Reply to Commentaries

The Holding Metaphor Embodies a Quality of the Interior While implicitly assuming, indeed relying on, the presence of an exterior. Holding presumes, simultaneously the existence of a background object that holds and the existence of an object that is held. It alludes to form within formlessness, which is suggestive of unfilled, undefined space surrounding an object insufficiently anchored, perhaps floating. Holding creates a buffer between the patient and the “otherness” of the analyst, establishing the conditions for intense affective contact of a particular kind.

The boundaries between interior and exterior and between patient and analyst are simultaneously reinforced and obfuscated during moments of holding, as the analyst attempts, sometimes silently, to enter her patient's experience at a deep level. The analyst's personal presence is felt both more clearly and less distinctly than at other times, for the holding function establishes a very particular kind of object experience. That experience facilitates the emergence or elaboration of affective structure (s) while creating an expanded sense of potentially “fillable” interior space.

It is interesting that the distinction I made between interior and intersubjective dimensions of analytic space finds a parallel in the rich commentaries by Drs. Stein and Ringstrom. Stein's commentary pulled me toward the interior and the metaphoric, allowing me to further elaborate on my own ideas, and Ringstrom's contribution reoriented me toward the intersubjective by raising stimulating conceptual and theoretical issues. My reply, then, shall move from the evocative toward the dialogic in both content and form as I consider first Stein's commentary and then Ringstrom's.

Stein's multifaceted and sensitive discussion has enriched and complicated my work by offering other metaphors (e.g., chorion) and