Begin the Beguine: Relational Theory and the Pluralistic Third

Abstract

Different clinical theories valorize particular aspects of clinical understanding. The author describes the need for analysts to hold themselves accountable through thinking about the blind spots that result from prizing these particular lenses. He explores the concept of the pluralistic third, which aims to think about clinical work with the use of theory external to our own. In examining the very beginning phase of an unusual analysis, he tries to examine particular aspects of his work including survival as an object for the patient, analytic play, and enactment. Even among relational analysts there are profound differences in how we interpret and make use of countertransference, particularly our disjunctive subjectivity from that of our patient. These differences point to the value of asking particular questions regarding how to hold ourselves accountable within the analytic process.

Notes

¹The writing of this paper preceded both the publication of Lew Aron's paper “Analytic Impasse and the Third: Clinical Implications of Intersubjectivity Theory” and the International Association for Relational Psychoanalysis & Psychotherapy colloquium that discussed his paper. The diverse usage of the “third” as a concept in psychoanalytic theory is beyond the scope of this paper. The concept of the third is used in this paper with only this restrictive and functional definition.