Dr. Melfi as Spectator to the Therapeutic Process
By Margaret Crastnopol
Posted Tuesday, March 27, 2001, at 9:55 PM ETWho are these people?
Dear Phil, Joel, and Glen,
I'm getting in on the interchange late this week and can't hope to do justice to the richness of the ideas already in the air, so I'll just give you my own initial take on this episode's therapy component. Sometimes patients outdo the therapist in their "therapizing," which is what happened last Sunday night. Carmela and Tony badly needed to have their chronic, signature "fight" with a capital "F" in the hearing of a third (professional) ear, and they did! They had to take over the work in part because Jennifer had indeed "sealed over"--that is, resurrected and fortified her defenses against her own longings for relatedness with Tony--and this impeded her ability to become responsive to the couple as a new entity in the treatment. OK, she may also have been jealous of Carmela's freedom to sling epithets and interpretations while keeping Tony as her man. So, there are plenty of personal reasons why Jennifer blew the session so badly on her end. But, a technical reason could be that she was trained in and couldn't creatively expand on what we call a "one-person," "there-and-then," insight-oriented approach to therapy. This approach, modeled on a classical Freudian view, involves "digging into" a patient's past history as the primary source of her or his current symptoms. A "one-person" model, while often extremely useful when working with individuals, has serious trouble being elasticized to suit a couple. Here's where a "two-person" approach would come in. This perspective, which I'd say is the most broadly used now by good psychoanalytic therapists of most persuasions, would invite in the spouse of an individual patient not to press for information about the patient's past lives and loves, but to watch (and, to some degree, "participate in") the relatedness that exists between the two now. In other words, the relationship itself becomes the "patient" in a good couple's session. Jennifer couldn't manage that, but Tony and Carmela knew implicitly what they needed to do. They presented themselves loud and clear to each other in the session, demonstrated the most chronic and destructive dynamics (as well as Carmela's efforts to "cure" Tony with her seat-of-the-pants methods), and then had the classic after-session quarterbacking, partly defensive and partly constructive. I look forward to seeing if they can teach Jennifer how it's done!
Dr. Melfi as Spectator to the Therapeutic Process
By Margaret Crastnopol
Posted Tuesday, March 27, 2001, at 9:55 PM ETThis spring, Slate will ask Dr. Melfi's real-life counterparts to examine developments on The Sopranos
. Glen O. Gabbard, M.D., is a professor of psychoanalysis at the Menninger Clinic and co-author of Psychiatry and the Cinema. Philip A. Ringstrom, Ph.D., Psy.D., is an analyst at the Institute of Contemporary Psychoanalysis in Los Angeles and a full-time practitioner. Joel Whitebook, a practicing analyst in New York, is on the faculty of the Columbia Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research. Margaret Crastnopol, Ph.D., is on the faculty of the Northwest Center for Psychoanalysis and a practicing psychologist/psychoanalyst in Seattle. Click here to comment on Sunday night's episode. Reader Comments From The Fray:
Margaret Crastnopol hit it right on the head: we are being too easy on Melfi (or at least the portrayal of Melfi). Fact is, Tony Soprano is an idiot and she's physically intimidated by him. She's also turned on by him--which is a revolting possibility. Thing is, thousands of women are, in fact, turned on by Tony and his merry band of thugs. Crastnopol's suggestion that the doctor-patient and doctor-doctor power positioning does little to counter stereotypes of weak women being pushed around by angry, stupid men--this is all correct, too. Actually, the whole program is misogynistic and ought not be watched by anyone....yet, I'm strangely attracted to it, bad writing/acting and all. Is it that I'm that desperate for entertainment or is this representative of some deep misogyny within? Doctors, tell me: what drives us (me) to watch this thing, even when I know it's negative TV? There are too many men and women out there watching this and thinking that this is an acceptable way of life. What's wrong with us? A diagnosis, please.
--Phil H.
(To reply, click here.)
To Phil H:
There is nothing wrong with "us." But there is a problem with your formulation of the problem. To enjoy this well-written and well-acted drama, we are not obligated to find that the fictional characters pursue "an acceptable way of life." On the contrary, I would guess that 99.9% of viewers strenuously object to the way Tony puts bread on the Sopranos' table.
We enjoy the bravura plot twists, the odd contrasts, the marvelous characterizations, and the Machiavellian tactics--and the occasionally absurd results of the characters' efforts. The monstrous is combined with the mundane in a striking and amusing way. Consider Tony strangling a mafia traitor as his beloved daughter is interviewed for admission to a genteel New England college.
Millions of people have read and admired Crime and Punishment. Do you suppose they accepted the grotesque reasoning that drove Dostoyevsky's main character? Must we approve of step-patricide to enjoy Hamlet?
Relax and enjoy the series. If you feel the urge to emulate the main characters, call your therapist (or your local sheriff).
--Gary
(To reply, click here.)
On the question of the Mafia don who approved of Tony's therapy: Remember that this was a leader of the Manhattan mob. Probably they are a little more sophisticated than the Jersey crowd. Remember, it was only Junior and Tony's assumption that seeing a shrink was taboo. The New York family was probably way ahead of them.
--Aurora Duane
(To reply, click here.)
(3/15)
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
SPONSORED CONTENT
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
What It Will Cost You To Deny Illegal Immigrants Health Insurance
Stupid Drug Story of the Week: NBC's Today Show Discovers Huffing
Can the Government Call God Jesus? What About Allah?
How Twilight Made Goth Fashion Mainstream
Is Disney's The Suite Life Making Your Child Into an Evil Lothario?
The Blind Side: Illegal Use of Sandra Bullock
Reader Comments From The Fray:
Margaret Crastnopol hit it right on the head: we are being too easy on Melfi (or at least the portrayal of Melfi). Fact is, Tony Soprano is an idiot and she's physically intimidated by him. She's also turned on by him--which is a revolting possibility. Thing is, thousands of women are, in fact, turned on by Tony and his merry band of thugs. Crastnopol's suggestion that the doctor-patient and doctor-doctor power positioning does little to counter stereotypes of weak women being pushed around by angry, stupid men--this is all correct, too. Actually, the whole program is misogynistic and ought not be watched by anyone....yet, I'm strangely attracted to it, bad writing/acting and all. Is it that I'm that desperate for entertainment or is this representative of some deep misogyny within? Doctors, tell me: what drives us (me) to watch this thing, even when I know it's negative TV? There are too many men and women out there watching this and thinking that this is an acceptable way of life. What's wrong with us? A diagnosis, please.
--Phil H.
(To reply, click here.)
To Phil H:
There is nothing wrong with "us." But there is a problem with your formulation of the problem. To enjoy this well-written and well-acted drama, we are not obligated to find that the fictional characters pursue "an acceptable way of life." On the contrary, I would guess that 99.9% of viewers strenuously object to the way Tony puts bread on the Sopranos' table.
We enjoy the bravura plot twists, the odd contrasts, the marvelous characterizations, and the Machiavellian tactics--and the occasionally absurd results of the characters' efforts. The monstrous is combined with the mundane in a striking and amusing way. Consider Tony strangling a mafia traitor as his beloved daughter is interviewed for admission to a genteel New England college.
Millions of people have read and admired Crime and Punishment. Do you suppose they accepted the grotesque reasoning that drove Dostoyevsky's main character? Must we approve of step-patricide to enjoy Hamlet?
Relax and enjoy the series. If you feel the urge to emulate the main characters, call your therapist (or your local sheriff).
--Gary
(To reply, click here.)
On the question of the Mafia don who approved of Tony's therapy: Remember that this was a leader of the Manhattan mob. Probably they are a little more sophisticated than the Jersey crowd. Remember, it was only Junior and Tony's assumption that seeing a shrink was taboo. The New York family was probably way ahead of them.
--Aurora Duane
(To reply, click here.)
(3/15)