Performance as annihilation or integration?

What happens when the analyst has the impression of being annihilated by the patient? Analysts have a tendency to use more general, i.e. simplifying, constructions such as destructiveness, psychosis or death instinct as explanatory models. In the authors' view, these constructions in the end evade rather than mirror clinical reality. More recent research points to promising possibilities of differentiation, e.g. psychotic mechanisms which are--as yet undiscussed--based on Freud's notion of the partial 'rent in the relation between ego and external world'. These findings emphasize the restitutive function of a symptom or disturbance, i.e. destruction of a relationship which hinders the therapeutic process and which is not understood initially, instead of solely stressing the destructive meaning in a tabooing gesture. The concept of performance attempts to replace simplifying models with a discriminant process, and will be preliminarily defined and explained in delineation to terms already in use such as acting out, enactment, and role responsiveness. The authors explore the question of how the perception of unthought certainty in the performance can either be recognized as a blueprint, i.e. organizing activity, or as the destruction of the relationship so that a new one can emerge. The evidence from a detailed clinical example shows that many treatments can fail at this point and demonstrates how an understanding of performance in this sense offers a chance for integrating processes that otherwise impede treatment.