Introduction
The
idea undergoing this article is that psychoanalysis is first of all a peculiar listening disposition. Today we probably
have a vast array of talking cures
(talking cure is how one of the first patients of Freud has described
psychoanalysis), but what differentiates psychoanalysis from any other
psychotherapeutic or counselling approach is a particular and distinctive
listening. From a theoretical perspective, it is probably not possible to
identify common grounds between different psychoanalytic schools; however, it
is probably still possible to describe a psychoanalytic listening that is
shared by majority of psychoanalysts. Despite listening is at the base of a
clinical practice, it has not been always stressed enough. However, a
distinctive psychoanalytic listening is particularly clear when compared to any
listening in counselling and psychotherapy. Indeed, the last part of this
chapter will analyze the premises of listening in counselling. 
The analytic attitude: a
different listening disposition
What is the specific of
psychoanalysis, and how does it work? Some scholars (Kernberg, 1993, 2001;
White, 2001) have tried to describe the convergences and the divergences
between some schools inside the psychoanalytic movement. Wallerstein (1991) tried
to find the so called “common ground” among different psychoanalytic
orientations; however as Green (2005) replied, this probably remains a wishful
thinking impossible to realize. Furthermore, the
adoption of a theoretical position does not guarantee the results of a
practice, which is probably depending by other factors like the transference,
rather than the analyst formation and his supposed knowledge or expertise. Instead,
is it possible to describe psychoanalysis not just as a sum of concepts, but as
a practice? What are the distinctive traits of psychoanalysis; and what are the
basic assumptions that lead the analysts to assume a particular attitude or
disposition when listen to their clients? While concepts may be specific of one
school only, if a psychoanalytic attitude exists, it should be inclusive of
different schools and orientations; and at the same time it should distinguish
psychoanalysis from other disciplines.
Probably, what better describes
a psychoanalytic attitude (differentiating at the same time psychoanalysis from
other practices) is a peculiar and distinctive type of listening. The analytic
listening is influenced by the theory, but is also a different disposition
toward the speech. Indeed, if psychoanalysis is a talking cure, than
listening cannot be less important. But very few scholars have emphasized this
dimension.
Listening as emerged by Freud’s recommendations
In 1912 Freud writes the “Recommendations to Physicians Practicing
Psychoanalysis”, in which he lists a number of technical rules that might help analysts
to conduct the process of analysis:
1.
The first technique, Freud (1912) says, is
a simple one, and consists in “not
directing one's notice to anything in particular and in maintaining the same
‘evenly-suspended attention’“ (p.110). This is simply the counterpart to the
demand made to the patient to obey to the fundamental rule of the free
association. “The rule for the doctor may be expressed: ‘He should withhold all
conscious influences from his capacity to attend, and give himself over
completely to his “unconscious memory”.’ Or, to put it purely in terms of
technique: ‘He should simply listen, and not bother about whether he is keeping
anything in mind.’” (p.111).
2.
A second advice is to
avoid taking notes during analytical sessions, because “a detrimental selection
from the material will necessarily be made as one writes the notes or
shorthand, and part of one's own mental activity is tied up in this way, which
would be better employed in interpreting what one has heard.” (p.112).
3.
A third advice concerns is for the analyst
to maintain emotional coldness, for creating the optimal condition for both
parties. Freud advices analysts to put apart any therapeutic ambition and
instead be content to operate as a surgeon who
“puts aside all his feelings, even his human sympathy, and concentrates his
mental forces on the single aim of performing the operation as skilfully as
possible.” (p.114).
4.
The analyst should do
everything not to become a censorship of his own in selecting the patient’s
material. “To put it in a formula: he must turn his own unconscious like a
receptive organ towards the transmitting unconscious of the patient. He must
adjust himself to the patient as a telephone receiver is adjusted to the
transmitting microphone. Just as the receiver converts back into sound waves
the electric oscillations in the telephone line which were set up by sound
waves, so the doctor's unconscious is able, from the derivatives of the
unconscious which are communicated to him, to reconstruct that unconscious,
which has determined the patient's free associations.” (pp. 114-115).
5.
“Educative ambition
is of as little use as therapeutic ambition.” Every doctor should “take the
patient’s capacities rather than his own desires as guide.” (p.118)
6.
Patient’s
intellectual cooperation: “mental activities such as thinking something over or
concentrating the attention solve none of the riddles of a neurosis; that can
only be done by patiently obeying the psycho-analytic rule, which enjoins the
exclusion of all criticism of the unconscious or of its derivatives. One must
be especially unyielding about obedience to that rule with patients who
practise the art of sheering off into intellectual discussion during their
treatment, who speculate a great deal and often very wisely about their
condition and in that way avoid doing anything to overcome it.” (p.118).
Psychoanalysis emphasizes listening critically, listening with
intelligence; not just “hearing”. In that essay “he was advising against
various determined efforts to remember and was urging an unbiased, open-minded
listening to everything the patient had to say. He explicitly indicated that
the psychoanalyst would thus remember more and with less intrusion of bias, and
he implicitly indicated that such a way of listening would lead to the
psychoanalyst hearing more” (Jackson, 1992, p.1626). Listening with free
floating attention goes beyond the
plan of the explicit meaning, the reasoning, the rational thinking. Indeed, it
is not easy to reach a condition of evenly suspended attention: it requires a
continuous practice. So, Psychoanalysis is a
priority, not a part time occupation. Psychoanalysis is an attitude toward
life: it is the way we write, create, and invent life. It is creativity, and critical
attitude. It is giving nothing for granted. Psychoanalysis is not a method for solving the crisis; on the opposite, it
is how we question the crisis, and go through it. 
