31

The author discusses the notion of “what makes interpretation”, according to Brigitte Eoche-Duval, who proposes a model according to which a sufficient degree of regression and the analyst’s capacity to use primary identification permit the emergence, between the analysand and himself, of a common form in the guise of an act of speech. The latter creates a crisis in the analysis and will eventually result in an act of interpretation. The author examines the identifications that come into play in interpretation, notably hysterical identifications, whose rôle she reminds us of, and she links the variations in these identifications to the changes in equilibrium which happen at certain moments between libidinous and narcissistic cathexes.