- Convenors:
-
John Borneman
(Princeton University)
Keir Martin (University of Oslo)
Hylton White (University of the Witwatersrand)
Send message to Convenors
- Chair:
-
Parvis Ghassem-Fachandi
(Rutgers University)
- Formats:
- Roundtable
- Network:
- Network Panel
Short Abstract
This panel seeks to explore unconscious dialogue in the dynamic of triangulation in anthropological fieldwork settings, “to think with and beyond polarization” through processes whereby a third, such as an anthropologist, is introduced into a polarized relationship.
Long Abstract
This panel explores unconscious dialogue in the dynamic of triangulation in anthropological fieldwork settings, “to think with and beyond polarization.”
In the development of psychoanalytic theory, the identification of triangulation in an Oedipal dynamic was initially assumed to be a foundational structure of the nuclear family. The father disturbed the relation of mother and child, providing a new possibility of identification but also novel competition for the attention of the mother.
Subsequent modification of the Oedipal complex replaced this mother-child-father dynamic with a more general and theoretical understanding of processes of triangulation: the introduction of a third to all dyadic relations. There is widespread agreement that introducing a third figure unsettles the tension of dyads or binaries, but there is much disagreement about whether this unsettling is always positive.
Psychologists generally argue the third does not ease tensions in the dyad but is, rather, employed to manipulate, control, and avoid direct communication, thus increasing mistrust and emotional distress. Psychoanalysts, however, view the effects of triangulation within families as positive and necessary to reconfigure tensions in the dyad, offering new possibilities for relationships and communication.
Thomas Ogden theorized the importance of an “intersubjective analytic third”: a shared, unconscious space of co-creation during a psychoanalytic session. This emergent "third" embodies the unconscious dialogue and the affects that arise in the relationship, allowing for the mobilization of otherwise unexpressed thoughts and fantasies. John Borneman has brought Ogden’s insights to bear on the ethnographer’s communication with his fieldwork subjects. In many fieldwork settings, the relation of researcher to their topic is triangulated by local informants who stand askance to their own society or group.
Querying “triangulation,”panelists demonstrate ways to making psychoanalytic understandings relevant to their contemporary anthropological practice in the study of polarization and conflict.