Practice

I offer psychoanalytically informed investigative consultations through a developed systematic engagement with non-ordinary sense-perception. My ongoing psychoanalytic practice (as an analysand) has given me distinctive and experiential tools actualized over many years which has open considered depth in my intuitive development.

In my research I develop awareness through sensory impressions; color, shape, and broader formal qualities that gradually build and reveal themselves into more complex understanding. Percepted forms are intentionally filtered through different internal registers, scrutinized through relationships and internally maintained through symbolic resonance maps as they present, which allows me to fine tune their connections to expose a reality of the “picture”.

Examining the representational tools in this way connects to a sense of actuality associated with the topic which I then carefully develop in harmony with words, images, and concepts to most accurately connect with the direct experiential encounter. My process begins to expose a multi-dimensional understanding which I consider a new awareness developed in real time.

Conscious focus toward the space between what presents itself and what can be articulated, organizes multiple registers of my own deeper interpretive-intuitive process and visual system to decipher deeper meaning of said forms, images, and metaphor into direct sensation and experience. Writing and sharing the final report synthesizes certain levels of understanding into sharable forms. This is where form and connection combine to structure relevant signifiers which we then work to interpret in this specific knowledge event. I believe the reality of the message reveals more of itself through this sharing and articulation.

Theory

My theoretical position treats language as a form of selective assembly where a focused engagement allows certain aspects of reality to come into sharper relief. I consciously engage with language and symbolic systems as functional responses to what exceeds direct representation. Forms, symbols, and visuals point me toward direct contact with what cannot be singularly captured in those perceived forms alone. I then develop and suggest a shareable understanding of the reality in focus which organizes the experience to be connected with others. What emerges is highly specific, attuned, and novel awareness extending through my embodied, integrated sensitivities. 

I believe this specificity of engagement involves my less dense visual components primarily, but synthesizes them with a deeper embodied contact through my intuitive knowing. It is important to understand that the focus of my attention doesn't negate what remains outside the picture I see and expose. I am aware in this work that my conscious attention operates from a particular vantage point. To accommodate my particularity, I work along the boundaries of my senses, body, and perception to reveal specific and sharable features that are precisely attuned to the connective experience. The intent of the investigation itself drives the direction of perception and inner felt proprioception providing me forms (data) which I interpret and describe. I have experienced how this specific psychic position opens a sense of capacity to build consciously meaningful states with reality in and beyond myself.

A tolerance for not-knowing has informed a capacity to maintain a kind of connective holding space long enough for the phenomena to "speak” and show its actual structure and connective movement in reality. What often results is deeper questioning and real consideration rather than packaged conclusions. I draw my positioned approach from various psychoanalytic models which specifically situates signifiers in a structural relationship to embodied psychic states and connective realities beyond oneself.

I liken this in depth work to symbolic and psychic excavation. I investigate from the ground up, using sensory dynamics as measurement tools to assess what's relevant before applying interpretive or conceptual frameworks. This generates something hard to quantify through words alone, likened to an aesthetic encounter, but which I consciously develop through sharable forms that eventually lead toward the collaborative knowledge event.

Rather than providing answers alone, a real encounter and interpretive process can orient us towards a shared assembly of knowledge specific to what is encountered. In the spaces between knowing and not knowing, something personally discoverable and generative may emerge that exceeds both question and answer.