Difference between revisions of "Resistance"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
[[resistance]] ([[French]]: ''[[résistance]]'') 
  
 +
---
 +
 +
[[Freud]] first used the term '[[resistance]]' to designate the unwillingness to [[recall]] [[repressed]] [[memories]] to [[consciousness]].
 +
 +
Since [[psychoanalytic treatment]] involves precisely such [[recollection]], the term soon came to denote all those obstacles that arise during the [[treatment]] and interrupt its [[progress]]: "Whatever disturbs the progress of the work isa resistance."<ref>Freud, 1900a: SE V, 517</ref>
 +
 +
[[Resistance]] manifests itself in all the ways in which the [[subject]] breaks the '[[fundamental rule]]' of saying everything that comes into his mind.
 +
 +
---
 +
 +
Though present in [[Freud]]'s work from the beginning, the concept of [[resistance]] began to play an increasingly important part in [[psychoanalytic theory]] as a result of the decreasing efficacy of [[analytic treatment]] in the decade 1910-20.
 +
 +
As a consequence of this, [[ego-psychology]] placed increasing importance on overcoming the [[patient]]'s [[resistance]]s.
 +
 +
==Jacques Lacan==
 +
[[Lacan]] is very critical of this shift in emphasis, arguing that it easily leads to an 'inquisitorial' style of psychoanalysis which sees resistance as based on the 'fundamental ill will' of the patient.<ref>{{S1}} p.30</ref>
 +
 +
[[Lacan]] argues that this overlooks the structural nature of
 +
resistatice and reduces analysis to an imaginary dual relation <ref>{{E}} p.78; {{Ec}} p.333ff</ref>
 +
 +
[[Lacan]] does accept that [[psychoanalytic treatment]] involves "analysis of resistances," but only on condition that this phrase is understood correctly, in the sense of "knowing at what level the answer should be pitched."<ref>{{S2}} p.43</ref>
 +
 +
In other words, the crucial thing is that the [[analyst]] should be able to distinguish between interventions that are primarily orientated towards the [[imaginary]] and those that are orientated towards the [[symbolic]], and know which are appropriate at each moment of the [[treatment]].
 +
 +
---
 +
 +
In [[Lacan]]'s view, [[resistance]] is not a question of the ill will of the [[analysand]]; [[resistance]] is [[structural]], and it is inherent in the [[analytic process]].
 +
 +
This is due, ultimately, to a [[structural]] "incompatibility between desire and speech."<ref>{{E}} p.275</ref>
 +
 +
Therefore there is a certain irreducible level of [[resistance]] which can never be 'overcome'.
 +
 +
"After the reduction of the [[resistance]]s, there is a residue which may be what is essential."<ref>{{S2}} p.321</ref>
 +
 +
This irreducible 'residue' of [[resistance]] is 'essential' because it is the respect for this residue that distinguishes psychoanalysis from [[suggestion]].
 +
 +
[[Psychoanalysis]] respects the right of the [[patient]] to resist [[suggestion]] and indeed values that [[resistance]].
 +
 +
<blockquote>"When the [[subject]]'s [[resistance]] opposes [[suggestion]], it is only a [[desire]] to maintain the [[subject]]'s [[desire]]. As such it would have to be placed in the ranks of positive [[transference]]."<ref>{{E}} p.271</ref></blockquote>
 +
 +
---
 +
 +
However, [[Lacan]] points out that while the [[analyst]] cannot, and should not try to, overcome all [[resistance]], he can minimise it, or at least avoid exacerbating it.<ref>{{S2}} p.228</ref>
 +
 +
He can do this by recognising his own part in the [[analysand]]'s [[resistance]], for "there is no other [[resistance]] to [[analysis]] than that of the [[analyst]] himself."<ref>{{E}} p.235</ref>
 +
 +
This is to be understood in two ways:
 +
 +
==One==
 +
The [[resistance]] of the [[analysand]] can only succeed in obstructing the [[treatment]] when it responds to and/or evokes a [[resistance]] on the part of the [[analyst]], i.e. when the [[analyst]] is drawn into the [[lure]] of [[resistance]] (as [[Freud]] was drawn into the [[lure]] of [[Dora]]'s [[resistance]]).
 +
 +
"The patient's resistance is always your own, and when a resistance succeeds it is because you [the analyst] are in it up to your neck, because you understand."<ref>{{S3}} p.48</ref>
 +
 +
Thus the [[analyst]] must follow the rule of neutrality and not be drawn into the [[lures]] set for him by the [[patient]].
 +
 +
==Two==
 +
It is the [[analyst]] who provokes [[resistance]] by pushing the [[analysand]]:
 +
 +
"There is no resistance on the part of the subject."<ref>{{S2}} p.228</ref>
 +
 +
"[[Resistance]] is the present state of an [[interpretation]] of the [[subject]]. It is the manner in which, at the same time, the subject interprets the point he's got to. ... It simply means that he [the patient] cannot  move any faster."<ref>{{S2}} p.228</ref>
 +
 +
[[Psychoanalytic treatment]] works on the principle that by not forcing the [[patient]], [[resistance]] is reduced to the irreducible minimum.
 +
 +
Thus the [[analyst]] must avoid all forms of [[suggestion]].
 +
 +
 +
----
 +
 +
 +
The source of [[resistance]] lies in the [[ego]]:
 +
 +
"In the strict sense, the [[subject]]'s [[resistance]] is linked to the [[register]] of the [[ego]], it is an effect of the [[ego]]."<ref>{{S2}} p.127</ref>
 +
 +
Thus [[resistance]] belongs to the [[imaginary]] [[order]], not to the level of the [[subject]].
 +
 +
"On the side of what is [[repressed]], on the [[unconscious]] side of things, there is no [[resistance]], there is only a tendency to [[repeat]]."<ref>{{S2}} p.321</ref>
 +
 +
This is illustrated in [[schema L]]; resistance is the imaginary axis a-a' which impedes the insistant speech of the Other (which is the axis A-S).
 +
 +
The [[resistance]]s of the [[ego]] are [[imaginary]] [[lures]], which the [[analyst]] must be wary of being [[deceived]] by.<ref>{{E}} p.168</ref>
 +
 +
Thus it can never be the [[aim]] of [[analysis]] to "strengthen the [[ego]]," as [[ego-psychology]] claims, since this would only serve to increase [[resistance]].
 +
 +
 +
 +
---
 +
 +
[[Lacan]] also criticises [[ego-psychology]] for confusing the concept of [[resistance]] with that of [[defense]].
 +
 +
However, the distinction which [[Lacan]] draws between these two concepts is rather different from the way in which they are distinguished in Anglo-American [[psychoanalysis]].
 +
 +
[[Lacan]] argues that [[defence]] is on the side of the [[subject]], whereas [[resistance]] is on the side of the [[object]].
 +
 +
That is, whereas [[defence]]s are relatively stable [[symbolic]] [[structure]]s of [[subjectivity]], [[resistance]]s are more transitory forces which prevent the [[object]] from being absorbed in the [[signifying chain]].
 +
 +
==See Also==
 +
 +
==References==
 +
<references/>
 +
 +
[[Category:New]]
 +
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]]
 +
[[Category:Terms]]
 +
[[Category:Concepts]]
 +
[[Category:Dictionary]]
 +
[[Category:Treatment]]
 +
[[Category:Practice]]
 +
[[Category:Imaginary]]
 +
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]

Revision as of 10:26, 4 August 2006

resistance (French: résistance)

---

Freud first used the term 'resistance' to designate the unwillingness to recall repressed memories to consciousness.

Since psychoanalytic treatment involves precisely such recollection, the term soon came to denote all those obstacles that arise during the treatment and interrupt its progress: "Whatever disturbs the progress of the work isa resistance."[1]

Resistance manifests itself in all the ways in which the subject breaks the 'fundamental rule' of saying everything that comes into his mind.

---

Though present in Freud's work from the beginning, the concept of resistance began to play an increasingly important part in psychoanalytic theory as a result of the decreasing efficacy of analytic treatment in the decade 1910-20.

As a consequence of this, ego-psychology placed increasing importance on overcoming the patient's resistances.

Jacques Lacan

Lacan is very critical of this shift in emphasis, arguing that it easily leads to an 'inquisitorial' style of psychoanalysis which sees resistance as based on the 'fundamental ill will' of the patient.[2]

Lacan argues that this overlooks the structural nature of resistatice and reduces analysis to an imaginary dual relation [3]

Lacan does accept that psychoanalytic treatment involves "analysis of resistances," but only on condition that this phrase is understood correctly, in the sense of "knowing at what level the answer should be pitched."[4]

In other words, the crucial thing is that the analyst should be able to distinguish between interventions that are primarily orientated towards the imaginary and those that are orientated towards the symbolic, and know which are appropriate at each moment of the treatment.

---

In Lacan's view, resistance is not a question of the ill will of the analysand; resistance is structural, and it is inherent in the analytic process.

This is due, ultimately, to a structural "incompatibility between desire and speech."[5]

Therefore there is a certain irreducible level of resistance which can never be 'overcome'.

"After the reduction of the resistances, there is a residue which may be what is essential."[6]

This irreducible 'residue' of resistance is 'essential' because it is the respect for this residue that distinguishes psychoanalysis from suggestion.

Psychoanalysis respects the right of the patient to resist suggestion and indeed values that resistance.

"When the subject's resistance opposes suggestion, it is only a desire to maintain the subject's desire. As such it would have to be placed in the ranks of positive transference."[7]

---

However, Lacan points out that while the analyst cannot, and should not try to, overcome all resistance, he can minimise it, or at least avoid exacerbating it.[8]

He can do this by recognising his own part in the analysand's resistance, for "there is no other resistance to analysis than that of the analyst himself."[9]

This is to be understood in two ways:

One

The resistance of the analysand can only succeed in obstructing the treatment when it responds to and/or evokes a resistance on the part of the analyst, i.e. when the analyst is drawn into the lure of resistance (as Freud was drawn into the lure of Dora's resistance).

"The patient's resistance is always your own, and when a resistance succeeds it is because you [the analyst] are in it up to your neck, because you understand."[10]

Thus the analyst must follow the rule of neutrality and not be drawn into the lures set for him by the patient.

Two

It is the analyst who provokes resistance by pushing the analysand:

"There is no resistance on the part of the subject."[11]

"Resistance is the present state of an interpretation of the subject. It is the manner in which, at the same time, the subject interprets the point he's got to. ... It simply means that he [the patient] cannot move any faster."[12]

Psychoanalytic treatment works on the principle that by not forcing the patient, resistance is reduced to the irreducible minimum.

Thus the analyst must avoid all forms of suggestion.




The source of resistance lies in the ego:

"In the strict sense, the subject's resistance is linked to the register of the ego, it is an effect of the ego."[13]

Thus resistance belongs to the imaginary order, not to the level of the subject.

"On the side of what is repressed, on the unconscious side of things, there is no resistance, there is only a tendency to repeat."[14]

This is illustrated in schema L; resistance is the imaginary axis a-a' which impedes the insistant speech of the Other (which is the axis A-S).

The resistances of the ego are imaginary lures, which the analyst must be wary of being deceived by.[15]

Thus it can never be the aim of analysis to "strengthen the ego," as ego-psychology claims, since this would only serve to increase resistance.


---

Lacan also criticises ego-psychology for confusing the concept of resistance with that of defense.

However, the distinction which Lacan draws between these two concepts is rather different from the way in which they are distinguished in Anglo-American psychoanalysis.

Lacan argues that defence is on the side of the subject, whereas resistance is on the side of the object.

That is, whereas defences are relatively stable symbolic structures of subjectivity, resistances are more transitory forces which prevent the object from being absorbed in the signifying chain.

See Also

References

  1. Freud, 1900a: SE V, 517
  2. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book I. Freud's Papers on Technique, 1953-54. Trans. John Forrester. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. p.30
  3. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.78; Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p.333ff
  4. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.43
  5. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.275
  6. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.321
  7. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.271
  8. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.228
  9. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.235
  10. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.48
  11. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.228
  12. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.228
  13. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.127
  14. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.321
  15. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.168