To introduce a reflection about “style” on interpretation

Abstract

The author asks himself how to speak on a psychoanalytic way about the matter of style of interpretation. The style of interpretation is engaged, in a fundamental way, to the issue of countertransference. Once this is admitted in the analytical process, the psychoanalysts could discuss about what from themselves is implicated in the style of their interpretations. Since S.Freud’s narcissistic economy description in 1920, we can no longer think the interpretation as a simple translation of contents repressed in words. It should assure a function of primary connection, in this manner the structure and the form of the interpretation will pass to the first plan of the reflection. The author highlights that in the current psychoanalytic thought there should be a syntony between the analyst and the possible kind of communication for each patient. Thus, two syntony types are established: a verbal, metaphorical, that operates in the secondary level and another syntony called mime-gesture-postural, characteristic of the primary bond, typical of the precocious interactions, making a connection possible. Working on this level the analyst’s interventions would work as actions or symbolic actions, creators of representations.