Rosemary Balsam (North America),
Roosevelt Cassorla (Latin America),
and Antonio Pérez-Sánchez (Europe)
来源:IPA精神分析百科辞典
I. DEFINITIONS
一、定义
The concept of enactment does not have a stable place in psychoanalytic theory. Uses of the term vary widely from confinement to the analytic situation to a broad range of interactions and behaviors in life.
扮演这个概念在精神分析理论中并没有一个稳定的位置。该术语的使用非常宽泛,范围从狭义的仅限于(confinement)分析情境到广义的一般生活中的互动和行为。
Following the first use of the term in a title of a paper by Theodore Jacobs (1986), enactment has often been thought of as a North American concept. However, in contemporary North American psychoanalytic literature, there is no single concept of enactment. Rather, there is a group of such concepts, more or less closely related to one another but also quite different from one another. The following sample of the uses absorbs, combines and expands on, the North American definitions of the concept by Akhtar (2009) and Auchincloss and Samberg (2012):
Theodore Jacobs(1986)在一篇论文的标题中首次使用了这个术语之后,通常认为扮演是一个北美的概念。然而,在当代北美精神分析文献中,没有单一的扮演的概念,相反,有一组这样的概念,这些概念彼此之间或多或少有着密切的联系,但也有很大的不同。下面的示例,吸收、结合并扩展了由Akhtar(2009)Auchincloss和Samberg (2012)对这一概念的北美定义:
Transference/Countertransference enactments (e.g., Jacobs 1986, Hirsch, 1998), where analyst and/or analysand express transference or countertransference wishes in action, rather than reflecting on and interpreting them. This use of the term was further expanded by McLaughlin (1991) to include 'evocative-coercive transferences of both patient and analyst’ and yet further developed by Chused (1991, 2003) as 'symbolic interactions' with unconscious meaning for both participants, potentially extending beyond the analytic situation. This phenomenon could be viewed as a version of ‘acting out’ or ‘acting in’ (Zeligs, 1957), extended to both participants.
移情与反移情扮演(例如,Jacobs 1986, Hirsch, 1998)的概念中,分析师和/或分析者的移情或反移情意愿是在行动中表达的,而不是通过反思和解释来表达移情/反移情。这个术语的使用进一步被McLaughlin(1991)扩展,包括“唤起了患者和分析师的强制移情”,同时,这个概念又进一步的被Chused (1991, 2003) 发展为:参与双方无意识意义的“象征性互动”潜在地扩展超越了分析情景。这种现象可以被看作是另一个版本的“咨询室内的付诸行动”或“咨询室外的付诸行动” (Zeligs, 1957),(将这一概念的适用范围)扩展到了参与双方。
· 在The analysand’s unconscious induction of the analyst to live out the analysand’s unconscious fantasies. This idea is akin to 'projective identification' and/or 'role responsiveness'.
分析者的无意识诱发了(induction)分析师对分析者无意识幻想的践行(live out)。这个观点与“投射性认同”和/或“角色响应性”是同源的。
An embedded series of often subtle, unconscious, interactive, mutually constructed dramas that are lived out' (Levine and Friedman, 2000, p.73; Loewald, 1975). Here, ‘enactment’ is being used to name a kind of intersubjectivity since the analyst is seen as a co-creator of what happens between the two parties.
一系列的践行化身(embedded)通常是微妙的,无意识的,互动的,相互构建的戏剧,(Levine and Friedman, 2000, p.73; Loewald, 1975) 。在这里,“扮演”被用来命名一种主体间性,因为分析者被看作是双方之间发生的事情的共同创造者。Any dramatic expression of transferential/countertransferential rupture of a fluid analytic containing exchange (Ellman, 2007), potentially extending beyond the psychoanalytic situation (Chused, Ellman, Renik, Rothstein, 1999), may be communicated nonverbally or verbally (see the “interpretative enactment” by Steiner, 2006a, below)
任何移情/反移情的戏剧性的表达打断了分析性涵容交流的流动(Ellman,2007),潜在地扩展超越了精神分析情境 (Chused, Ellman, Renik, Rothstein, 1999),可能通过语言或非语言形式进行沟通(参见“诠释性扮演”的斯坦纳,by Steiner, 2006a, 下同)。
In Latin America this conceptual plurarity has been reduced, owing to the additional historical influences of authors like Racker (1948, 1988), Grinberg (1957, 1962), and Baranger & Baranger (1961-1962), and the further contemporary studies of Cassorla (2001, 2005, 2009, 2012, 2013, 2015), Sapisochin (2007, 2013) and others.
在拉丁美洲,这个概念的众多性有所简化,源自于像Racker(1948, 1988), Grinberg (1957, 1962), and Baranger & Baranger (1961-1962)这些作者的附加历史影响,以及Cassorla (2001, 2005, 2009, 2012, 2013, 2015)Sapisochin (2007, 2013) 和其他人对这一概念的进一步研究。
The predominant contemporary understanding of enactment in Latin America concerns phenomena where the analytical field is invaded by discharges and/or behaviors that involve both patient and analyst. Enactments arise from mutual emotional inducement without the members of the analytical dyad clearly realizing what is happening. Enactments reflect back to situations where verbal symbolization was impaired and, when words are available, they are used in limited and concrete ways. Enactments are ways of remembering early relationships through behaviors and feelings that are part of defensive organizations. (See below the differences between chronic and acute enactments)
情绪的相互诱导中产生了扮演,分析二元关系中没有一个成员清晰的认识到正在发生的是什么。扮演如是的反应了以下的情景,在这一情景中,语言符号化受损了,而且,词语是有效可用的,他们被用在了有限和具体的方式之中。扮演通过行为和感受回忆着早期的关系的方式,是防御组织的一部分。(参见下文中的慢性与急性扮演之间的差异)
当代拉丁美洲将扮演的概念现象理解为,分析师以及分析者双方的卸载和/或行为侵入了分析领域的现象。在
European understanding of the term is closer to the Latin American than to the North American version, because the concept is rather exclusively confined to the analytical session.However, for some European analysts it differs from the Latin American version in that enactment is not so much a co-creation of patient and analyst, but rather the result of the interaction between them. The references to enactment being positioned within the countertransference or acting out are also fairly common
欧洲对这个术语的理解比北美版本更接近拉丁美洲,因为这个概念完全局限于分析会谈之中。然而,对于一些欧洲分析家来说,它不同于拉丁美洲版本的地方是,扮演不是病人和分析家共同创造的,而是他们之间交互作用的结果。所涉及的扮演被设定在反移情之中或咨询室外付诸行动之中也相当普遍。