說明兩岸的局和生處如是險(precarious)境如何做人起因是讀馮勝平上書習近平一書莫大悲哀無路可走馮君長我三歲其心之所繫顯為大陸局勢台灣對他而言是歷史的沒有作用的盲腸台灣做為五千年來第一個能民主自由法治度日容許每一個人好好做人的華人社群的這件事對馮君而言顯然只見其弊台灣的民主當然需要深化我們身處島內當然憂心但起碼我們已有一些深化的條件這是島內唯一需要珍惜的風景但大陸猶為轉型不見端倪有識者仍需上書皇上的局我的書寫是寫給明天的我看的讓今天的我留下一點曾經存在的證據不是寫給別人看的台灣做為五千年來第一個能民主自由度日的華人社群的這件事是一件華人歷史命脈存在過的作品說明華人是可以做得到的意思是說過去三十年的台灣是接下來三十年的大陸的借鏡我先前說過讓華人先有我再有我們之所以這個順序的理由是因為華人承受了關係主義數千年餘毒最常見的命運是有了我們就以為有了我這是我對黃光國急著強調關係主義不能同意的原因台灣的唯一希望當然是自立自強我的意思是說讓每一個人活出一個真實的精采的有見地有情義有膽識有遼闊的風景的不怕死的我我誠然有限但恰恰就是那個有限才是真實而兩岸並不相識我不認識你你不認識我讓這個相互認識素面相見有機會再發生久一點深刻一點我們才可能長出歷史的理性一起看到乃至走出歷史的魔咒和詛咒
Monday, July 31, 2017
Sunday, July 30, 2017
正確
正確的父母正確的害人正確的配偶正確的兒女正確的基因正確的神經迴路正確的刷牙正確的出恭正確的勾心鬥角正確的過馬路正確的惡意正確的開車正確的無意義正確的停車正確的學校正確的公司正確的工作正確的混日子正確的退休正確的叫床正確的解釋正確的答案正確的洗澡正確的關說正確的貪污正確的高喊民進黨萬歲正確的倒著走路正確的砲姿正確的砍死前女友正確的笑話正確的品嘗紅酒正確的速度正確的方向正確的理髮正確的操作絞肉機正確的關係正確的察顏觀色正確的說柯文哲是一個偉大的第三世界的所謂首都的市長正確的抽事後菸正確的吃法國料理正確的洗碗正確的裝神弄鬼正確的說他媽的正確的人生正確的政治正確正確的貪生正確的怕死正確的告別式正確的明牌正確的下注正確的正確的正確的正確的正確的正確的正確的正確的正確的正確的正確的在這麼多正確的正確之後那個人正確的長考之後正確的決定他要正確的不停的正確的嘔吐
Saturday, July 29, 2017
小
剛剛說台灣的局好在小好操作但也壞在小壞在小聰明小心眼意思是說外在內在都沒有遼闊的風景遼闊就是寥闊寥就是寂寥就是在北達克塔州開車三百公里見不到半個人而我們不管做甚麼都一窩蜂壅擠深怕吃虧卡不到位為細故慍怒動氣無日無之沒有歷史沒有人文沒有教養變成品牌這兩天大家最關心的是郭台銘的老婆穿甚麼衣服進白宮晉見川普那廝投誠納供我的朋友查理士布朗遜說他最關心的是他的朋友波多野結衣有沒有穿衣服其實外在內在沒有遼闊的風景的人穿甚麼衣服都是多餘這句話我託我的朋友查理士布朗遜告訴他的朋友波多野結衣他的朋友波多野結衣說她完全同意
過境
颱風正開始過境
剛看完馮勝平寫給習近平的第三封信
遣詞用句寫得很好
但仍然是資治通鑑的傳統
是寫給皇上的諫言獻策
揀皇上耳根勉強還聽得下去的話來說
當年不曉得有沒有人曾經給蔣經國諫言獻策
1987解嚴的決定是如何發生的
台灣的局好在小好操作
大陸的局壞在大不好操作
且這個大
是大一統的帝國的幾千年的包袱
這個歷史的魔咒和詛咒
馮勝平開的方子是
極權在握者由上而下的黨主憲政
他明顯不信任由下而上的路
但權力者是否有誠意啟動改革
高伐林訪問稿的最後
他陷入沉思
沒有作答
看到這裡
窗外呼嘯的風雨其實不算甚麼
蘆笛
蘆笛，1940年代末生於中國大陸。高中畢業適逢文革爆發，學業中斷，先上山下鄉，後返城進廠當工人，1977年高考恢復後考入大學，1980年代後期出國留學，獲博士學位後一直在海外科研機構工作，現專事文史寫作。
蘆笛被認為是近年海外最有爭議性、最具影響力的華人文史作家之一，甚至有海外「第一寫家」之稱。
2010年1月以來，在明鏡出版社連續出版了五本書：《毛澤東與他的近臣和女人》《國共偽造的歷史》《百年蠢動》《野蠻的俄羅斯》和《毛主席用兵真如神？》。
https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%98%86%E7%AC%9B_(%E4%BD%9C%E5%AE%B6)
https://archive.is/1JUKC
蘆笛被認為是近年海外最有爭議性、最具影響力的華人文史作家之一，甚至有海外「第一寫家」之稱。
2010年1月以來，在明鏡出版社連續出版了五本書：《毛澤東與他的近臣和女人》《國共偽造的歷史》《百年蠢動》《野蠻的俄羅斯》和《毛主席用兵真如神？》。
https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%98%86%E7%AC%9B_(%E4%BD%9C%E5%AE%B6)
https://archive.is/1JUKC
海航
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdU7d_pgst4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbmN0UCqAJ8
【话题一】：万达海航等权贵资本，十九大前纷纷被敲打？
馮勝平說現在的局
是資本和權力的博弈
雙方旗鼓相當且有底線
所以不至於零和
但是資本是趙家人的
資本家不可能不是趙家人的白手套
權力也是趙家人的
趙家人趙家人
趙家人通殺必贏
所以上述資本和權力的博弈
不過是趙家人派系彼此間的鬥爭
這些二貨爭權爭錢
但通常不爭女人(這方面他們是共享經濟的先行者也可見女人是解決中國政治的勝出者的性慾的工具與權力的殺戮本質無關)
以上我看不出希望在那裡
也看不出馮勝平這幾年鼓吹的
"黨主憲政" "讓一部分人先民主起來" (意思是說 "讓趙家人先民主起來" 一般百姓消受不了民主 亂了就糟了 實在像當年鄧小平講的 "讓一部份人先富起來")
的希望在那裡
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbmN0UCqAJ8
【话题一】：万达海航等权贵资本，十九大前纷纷被敲打？
馮勝平說現在的局
是資本和權力的博弈
雙方旗鼓相當且有底線
所以不至於零和
但是資本是趙家人的
資本家不可能不是趙家人的白手套
權力也是趙家人的
趙家人趙家人
趙家人通殺必贏
所以上述資本和權力的博弈
不過是趙家人派系彼此間的鬥爭
這些二貨爭權爭錢
但通常不爭女人(這方面他們是共享經濟的先行者也可見女人是解決中國政治的勝出者的性慾的工具與權力的殺戮本質無關)
以上我看不出希望在那裡
也看不出馮勝平這幾年鼓吹的
"黨主憲政" "讓一部分人先民主起來" (意思是說 "讓趙家人先民主起來" 一般百姓消受不了民主 亂了就糟了 實在像當年鄧小平講的 "讓一部份人先富起來")
的希望在那裡
epilogue (peppiatt 2015)
One late-autumn
afternoon, many years later, I am back in Francis’s old studio on the rue
de Birague. All the furniture, including the brass-bound sea chest, the big
easel and the trestle table with its paraphernalia of paint tubes, brushes and rags,
has long disappeared. The walls and the heavily beamed ceiling have been repainted
in the exact matt white that Francis originally chose. The room stands
totally empty but
nothing else has changed: the same, even northern light coming through the
tall, elegant windows, the same carved wooden shutters, the same Versailles
parquet on the floor. The nostalgia I feel looking round this immaculate,
vacant room turns to melancholy as I reflect on how brimming with life this
space once was and how neutral and banal it is now, emptied of all traces of
Francis’s presence and creativity. I can still see him here, laughing,
full of vitality, eager to get back into the pleasures of Paris. I start
thinking too of the various canvases painted here, from the intimate evocations
of George, whose suicide still weighed on him, to the astonishingly vivid
portraits of Michel Leiris and the starkly concentrated, translucent images of
his last years.
I turn to leave, hoping
to get away from the powerful feelings of loss and sadness that are
enveloping me, but just before I go I pull open the built-in wardrobe where
Francis always left a few clothes. It is completely bare inside now but the
haunting, pungent smell of his asthma inhaler, which always pervaded the places
where he lived, wafts up. The moment I breathe it in it sets off a series
of images sliding through my brain that I cannot stop. Francis’s face close up
laughing, the spin of a roulette wheel, Nada, Nada, a glass of
wine spilling like blood
over a tablecloth. I push the wardrobe doors to right away but the inhaler’s
corrosive smell is already settling in my lungs, releasing a chaotic flow
of memories.
Outside it is already
dusk and a fine rain has begun to fall. The ancient lamps cast a faint
glow over the large, empty courtyard. Once it would have been filled with
horses and carriages, with people going intently about their lives. They have
gone, and coming after them others immortalized in early photographs taken here
with their confident expressions and stiff clothes have gone. Generations have gone, and
the courtyard is silent now. Emotional and confused, I think of people I
have been close to and who are now dead. I think of you, Danielle, and you,
Zoran, and I think fleetingly, awkwardly, of my own dead father. As I make my
way over the courtyard towards the street I picture each of the
glistening, yellowish cobblestones as marking a grave, uneven little
memorials to the dead whom
I knew and who are now beyond recall and whom we will rejoin, whatever and
wherever they may be. And standing under the lamplight, although I know it
is no more than a rush of fantasy, I find a headstone for you, Sonia, and for
you, George and John Deakin, for Michel Leiris and Isabel Rawsthorne and all the
others I have known through those hundreds of hours in clubs and
restaurants, with the champagne pouring and the conversation rising as if
neither would ever end. I think back to that mass of time bright with the hopes
and illusions I once had, the unbearable excitement entwined with the blackest
despair, now all gone, all past, all lost. I think of the horror of life and the
beauty of life, standing there in this graveyard of my own imagining, its
fleeting grandeur and its
certain decay. And I can no longer hold back the tears. Emotions that have
been held in check for years well up, and I cry as I haven’t cried since I
was a child sobbing myself to sleep, but I also cry as an adult in the awareness
and acceptance of death. I cry for myself and I cry for all the dead and I
cry for Francis, through whom I came to know them and who, like a light gone
out, is himself dead. And slowly it comes home that this powerful surge
of feelings that he has
left in me can be unleashed at any moment, out of the blue, when I come
across a torn photo, glimpse a familiar face or hear a half-forgotten song. Once
Francis Bacon is in your blood, he will be there for ever.
Gradually the tears
subside, leaving a huge void of relief behind. The light coat I’m wearing
is wet from the rain. I shake myself like a dog, then I move on, crossing
the formal gardens of the Place des Vosges and into the old, dark streets
beyond.
當心
看了太多大陸電視劇得到以下結論要當心螢幕下的權貴爸爸真正作惡的就是這些二貨不用當心螢幕上的老實人爸爸螢幕上他們都像雷鋒一樣正確乖乖的沒有歷史很怕老婆特別要當心媽媽不管螢幕上還是螢幕下她們都很霸道主宰兒女床上和床下的生活六十年沒有看台灣電視劇得到以下結論台灣有很多電視機但沒有電視劇所以不用當心台灣人的爸爸和媽媽他們沒有用除了幫你洗碗要當心的是台灣的名嘴和資本家和政要這些極品二貨主宰了這個小人國動物園的命運要注意觀察他們的嘴巴和鼻孔前者流涎後者扇動表情義正詞嚴悲天憫人讓人感動
ritual and symbol
田立克和羅洛美說
找到儀式和象徵
就找到救贖
台灣人分手
習慣砍對方七十七刀
這算不算儀式和象徵
那個布魯克林的雜貨店老闆在同一個位置
每天把腳架放好照一張7:20AM的路人和街景
這算不算儀式和象徵
action (language)
明顯是動作的
外在的或內在的
比如說
我坐在窗前
看著窗外
心來到墾丁
看著蔚藍的海
或比如說
我坐在窗前
看著窗外
心來到十年後
看著逃難的2017當朝權貴
當然自始至終
我都還在窗前
看著窗外
這時窗外
陽光燦然
開始落雨
雨水告訴我們
不應高估
內在的動作
意思是說
最好的動作
是千里迢迢
來到一棵樹下
或不知名的街角
在那裡坐一會
的時候
心來到窗前
看著窗外
中等收入陷阱
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu3WF5ZWM2g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXXNCJ90Be0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_income_trap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXXNCJ90Be0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_income_trap
Friday, July 28, 2017
血汗工廠就是我的祖國
原文是市場就是我的祖國
這是血汗工廠教父的名言
我們不缺名言和祖國
當然也不缺血汗工廠和
相約血汗跳樓的黑臉血汗士兵
你知道阿城的棋王
和為什麼我說過這是
裝模作樣畜生不如罷
年初列下一串題目
其中一題如何快活在
我們這個富貴
必淫威武必屈的血汗年頭
這是血汗工廠教父的名言
我們不缺名言和祖國
當然也不缺血汗工廠和
相約血汗跳樓的黑臉血汗士兵
你知道阿城的棋王
和為什麼我說過這是
裝模作樣畜生不如罷
年初列下一串題目
其中一題如何快活在
我們這個富貴
必淫威武必屈的血汗年頭
颱風和人口素質
等待颱風汗如雨下人口素質的定義是一般文明標準可視為當然之餘有藝術作品般創造力的呈現且容許生命森羅萬象磅礡展現依此觀之你認為台灣的人口素質如何你認為大陸的人口素質如何上述人口素質應歸約回個人先有一個一個真實精彩的我從那裡才到達得了有意義的我們所以上述文明標準恰恰就是容許兩字容許每一個我能成為有意義的我這點台灣的狀況近兩年明顯退步大陸則已在狹縫中發生但分布不均且仍非常態總的來說國進民退非文明表現台灣如此大陸當然更如此所以普遍來說兩地人口素質大致生猛有餘裝模作樣教養不足畜生不如這是劉曉波為什麼說被殖民三百年才能救贖的原因絕望的時候我則會說三千萬年在如此世道尋找素樸質地有見識有情義的人有點像在狂風中尋找落翅的大雁
roy schafer on the Kleinians (1995)
Firstly he contends that the contemporary Kleinians remain ‘objectivist’ or ‘realist’ in their phenomenology, as if operating as independent observers. Schafer goes on to contend that they have not yet described a coherent position on many matters of importance, such as the distinction between the self and the ego. Thirdly, he questions their de-emphasising reconstruction.
Stern, J. (1998). The Contemporary Kleinians of London. Edited by Roy Schafer. Madison: International Universities Press. $65.00, £62.00. Pp. ix + 442.. Psychoanal. Psychother., 12(1):75-79
see also
Neither group does much to acknowledge divergent points of view, that is, to practice what I call comparative analysis (Schafer, 1985).
Stern, J. (1998). The Contemporary Kleinians of London. Edited by Roy Schafer. Madison: International Universities Press. $65.00, £62.00. Pp. ix + 442.. Psychoanal. Psychother., 12(1):75-79
see also
V Critical
Remarks
I come now to some concluding
observations, suggestions, and criticisms of the work I have been sketching.
Like what has come before, however, these concluding remarks are hardly more
than signposts of important problems to be confronted in relation to these
Kleinian advances in clinical work.
1. These Kleinians remain
objectivist or realist in their phenomenology.
They consistently present their
material as though they are in the position of purely independent
observers—even of their own countertransferences.
To my mind, this is contrary to what one might expect from the object-relational point of view. That point of view would seem inherently to favor a dialogic rather than objectivist idea of the material being analyzed; by "dialogic" I mean put into words and developed jointly by analysand and analyst in their interchanges (Schafer, 1992).
They, however, maintain a steadily factual or realist tone throughout their writings; they "discover" rather than "coauthor." In this respect, they do not differ from standard Freudians.
To my mind, this is contrary to what one might expect from the object-relational point of view. That point of view would seem inherently to favor a dialogic rather than objectivist idea of the material being analyzed; by "dialogic" I mean put into words and developed jointly by analysand and analyst in their interchanges (Schafer, 1992).
They, however, maintain a steadily factual or realist tone throughout their writings; they "discover" rather than "coauthor." In this respect, they do not differ from standard Freudians.
Neither group does much to acknowledge divergent points of view, that is, to practice what I call comparative analysis (Schafer, 1985).
2. As I see it, these
Kleinians have not adequately developed a position on matters of importance
in standard Freudian structural and functional
theory.
For example, beyond some dynamic propositions, they do not concern themselves sufficiently with such key questions as what enables their analysands to answer with more or less stable understanding to interpretations. I have tried to show that they do put a lot of emphasis on the motives, mechanisms, and fantasies that interfere with the reception and understanding of what the analyst imparts to them.
But because their paranoid-schizoid and depressive positions are presented as all-encompassing, even if with adaptive potential, there is no well-developed theoretical provision for what standard Freudians call the observing ego and the ego's synthesizing function, that is, the analyst's structurally and functionally stable and intact collaborator and dialogical partner in the process.
In this connection, the Kleinians do not draw systematic distinctions between self concepts and ego concepts; using them rather interchangeably, they speak comfortably about attacks on the ego, the self, even the mind, in a way that refers in part to actual functional disturbances and in part to unconscious fantasies of the ego, self, or mind being a substance that can be ejected, spoiled, or broken into pieces.
The concretistic fantasy of mind is not foreign to any analyst who works on primitive levels of function, but fantasy is not systematic theory, and primitive dynamics cannot account adequately for secondary process communication and organization.
For example, beyond some dynamic propositions, they do not concern themselves sufficiently with such key questions as what enables their analysands to answer with more or less stable understanding to interpretations. I have tried to show that they do put a lot of emphasis on the motives, mechanisms, and fantasies that interfere with the reception and understanding of what the analyst imparts to them.
But because their paranoid-schizoid and depressive positions are presented as all-encompassing, even if with adaptive potential, there is no well-developed theoretical provision for what standard Freudians call the observing ego and the ego's synthesizing function, that is, the analyst's structurally and functionally stable and intact collaborator and dialogical partner in the process.
In this connection, the Kleinians do not draw systematic distinctions between self concepts and ego concepts; using them rather interchangeably, they speak comfortably about attacks on the ego, the self, even the mind, in a way that refers in part to actual functional disturbances and in part to unconscious fantasies of the ego, self, or mind being a substance that can be ejected, spoiled, or broken into pieces.
The concretistic fantasy of mind is not foreign to any analyst who works on primitive levels of function, but fantasy is not systematic theory, and primitive dynamics cannot account adequately for secondary process communication and organization.
Although it can therefore be argued
that significant aspects of their work is undertheorized, it is not at all
clear that at this stage of creative endeavor comprehensive
systematization should be emphasized; the model set by Heinz Hartmann (1964) is, in general, no longer
a major influence in psychoanalysis.
Also, variations of function can be taken up in terms of fantasy,
too.
3. More and more, these Kleinian
Freudians de-emphasize reconstruction. Going further, I
would say that they seem to deemphasize causal explanations of any sort.
Not that they scrupulously avoid these formulations or condemn them, but primarily they remain intent on developing explicitly the phenomenology of the internal world and the way it is played out in relations with the external world.
They fear that otherwise they might interpret before they truly understand, and this, I would say, is a well-taken caution. One sign of this shift of emphasis away from explanation is that, in their case presentations, they do not develop accounts that warrant the designation "life histories."
Typically, the examples of work they present are in midstream, and we do not get much of an account of the preceding analytic process and its place in overall history.
Thus, they seem to follow the guidelines laid down by Bion (1967): to approach each session so far as possible "without memory or desire." I believe that this restricted emphasis on the present, technically and interpretively, pushes other aspects of the analytic context out of sight and leaves their readers with too many unanswered questions.
Not that they scrupulously avoid these formulations or condemn them, but primarily they remain intent on developing explicitly the phenomenology of the internal world and the way it is played out in relations with the external world.
They fear that otherwise they might interpret before they truly understand, and this, I would say, is a well-taken caution. One sign of this shift of emphasis away from explanation is that, in their case presentations, they do not develop accounts that warrant the designation "life histories."
Typically, the examples of work they present are in midstream, and we do not get much of an account of the preceding analytic process and its place in overall history.
Thus, they seem to follow the guidelines laid down by Bion (1967): to approach each session so far as possible "without memory or desire." I believe that this restricted emphasis on the present, technically and interpretively, pushes other aspects of the analytic context out of sight and leaves their readers with too many unanswered questions.
Further to this point, I
believe that Bion's advice makes a good deal of sense so long as it is
not examined too closely; in his own way, Freud had already recommended the same basic
approach when encouraging bending one's
own unconscious to the patient's. More closely examined,
however, the advice clearly misrepresents the mind of any analyst working with an analysand
about whom a good deal has already been
formulated and in relation to whom a good deal has already been
experienced. And this is not yet to speak of theoretical orientation and therapeutic aims, however
well regulated they may be. Nor is it to speak of all those benign and
malignant countertransferential aims that require constant monitoring. Finally,
thinking causally and retrospectively is probably impossible to suspend
altogether; certainly, this is so for the short term, and probably it is
indispensable in organizing any significant intervention, however
phenomenologically cast it may be.
4. Characteristically, these
Kleinians view their analysands, including those who diagnostically would not
be put in any seriously disturbed group, as struggling with many
unresolved primitive issues associated with the
paranoid-schizoid and early depressive positions.
By implication, then, it is as if the analysands are struggling with problems that date from their earliest years.
Consequently, the prototypical objects they refer to in their interpretations tend to be the mother of unconscious fantasy with her baby or toddler though sometimes also an undifferentiated parental couple.
Similarly, the prototypical issues and modes of relationship tend to center around primitive experiences of pain, goodness and badness, anxiety, dependency, loss, abandonment, and the like.
By implication, then, it is as if the analysands are struggling with problems that date from their earliest years.
Consequently, the prototypical objects they refer to in their interpretations tend to be the mother of unconscious fantasy with her baby or toddler though sometimes also an undifferentiated parental couple.
Similarly, the prototypical issues and modes of relationship tend to center around primitive experiences of pain, goodness and badness, anxiety, dependency, loss, abandonment, and the like.
In the current life details in their
published process notes, however,their analysands often come across much
like those presented in papers written by members of other schools
of psychoanalytic thought.
That is to say, the analysands are often preoccupied with their sexual relationships, usually heterosexual desire, love and its frustrations, and sometimes with similar homosexual issues. Triangulations, ambitions, and feelings of inadequacy, damagedness, and undesirability are also common.
But the Kleinian analyst's interventions tend to reduce this material rather quickly to what the
That is to say, the analysands are often preoccupied with their sexual relationships, usually heterosexual desire, love and its frustrations, and sometimes with similar homosexual issues. Triangulations, ambitions, and feelings of inadequacy, damagedness, and undesirability are also common.
But the Kleinian analyst's interventions tend to reduce this material rather quickly to what the
standard Freudians would call the
pregenital or preoedipal levels of experience and organization.
Consequently, there is precious little
Consequently, there is precious little
development of the analysis of
conventionally oedipal sexual conflict in and of itself. Although,
in working through problems of
the paranoidschizoid and depressive
positions, the analyst may take note of the analysand's developing a
reliable capacity for love and concern and a readiness for sexual
gratification, and although he or she may refer to an early form of the oedipus
complex, that analyst may still treat genital matters much as the manifest
content of a dream should be treated, that is, primarily as a
pathway to unconsciously dyadic issues.
On their part, however, contemporary
Freudians have been paying much more attention to the preoedipal or
pregenital, dyadic foundations of
the oedipus complex and its
disturbances. They also keep a sharp eye out for signs of early oedipal
developments as well as disruptions of early ego and
superego development and the stable and constant object relations that
should be beginning to evolve. In this, they move closer to the
Kleinians. Rather characteristically,
however, they seem to me to try to
work with both dynamic levels, that is, to maintain an optimally flexible position with
regard to the dynamic level most appropriate to
take up at any given time. In any event, they would not be so quickly
reductive as the Kleinians, which is to say that they would not
be so quick to view conventional sexuality with suspicion as probably being
emphasized for defensive
purposes in order to avoid the
larger issues appropriate to the paranoid-schizoid and depressive
positions. Consequently, in my
view, the standard Freudian
phenomenology and patterning of sexual experience is more developed even if
not always appropriately applied and even if still, and far
too often, quite limited in its departure from a narrow oedipal
approach.
How does this Kleinian focus on the
primitive tie in with these Kleinians' de-emphasis of
reconstruction? Much of their argument seems to depend on the idea that
accounts of the past or of events outside the consulting room, even
those in the immediate present, are
unreliable. These accounts are not
necessarily false; rather, patients are probably presenting them as
props in order to develop an emotional position vis-à-vis the analyst.
Consequently, one cannot be sure of having a rounded or
balanced or comprehensive picture or what, in ordinary terms, would be
accepted as the actual life history or the actual present life situation
or even a specific other person. I believe that there is much to recommend this
policy of suspicion or suspended judgment. Remaining with this moment-to-moment
work is essential in the opening up of significant themes and the establishment
of communication that resonates with the deep emotional experiences of hitherto inaccessible analysands. I believe that
standard Freudians in general take a similar view of
the unreliability or undecidability of "case history"
material, and yet in their published reports they often seem to forget their appropriate reservations in
this regard.
5. Finally, taken in its entirety,
we can see that this Kleinian approach is so centered on the dynamic present,
and on issues of relatedness and the many forms of dialogue, that it
allows these Kleinians much narrative freedom in writing up
their cases for publication.
We can tell that this is so from the titles of many of their papers. In Betty Joseph's work, for example, we find such titles as "The Patient Who Is Difficult To Reach," "Addiction to Near-Death," "On Understanding and Not Understanding." Other titles from this group of workers emphasize resonance, reassurance, retreats, enclaves, and so on.
This narrative freedom becomes most evident within the bodies of Kleinian Freudian papers where the theme announced in the title becomes and remains an organizing principle. On their part, standard Freudians no longer systematically avoid colorful experiential titles, but usually they practice more reserve in the body of their papers, as though to demonstrate that they are scientifically sound and safely neutral. Consequently, and as an extra bonus, these Kleinian Freudians are, I think, usually more engaging writers, and, in this stage of the evolution of psychoanalysis, they can have a liberating and invigorating effect on the reader as well as helping him or her work with patients with greater acuity and depth.
We can tell that this is so from the titles of many of their papers. In Betty Joseph's work, for example, we find such titles as "The Patient Who Is Difficult To Reach," "Addiction to Near-Death," "On Understanding and Not Understanding." Other titles from this group of workers emphasize resonance, reassurance, retreats, enclaves, and so on.
This narrative freedom becomes most evident within the bodies of Kleinian Freudian papers where the theme announced in the title becomes and remains an organizing principle. On their part, standard Freudians no longer systematically avoid colorful experiential titles, but usually they practice more reserve in the body of their papers, as though to demonstrate that they are scientifically sound and safely neutral. Consequently, and as an extra bonus, these Kleinian Freudians are, I think, usually more engaging writers, and, in this stage of the evolution of psychoanalysis, they can have a liberating and invigorating effect on the reader as well as helping him or her work with patients with greater acuity and depth.
Schafer, R. (1994). The Contemporary Kleinians of London. Psychoanal. Q., 63:409-432
Thursday, July 27, 2017
tragic knots (roy schafer 2009)
Schafer orients his chapters around a concept that he calls “tragic knots.” The idea is complicated, but what I think he is getting at is that life, as it can be understood and studied in psychoanalysis and literature, can be experienced through impossible or tragic choices. These are not necessarily tragic in a heroic and fixed way, rather in the sorrowful recognition that reality limits sometimes in very unhappy ways. He also suggests that such tragic knots often have elements out of one's control and perhaps without the possibility of considering the outcome.
He illustrates this with the dilemma of Cordelia in Shakespeare's King Lear. Cordelia loves her father and is asked to compete with her sisters to express devotion to their father beyond realistic possibility, but her personal integrity foreswears her participating in such distortion, leading to tragedy for her and her father. With that template, Schafer more directly enters into the field of the analytic setting.
Basseches, H.I. (2014). A Psychoanalytic Life. DIVISION/Rev., 10:13
Schafer writes modestly about his development as a psychoanalyst, reserving the designation “memoir” for something that in fact captures the essence of the whole book: “I have written extensively: first on testing, then more or less in turn on psychoanalytic ego psychology, an action language for psychoanalysis, feminist issues, narrative in psychoanalysis, and the contemporary Kleinians of London. This memoir traces the intellectual continuity that characterizes these writings and my continuing development as a psychoanalyst—my first ambition and great love” (“The Author's Odyssey: You Can Get Here from There”, p. 155, emphasis added).
Kite, J.V. (2012). On Roy Schafer. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 60(4):851-859
語境
張博樹寫中國思潮提到語境二字也強調現場的重要所以這是昆德拉的兩難當那個深夜他決定穿過邊界離開捷克文的語境和捷共統治的現場酷暑中我想起流亡的馬建和老威離開現場離開語境的人就像離開動物園的野獸被恩賜野放在陌生的荒野任由牠無聲無息啃噬回憶自生自滅去那裡好呢那隻飢餓的獵豹徘徊在桃園站口
Roy Schafer (b 1922)
action language
Following literary theorists, who examined the role of telling and showing in narration, Roy Schafer makes a distinction between telling and showing in the psychoanalytical situation. Telling happens when the analysand tells in words about events; about the past. Showing happens when the analysand conveys ideas, feelings, fantasies or reactions, verbal or non-verbal and freely associates these in an unselective way and without rehearsal. The analysand seems to be operating in the present; even when talking about the past.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Schafer
Aspects of Internalization (1968)
A New Language for Psychoanalysis (1976)
The Analytic Attitude (1983)
Retelling a Life (1992) (questia)
The Contemporary Kleinians of London (1997)
Bad Feelings (2003)
Insight and Interpretation (2003)
Tragic Knots in Psychoanalysis (2009) (kindle)
Schafer, R. (1980). Action Language and the Psychology of the Self. Annu.
Psychoanal., 8:83-92
Schafer, R. (2013). Final Word. Psychoanal. Q., 82(1):83-85
Following literary theorists, who examined the role of telling and showing in narration, Roy Schafer makes a distinction between telling and showing in the psychoanalytical situation. Telling happens when the analysand tells in words about events; about the past. Showing happens when the analysand conveys ideas, feelings, fantasies or reactions, verbal or non-verbal and freely associates these in an unselective way and without rehearsal. The analysand seems to be operating in the present; even when talking about the past.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Schafer
Aspects of Internalization (1968)
A New Language for Psychoanalysis (1976)
The Analytic Attitude (1983)
Retelling a Life (1992) (questia)
The Contemporary Kleinians of London (1997)
Bad Feelings (2003)
Insight and Interpretation (2003)
Tragic Knots in Psychoanalysis (2009) (kindle)
Schafer, R. (1980). Action Language and the Psychology of the Self. Annu.
Psychoanal., 8:83-92
Schafer, R. (2013). Final Word. Psychoanal. Q., 82(1):83-85
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
天色暗下來的時候
他們出發去林口尋找豬腳便當
Michael Peppiatt (b 1941)七十前後
急著回憶Francis Bacon (1909-1992)
From Bacon I learnt that my own contradictions could only be resolved by letting myself drift as freely as possible. (Peppiatt 2015, p. 8)
In 1994, Peppiatt returned to London with his wife, the art historian Jill Lloyd, and their two children, where he wrote the biography of Francis Bacon (1909–1992), whose close friend and commentator he had been for thirty years. Chosen as a ‘Book of the Year’ by The New York Times and translated into several languages, the biography is considered the definitive account of Bacon’s life and work.
1997
如何辨識匪諜
x = (右手中指的長度 x 0.375) + (鼻子到肚臍的距離 x 0.625) + (姓名筆劃數 x 0.223) + (托福成績減收縮壓 x 0.444)
y = [ (上輩子讀過幾本書 + 這輩子讀過幾本書 + 下輩子打算讀幾本書) x 0.188 ] + [ (上輩子用過幾根牙膏 + 這輩子用過幾根牙膏 + 下輩子打算用幾根牙膏) x 0.743 ]
i = 有關單位自由心證決定的參數
依照以上公式全台匪諜共二千二百九十九萬九千九百人
Francis Bacon in Your Blood: A Memoir (Michael Peppiatt, 2015)
accessible via scribd
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)