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 on Benjamin is part 1 of a series presenting the work of three contemporary theorists whose ideas are associated with the intersubjective turn in psychoanalysis. Part 2, on Bollas, and part 3, on Ehrenberg, will appear in subsequent issues of Psychoanalytic Dialogues. Although we have made a minimal attempt to critically review the different theories, we have allowed ourselves the fiction of trying to produce a representational text in which the different arguments of the different theorists are presented, more or less, in their own terms. While this version of textual production on our part may be troubling, as it obscures as much as it reveals, insofar as our own position is never quite
We wish to thank Victor Bonfilio, Sam Gerson, and Charles Spezzano for comments on various parts of this paper. Needless to say, we are responsible for all its faults and foibles.
For the purposes of clarity and stylistic consistency it was decided that Gerhardt's academic writing style fits the needs of this paper.
declared, our intent is to try to minimize our own mediating voice and focus on the different theorists in their own right by giving clinical examples to demonstrate their claims. The irony, even folly, of attempting to eliminate our own presence from this series on intersubjectivity is not lost on us—and neither is our plea for special circumstances. However, given the growing interest in the intersubjective turn, in order that it not be construed as privileging the emotional authenticity of the two-person exchange, we believe it is absolutely essential to understand the theorists' self-articulated arguments and to keep alive their differences rather than to assimilate the intersubjective perspective as a unified or hegemonic approach. It is in the spirit of keeping alive these differences—itself a crucial commitment of the intersubjective approach—that our somewhat exegetical text should be understood.