No abstract

The author starts by treating the general epistemological problems inherent to research and emphasizes that all investigation takes place between two poles: a creative pole and one that is defensive in relation to the unknown and formlessness. In the psychosomatic field, an additional difficulty resides in the western dualistic vision of the relationship between psyche and soma which influences our way of thinking about the body as well as about otherness. The author continues by exploring Pierre Marty's psychosomatic model. Its psychosomatic monism is revolutionary but incomplete and creates a distance with the other, the somatizing patient, resulting in a medically oriented nosology symptomatic of the impossibility to think about some of the most important aspects of counter-transference. With the help of clinical material, the author considers these unthought aspects and some of their theoretical implications, particularly the way of understanding the negative often so prevalent with these patients. Based on these reflections as well as Freud's on beyond the pleasure principle and Winnicott's theorization on the fear of breakdown, the author suggests some directions for research. Somatic illness might occur when the attempts at filling the cracks created by a breakdown are unsuccessful.

Construction avec fin, construction sans fin  « Constructions dans l’analyse » constitue une reprise de l’impensé d’« Analyse avec fin et analyse sans fin ”. Il est gros d’un saut épistémologique dont l’auteur développe quelques aspects : l’extension de la notion de régression (Winnicott) ; la place de la crainte de l’effondrement au cœur du psychisme humain ; les effets du trauma ; une nouvelle définition de l’hallucinatoire. Enfin, il en examine les conséquences sur la construction de la théorie en psychosomatique, distinguant les maladies à crise, enclaves psychotiques actuelles, des désorganisations, faisant suite à une fuite maniaque de comportement devant la crainte de l’effondrement.

The author hypothesizes that the papers Freud wrote in the period 1934-9 constitute a final turning point in his work resulting from an attempt to work through, by means of self-analysis, early traumatic elements reactivated by the conditions of his life in the 1930s. The author emphasizes that the ups and downs of Freud's relationship with Sándor Ferenczi and the mourning which followed his death in 1933 played an important role in this traumatic situation. He suggests that through these last works, Freud pursued a posthumous dialogue with Ferenczi. This working through led Freud, in Moses and monotheism, to an ultimate revision of his theory of trauma, a revision which the author examines in full, in the light of the works of the Egyptologist, Jan Assmann. A new analytical paradigm emerges: that of constructions in analysis developed in the article of the same name. The activity of construction appears as an alternative to the mutual analysis proposed by Ferenczi and is closely bound up with the notion of historical truth. In psychoanalysis, it would mean constructing a historical truth whose anchoring in the material truth of the past is essential, though it should not be confused with it.

L’auteur souligne que toute recherche se meut entre deux valences : l’une créative, l’autre défensive par rapport à l’inconnu et à l’informe. Cela est vrai du modèle psychosomatique de Pierre Marty qui apparaît comme une révolution inachevée : son monisme psychosomatique est révolutionnaire mais incomplet ; il aboutit par ailleurs à une nosologie de type médical symptomatique d’une impossibilité à penser des aspects centraux du contre-transfert. À l’aide d’un exemple clinique, l’auteur met cet impensé au travail puis propose quelques pistes de recherche à partir des réflexions freudiennes sur l’au-delà du principe de plaisir et winnicottiennes sur la crainte de l’effondrement.