In Deleuze and (1999) view, the fluidity of becoming, which underlies deep Guattari’s change, is not of a sexualized nature. They speak of it in terms of receptivity; it is profoundly relational; it is what I refer to as old/becoming Though there is little scope ‘becoming child’. to expand on it here, this a-sexual aspect of analysis recurs in Winnicott and Turner, whose work, discussed below, also emphasizes flow and connectivity rather than differentiation. Deleuze reverses the relationship between repetition and do not repeat repression: ‘We because we repress, we repress because we 1994, p. 105). Repression repeat’ (Deleuze, happens because our tendencies, or, as I put it earlier, our pattern of identity, repeat themselves in a passive, i.e. involuntary synthesis of who we are. We remake ourselves out of continuously changing circumstances, which, by necessity, involves also forgetting, leaving something behind. As nothing is ever really totally erased, it is perhaps more accurate to say that we go through a process of foregrounding some aspects of ourselves, while others recede to the background. What is needed to adjust to and manage the change are objects that help us to relate the virtual and the actual, the past, the present and the potential of the future in a synthesis that opens the way to the new. This is even more important when part of the new is not something we cherish and long for. It may be learning to live with problems, pain, illness or loss of capacity, and, of course, eventually the letting go required by dying. Transitional objects and phenomena -- Winnicott Winnicott (1951) speaks of transitional phenomena as follows: The transitional objects and transitional phenomena belong to the realm of illusion which is at the basis of the initiation of experience . . . This intermediate area of
In Deleuze and Guattari’s (1999) view, the fluidity of becoming, which underlies deep change, is not of a sexualized nature. They speak of it in terms of receptivity; it is profoundly relational; it is what I refer to as ‘becoming old/becoming child’. Though there is little scope to expand on it here, this a-sexual aspect of analysis recurs in Winnicott and Turner, whose work, discussed below, also emphasizes flow and connectivity rather than differentiation. Deleuze reverses the relationship between repetition and repression: ‘We do not repeat because we repress, we repress because we repeat’ (Deleuze, 1994, p. 105). Repression happens because our tendencies, or, as I put it earlier, our pattern of identity, repeat themselves in a passive, i.e. involuntary synthesis of who we are. We remake ourselves out of continuously changing circumstances, which, by necessity, involves also forgetting, leaving something behind. As nothing is ever really totally erased, it is perhaps more accurate to say that we go through a process of foregrounding some aspects of ourselves, while others recede to the background. What is needed to adjust to and manage the change are objects that help us to relate the virtual and the actual, the past, the present and the potential of the future in a synthesis that opens the way to the new. This is even more important when part of the new is not something we cherish and long for. It may be learning to live with problems, pain, illness or loss of capacity, and, of course, eventually the letting go required by dying. Transitional objects and phenomena -- Winnicott Winnicott (1951) speaks of transitional phenomena as follows: The transitional objects and transitional phenomena belong to the realm of illusion which is at the basis of the initiation of experience . . . This intermediate area of