Changes

The term <i>symbolization</i> is hardly discussed by [[Freud]], although the [[process ]] is fundamental to [[mental ]] [[activity]]. We can define symbolization as the operation by which something comes to [[represent ]] something else for someone. While it may appear as the [[substitution ]] of one object for [[another]], it is primarily the result of a process that assumes both the ability to represent an [[absent ]] object and a [[subject ]] capable of [[knowing ]] that the symbol is not the [[symbolized ]] object.In this [[sense ]] it promotes the ability to fantasize and the organization of mental [[space]]. From this point of view it is primarily a [[mechanism ]] enabling the subject to fight against the [[depression ]] associated with object [[loss ]] and to [[limit ]] the flow of affects.

Aside from allowing one term to [[substitute ]] for another, symbolization designates back and forth flow of [[meaning ]] between subject and object, between mental [[reality ]] and [[external ]] reality, between [[past ]] and [[present]]. This is the effect of the symbolization process, which makes possible a [[system ]] of intra- and [[intersubjective ]] exchanges. This can be verified in [[analytic ]] [[therapy]], which, in the standard [[model]], assumes a relation between two centers of meaning, the [[analyst ]] and the [[patient]], whose [[work ]] is possible only on condition that it is referred to an [[outside ]] [[agency]], which is the "[[frame]]" of [[analysis]]. The analytic [[situation ]] thereby appears as both [[symbolic ]] and symbolizing, in that its mode of operation is based on a [[structure ]] with [[three ]] points of reference.The [[experience ]] of satisfaction—that of the [[infant ]] at the [[breast]], as described by Freud in [[terms ]] of [[images ]] and [[memory ]] traces—is a prototypical model that delimits the scope of the symbolization process in the transition from [[need ]] to [[drive]]. Freud defined the drive as a borderline [[concept ]] between the [[psychic ]] and the somatic, formed by reworking the [[hallucination ]] of [[satisfaction ]] at the breast, and whose constant thrust (as distinct from the momentary or periodic [[nature ]] of the satisfaction of [[organic ]] need) relates to the permanence of the object during [[perception ]] of the [[total ]] object.It is, as we [[know]], a postulate also found in the experience of the [[dream ]] and unverifiable by experience, according to which hallucination is a [[form ]] of satisfaction. Into this Freud introduced a [[temporal ]] [[dimension ]] by distinguishing the period during which the [[sexual ]] [[drives ]] are attached to functions of [[self]]-preservation (corresponding to the hallucination of satisfaction and the increase in automatic [[traumatic ]] [[anxiety]]) from the period of object-[[formation]], and hallucination of the object, when the [[mother ]] is perceived as a total object. The structure so described occurs in two [[stages]], which the [[anaclisis ]] or propping of the drive on organic self-preservation enables us to comprehend as a [[retroactive ]] reorganization. The symbolization process thus emerges during the [[split ]] between the framework of need (ingesting milk) and the framework of the drive (incorporating the breast). It is this [[difference ]] that [[Jean Laplanche ]] (1980) described in great detail, noting that the displacement from need to drive was simultaneously [[metonymic ]] with respect to the object (from milk to breast) and [[metaphoric ]] with respect to the aim (from ingesting to incorporating).Between [[narcissistic ]] [[cathexis ]] (I am the breast) and object cathexis (I have it, that is, I am not it) the dimensions of a psychic space—a [[topological ]] space—and [[time ]] are organized. Psychic time evolves through acceptance of a delay, a waiting period, the succession from the time of [[being ]] to, as Freud himself said, only after the fact, the time of having. Beneath these abstractions, at a more [[concrete ]] level, we find [[analyses ]] of symbolic assimilation (Melanie [[Klein]]), symbolic equation (Hanna Segal), and pathological projective [[identification]].From this viewpoint the [[hallucinatory ]] experience of satisfaction designates the [[dialectic ]] between the nonoptative (I am) and the optative (I [[want]], I am not), which is articulated only on condition that enough time is allocated to the non-optative dimension. This is probably one of the major contributions of Donald [[Winnicott ]] (1951), namely, to have insisted on the importance of duration during this period of nonoptative [[illusion ]] so that the optative period, the period of disillusion, might become possible.Thus the experience of object loss results in different outcomes for symbolization given the possibility of forming a dialectic between the time of being and the time of having. This essential difference and the dialectic it involves can be terminated by the [[illusory ]] [[wish ]] to unite, at the "same time," subject and object, memory and perception, in the effort to exclude the object as well as the effort intended to include it.In this way different modalities of symbolization are designated. [[The symbolic ]] assimilation controlled by the [[search ]] for sameness seeks to implicate [[projection]], leaving [[nothing ]] but the search for immediate satisfaction through [[action ]] and degrading the symbol, which represents the object, to the status of a [[signal]]. Symbolic assimilation can, on the contrary, seek to include the object in the act of projection, which, although it dehumanizes the [[world ]] by transforming it into abstract entities, nevertheless maintains a link to a [[universe ]] of indexical [[signs]], where the [[categories ]] of [[certainty]], foreseeability, and univocity prevail. There are, therefore, two different economies which, depending on the use of the object, can lead in one [[case ]] to a [[repression ]] of affects and a [[splitting ]] of the [[body ]] through the [[exclusion ]] of all symbolization (this is the [[register ]] of non-delusional [[psychoses ]] and [[psychosomatic ]] [[disorganization]]); and in the [[other ]] to the preservation of those affects in the [[psyche ]] through symbolic efflorescence, which, although it seeks to eliminate

difference and distance, nonetheless indicates an attempt at a solution through representation (as shown by delusional psychoses). As Wilfred Bion noted (1970), we cannot say that the [[psychotic ]] patient is incapable of symbol formation, but that he symbolizes excessively and prevents himself from learning through [[knowledge ]] of the world.From this point of view the interiorization of psychic bisexuality becomes the source of unfettered symbolization and [[creativity]]. The essential point is to be able to confront [[maternal ]] invisibility and the [[terror ]] of the unlimited or the infinite. This assumes the organization of the dialectic of conservation and loss inherent in [[anal ]] [[eroticism]], which contributes to the differentiation of the [[inside ]] and outside of the body and ensures that the [[control ]] of mental activity and sphincter control are cathected in the same way.The [[fort-da ]] [[game ]] (Freud, 1920g) is often considered to be the key experience revealing the formation of symbolization. However, this activity of symbolic substitution through gestures and [[speech ]] that bear [[witness ]] to the [[development ]] of object loss, assumes the manipulation of a simultaneously preserved and expelled [[internal ]] object, which defines [[anal eroticism]]. The experience of [[mastery ]] demonstrates that the anxiety of [[destruction ]] by the object associated with orality (to consume or be consumed) is here contained within limits through a [[third ]] possibility, the external object.The fault lines in this mediatory function of the third object determine the recourse to variant techniques (face-to-face [[psychotherapy]], [[psychoanalytic ]] psychodrama) compared to the usual therapeutic situation on the couch. From this viewpoint the analytic framework can be considered a genuine "intermediate region of experience," to use Winnicott's phrase, the crucible or [[matrix ]] of all symbolization, which triggers the operation of the intermediary intrapsychic region known as the [[preconscious]]. The movement is of course asymptotic.Accordingly, the semantic function of the symbol as [[content ]] is inseparable from its mediatory function, intra- and intersubjective, providing we realize it is less a [[universal ]] and univocal function (the [[archetype ]] for Carl G. [[Jung ]] or the symbolic [[order ]] for Jacques [[Lacan]]) than a personal and polysemic one, making possible [[processes ]] of [[sublimation ]] and creation. Rather than being enclosed in a private dimension, [[true ]] symbolization reveals, on the contrary, as Bion (1970) suggested, its essentially [[social ]] dimension. This assumes symbolization is capable of being instructed by the body and the world so it is able to produce other [[figures]], while leaving room for the indeterminate, the uncertain, and the unexpected.

# Bion, Wilfred R. (1970). Attention and [[interpretation]]. [[London]]: Tavistock Publications.# [[Freud, Sigmund]]. (1920g). Beyond the [[pleasure ]] [[principle]]. SE, 18: 1-64.# Laplanche, Jean. (1980). Problématiques III, la sublimation. [[Paris]]: Presses Universitaires de [[France]].