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 paper, like the previous ones, deals with a clinical and theoretical theme that constitutes one of the main trends of contemporary Italian psychoanalysis, although written from a different, original point of view. The author propounds a route through some particularly topical aspects of Balint's work which have been almost neglected and which, in his opinion, have contributed in a truly conspicuous way to a different technical and clinical tradition: a tradition that defines not interpreting and the patient's capacity to tolerate regression as mutative factors of psychic change on a par with interpretation.
The articulation of the analytic situation proposed by Balint includes, the author believes, a notion of the analyst's contribution, in certain analytic conditions and with certain patients, which essentially consists in placing the analyst at the service of a process that occurs within the patient and which has to do with the patient alone. Bonamino maintains that the contemporary tendency to observe chiefly what happens between the patient and the analyst risks befogging the patient, his/her own individuality, and also the individuality of the analyst. It could be said, the author tells us, that Balint clinically counterposes a too objectified or even excessively “intersubjective” conception of the analyst (and of the patient) to the unintrusive analyst. The author presents two dreams, drawn from two different clinical cases, which exemplify the potential interference that the analyst's interpretative activity may represent at times with regard to the analysand's creative and intimate processes.