Stations Along the Via Dolorosa Towards Good-Enough Endings.

Q3 Psychology
Alina Schellekes
{"title":"Stations Along the Via Dolorosa Towards Good-Enough Endings.","authors":"Alina Schellekes","doi":"10.1057/s11231-024-09432-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article focuses on the prevailing aspiration to reach a \"good-enough ending\" in analysis, a concept that is partly realistic and partly illusional. I discuss some of the obstacles that interfere with achieving this yearned for goal, and lead to endings that are far from the misleading illusion of the good-enough termination, that many of us believe we have achieved and are many more than it is commonly reported. I describe characteristics, obstacles, blockages, dreads within the analysand, within the analyst and in the space in between, which lead to endings which are far from good enough, by any criteria we might choose. These obstacles include the failure to distinguish between \"real\" versus \"similar to\"; emotional excess; emptying out of internal resources and toxemia of therapy/analysis; a fascination with certain levels of mind versus a neglect of others; osmotic pressure for oneness and the terror of perfection; and malignant nostalgia. Reflecting on such complex facets in the analytic process is relevant not only for a deeper understanding of illusions that we and our analysands hold with regard to endings, but also, implicitly, to the understanding of illusions, beliefs, and myths we and our patients have regarding beginnings.</p>","PeriodicalId":52458,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Psychoanalysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Psychoanalysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s11231-024-09432-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article focuses on the prevailing aspiration to reach a "good-enough ending" in analysis, a concept that is partly realistic and partly illusional. I discuss some of the obstacles that interfere with achieving this yearned for goal, and lead to endings that are far from the misleading illusion of the good-enough termination, that many of us believe we have achieved and are many more than it is commonly reported. I describe characteristics, obstacles, blockages, dreads within the analysand, within the analyst and in the space in between, which lead to endings which are far from good enough, by any criteria we might choose. These obstacles include the failure to distinguish between "real" versus "similar to"; emotional excess; emptying out of internal resources and toxemia of therapy/analysis; a fascination with certain levels of mind versus a neglect of others; osmotic pressure for oneness and the terror of perfection; and malignant nostalgia. Reflecting on such complex facets in the analytic process is relevant not only for a deeper understanding of illusions that we and our analysands hold with regard to endings, but also, implicitly, to the understanding of illusions, beliefs, and myths we and our patients have regarding beginnings.

多罗罗萨大道上的驿站,走向足够好的结局。
本文的重点是在分析中达到 "足够好的结局 "的普遍愿望,这一概念部分是现实的,部分是虚幻的。我讨论了妨碍实现这一渴望目标的一些障碍,这些障碍导致的结局与 "足够好的结局 "这一误导人的假象相去甚远,我们中的许多人都认为自己已经实现了这一目标,而且比通常报道的要好得多。我描述了被分析者、分析者以及分析者之间的特征、障碍、阻塞和恐惧,这些特征、障碍、阻塞和恐惧导致的结局远远不够好,无论我们选择什么样的标准。这些障碍包括:无法区分 "真实 "与 "相似";情感过度;内部资源的空虚和治疗/分析的毒血症;对某些心灵层次的迷恋和对其他心灵层次的忽视;对同一性的渗透压和对完美的恐惧;以及恶性怀旧。在分析过程中反思这些复杂的方面,不仅有助于更深入地理解我们和被分析者对结束所抱有的幻想,而且还能潜移默化地理解我们和患者对开始所抱有的幻想、信念和神话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Psychoanalysis
American Journal of Psychoanalysis Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Psychoanalysis is an international psychoanalytic quarterly founded in 1941 by Karen Horney. The journal''s purpose is to be an international forum for communicating a broad range of contemporary theoretical, clinical, professional and cultural concepts of psychoanalysis and for presenting related investigations in allied fields. It is a fully peer-reviewed journal, which welcomes psychoanalytic papers from all schools of thought that address the interests and concerns of scholars and practitioners of psychoanalysis and contribute meaningfully to the understanding of human experience. The journal publishes original papers, special issues devoted to a single topic, book reviews, film reviews, reports on the activities of the Karen Horney Psychoanalytic Center, and comments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信