You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
This is an attempt to clarify the confusions which, I argue, have accumulated in the uses and meanings of the term ‘projective identification’. As a remedy, I propose a return to Melanie Klein's original concept which focuses on the mental activity of the person in whose mind the projective identification takes place. I cover the early territory of Klein's definition and Bion's alteration of this, with its sole focus on PI as a communication which is dealt with in various ways by its object. Thomas Ogden followed his example. This narrowed the field opened by Klein. The confusions caused at this time persist today and render the concept less useful than it could be. I distinguish between projections and projective identifications. Further, I discuss five main types of projective identification and try to show that only one of these is evocatory; that is, only one involves a responding object.
I hope to show that the concept, as devised by Klein, has a family of uses, all of which can be grasped fairly easily if we concentrate on the state of mind of the subject ‘owning’ the projective identification. While evocatory PIs, which affect their objects and prompt certain responses, are part of the therapeutic process, other types of PI are equally important although harder to grasp.