Hermeticism and openness in the analysis of a pervert

Abstract

Two phases of the analysis of a perverse patient —homosexual, fetishist— are studied: 1) The necessity he had of withdrawing himself and building a strong barrier against the analyst, besides of keeping also interior barriers to separate zones
of “bastion”. The characteristics with which he functionned at this moment are described: communication through dreams; projective identification and anxiety situations bound up to it; and transferential autism. Material characteristic from
this period is presented. The good aplitted and hidden relation with the analyst is shown; the increase of this splitted relation, duex to the repeated interpretation of the negative transference and of the schizo-paranoid anxieties bound up to it, lead to an aperture.
2) The way in which he could get out of the paralysis of introjection and projection, crystallized in an analyst-Outside-bad and a patient-inside-good, adhered to and protecting his good internal objects and controlling his persecutors. The way in which the barriers got open is indicated, as well as the ensuing overcome of the transferential autism. The lessening of the aplitting
permited the aceess to the patient’s psychotic part. This part expresses itself in the perverse behaviour: homosexuality, representing the relation ship with the idealized object —the penis, but with a persecuting breast underlying it— and
fetishism, constituing the externalization of the omnipotent control exerced over the archaic internal objects, as much as of gratification than of persecution, objets whose symbolic equation are the fetishes. The patient’s omnipotence maintains the difficult equilibrium of this system: a) aplitting idealized and persecutory objects, and so aplitting the ego; b)
projecting outside the persecutory objects and his own bad parts; e) building a barrier against the possible entry of the bad external objects, to preserve the idealized internal objects, specially the idealized breast and the idealized penis
from reintrojection, felt as the intrusion of persecutors, additionned of bad parts of his own; d) building internal barriers between the psychotic part and the other parts to avoid the invasion of psychosis; e) controlling omnipotently the archaic
objects locked up in the psychotic part through the fetishistic behaviour, a real exorcism for these objects.
Get related to the analyst, become involved into the analysis, meant to the patient renouncing to his omnipotence and, so, face the dissolution of the splitting and the ensuing danger of disintegration —by invasion-intrusion of the
bad objects and bad parts projected, by attack of the internal persecutors—. It is evident that the process has nut reached yet the patient’s integration. A lot remains to be done. We have only changed from being in front of a wall to be in front of a scene in which we see the play of the internal objects of the patient, with ah that remains in this image of comtemplation from the outside and of
keeping at a distance.