Abstract
Contemporary psychoanalytic writers have cautioned against reifying internal objects (Aron, 1996; Cooper, 2010; Davies, 2006; Seligman, 2018), while others emphasize the emergent qualities of the internal world (Bass, 2001). This paper extends these perspectives by conceptualizing internal objects as fundamentally processual rather than fixed structures. Psychological development is proposed to involve a lifelong capacity to generate new internal objects through ongoing investment in both the external world and the internal object world. When development proceeds with minimal obstruction, this capacity is supported by the internalization of a “good enough” and vitalizing object that facilitates the creation of flexible internal links. These links allow individuals to imbue experience with symbolic meaning and form new connections even when associations are partial or indirect. When this generative process is disrupted, internal links may become rigid and associated with experiences of psychological deadness. Reframing the “good object” as a vitalizing process highlights its role in sustaining psychological vitality and internal growth, with implications for clinical work aimed at restoring generative internal processes.
Learning Objectives
At the end of this presentation, participants will be able to:
1. Define the concept of flexible internal links, and describe how this concept can be used to assess patients’ internal object systems and capacities for vitality in experience.
2. Apply clinical interventions that support and validate patients’ movement toward their leading-edge aspirations.
3. Describe the developmental origins and clinical manifestations of rigid internal links, and explain their relationship to experiences of psychological deadness or diminished vitality.
4. Identify conditions that support the development and maintenance of the good object process, and recognize clinical indicators that this process has been disrupted or inhibited.
Biography
Rachel Sopher, LCSW, is Faculty and Supervisor at the National Institute for the
Psychotherapies Training Institute (NIP) and the National Training Program (NTP); she serves on the Executive Committee and as Faculty and Supervisor at the Stephen Mitchell Center for Relational Studies. She is Senior Editor of Psychoanalytic Perspectives and has written and presented widely on issues of aliveness and deadness in the transference-countertransference. Rachel is co-editor, with Amy Schwartz-Cooney, of the collection Vitalization in Psychoanalysis and maintains a private practice in New York City.
References
Caflisch, J. (2020) “When reparation is felt to be impossible”: Persecutory guilt and breakdowns in thinking and dialogue about race. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 30(5), 578–594.
Schoen, S. (2023) The patient’s experience of the analyst’s physicality: It’s what’s on the outside that counts. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 33(2), 240–255.
Schwartz Cooney, A. (2018). Vitalizing enactment: A relational exploration. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 28(3), 340–354.
Stern, S. (2019) Airless worlds: The traumatic sequelae of identification with parental negation. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 29(4), 435-450.
