Stephen Hartman’s paper is a very stimulating contribution to the psychoanalytic debate on the interpretation of cyber reality. In my commentary I address some of the conceptualizations introduced by Hartman: different realities (conventional, psychoanalytic, internal, external, Reality 1.0, 2.0, 1.1,1.2. . . . etc.), infinite access, cybermourning, and loss. Starting from the personal and clinical histories presented by Hartman (I refer to them as “names”), I discuss some more or less embodied aspects of virtual life, such as gender, online romances, betrayal, privacy, multiple settings. Leaning on the concepts of psychic retreat, transitional area, and psycho(patho)logical use of the object I try to put realities in dialogue, persuaded that different realities are always connected or embedded.
Realities in dialogue / Lingiardi, Vittorio. - In: PSYCHOANALYTIC DIALOGUES. - ISSN 1048-1885. - STAMPA. - 21:4(2011), pp. 483-495. [10.1080/10481885.2011.595342]
Realities in dialogue
LINGIARDI, Vittorio
2011
Abstract
Stephen Hartman’s paper is a very stimulating contribution to the psychoanalytic debate on the interpretation of cyber reality. In my commentary I address some of the conceptualizations introduced by Hartman: different realities (conventional, psychoanalytic, internal, external, Reality 1.0, 2.0, 1.1,1.2. . . . etc.), infinite access, cybermourning, and loss. Starting from the personal and clinical histories presented by Hartman (I refer to them as “names”), I discuss some more or less embodied aspects of virtual life, such as gender, online romances, betrayal, privacy, multiple settings. Leaning on the concepts of psychic retreat, transitional area, and psycho(patho)logical use of the object I try to put realities in dialogue, persuaded that different realities are always connected or embedded.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
