiar humanism of Winnicott and (ap:ur from rhe academ ica lly based Lacanians . interest in Lacan by Anglophone analysts has cont inued cited piece. wh<'l'l'. 1999). overva lued the paternal/phallic function. Tort. I 1999). and suggesrs rhar " ... on the transitional object-certainly a sign of respect-but he also gently For example. 5). Many followers of Lacan found in vol u mes such as Lacan in America (Raba té.l x ( 1 9'>0). A number of aut hors con.l y." (p... p. l. Lacan. chose ata crucia l point to break ranks: while noting that Lacan was genera lly "pro-Winnicott. In rhc Unired Srares.ll idioo.. a number of relational found his [Lacan's] writings a real load of rubbish" (1985. however. Moi.S. (See also Fink. 2007. Mndwll. 1988. 1993). gui leless. 1997. (. Furt her evidence is found Lacan's re-reading ofFreud incomprehensible. 19 74. other man. finds Lacan's rragic worldview "compelling and coherent" Lacan and Winnicott attracted critica! interest. who acknowledged in a letter ro Ernest Jones "a neu. . Lacan developed a following among Anglophone academics.1111.g. Canada. to grow as Lacanian training and st udy gro ups have arisen in the United rotic inhibition to reading Freud" (Rodman. . ) on ly very recently has raken up rhe thc Middle Croup in favor of the iconoclastic Frenchman. 43).. the more I had the feeling that this was where I cou ld perverse system of thinking ("une propédeutique pérverse") (Miller.1n. "¡• l(uudllll ' U (1'. Lonic.

1954-1955. and which up toa certain point converge. 1990. 233). "1 am notan most famous teachings is: "Il n'y a pas de rapport sexuel" (There is no such unconditional Winnicottian .4 Deborah Anna Luepnitz Thinking in the space between Winnicott and Lacan 5 find what was missing in Lacan's approach. Coreen rcnOLI!l c cd I . social health is mildly depressivc-exccpt for holidays. Kirshner. revealing his view of human households as potentially benign." and "mature intimacy. or his famously recondite patible thought. terms like "health.11 . He sounded an occasional melancholic note (e. who can foster the self's coherence and experience of wholeness. 2006. 1 Thc inf. 1981.•H:. coherence very far on the basis of two quite diffcrent points of view.l l' t . profoundly wounded in the human rela- absent in Winnicott" (p. indeed. Absent such were moving toward something that could be called a new Independent tra.11L' I' inl c l' vi c w. 2006. Winnicott achieved this through both an emphasis on spontaneity and play. no reason to refer to the contributors to this volume as anything (p. In . 2003. I believe. These two authors are Lacan p. the individual has a second chancc with a good-enough analyst dition.tnl who rccognizcs ils imagc in the mirror-often while hearing lllli ' IVI

Related Interests

W of André Creen by Annc Clancicr (Ciancier & Kaii11.111 1111.1111.ll'.. rhe world and the prospects for social change. forward and full of promise. Klein. li))) . introduced the "comic tradition" into Although Creen clearly admired Bion. His posi- For Creen." "wholeness. p. or even a "New Middle Croup. Neither selves in a position that. One of Lacan's became sine qua non. 1993). but his thcoretical work.1 ' '.. p. dn\ nh lll fl hllll 'o rJI . his esteem psychoanalysis. is not cal problems from obverse points of view. But why these two? Why not Lacan and Fairbairn or Winnicott and Bion? isfactory.. it has been said.ook rhill\ YOU!" begins a lifclong course of searching N 1h11l . by definition. spcctrum. which seemed tome unsat. adding a gravitas that was all his own. other than analysts interested in both Winnicott and Lacan.lllll' lh . Creen (1986) asserted: "I consider Playing and Reality to be since Frcud could el a i m-they represent equa lly i mportant ends of the a na !y tic one of the fundamental works of contemporary psychoanalysis" (p... dw word-.11' 1' 11###BOT_TEXT###fl' Ílll. " ." Responses to this notion were univo. was persistently upbeat.11111 1'. even for idi'IIIÍi y." which.? about child devclopment.1!'.H tion to the world" (Lacan. I " 111

Related Interests

" of 1 . 2002. for Donald Winnicott and Jacques Lacan appeared overarching: 1991. 1988. Rogers.111 1111'111 y 11111 1" . impact on audiences both popular and professional-an impact few analysts lectual rigor. After Freud. in addition to their exceptional In contrast to the view of Winnicott as a "nurse analyst" without intel. ld of i11w. I argue for Winnicott and Lacan because. but rather to bring writings on the mirror stage.. Engaged by both Lacan and Winnicott.ol 11111'-I ' IVI ' '-• 1111\)111)\ lnr H ' :l'-'-lll. and many others. they work in the area between two schools of allegedly incom. 1. p.g. in contrast. and disinclined to television interviews would he spare bis audience either his somber view of discipleship. in his engagement with the student demonstrators of 1968 nor in his later nal Middle Croup.111 (1\i' IIV

Related Interests