This is the third of a series of three articles, based on the lecture we delivered at the International Workshop ‘Studies of Large Groups and Social Unconscious’, which took place in Belgrade in June 2013. In the first part we compared the British and the Latin American traditions of group analysis. In the second, we discussed the conception of the social unconscious and the group analytic large group, in both traditions. Now we present our own approach to large groups and discuss the problem of the wider context in which the large group takes place.
AhlinG. (2010) ‘Notations about the possibilities in large groups’, Group Analysis43(3): 253–67.
2.
AhlinG. (2011) ‘Response to von Sommaruga Howard’s “Architecture of Domination”’, Group Analysis44(3): 342–5.
3.
BeuchotM. (1997) Tratado de hermenéutica analógica. Hacia un nuevo modelo de interpretación [Treatise of analogical hermeneutics: Towards a new model of interpretation], 4th revised and enlarged edition. Mexico City: National Autonomous University of Mexico, Itaca, 2009.
4.
BeuchotM. (2003) Hermenéutica analógica y del umbral [Analogical hermeneutics and threshold hermeneutics]. Salamanca, Spain: San Esteban.
5.
Blowin’ in the Wind (1962) Writer: Bob Dylan. Distributed by Columbia Records, USA.
6.
CappielloA.ZanasiM.FiumaraR.S. (1988) ‘The therapeutic value of the silent observer: Clinical experience in group analysis’, Group Analysis21(3): 227–32.
7.
DellarossaA. (1979) Grupos de reflexión. Entrenamiento institucional de coordinadores y terapeutas de grupos [Reflection Groups: Institutional training of group co-ordinators and group therapists]. Buenos Aires: Paidós.
8.
de MaréP.PiperR.ThompsonS. (1991) Koinonia: From Hate, Through Dialogue, to Culture in the Large Group. London: Karnac.
9.
FoulkesS.H. (1948) Introduction to Group-Analytic Psychotherapy: Studies in the Social Interaction of Individuals and Groups. London: Karnac, 1984.
10.
FoulkesS.H. (1975) ‘Problems of the large group from a group-analytic point of view’, in KreegerL. (ed.) The Large Group: Dynamics and Therapy, pp. 33–56. London: Karnac.
11.
FreudS. (1937d) Constructions in Analysis. S.E. 23, pp. 255–70. London: Hogarth.
12.
GadamerH.G. (1960) Truth and Method. New York, NY: Continuum, 2004.
13.
Hernández-TubertR. (2009) ‘A personal reflection on the Large Group experience: thinking group or therapeutic group’, Group-Analytic Contexts 44: 27–32.
14.
HopperE.KreegerL. (1980) ‘“Report on the Large Group” of the Survivor Syndrome Workshop (1979)’, in HopperE.The Social Unconscious. London: Jessica Kingsley, 2003, pp. 95–102.
15.
LacanJ. (1973) The Seminar XI—The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, MillerJ.A. (ed.), SheridanA. (Trans.). New York, NY: Norton, 1998.
16.
MarroneM. (1979) ‘The development of group psychotherapy in Argentina’, Group Analysis12(3): 250–3.
17.
Pichon-RivièreE. (1971) El proceso grupal. Del psicoanálisis a la psicología social (I) [The group process: From psychoanalysis to social psychology (I)]. Buenos Aires: Nueva Visión.
18.
Pichon-RivièreE.BlegerJ.LibermanD.RollaE. (1960) ‘Técnica de los grupos operativos’ [Technique of operative groups], in El proceso grupal. Del psicoanálisis a la psicología social (I) [The group process: From psychoanalysis to social psychology (I)], pp. 107–120. Buenos Aires: Nueva Visión.
19.
PintoR.d’EliaA. (1980) ‘The therapeutic role of the observer’, Group Analysis13(1): 21–4.
20.
SharpeM. (2008) ‘Styles of large group leadership’, Group32: 289–301.
21.
SternD.B. (1983) ‘Unformulated experience: From familiar chaos to creative disorder’, Contemporary Psychoanalysis19: 71–99. Reprinted in MitchellS.A.AronL. (eds), Relational Psychoanalysis: The Emergence of a Tradition. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press, 1999, pp. 79–105.
22.
SternD.B. (1997) Unformulated Experience: From Dissociation to Imagination in Psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
23.
StiersM.J.DluhyM. (2008) ‘The large group and the organizational unconscious’, Group32: 251–60.
24.
Tubert-OklanderJ. (2002) ‘Enrique Pichon-Rivière: Pioneer and outcast’, in Tubert-OklanderJ.Hernández de TubertR.Operative Groups: The Latin-American Approach to Group Analysis. London: Jessica Kingsley, 2004, pp. 25–36.
25.
Tubert-OklanderJ. (2006) ‘I, Thou, and Us: Relationality and the interpretive process in clinical practice’, Psychoanalytic Dialogues16: 199–216.
26.
Tubert-OklanderJ. (2009) Hermenéutica analógica y condición humana [Analogical hermeneutics and the human condition]. Analogía Filosófica, Special Number 24, Mexico City.
27.
Tubert-OklanderJ. (2011a) ‘Lost in translation: A contribution to intercultural understanding’, Canadian Journal of Psychoanalysis—Revue canadienne de psychanalyse19: 144–68.
28.
Tubert-OklanderJ. (2011b) ‘Enrique Pichon-Rivière: The social unconscious in the Latin-American tradition of group analysis’, in HopperWeinberg (eds) The Social Unconscious in Persons, Groups and Societies—Volume I: Mainly Theory, pp. 45–67. London: Karnac.
29.
Tubert-OklanderJ. (2013) Theory of Psychoanalytical Practice: A Relational Process Approach. London: International Psychoanalytical Association, Karnac.
30.
Tubert-OklanderJ. (2014) The One and the Many: Relational Psychoanalysis and Group Analysis. London: Karnac.
31.
Tubert-OklanderJ.Beuchot PuenteM. (2008) Ciencia mestiza. Psicoanálisis y hermenéutica analógica [Hybrid science: Psychoanalysis and analogical hermeneutics]. Mexico City: Torres.
32.
Tubert-OklanderJ.Hernández de TubertR.(2004) Operative Groups: The Latin-American Approach to Group Analysis. London: Jessica Kingsley.
33.
Howardvon Sommaruga (2011) ‘The Architecture of Domination: Reflections on Conducting the Symposium Large Group in Dublin’, Group Analysis44(3): 328–41.
34.
Zito LemaV. (1976) Conversaciones con Enrique Pichon-Rivière. Sobre el arte y la locura. [Conversations with Enrique Pichon-Rivière: On Art and Madness]. Buenos Aires: Timerman Editores.
