Laura Gonzalez


9 Apr 2006

Thinking about doing, then writing; Or, the third entry on psychoanalysis

It is beginning to dawn on me that the process of undergoing analysis may not be the clean-cut objective and process-based approach to methods I have been thinking about. I will not be able to hide myself behind such and such theory, this or that concept. It will be subjective, and, undoubtedly, things I do not talk much about (like my mother, life before 1999, school, my relationship to my body, not being able to make art and the painful subject of friendship) are going to surface. I will have to approach my less favourite topic of conversation –my own self– and I am not really sure if I am totally prepared for this, or if I ever will. I am not scared, that is not it. I definitely want to go through with it and feel excited about finally doing something more than reading about psychoanalysis. What I have been realising lately is that I have been on the up since I started and there will be times when I am lost, when I don’t like it, when I don’t know why I am doing it. Psychoanalysis will probably exacerbate that, apart from blurring the boundary between my life and my PhD. What I am trying to say is: it will not be easy, probably it should not be, and I need to know that so I don’t get up and leave when things don’t go my way.

The very first step, finding a psychoanalyst in Glasgow, was not an straight forward task either. It involved a lot of phoning around, asking questions and trying to stop transactional analysis therapists wanting to help me (I am sure they could be very effective, just not now). It was a little like going for jobs: something told me this or that person was not right until I phoned JS. His approach was completely different to the rest, as if he KNEW. Transference places the analyst as the subject-supposed-to-know and I think this was already happening in that very first conversation. Very curious indeed, as I am not the sort of person to follow that kind of signs… He already had high marks on my list for defining himself as a psychoanalyst (not a psychotherapist) in the British Psychoanalytical Society webpages. I am seeing him on the 27th (aptly, the day my mother comes to visit). I have plan B, and maybe even C, if this does not work out. The key questions to resolve will be: is he a psychoanalyst; does he have a couch; does he want to work with me given my demande d¬íanalyse.

Posted in Blog, Psychoanalysis

Leave a Reply

About Me

I am an artist and writer. My recent practice performance, film, dance, photography and text, and my work has been performed, exhibited and published in many venues in Europe and the US. I have spoken at numerous conferences and events, including the Museum for the Fashion Institute of Technology in New York, the Medical Museum in Copenhagen, College Arts Association and the Association for the Psychoanalysis of Culture and Society. When I am not following Freud, Lacan and Marx’s footsteps with my camera or creating performance works as part of my Athenaeum Research Fellowship at the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland, I teach postgraduate students at Transart Institute.

I am currently immersed in an interdisciplinary project exploring knowledge and the body of the hysteric. In 2013, together with Child and Adolescent Mental Health practitioner Frances Davies, I co-edited the book ‘Madness, Women and the Power of Art’, to which I contributed a work authored with Eleanor Bowen. My book ‘Make Me Yours: How Art Seduces’ was published by Cambridge Scholars in 2016. In this text, investigates psychoanalytic approaches to making and understanding objects of seduction, including an examination of parallels between artistic and analytic practices, a study of Manolo Blahnik’s shoes as objects of desire, a disturbing encounter with Marcel Duchamp’s last work, and the creation of a psychoanalytically inspired Discourse of the Artefact, a framework enabling the circulation of questions and answers through a relational approach to artworks.