The psychoanalytic setting: José Bleger’s encuadre

ABSTRACT

José Bleger’s paper on the setting (encuadre) is integral to his 1967 book Symbiosis and Ambiguity. Relevant concepts from the book are summarised before examining his view of the setting as a “non-process” consisting of “constants”, complementing the “variables” of the analytic process. Process and setting are related as figure and ground in Gestalt psychology. The ideally maintained setting is studied as a thought experiment, uniting the categories of institution, personality, body schema, and body. Deposited in the setting, the psychotic part of the personality, or “agglutinated nucleus”, is a remnant of early symbiosis with the mother. Bleger distinguishes two settings: the analyst’s and the patient’s. The latter can only be analysed by strictly maintaining the former. Ritualisation of the setting denies temporal reality. De-symbiotisation is not always possible. A concept of “internal” setting is suggested, but Bleger nowhere mentions this and the concept is problematic, leaving open the question of how to listen to the silence of the setting. Bleger’s concept of encuadre can be applied to constants (invariants) in the wider world, the psychotic part of the personality being deposited in everything that is familiar and felt to be constant, including technology, which creates a “platform” for human activity.

L'article de José Bleger sur le cadre (encuadre) fait partie intégrante de son livre Symbiose et ambiguïté (1967). Les concepts pertinents de ce livre sont résumés avant d’examiner sa vision du cadre en tant que “non-processus” constitué de “constantes”, en complément des “variables” du processus analytique. Le processus et le cadre sont comme la figure et le fond dans la Psychologie de la Gestalt. Le cadre idéalement maintenu est étudié comme une expérience de pensée, en réunissant les catégories de l'institution, de la personnalité, du schéma corporel et du corps. Déposée dans le cadre, la partie psychotique de la personnalité, ou “noyau agglutiné”, est un vestige de la symbiose précoce avec la mère. Bleger distingue deux cadres: celui de l'analyste et celui du patient. Ce dernier ne peut être analysé qu’en respectant strictement le premier. La ritualisation du cadre est une négation de la réalité temporelle. La désymbiotisation n’est pas toujours possible. Le texte suggère le concept de cadre “interne” bien que Bleger ne le mentionne nulle part et que c’est un concept problématique qui laisse ouverte la question de savoir comment écouter le silence du cadre. Le concept d’encuadre de Bleger peut être appliqué aux constantes (invariants) dans le monde en général, la partie psychotique de la personnalité étant déposée dans tout ce qui est familier et ressenti comme constant, y compris la technologie qui crée une “plate-forme” pour l'activité humaine.

José Blegers Artikel über der Rahmen (encuadre) ist integraler Bestandteil seines 1967 erschienenen Buches Symbiose und Ambiguität. Nach einer Zusammenfassung der relevanten Konzepte aus dem Buch wird seine Auffassung vom Rahmen als “Nicht-Prozess” untersucht. Dieser besteht aus “Konstanten” und wird durch “Variablen” des analytischen Prozesses ergänzt. Prozess und Setting stehen in der gleichen Beziehung wie etwa Figur und Grund in der Gestaltpsychologie. Ein ideal eingehaltener Rahmen ist ein Gedankenexperiment, das die Kategorien der Institution, der Persönlichkeit, des Körperschemas und des Körpers in sich vereint. Der im Rahmen deponierte psychotische Teil der Persönlichkeit, ein “agglutinierter Kern”, ist ein Überbleibsel der frühen Symbiose mit der Mutter. Bleger unterscheidet zwei Rahmen: den des Analytikers und den des Patienten. Letzterer kann nur unter strikter Beibehaltung der ersteren analysiert werden. Die Ritualisierung des Rahmens verneint die Realität der Zeit. Eine ,De-Symbiotisierung‘ ist nicht immer möglich. Es wird ein Konzept des “inneren” Rahmens vorgeschlagen, das Bleger jedoch nirgends erwähnt. Das Konzept ist problematisch, da es die Frage offen lässt, wie man auf die Stille des Rahmens hören kann. Das vorgestellte Konzept Blegers (“encuadre”) ist auf Konstanten (Invarianten) in der weiteren Welt anwendbar. Dabei wird der psychotische Teil der Persönlichkeit in allem, was vertraut ist und als konstant empfunden wird, deponiert und schließt auch die eine “Plattform” für menschliche Aktivitäten schaffende Technologie mit ein.

El artículo de José Bleger sobre el encuadre forma parte de su libro de 1967 Simbiosis y ambigüedad. Se resumen los conceptos relevantes del libro antes de examinar su visión del encuadre como “no-proceso” que consiste en “constantes”, complementando las “variables” del proceso analítico. En la psicología de la Gestalt, el proceso y el encuadre se relacionan como figura y fondo. El encuadre idealmente mantenido se estudia como una experiencia ideal, que reune las categorías de institución, personalidad, esquema corporal y cuerpo. Depositada en el encuadre, la parte psicótica de la personalidad, o “núcleo aglutinado”, es un remanente de la simbiosis primaria con la madre. Bleger distingue dos encuadres: el del analista y el del paciente. Este último sólo puede analizarse manteniendo estrictamente el primero. La ritualización del encuadre niega la realidad temporal. La desimbiotización no siempre es posible. Se sugiere un concepto de encuadre “interno”, pero Bleger no lo menciona en ninguna parte y el concepto es problemático, dejando abierta la cuestión de cómo escuchar el silencio del encuadre. El concepto de encuadre de Bleger puede aplicarse a las constantes (invariantes) del mundo en general, la parte psicótica de la personalidad depositándose en todo lo que es familiar y se siente como constante, incluida la tecnología que crea una “plataforma” para la actividad humana.

Il capitolo di José Bleger sul setting (inquadramento/encuadre) è parte integrante del suo libro Simbiosi e ambiguità del 1967. I concetti rilevanti del libro sono riassunti prima di esaminare la sua visione del setting come “non-processo” costituito da “costanti” che completano le “variabili” del processo analitico. Processo e setting sono correlati come figura e fondo nella psicologia della Gestalt. Il setting idealmente mantenuto viene studiato come un esperimento mentale, che unisce le categorie di istituzione, personalità, schema corporeo e corpo. Depositata nel setting, la parte psicotica della personalità, o “nucleo agglutinato”, è un residuo della simbiosi precoce con la madre. Bleger distingue due settings: quello dell'analista e quello del paziente. Quest'ultimo può essere analizzato solo mantenendo rigorosamente il primo. La ritualizzazione del setting nega la realtà temporale. La de-simbiotizzazione non è sempre possibile. Viene suggerito un concetto di setting “interno”, ma Bleger non lo menziona da nessuna parte e il concetto è problematico, lasciando aperta la questione di come ascoltare il silenzio del setting. Il concetto di "encuadre" di Bleger può essere applicato alle costanti (invarianti) del mondo in generale, essendo la parte psicotica della personalità depositata in tutto ciò che è familiare e sentito come costante, compresa la tecnologia che crea una “piattaforma” per l'attività umana.

KEYWORDS:

• Bleger
• setting
• body

Acknowledgements

This paper could not have been written without the benefit of discussions over many years with various colleagues. I am especially indebted to Leopoldo Bleger, to Marie Bridge, and to Haydée Faimberg.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 For example, Kaës (who is not mentioned in the Dictionary) distinguishes three terms: “setting” (dispositif), “situation” (situation), and “frame” (cadre). By dispositif he means certain physical and practical arrangements that the analyst makes use of, “ … both that which the analyst has at his disposal and that which he puts in place for practising psychoanalysis” (Kaës 2007, 57). He thus treats “setting” (dispositif) and “frame” (cadre) as distinct concepts, but in a note to the English translation of his book he acknowledges that Bleger’s concept of encuadre includes both of them (Kaës 2007, 67n1).]

2 Chapters 7–9 together make up Part III of the book, which is titled “Appendix”.

3 In the Spanish original and in the 2013 English translation the sections are separated typographically by the Greek letter ψ; in the 1967 journal versions they are separated by a blank line only.

4 Tylim and Harris include the text of the 2013 translation of José Bleger’s paper. Moguillansky and Levine include the text of the 1967 translation.

5 These include: Sigmund Freud, Melanie Klein, Ronald Fairbairn, Otto Fenichel, Heinz Hartmann, Ernst Kris, Rudolph Loewenstein, Anna Freud, René Spitz, Michael Balint, and Lagache.

6 Following a distinction made by Bleuler ([1911] 1950), Bleger identifies abnormal splitting with Bleuler’s Zerspaltung, and normal splitting with his Spaltung.

7 Bleger discusses the similarity between this and Strachey’s (1934) mutative interpretation. There is also a parallel with Steiner’s distinction between analyst-centred and patient-centred interpretations (Steiner 1994).

8 This definition formally resembles the one in Bleger’s study of conceptual frameworks (encuadres) mentioned above (Bleger [1963] 1973), but the practical application is different.

9 Marion Milner compared the psychoanalytic setting to the frame around a painting: “The frame marks off the different kind of reality that is within it from that which is outside it; but a temporal spatial frame also marks off the special kind of reality of a psycho-analytic session. And in psycho-analysis it is the existence of this frame that makes possible the full development of that creative illusion that analysts call the transference” (Milner 1952, 183).This is similar to Bleger’s use of the figure–ground analogy in the sense that the psychoanalytic process as a “special kind of reality” takes place within the bounded space of the “figure”. But it is also dissimilar in that the frame around a painting itself has extension, with both external and internal boundaries.

10 The Spanish translation of this originally German term is experiencia ideal. In the 1967 version in the IJP this was translated as “ideal experiment”, which fails to convey the concept.

11 The Spanish is miembro fantasma. In the 1967 version in the IJP this was translated as “ghost member”, which makes little sense in English. Correctly translated as “phantom limb”, Bleger’s meaning is clarified and the vital connection in his thinking between the setting and the human body is made evident.

12 The italicisation here seems deliberately to echo Winnicott’s assertion that “The couch is the analyst’s lap or womb … ”, which Bleger quotes in the previous paragraph but one.

13 In Spanish this last phrase is: “la indiferenciación cuerpo-espacio y cuerpo-ambiente” (Bleger 1967a, 247). The 1967 translation has: “the body-space and body setting non-differentiation” (Bleger 1967b, 517).

14 Bleger probably derived his concept of the body schema from Schilder, influenced by discussion with Pichon Rivière and their reading of Merleau-Ponty (Tubert-Oklander and Hernández de Tubert 2004, 71). Schilder (1950) was building on the pioneering neurological work of Head and Holmes (1911–12) and had expanded the concept to include both libidinal and “sociological” dimensions. Schilder's work has been criticised for not distinguishing clearly between the body schema as the postural model of the body that is involved in the organisation of bodily movements, and body image as the mental image of the body (Gallagher 2005). For further discussion of this point see Churcher (2023, 43–44).

15 Although both Churcher (2013) and Lemma (2014) state that Bleger did not make this point explicitly, in fact he did: briefly, in a footnote (Bleger [1967] 2013, 232 n178). See also Godsil (2018).

16 In Spanish, baluarte: a type of fortification, projecting from the walls of a fortress, which enables the defenders to attack from the side anyone who tries to attack the walls, thus making an assault on the main structure more difficult.

17 See also the very similar description by Lemma (2014) of her patient Ms A’s way of entering the session.

18 In Freud’s paper on “Negation”, the creation of the distinction between internal and external is, in the first instance, the same process as the constitution of the ego: “internal” is equated with “mental”, i.e. existing in the mind; “external” is equated with “reality”, i.e. confirmed by perception as existing independent of wishes (Freud 1925).