In this text from 1956, Pichon-Rivière presents the conclusions he drew based on the work he carried out together with the artist Franco DiSegni (described in the book “On Painting”). The task consisted of analyzing DiSegni's creative process in the context of his practice of painting which was based on a "schema" (or a conception of the painting) that emerged during the therapy he underwent with Pichon.
The schema was transferred to—and objectified in the form of—a "concrete aesthetic object." At the same time, the aim was to describe the creative process through spoken words (in the analytical process). Using this material, along with additional information from texts written by artists and scientific studies on the subject, an initial text was developed.
Subsequently, DiSegni and Pichon jointly embarked on a new task. DiSegni delivered a series of lectures on painting and the artistic creative process. Pichon contributed by coordinating the subsequent discussions and group analyses.
The final task consisted of writing the book “On Painting”, which DiSegni undertook, and composing the concluding commentary (the text below), which Pichon authored. In this text, Pichon provided information about the framework within which the experiment took place, as well as the conclusions he himself drew.
Pichon-Rivière's concluding text on DiSegni's book thus has to do with these two processes: DiSegni's analytic experience, while speaking about his creative process, and the group discussions and conclusions that followed DiSegni's subsequent lectures.
The aim of surrealist painting is the projection of the secret metamorphoses of the world of objects in the perpetual exchanges between the subjective and the objective.
—André Breton
Although I was already familiar with the content of the accumulated material and could position myself as either a co-author or a witness, depending on the time elapsed since the material was obtained (distance), my current interest focuses on the effect produced on this material and on the analysand through the combined action of two new factors:
The aesthetic experience was communicated by Di Segni to groups of young people through lectures and discussions.
The reworking of the material was carried out simultaneously, with the purpose of being communicated to a broader audience (readers) through the book.
In general terms, the effect of these two factors on the original experience (the analysis) was that it appeared with a new significance to the analysand, something we will call "coming to terms" with the concrete experience in a broader way while transforming it into a working tool. In this way, it acquires an operational character in relation to others such as the members in every type of group. In the latter were also observed energizing or dynamizing effects.
The technique used in the collective approach can be summarized as follows:
The group members were primarily young people of both sexes, with a more or less homogeneous background and an interest in visual arts.
Di Segni delivered weekly lectures, following the outline of this book.
After the lectures, discussions were organized. These began with the day’s lecture topics and evolved into exchanges between the group members and the lecturer or among the members themselves.
These groups operated in a progressive way marked by a climate of enthusiasm, free expression, increasing levels of understanding and lived experience while aiming to accomplish a meaningful task.
These aesthetic experiences (when integrated) acquire the characteristics of an act of knowledge of the aesthetic object in its objectifying metamorphosis. Thus, this knowledge intervenes in the configuration of a conceptual and referential scheme, which remains flexible, sensitive, and plastic (not stereotyped), embedded in a psycho-social-historical context. This operational aspect is observed through the ratification or rectification of stereotyped and distorted attitudes due, among other causes, to outdated teaching methods that have been kept in place as guardians of certain ideologies. These rigid attitudes, maintained by a similar conceptual scheme and functioning in a more or less unconscious manner, constitute barriers that prevent the emergence of new and original aesthetic objects that arise in the mind of the innovative artist as a true discovery in a specific, already indicated context.
This emergent (new and original aesthetic object), with its own significance and language (previously culturally repressed), is now recognized or rediscovered with the characteristics of a hidden object (return of the repressed) that provokes anxiety, which may reach the experience of the uncanny depending on how unusual its appearance is. Such situations can provoke hostile reactions in the audience, including the destruction of the aesthetic object (work of art) or symbolic destruction of the artist through destructive criticism. In this criticism, using specialized language, the critic denounces the supposedly destructive nature of the work, attributing a specific intent to the artist. The critic assumes the role of spokesperson for the social group. Here, the relationship between the aesthetic object, the original object, the hidden or magical/uncanny object and madness is merely outlined. The appearance, encounter, and presence of the aesthetic object in the operational field of psychoanalysis (the interview with its unfolding and context) makes possible its comprehensive, multifaceted investigation through a continuous interaction between the analyst and the analysand. This interaction is achieved through a process of communication (a transmitter, a receiver, and a message to be translated), which we can graphically represent as the functioning of a spiral in continuous motion, in which situations of opening (progress, evolution, facing new dimensions) and situations of closure (coherence and objectivity upon reopening/Translators remark: It refers to the process of maintaining logical consistency and impartiality when the situation or process opens up again after a closure or a moment of reflection) alternate and are resolved dialectically in a continuous manner. However, under abnormal conditions, it transforms into a closed, vicious, pathological circle that functions as a closed system. The activity (the work) acquires the character of a stereotype; this difficulty can be defined as an inhibition (phobia) in response to the space opened up by the new cycle of the spiral.
This phenomenon also characterizes neuroses in general, and the goal of treatment is to restart and transform it into an open system. Within the very field of work the aesthetic object appears as entangled in the dynamic structure of the emergent in the analysand. It is an unknown object to the subject, later "found," "discovered," or "rediscovered" in a state of varying degrees of destruction that must be recovered, reconstructed, managed and incorporated into the transference situation. It is in this situation, marked by temporal-spatial characteristics (here-now-with me), and based on the unconscious fantasies of the analysand, that it must be "reconsidered."
In Franco Di Segni, the creative process manifested uniquely through a phenomenon of dual aspects. As an active subject in the process, he painted: the framework of the painting could take shape within the analytical situation and was later "transposed" onto the canvas, transforming into a concrete aesthetic object through this process. At the same time, as an observing subject, he sought to articulate the unfolding of this process in spoken (analysis) and later written verbal language.
This material formed the basis of the present book. Following the original experience, Di Segni sought to learn from and gather the experiences of others through writings by painters and scientific works on the subject. His goal was to collaborate with me to rework the entire material into a new task (criteria of verification and confrontation), resulting in a more refined framework for addressing the problem.
As has been said, the analysand attempted to recount the characteristics of his private link to this object, experiencing as an aesthetic event the vicissitudes and transformations the object undergoes. The analysand’s journey through situations that condition progressive metamorphoses of the aesthetic object and their relationship with him (link), culminating in its recreation or repair, is achieved through a learning process aimed at integrating the object, the subject, and, to some extent, the analyst. The analyst integrates this triadic relationship—object-subject-analyst—in a concrete and operational manner.
Through successive interpretations of the analysand’s emerging fantasies, I worked with these to clarify (insight) the significant nature of that object in the present, past, and future for the both of us - as well as the motivations behind this process (e.g., feelings of guilt). Similarly, the necessity to create a given object was examined, one that is also meaningfully included in the analysand’s history as a link that was initially external and later became internalized within the self as an internal connection (with an internal object). This task is facilitated in cases where there is an affinity between analyst and analysand, characterized by certain similarities in their conceptual, referential, and plastic schemas, including the capacity to plastically express a given situation. This aptitude becomes a medium or tool used in the process of repair or reconstruction.
The appearance and presence of the object under specific structural and functional conditions (destroyed or in the process of destruction) evoke a particular impact and repercussion in both participants. The need or demand for reconstruction is heightened, and the mechanisms of repair, oriented toward this goal, establish a situation that encompasses a shared purpose, a common task within a shared context, with different but complementary functions or roles. This entails operating within the mind of the analysand (a stage) on a destroyed object that also belongs to them, whose reconstruction is represented through the theme and structure of the artwork.
The more successful (quality of the resulting aesthetic object) this task is, the greater the psychological benefit for the analysand. This benefit is expressed through a reduction in anxiety, feelings of guilt, aggression and so on.
In the subject (the creator or artist) another process of dual significance, both aesthetic and moral, takes place through the transformation (metamorphosis) of a distinctive link between the self and an internal object (an object destroyed and later repaired). This occurs in two temporally consecutive and opposing acts (destruction and reconstruction) within the same stage (the artist's inner world). The analyst intervenes in the second phase as the first is a fundamental condition for the onset of the illness.
We now ask: What happens to the analyst during this process? The more authentically the analyst engages in this dual task which analysis is (constantly dealing with at least three persons—a triangular situation), the success achieved also brings about modifications. It works in the same direction as the other one described since to operate effectively (as an analyst) one must identify (empathize) with the other person and thus participating in an aesthetic experience that also includes a moral benefit.
The aesthetic experience that occurs and is lived by the spectator arises when an object (a work of art) symbolically functions as a medium for satisfying his unconscious emotional needs (fantasies). This involves a discovery—or more accurately a rediscovery—of his unconscious fantasies through the form and content of the aesthetic object functioning thereby as a mirror reaction.
The observer participates in the very process of reconstruction, which takes place within his own inner world and is expressed as aesthetic pleasure.
Through contemplation (aesthetic perception) and during this re-living of the creator's basic situation expressed in the work, these unconscious contents can become conscious within the very context of the aesthetic experience transforming the latter into an experience or act of knowledge.
Traduction: Sören Lander 2025-01-21