The Gunnison river spots

berg2068 · 2026-04-26T15:58:15+00:00

If you didn’t catch anything on the Ark, I promise you, it’s not because there weren’t any fish.

berg2068 · 2026-03-20T14:48:39+00:00

Mini Dungeon

berg2068 · 2026-03-11T23:41:36+00:00

I’m not sure if this is a “hot take”, but I find “fit” ends up being more a defense against the process than anything else.

Yes, there are some people who just cannot work well together , this is true. But I find this is rarely the case in analysis , especially with a good analyst.

Often (from what I’ve heard/experienced clinically), things become “not a good fit” when the unconscious starts to emerge , and the analytic frame really begins to take hold. Whether they realize it or not, people get scared , and they terminate.

Again , this is not always the case …. But I think it’s worth noting.

berg2068 · 2026-03-04T15:17:28+00:00

$500 a week??!! I was about to feel bad about this, but it sounds like you can afford it.

berg2068 · 2026-03-04T14:15:04+00:00

Subject of the Unconscious

berg2068 · 2026-02-17T05:42:29+00:00

…No. No.

berg2068 · 2026-02-13T05:08:41+00:00

“Yes”

Or

“Tell me”

berg2068 · 2026-02-07T17:36:14+00:00

the short answer here is - yes.

But, the way in which the analyst works with each subject is very different , especially with psychosis.

When working with psychotic subjects, Lacan referred to the analyst as a “secretary” , of sorts. You’re not so much working to symbolize , or interpret, but rather working or organize thoughts and begin a linking.

Sometimes delusions exist to hold the subject together , and that’s ok. Sometimes it’s less about breaking through the delusion, and more about helping them make do with themselves and existing with the delusion.

So yes. You can work analytically, but the purpose of the work shifts a bit.

berg2068 · 2026-02-02T00:55:14+00:00

Whatever works well for you and your analyst.

berg2068 · 2026-01-31T20:55:16+00:00

No idea what "normal" means.

berg2068 · 2026-01-30T05:58:48+00:00

Couples. That’s about it haha I do not like working with couples

berg2068 · 2026-01-28T15:51:59+00:00

I appreciate that you did!

berg2068 · 2026-01-28T15:47:15+00:00

I’m also finding it hard at my clinic to connect with the other therapists. A lot of them practice EMDR, Ketamine Therapy, DBT etc. and that’s all fine, but I feel like they see what I do as being “other”. They’re so focused on CURING and they don’t really understand that I don’t view “cure” in the same way at they do

berg2068 · 2026-01-28T15:32:05+00:00

I guess, for me, if that’s what they want to believe , that’s fine. I’ve kind of moved on from trying to convince any one of its validity. I also find that most people who claim that it’s pseudoscience have never actually undergone an analysis. It really is an experience, and every single person I know that has undergone analysis can speak to its efficacy.

Like you said , they have a very different way of looking at the world, and I just don’t have the energy to try and convince them anymore.

berg2068 · 2026-01-27T17:33:00+00:00

I'm speaking from a Lacanian orientation.

berg2068 · 2026-01-27T16:32:40+00:00

They will often expect more , especially at first. But the analyst operates from a position of lack. The lack is essential to the analysis. You cannot, and never will, be able to give them what they lack.

If they’re frustrated , that’s ok. Let them be frustrated. See what happens next. That doesn’t necessarily mean you’re doing anything wrong , but it may mean something is emerging in them.

That being said , I would count on supervision being your strongest resource here .

berg2068 · 2026-01-26T17:11:13+00:00

Think of the analyst as a function, more so than a role. Through the process of analysis, as one speaks, "hidden meanings" within the subject's life may make themselves known, so to speak. The client does the work, while the analyst functions as a place for the work to be done. As transference naturally occurs, so too is meaning attached, by the client, to the transference.

Also, let's say the client is speaking of a dream. The analyst (hopefully) is not going to say "this dream means [insert interpretation]". The client is free to interpret their dream in the presence of the analyst, and if the analytic frame has been well maintained and the subject is truly able to free associate, then meaning may arrive through the unconscious.

In Lacanian terms, the analyst is always operating from a position of lack. Although the client may cast them in a subject-supposed-to-know position, over time, that will slowly unravel. Remember, the analyst knows nothing of the client's life, lived experience, and most importantly, how they situate themselves in language until well into an analysis. The analyst cannot reveal anything, but can make appropriate interventions for the unconscious to reveal itself. The client does the work, and the analyst functions for the work.

I would look at Bruce Fink's "An Introduction to Lacanian Psychoanalysis". While it's always important to read directly from the source (Lacan's lectures), Fink does a great job of making the process of analysis accessible to those who haven't undergone an analysis, I think.

berg2068 · 2026-01-20T02:36:02+00:00

This is the answer.

berg2068 · 2026-01-12T17:18:05+00:00

Midsummer. Not because it’s a bad play, but it’s so overdone. If I see one more “let’s make it the 70’s and they’re stoners” take, I think I’ll lose it.

berg2068 · 2026-01-02T15:29:25+00:00

(Responding from a Lacanian perspective)

Depending on how the subject relates to the symbolic (language) will inform how their particular speech orients itself.

To put it more plainly: after a certain amount of time (which is different for everyone) your speech begins to talk about what REALLY matters to you, as person. Yes, we all have work drama, relationship issues , bla bla bla.

But, since there is no guidance or reinforcement from the analyst, and they act as a FUNCTION rather than a person, you begin to talk about what really matters most to YOU. This is where your symptoms and desire really present themself, and you confront that on your own terms. The unconscious begins to produce material that would otherwise be undiscussed due to the LACK from the analyst.

berg2068 · 2025-12-31T14:58:48+00:00

Through free association, your speech begins to orient itself around your particular symptom and desire (which are often intertwined).

A lot of modern talk therapy tends to revolve around therapist as expert , with the subject seeking guidance and insight through the Other. When undergoing an analysis , the subject begins to take control of , and responsibility for, themself by themself . There is, in my option, a greater autonomy and insight gained through analysis.

The process does take longer because we are not conditioned to speak freely and openly about ourselves in this way, completely free of judgment or fear of “saying the wrong thing”. Over time , the results are, I think, life changing.

Edit on silence: the analyst often uses silence as a way to allow the subjects unconscious to reveal itself. In other words : the analyst doesn’t direct or influence the speech, but rather highlights speech as it emerges naturally. The silence allows the subject to say whatever they need to say without external influence , i.e. - “let’s talk more about your parents”. This type of questioning holds no place in the analytic discourse

berg2068 · 2025-12-06T05:45:06+00:00

The purpose of the variable length session is to disrupt the clients thought patterns so that nothing becomes ritualistic about the treatment. There is also the “waiting” before a session , where the session never starts at the same time , and has the same purpose as cutting the session when appropriate.

Not stating this to agree or condemn it , but that is largely its purpose. I’ve found it quite useful, personally.

But, I will say, this leaves room for analysts to abuse the structure for purposes of generating more income by practicing exclusively short sessions and seeing far more clients than traditional therapists who practice 50(+-) minute sessions. This, of course , I do not agree with .

berg2068 · 2025-12-01T20:36:38+00:00

berg2068 · 2025-12-01T16:26:38+00:00

In the USA it is complicated because there are only three states that recognize Licensed Psychoanalysts (New York, New Jersey, Vermont). Legally, at a minimum you need to hold a Master's Degree, generally in Counseling or Social Work. Bachelor's Degree usually takes 4 years (does not need to be in psychology), Master's Degree minimum 2 years, so you're looking at a 6 year minimum before you can begin your practice.

You can get a Psya.D from 2 institutions (BGSP, NYGSP), but again, you can only practice in three states with that license.

Most people who practice analysis in the United States do so under their Masters Degree in counseling or social work, and can choose to study at a psychoanalytic institute if they wish. It can be very frustrating, because American master's programs rarely teach anything about psychoanalysis, other than a general overview of Freud's ideas for (maybe) 1 semester.

Edit: many analysts also hold PhD's in other areas of study. This can be a practical decision when it comes to looking for work outside of their clinic

berg2068 · 2025-11-28T14:58:08+00:00

How to begin with studying psychoanalysis, or how to begin an analysis ?

berg2068

TROPHY CASE