A GESTALT APPROACH TO TRANSFERENCE

Peter Philippson

(This article is from the British Gestalt Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2002.)

Keywords: Transference, co-creation, field theory, phenomenology, present moment,

defensive and expressive transference, projective identification.

The question that I want to pose in this paper is: what is the meaning of transference in
Gestalt therapy?

The originators of Gestalt therapy, trying to distance themselves and their approach from their
psychoanalytic roots, emphasised the here-and-now relationship between therapist and client
rather than transference. More recently, there has been a rapprochement to psychoanalysis in many
parts of the Gestalt community, and a rediscovery of transference, countertransference and
projective identification. Often there is a sense of two relationships g oing on
simultaneously: the real relationship and the transferential one (see in particular Clarkson.
1992). Yet there are still questions about what these words mean in a Gestalt context.

One approach would be to reduce the concept of transference to that of projection of an

introjected parental figure onto the therapist, but this reduces it to an instance of such a wide
phenomenon that it sa ys nothing particular about the therapeutic encounter, which it must do to
have any connection to the psychoanal y tic meaning. Similarly, it can be viewed as an instance
of a fixed gestalt, an unfinished scene that is pushing for completion with the therapist.
Once again, however, such a replay would be happening in a wide variety of settings, and
says nothing about the therapeutic encounter. If transference is to mean anything particularly
significant about therapy rather than life in general, there needs to be something more specific
than these.

Requirements for a Gestalt approach to transference

Recall that 'self in Gestalt therapy is a field-relational term, so that what we are exploring in the
therapy situation is the moment-by-moment co-creation by and of therapist and client. This is a very
different image of the therapeutic encounter to the anal y tic one in which transference has its
normal meaning: A patient in psychotherapy tends to transfer into his relationship with the therapist
the sometimes intense feelings he experienced at an earlier stage in his life, in his relationship
with his mother or father or other important figure.' (Davis, 1987). So the classical theory
presupposes a possibility of the therapist being a blank screen onto which some other historical
relationship can be projected. This cannot be true in a Gestalt theorem. The therapist's action
cannot be separated from the client's experience. If suc h in t en se t r an sfe r en t ial fe e lin gs
an d at t it ude s t o th e t h er ap ist ar e a sp ec ific asp e c t o f psychotherapy, as I believe they are,
there must be something in the therapeutic relationship itself that lends itself to such a response.

Furthermore. Gestalt therapy is a phenomenological approach, so the idea that we can ever fail to
transfer our expectations onto our present experience is inconsistent with the approach. Yet neither does
Gestalt phenomenology support the idea that all is transference, that the world is just what we make of
it. As I have written above. Gestalt theory always points to a co-creation in a field context: organism
and environment, or self and other. The most we1can achieve is some degree of 'bracketing': having
some sense of our own bias, and what thisC
mi g ht mean in terms of the 'spin' we put on our experience and consequent ways in which we
limit our being in the world. That is, what is the therapist's phenomenology in the present
situation which links to the client's transferential phenomenology?

Thirdly, there are presuppositions about the nature of memory, childhood and developmental
theory concealed in the word 'transference' which are quite different from the present -centred
emphasis in Gestalt therapy. Developmentally, the theoretical groundwork was c onsistent
with the classical theories of Mahler et al (1975), where child development was understood to
pr oceed in comp leted sta g es, with a 'develop mental arr est' if a stage is not able to be
comp let ed satis fact or il y . T he mea ning of 'tr ans f er ence' was cau g ht up in the idea of
' g
r e r ession', conceived as a wholesale return to a historically previous way of being. The
more recent work of Stern (1985) has questioned the empirical and theoretical basis for this
approach. and the whole idea of 'regression' as a r eturn to a past state has been questioned in the
Gestalt world (Staemmler. 1997 and Philippson. 1993). In Perls et al (19941951. p. 70.
hereafter referred to as 'PHG') we read '...it is not b y inertia but by function that a form
persists. and it is not b y lapse of time but b y lack of function that a form is forgotten.' and (p. 69)
For the pur pos es of t her apy, however , only t he pr es ent str uctur e of s ensat ion,
introspection, behavior is available; and our question must be what role remembering plays in this
structure.'

Thus it seems clear to me that no theory of transference can be integrated into Gestalt therapy which does
not take into account field theory phenomenology and attention to the present moment (including
memory as one of the functions of that moment).

I will look at all these consider ations in tur n, and pr opose how we might under stand
transference and related phenomena in a manner consistent with them. I will then suggest how
this might inform the work of the Gestalt therapist.

Transference and co-creation

If the client experiences the therapist in ways which could be labelled (by client. therapist. or
observer) as resembling childhood relationships to significant others, how does this come
about' It is often simplistically assumed to be inherent in a relationship where the client is
looking for help, or where the therapist is offering help, but this is not true in m y experience. The
client is equall y likel y to expect some arcane procedure from the therapist (analogous to what
might be expected from a doctor) that will make thin gs better, or to expect to talk to the therapist
and be listened to with little other input. It rather depends what has been shown on television
most recentl y . or how a referrin g agenc y has described the therapy. It is true t hat clients are
often read y to pick up therapists' assumptions, but it is unclear to me as a parent that this is a
defining aspect of what children do with parents!

If something recognised as transference develops in a specific way in therapy (which I agree it does, in a sense),
then it must emerge from something the therapist brings to the encounter. This might be an assumption that
transference will emerge, which is then passed to the client. If so, it says something about the
therapist, and very little about the client. It might be a response to the therapist's refusal to take
the role the client does expect - the understanding I

2
 favour - but then there is a need to explain two things: ho w do the actions of the therapist
connect with the client's 'transferential' responses, and how is this therapeutic?

Let us begin with some Gestalt fundamentals. I will primarily use a Perlsian formulation of
ps ychopatholog y as it is most directl y easy to understand, but it is not normally different from
t he d es cr ipt ions of ' loss of e g o f u nct ion' in P HG. P er ls s p oke of ' ma nip u lat ing t he
envir onment for support' instead of 'self -support'. Note the choice of words. He was not
polarising 'self-support' and environmental support', as he has often been taken as saying,
but never said. For Perls consistently, 'self is located at the boundary of a person and the
person's environment, so such a polarisation would have been meaningless. To self-support is
to orient yourself creatively and contactfully in the environment so that the ever-changing environment
supports you. This is the theory of 'creative adjustment'. To manipulate the environment for
support is to act in a way that is familiar rather than creative, to adjust oneself in such a way
as to pull a familiar outcome from the environment, and to avoid any contact which cannot be
pulled into such an outcome. It was a creati v e adjustment when the person first did it; now it is
a fixed gestalt. There will then be areas of the person's life which are repetitions of familiar
relationships, often beginning in childhood. It is when these are seen a s pr oblematic that
the p er son comes t o a ther apist, but the 'pr ob lems ' ar e now disowned, alien 'things' to be
solved rather than what the client does.

The fundamental assumption of the Gestalt therapist, though, is that there is no alien problem. but
the action of the client. If ther e is to be change, it will come through the client's
reidentification with his/her own actions, and this awareness will be part of the ground of the therapist's
presence 'with the client. Yet this will not be an abandonment - "You're on your own" - but a
statement by one who stays in contact. (Notice how pow erfully this happens in classical
psychoanalysis, with the silently present therapist.) In this situation, the client will experience
a number of thin g s: anxiet y , confusion and powerlessness (and a Swish for the therapist to
take on the powerful projection). Those like me who like the five-layer model can see in this
the impasse and the implosive laver. Then comes the next layer. which Perls called the
explosion: the suppressed needs. desires, emotions and contact -wishes. Notice that it is not these
desires, etc., that are archaic, but the sense of how the world reacts to me, and how those desires
can or can't be met. As PHG points out: `It is not the old image that has released the feeling, but
the relaxation of the present inhibition. The old scene is revived because that happened to be the last
freed exercise of the feeling and gesture in the sensory environment, trying to complete the unfinished
situation.' (p. 72. italics in original)

Phenomenology
One of the problems with the whole theme of "transference' is the assumption that it's a rreplay
g g
replay of childhood in some sense. Rather than explorin phenomenologically the meanin of
this desire or emotion now as part of the process between the therapist and the client. it is seen
in analytic ps ychotherapy as a provider of information on the past, to be interpreted and understood. In
some forms of post-analytic psychotherapy, the transference is seen as aregression to childhood
beha v iour. to be re-enacted with the therapist explicitl y taking a parental role to provide a
corrective developmental experience to the client's 'inner child'. In either case, the emotions
and behaviour assumed to be childlike' ar e love, hate, fear, dependency, or desire for
nurturing: but I would not see these as being inappropriat e adult responses.
3
Thus, rather than bracketin g assumptions, and looking for what is particular in this moment, the
whole process is looked at through a fixed lens based on the past. The therapist acts (and
encourages the client to act) as thou g h this lens is the pr esent reality, and as thou g h the
client's phenomenolo g y cannot belong to the pr esent. T hen clients will oft en b ecome
confluent with this sense of thems elves as 'r egr essed childr en. T his can be a wa y of
mutuall y understandin g ps ychotherapy, but it is very different from the paradoxical theory of
change in Gestalt therapy, where what the client brings in relation to therapist Bs accepted and explored in
aware relation to what the therapist is bringing to the relationship, so that it can be fully owned by the
client as her/his own chockfull activity. In terms of the PHG quote above, the chronic inhibitions can
be relaxed precisely because the person is now not in the childhood situation, the therapist is not the
parent, and thus the emergency is safe.

Phenomenology fits best with the Gestalt theory of the 'here-and-now'. Phenomenologically,
what is ava i lable to us as the past' is memories, reconstructions, myths, etc. : while the
'future' is available to us as expectations, hopes, fears, myths, etc.

The present moment, history and memory

The classical theory of transference assumes that the meaning of the client's response belongs to
the past, and thus that the past is accuratel y reconstructable fr om such r esponses. In
S t er n ' s ( 1 9 8 5 t er m s . t h e r ec o n s t r u c t e d i n f a n t ' i s s y n o n y m o u s w i t h t h e a c t u a l
infant. Stern and many other researchers working with memory make it clear that this is not how
memoir works. Memor y is alwa y s a construct based on the person's present state. Nor does
recent research. notably b y Stern (op. cit.) support the idea of developmental stages as
sequential and needin g to be completed before the next stage can begin. Rather. there are
several 'domains of relatedness'. which may start sequentiall y , but which continue as wa ys of
relating and experiencing selfhood throughout a person's life.

Phenomenologically, what is the difference between childhood and the client's present adult
state' Is there anything to be gained therapeutically b y tr y ing to 'recapture' the childhood state?
The differences as I understand them are:

I. The child is physiologically not full y developed. This means lack of mobilit y . physical
dependence on carers, brain function (especially in the field of memory and understanding of
consequences) not fully developed.2.

2.The child is smaller and weaker than parents for most of childhood. This is supported by the
fact that parents and schools are supported by lacy their control of the child. The child cannot
just leave home. for example.

3. The child has limited perspective. The way things happen in his/her limited world is how
the world is. Even that is only understood in a limited way.

There are also aspects that do not conform to the 're gressed' view of the child. Children can feel
secure and powerful, relate to other children an d adults with pleasure and skill. enjoy
experimenting and learning about the world. even if aspects of their lives are difficult. They

4
often look forward to g rowin g up and havin g more possibilities in their lives. rather than trying
to stay little.

Taking all these aspects into account. I do not understand how it can be helpful to encourage a
regression to a position which emphasises lack of resources. It is true that clients sometimes g o
to such a place. usually as part of an avoidance of choicefulness (loss of e go function), as
described abo v e. The experience of being with a therapist who is bein g encouraged to act in the
complement parental way will then seem familiar and intense. but the meaning .N-111 be ver y
differ ent from the analo g ous exper ience in childhood (even if this was an accurate
depiction of the client's own childhood). where this could have been an experience of an
inescapable reality..

Transference, countertransference and projective identification

That is, much of what is called transference is an enactment of a fixed gestalt of smallness and
power lessness, a pr ojection of the lar genes s and power onto the therapist. and an
avoidance of facing the realit y of present freedom and choice. We could call this 'defensive
transference'. The therapist's countertransference is either a confluence with t& client's fixed
position, or something of the therapist's own process (a wish for a powerful position. for
example): and these two are not mutuall y exclusive. Unless there is an underl y ing theory of the
need to complete de v elopmental sta g es, there is no possible therapeutic reason for the therapist
to encourage the development of such a state.

As I have written above, other aspect of the transferential experience is the re-owning in the relationship
with the therapist of intense emotions of love, hate, fear, shame, rage and sexual arousal, long denied as
overwhelmingly dangerous, either to the client or to those around him/her. We could call this
'expressive transferences'. The therapist's countertransference her e could be fear and withdrawal. or
a wish to exploit the client's exper ience by, for e x a m p l e . e n g a g i n g i n i n a p p r o p r i a t e
s exua l a ct i vit y (s om et i mes i n t he gu is e of p h ys i ca l nur t ur i ng).

For example, let us take the situation of a man, severely beaten in childhood for the slightest
infraction of parents wishes. The immediate organismic r esponses to the beatings were fear
and rage, which the boy did not dare to express. I have described the consequences of this in my
paper on shame (Philippson. 2001. p.48):

'An energetic, emotional expression of a vital boundary function [disgust] does not merely
disappear, however: it is retroflected. To be more precise, the boundary identifications and
alienations of the e-o ar e alter ed, so that the child identifies with the for ce -feeder and
alienates her/his disgust response as an 'other', whose disgust is then aimed at the 'self that is the
source of the poisoned food.'

In this way, the boy retroflects his outward aggression, regards the world as too dangerous to
look at directly, and himself as both weak and the object of his own retroflected aggression . He
projects this aggression onto other significant figures, who are seen as dangerously hostile
towards him, once more justifying his avoidance of contact. Thus he never has to face the

5
fear of risking his outward a gg ression, but at the cost of a greatl y diminished capacity for
spontaneous existence.

This makes ver y clear what the 'defensive transference' of this boy - become - man would be
with a therapist: I am weak and he is powerful, and will hurt or reject me if I show myself.' If the
man is supported to risk moving beyond this avoidance, this will be replaced by the ' expr ess iv e
tr ansf er ence: t he f ear and r age appr opr iat e to the fu ll expr ess ion of the unfinished
situation, expressed to the therapist, who 'according to his own self-awareness, declines to b e
bor ed, intimidated, cajoled, etc.; he meets an g er with explanation of the misunderstanding,
or sometimes apology, or even with anger, according to the truth of the situation' (PHG. P.25

Projective identification, the experiencing by the therapist of emotion that is being denied by the
client, I would understand in Gestalt therapy ter ms as a mor e technical (although
int er esting and clinically useful) e v ent. Notice that the ther apist is tr ying to practice
inclusion, an understanding of the experience of the client while maintaining separateness. Part of
this is a close observation of the client's psychophysical state, usin g a refinement of th e
knowledge all hu man b ein g s (apar t fr om a few' as autistic or similar ) have abou t the
'body language' of others. T hus the therapist notices the beginnings of the feeling
(tensing of shoulders. reddenin g of eyes. clenching o f fists. etc.), and becomes ready for the full
expression. When this comes, it represents for the therapist - and of course for the client -an
unfinished gestalt. which pushes for completion. Just as Al wandered lonely as a...' brings up
the word '...cloud' in most people who know the poem. an incomplete emotional gestalt br in g s
up the emot ion in t he t her apist. T his can b e ver y us efu l as a guided t o what is happening
for the client, but does not for me need any mystical explanation.

Implications for therapy

The therapist must face the defensive transferential enactment in full understanding that this is a present
action in support of a fixed gestalt, avoiding the risk and anxiety of choicefulness. As Per ls said t o
Glor ia. -Ar e y ou a little gir l?' T he-ther apist needs to avoid becoming confluent with the
client's wish for a parent. At the same time, the therapist must be aware that the client can only move
beyond this by facing a high, and seemingly the client can only move d ingly overwhelming, level of
anxiety. It is like ima g ining there is an intruder in a room: the onl y wa y to remove that fear is
to - turn on the light and check - but this is fri g htening because the intruder might actually be
there and attack you. What the therapist provides at this point is t he support that the client is not
alone.

In ter ms of our examp le client, the exp er iment towar ds moving out of the def ens iv e
transfer ence might be to look the ther apist in the eves, to sit mor e upr ight, to sa y an
uncomfortable truth, to show an interest in some aspect of the room, to breathe more fully etc. If
there is no increase in anxiety or agitation, the situation is still in some wa y avoiding the real
issue.

The expressive transference needs to be met by the therapist as a present moment experience: with
acceptance and presence, neither exploiting it nor pulling awa y from it. For this client, the
transference is likely to be rage, fear of rejection, fear of exercising his own power and

6
becoming like father. or of killing the therapist. It is very tempting, but not very useful for the
therapist to avoid facing this b y explorin g the defensive transference rather than encouraging the
client to move beyond it to such an expression.
The significance of groups as an important wary of workin g thus becomes clearer, precisely
because it discourages reviewing of the therapy horizon as limited as childhood. The other
group members can be a support in challenging the therapist, and a support for the therapist in facing
the client's ra g e. The client can see other group members den y ing their power in ways which they
cannot see in themselves. Kindly feedback from group members are often more easil y believed than
the same feedback from the therapist, who can be dismissed as saying what s/he things the client will
like. The power of an individual therapy to encoura g e a 'childlike' transference is a potential
problem to be avoided by the therapist rather than an advantage. (Even in its own terms. there
is a contradiction: is an onl y child generall y more psychologically healthy than one with siblings')

Whi l e it is ea s i er f or a client t o mou r n a nd ma t u r e f r om a ' g oo d enou g h' p a r ent in g

experience, the need to be able to move on and become adult is common to all. For example. a
child who has been sexuall y abused by father needs to reclaim her/his own sexuality from him
and appl y it to the adult situation maturing, and so does ever y maturing adolescent. It is in this
case mor e anxiety-pr oducin g and needs mor e support, but the pr ocess is not inher ently
different.

Conclusion

I n t his pa p er , I ha ve end ea vou r ed t o pr odu ce a G es ta lt t heor y of tr a ns f er enc e a nd

countertransference consistent with our approach based on field theory, phenomenology and
attention to the present moment. I have distinguished between defensive and expressive aspects
of the experience usually described as transferential, and proposed that neither of them benefits
from being understood as a - regression to childhood. I have described ways of envisaging the
work with each of theses aspects. I have proposed a mechanism from gestalt psychology to
account for the phenomenon of 'projective identification'.

References

Clarkson. P. (1992). Transactional Analysis Psy chotherapy: An Integrated Approach.

Routled2e. London.

Davis. D.R. (1987). Transference. In The Oxford Companion to the Mind, ed. Gregory.
R.L.. Oxford University Press. Oxford.

Mahler. J.S.. Pine. F.. Beraman. A. (1975 The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant.
Basic Books. New York.

Philippson. P.A. (1993) Gestalt and Regression. British Gestalt Journal

Philippson. P.A. (2001) The Experience of Shame. Australia Gestalt Journal

7