Playing is a form of responsiveness that involves a shift from more formal interpretation about defense, unconscious fantasy, or transference to one that employs humor or irony regarding the content of fantasy or poses a more direct confrontation between internal fantasy and external reality. Playing is differentiated from more formal interpretation by the analytic couple’s intensity of affective expression, the idiomatic language used to express affect or ideas, or the analyst’s more personally revealing reaction to the patient’s recruitment of him as an internal object. Two clinical vignettes show how play emphasizes experiences of loss and waste that have been enacted in the patient’s life and often in transference-countertransference engagement. Through newly discovered forms of play, these processes are occurring now in real time between patient and analyst and less through frozen memorialization of what never was.
BenjaminJ. (2016). From enactment to play: Metacommunication, acknowledgement, and the third of paradox. Revista di psicoanalisi62:565–593.
2.
CoenS.J. (2005). How to play with patients who would rather remain remote. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association53:811–834.
3.
CooperS.H. (1998). Countertransference disclosure and the conceptualization of analytic technique. Psychoanalytic Quarterly67:128–154.
4.
CooperS.H. (2018). Playing in the darkness: Use of the object and use of the subject. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association66:743–765.
5.
CooperS.H. (2021). Toward an ethic of play in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Quarterly90:373–397.
6.
CooperS.H. (2022). The limit of intimacy and the intimacy of limit: Play and its relation to the bad object. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association70:241–261.
7.
CooperS.H. (2023). Playing and Becoming in Psychoanalysis. New York: Routledge.
8.
EriksonE.H. (1950). Childhood and Society. New York: Norton.
9.
FairbairnW.R.D. (1952). Psychoanalytic Studies of the Personality. London: Tavistock Publications.
10.
FreudS. (1914). Remembering, repeating and working-through. Standard Edition12:147–156.
11.
FreudS. (1917). Mourning and melancholia. Standard Edition14: 243–258.
12.
FreudS. (1920). Beyond the pleasure principle. Standard Edition18:7–64.
13.
KrisA.O. (1982). Free Association. New Haven: Yale University Press.
14.
KrisA.O. (1984). The conflicts of ambivalence. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child39:213–234.
15.
KristevaJ. (1992). Black Sun. New York: Columbia University Press.
16.
McLaughlinJ. (1987). Some reflections on enactment in the psychoanalytic situation. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association35:557–582.
17.
ModellA.M. (1975). On having the right to a life: An aspect of the superego’s development. International Journal of Psychoanalysis46:223–231.
18.
MorrisH. (2016). The analyst’s offer. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association64:1173–1187.
19.
OgdenT.H. (1994). The concept of interpretive action. Psychoanalytic Quarterly63:219–245.
20.
OgdenT.H. (2010). Why read Fairbairn?International Journal of Psychoanalysis91:101–118.
21.
ParsonsM. (1999). The logic of play in psychoanalysis. International Journal Psychoanalysis80:871–884.
22.
RizzoloG.S. (2016). The critique of regression: The person, the field, the lifespan. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association64:1097–1131.
23.
RosenfeldH. (1987). Impasse and Interpretation: Therapeutic and Anti-Therapeutic Factors in the Psychoanalytic Treatment of Psychotic, Borderline, and Neurotic Patients. New York: Routledge.
24.
RoussillonR. (2011). Primitive Agony and Symbolization. New York: Routledge, 2018.
25.
SymingtonN. (1983). The analyst’s act of freedom as agent of therapeutic change. International Review of Psychoanalysis10:283–291.
26.
ValensteinA. (1973). On attachment to painful feelings and the negative therapeutic reaction. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child28:365–392.
27.
VygotskyL.S. (1934). Thought and Language, transl. HanfmannE.VakarG.Cambridge: MIT Press, 2012.
28.
WilsonM. (2006). “Nothing could be further from the truth”: The role of lack in the analytic process. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association54:397–422.
29.
WilsonM. (2013). Desire and responsibility: The ethics of countertransference experience. Psychoanalytic Quarterly82:435–476.
30.
WinnicottD.W. (1947). Hate in the countertransference. In Through Paediatrics to Psychoanalysis: Collected Papers. New York: Basic Books, 1958, pp. 194–203.
31.
WinnicottD.W. (1951). Transitional objects and transitional phenomena. In Playing and Reality. New York: Basic Books, 1971, pp. 1–25.
32.
WinnicottD.W. (1958). The capacity to be alone. International Journal of Psychoanalysis39:416–420.
33.
WinnicottD.W. (1968). Playing: Its theoretical status in the clinical situation. International Journal of Psychoanalysis49:591–599.
34.
WinnicottD.W. (1969). The use of an object. International Journal of Psychoanalysis50:711–716.
