Date: 03 Jul 96 02:37:09 EDT
From: "Chris, London" <100423.2040-AT-compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Rolf's transference


Rahul:
-----
Chris, have you unwittingly betrayed the way you view your role on this
l'st?


Chris:
------

Because I like your sense of humour I am tempted to reply,
"That is an interesting suggestion. Would you like to say more
about why you see me that way?"

But seriously, my comments were intentional and  "witting".

In so far as Rolf goes, I have played the role of recipient
of persecutory projections, more illustrative of his own 
mental state, of course than my own, although it could be discussed
why I in particular was the lightening conductor for them. He 
tried others too, such as the "Avakian clone", but C did not play
into the role, as much as I did.

My paragraph in which I made more general points, was also "witting",
despite being in appalling English.  
I believe that the opaque nature of communications on this l'st
stimulates transference between individuals across many planes.
For example some people really appear to feel they have met Stalin here.

Obliging someone else to accept your projections, is one of the 
power plays of this l'st.

Even more theoretically I am on record as an admirer of a group 
psychotherapist, SH Foulkes, who was trained as a Freudian 
psychoanalyst in Vienna and then worked in Frankfurt at a time when the 
school of psychoanalysis there shared the same refeshment 
facilities as the school of sociology. On coming to England
he experimented with using psychoanalytical methods in a group setting,
and argued that in groups we see ourselves reflected repeatedly in 
others. Transference was not a just a phenomenon to be analysed 
by the individual patient towards the individual therapist. 
Furthermore that the interaction between the psychological assumptions 
that people bring to a group and the assumptions tested in the group, 
creates a group matrix of ideas, attitudes, and emotions. Through often 
chaotic interactions a feeling of group culture and fellowship emerges.

I am as convinced as on my first work joining this group, that
such phenomena can be perceived continuously on this l'st. Anyone
is free to comment on them. The low key non-directive
moderator is similar to the low key non-directive conductor in 
a Foulkesian group. I have not essentially changed my 
participation in this l'st in this fundamental respect over the
period before, during and after I was a (non) moderator.

The experience of Foulkesian group psychotherapy is profoundly 
democratic, althoug in a psychodynamic group: it is not task orientated.

I think such a theoretical approach to the l'st is not in conflict with 
a more overtly political approach, particularly of a Gramscian kind. It 
does accept that this l'st in itself is unlikely to produce specific 
action, but it may have spin-off influences on action outside the 
l'st.

The attempt to find some link between marxism and psychology or
psychodynamics is a recurring theme  this century. I think 
it is worth revisiting in view of the intense feelings of 
individuals about emotional and psychological issues in late
twentieth century civil society. 

An approach that emphasises the subtlety of 
the experiences  of the individual in a *social* context deserves 
serious favourable consideration by marxists.

Yours wittingly,

Chris


     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---