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 article examines the development of the notion of “thirdness” in psychoanalysis and, in particular, Thomas Ogden's concept of the analytic third. Beginning with Samuel Gerson-who distinguishes developmental, cultural, and relational forms of thirdness-the discussion proceeds through André Green'sstructural-symbolic approach and Jessica Benjamin's intersubjective model of recognition and surrender. Together, these perspectives provide the conceptual groundwork for Ogden's theory. While Green argues that every dyadic relationship inherently generates a third dimension, Benjamin emphasizes a “shared third” that enables recognition and surrender, allowing subjects to move beyond the constricting doer-done-to complementarity.
Ogden's analytic third is the emergent intersubjective field co-created by analyst and analysand through a relational dialectic. Thoughts, feelings, and even bodily sensations are transformed through mutual influence and take shape within this third subjectivity. In this context, the analyst may understand his or her own reveries as reflections of the analysand's unconscious communications. The analytic third can at times be creative, containing, and transformative, while at other times it may take on a more constricting form as a “subjugating third.” In successful analysis, this third is both lived and ultimately transcended, enabling the analysand (and the analyst) to achieve a more flexible and expanded capacity for subjectivity.
In the final section, while acknowledging the conceptual strength of Ogden's formulation, the text questions the risk of reifying the analytic third as if it were an autonomous entity, and proposes instead the notion of a relational analytic field, emphasizing its shared nature rather than treating it as an autonomous entity.