Customer Reviews

Melting the Darkness: The Dyad and Principles of Clinical Practice

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Melting the Darkness is a book intended for professionals, but it speaks to patients, too. It was recommended to me by my own analyst after my ongoing questions about how the "dyad" works. The "dyad," for other non professionals considering this book, is the relationship between the analyst and patient. The dyad is now seen as a key (perhaps THE key) instrument of healing a psyche. I was astonished to see my own feelings spelled out in this book, feelings understood by analysts in general. Those of us in analysis tend to feel as though we are alone, but we're not. It is difficult to remember that our analysts themselves have been through analysis. They DO know what it means to feel vulnerable.

Here are a couple of lines that struck me:

"The very experience of being viewed by the analyst may feel disintegrating for a patient with a weak sense of self." Oh. Now I see why feel so self conscious in session.

"Analysis not only exposes, it intensifies." Oh. Now I see why I feel bad on the way to feeling better.

"The analyst's silence, too, is a form of statement, often a powerful one." Oh. Now I see why, at least partially, I feel panicky when he's silent. Now I know why it feels like he's shouting when he's silent. For me, a silence often puts me floating in an abyss with nothing to grasp onto. I hadn't told my analyst that before I read the book.

"Analysis demands profound regression." Oh. Now I see why I have to cry, even though I don't want to. Now I see why I want to stay home, under my comforter, and not face the day.

"There are levels or degrees of insight. Perhaps the deepest level is that in which understanding is most thoroughly integrated, so integrated that one's character and mental functioning utilize the understanding without having to resort to conscious thought." Oh. Now I see where I'm going.

Dr. Poland humanizes the analyst in a way the analyst cannot do. Dr. Poland can generalize. With one's own analyst the relationship is too singular, too specific. One never knows if a reaction is part of a transference. One never knows if a behavior of an analyst is a personality quirk or a technique.

The book is also reassuring on the genuineness front. For a long time with my own analysis I wasn't sure what was genuine and what was technique. There is too much information to go into detail here, but by the end of the book, I had a deep sense of the caring and genuineness that emanates from at least some (and hopefully most) of the people who do this work.

Not a quick and easy read, but definitely an enlightening one.

Enjoy.