August 22, 2025 • 30 mins
For the past four seasons on Showtime, Dr. Orna Guralnik has showcased the benefits of the talking cure to help relationships in crisis. In this revealing interview, she talks about why she was motivated to pull back the curtain on what's always been a private practice, and how she grapples with the ethics of psychoanalysis for public consumption.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
Welcome to another episode of Strictly Business, the podcast in
which we speak with some of the brightest minds working
in the media business today. I'm Andrew Wallenstein, and the
dog days of summer are traditionally the time psychotherapists of
all stripes take some well deserved time off. Well, Strictly
Business has managed to coax one of them back in
(00:28):
front of the couch to fill the vacuum. But this
is no average shrink. Doctor Orna Garalmik is the featured
physician on the Showtime series Couples Therapy, where she helps
relationships in crisis, letting viewers follow their progress we're lack
thereof from episode to episode. She's currently shooting a fifth season,
so we're glad she's making time today to talk about
(00:51):
what it's like to adapt her practice to the small screen.
Welcome to Strictly Business.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Auna, Thank you, thank you for inviting me, Andrew.
Speaker 1 (01:00):
We must explain for the uninitiated and maybe some cynics.
Your show features real life couples sharing real life problems
with the world, and of course you are a very
real practicing clinical psychologist and psychoanalyst. You teach An NYU's
postdoctoral psychoanalysis program, So you're not just playing one on TV,
(01:22):
so to speak.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
I'm not playing one at all.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
I'm myself okay, But it begs a question, what is
a nice, pre eminently qualified therapist like you doing on
a medium like this, What motivates you to open up
what is a very private process typically?
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Well, first of all, I join in the question because
I asked myself that question still, But it was it
didn't It happened kind of gradually. It was not at
all my plan. I mean, most people who choose to
be psychoanalysts, including myself, are generally very private people. We're
(02:04):
usually in a profession that privacy is like the number
one frame or rule of the game, right, And we
like to sit behind our patients and not even look
at them face to face. So we're typically very private people.
But I have become gradually somewhat more public being in academics.
(02:26):
So I teach, and I write, and I write not
only for academics, I write kind of beyond the scope
of psychoanalysts. So I've already had somewhat of a public
reach before, and that's probably what got the makers of
the show to got to me. Somehow. They reached out
(02:49):
to me, and first I thought I would consult to
them just to make sure kind of they're keeping in
like doing a good job in representing my profession. Sure,
but we really hit it off and they convinced me
to actually try and do it myself, which was a
(03:09):
total strange idea to me, to try to do something
so private on camera, and none of us knew it
was going to work. We didn't know that function on camera,
we didn't know that the work could be done on camera,
and it was all like one big experiment.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
So what made you, you know, give this a world?
Speaker 2 (03:30):
Many things. First of all, I guess just kind of
an adventurous spirit, something about the adventure of it. And
I really liked the filmmakers. They're just incredible people, and
they felt like I could do something with these people.
It would be good, it would be of high quality,
it would be ethical, it would be a real project,
(03:50):
it wouldn't be some kind of fake representation. But I
also feel in ways compelled to represent the prefetsion well.
And I think the world kind of needs a lot
more psychological and psychoanalytic thinking nowadays. I think it's and
(04:13):
I think that's one of the reasons the show became
so successful. It just hit a spot that is desperately needed,
which is like deeper, slower thought into like the underlying motivations.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
So I mean, I couldn't agree more in terms of
that public need. But you know, I've also wondered, are
you want a mission of sorts, maybe even to sort
of preserve the world of psychoanalysis, which you know is
often described And please dispute my characterization if you take
(04:49):
issue with it as something of a dying art approaching obsolescence?
Did you am? I off both there?
Speaker 2 (04:57):
I have two things to say about that. Honestly, I'm
not doing the show to promote psychoanalysis or to promote psychotherapy.
I don't. I mean, there are not enough therapists out
there in the world. There's obviously a great need, but
I'm not there to promote therapy. I'm there mostly to
promote psychological thinking. See, I want people to come out
(05:24):
of the show thinking about themselves in a deeper way,
thinking about fellow humans in a deeper way, thinking psychologically,
not oh, how do I go and find a therapist
right now? So that's my objective as far as, like
you know, since I became a psychoanalyst, which was quite
some time ago. There's always been talk about like the oh,
(05:46):
it's a dying field, it's a dying profession. That is
not true. I mean, especially not in New York. Sure,
you constantly people looking for therapy. They are not enough
therapists around. People want to do real deep work. They
start with regular therapy, then they want to go deeper
into analysis. It is not a dying profession. And there
are other ways that psychoanalysis is relevant in the world,
(06:09):
not only by way of therapy. It's it's it's a
it's a way of thinking. It's a way of analyzing
the world, and we need it.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
I get it. And so you mentioned that you had
to be sort of coaxed into trying this out. We
should mention the names of the producers, by the way,
Elise Steinberg, Josh Kriegman, and forgive me if I'm miss
to pray.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
You like to pray?
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Yeah, Okay, there you go. And so they put you
in the saddle, and I'm curious what that first experience
was like and were you hooked or maybe still a
little skeptical.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
I was definitely skeptical. We started with kind of a
few test sessions with Actually the cameras were still in
the room when we were doing that, and part of
what happened was oddly, even though I was nervous and
(07:06):
confused about how this is all going to play out,
the work is the work. That was Like I remember
coming out of the few test sessions and saying, wow,
I feel like a baker. I know how to make bread.
Doesn't matter the conditions, you always have to do the
same thing. So the material just presents itself and you
(07:27):
know what to do. I've been doing it for so
many years, so that was like a first surprise. But
then even the people I was kind of working with,
even though they were nervous and confused and not exactly
knowing what's going to happen here, it just you know,
you listen to people and they want to tell you
(07:47):
their stories, and then you think together about how to
problem solve and it just happens.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
It's like, got it.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Yeah, it's stronger than the artific context.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
And but you mentioned artificial context. And so the question
that arises for me is it certainly looks like what
you're doing is actual therapy, but is it? I mean,
do you have to explain to participants, perhaps that this
is maybe like a similacrum of therapy, or you're saying, no,
(08:23):
this is the real deal, and there's something about I mean,
I guess I wonder if somehow the cameras corrupt the
process despite the best of intentions.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Yeah, really really good questions. It is not therapy per
se in the sense that, first of all, you know,
as I mentioned earlier, like the iron frame of confidentiality
is gone. So whoever starts this work knows that this
(08:56):
is not private information between them and me. It's potentially
going to be broadcast to the world. So in that
sense it's definitely not regular therapy. But also part of
the contract of therapy is the patient pays the analyst,
and we don't do that. I mean, this is free,
(09:18):
so it's not it's a different The whole frame of
it is not the frame of therapy, right, not that
aren't pro bono therapies, but the entire frame of it
is different. So we call them participants, not patients, the couples,
and it is in its in its contract and its
(09:40):
ens in its essence, it is a similar croom in
the sense that certain aspects of the therapy of original
therapy continue. I think as a therapist, the work we're
doing is therapeutic. It's hopefully helpful, but the basic tenants,
the base frame is gone, so it's a similar room,
(10:06):
but many aspects of the therapeutic process continue and are
very powerful. So we're sitting together, I'm thinking analytically and
systematically about what they're presenting me with. They're talking about
their problems. We're trying to problem solve. Together. We build
a relationship of a certain kind of trust and mutual care,
(10:29):
and good things happen, like people get better with the
material they bring.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
So that's certainly clear to anyone who has watched the
past four seasons. And I'm actually curious, as you're currently
shooting the fifth season, has the process changed as your
approach evolved. Does it get easier because you sounded initially
almost as if like you still need a little coaxing
to even do this.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
Yeah, I don't know if it gets I mean, I'm
convinced now that what we're doing is an incredibly useful
thing for the public, which is kind of an amazing
thing to be involved in nowadays. I mean, there's so
many things that are going wrong with our world and
(11:16):
to be part of something that is actually helpful for
the world and pushes whoever is like watching it is
pushing them towards more compassion and slowness and empathy and goodwill.
To be part of that is an incredible experience. And
(11:37):
the team I'm working with is just, you know, just
the best people on earth. But it's not easy. It's
not It didn't get easier. No, it's hard work. We
take our job and we take the mission very seriously.
So there's like an enormous amount of like thought and
(11:58):
intention and presence that goes into this project by everyone.
It's kind of a very intense commitment. Like every season
that we shoot, it's like a full on dive into
a few months of just full on commitment to the
well being of the people to like a dignified representation
(12:21):
of who they are. It's it's not easy. It's very satisfying,
and I think we all feel just incredibly lucky to
be part of this. But it's hard work.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
I do wonder though, you know, I can't help but
think about the field in which you operate and the
fundamentals that many insist on, and so I know you've
gotten compliments. I'm curious though, if you've gotten criticism people
who say that, well, once you pull out certain frameworks,
(12:57):
this is not something that is this cheapen or distort
what the actual process is.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
Yeah, you know, I oddly I did not get a
lot of criticism. To my face, I don't want.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
To know how that works.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Yeah, I don't know what's happening behind closed doors. But
what I have heard and what I've read are legitimate questions,
really legitimate questions about you know, big ethical questions like
even people who agree to participate and are supposedly benefiting
from the show, do they end up regretting it? Do
(13:36):
they feel exploited? And those are always big questions that
we take super seriously, and I think it would be
dishonest to say that there isn't some degree of compromise
for at least some of the participants experience privacy, and
(13:59):
they may you know, they consent is like a funny thing.
They might feel totally gung ho while they're doing it,
but a year later they might feel very differently about
it and have regrets or feel like, oh, it would
have been very different if I did it now, or
and that's real. So you know, my way of thinking
(14:24):
about it is that and I think the participants feel
that way, is that the benefit to the public ultimately
fit it outweighs this this kind of sacrifice. But yeah,
they're they're they're ethical questions here. I mean, I were
(14:46):
super sensitive when when people during the filming, if anyone
is feeling uncomfortable about what they're going through, they're always
free to like drop out and stop. It's people are
always doing it with like a great degree of like
wanting to do it, being grateful for doing it. There
(15:07):
there there's never any kind of pressure on them. So
but it's it's it's a complicated issue.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
How involved are you in choosing which participants participate. I
assume the producers have their thoughts, but I'm curious if
you know, producers can say, hey, here's a couple with
an interesting dilemma, and you may find, you know, what,
these people need the real deal and maybe aren't suitable
for TV.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
Yeah. There, there's there's a whole team that is that
they recruit people and they interview people, and there's there's
a team of psychologists that interview people before I meet them.
So I'm not involved in any of that. I basically
meet the people for the first session on camera. Oh,
(16:00):
but if I meet people and I feel like, I mean,
it's been very rare. But if I feel like people
are too vulnerable or there might be kind of an
issue that we didn't think about or that didn't come
up in earlier interviews, I can say I don't think
this is a good idea, this is too vulnerable a couple,
or let's say there's a vulnerable kid that's involved in
(16:20):
the family or something like that, And then I say,
this is not a good idea. But it's rare because
usually they do a really good job of screening.
Speaker 1 (16:29):
Sure, I guess I find as I watch that I
want to pay you the compliment of saying you really,
you know, you radiate a genuine integrity and it really
comes across. But it's also a bit of a backhanded
compliment because I worry about that. I worry about as
you become a more and more public figure, how you
(16:52):
protect that integrity and how you preserve it. I mean,
do you ever fear as you I mean, you're several
years into this now sort of a corruptive influence, because
sometimes I see a lot of no one does typically
what you do, but there are certain people whose names
I won't name, who are you know, therapists who go
(17:12):
into various modalities of this in the media, and I'm
amazed at the transformation over time, let's put it that gently.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
Totally agree. And I'm very aware of the corruptive nature
that is lurking every corner, whether it's the corruptive nature
of money, you know, being offered to do something that
will pay you a lot of money but will be
kind of a real compromise to the profession, or the
(17:42):
corruptive nature of like somehow, you know, I don't know,
somehow fame seems to have some kind of pull for
people I don't. That doesn't do much for me. But yeah,
there's always there's always, you know, on the corners of things.
There's always way that you can forget about your ethical principles.
(18:04):
And I'm very aware of it, and i try very
hard to protect myself. And I'm also just like you're
saying that you're worried, I'm worried too my own. I
think about it a lot. I'm it's I mean, especially nowadays,
there's there's just such a sliding slope where like ethics
(18:27):
and morals are like so cheap. Now, wow.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
Well, but the thing is success always in in the
biz begets more opportunity. And I'm curious, you know, do
you have ambitions beyond this show in the media space.
Speaker 2 (18:47):
I don't have ambitions in the media space. I have
I have, you know, somewhat ambitious mcgallu Mannic hopes to
contribute something to making the world a better place. That's
(19:09):
my real ambition is to somehow add to the forces
that are going against this kind of doggy dog world
we're facing. You know, I have things that matter to
me that I want to use this whatever engine I'm
getting behind me to contribute to things that matter.
Speaker 1 (19:34):
So, you know, I could play Devil's advocate here and say,
I hear what you're saying. The media is the place
to advance that cause. If you want to reach the
most people, So do this other show or produce this
other thing. How does that strike you?
Speaker 2 (19:51):
If it's something I don't know, if I can produce
a show that will somehow help people deal with their
denial about climate or about what's going on, and or
I would do it. I'm open to doing things about
to participating in things that matter to me, and I
will I'm going to join an international peacemaking organization. I will,
(20:18):
and I want to, and I appreciate kind of having
the opportunity to do that if I'm asked to join
in selling a product that doesn't help anyone, No.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Okay, but how do you think about the prospect of
what you do and the way you are doing it
on TV being done elsewhere? I guess I asked the
question because often when I watch your show, which I love,
I say, oh my god, I could watch this all day.
This could be a whole network. Do you feel like
(20:54):
there's an untapped appeal regardless of whether you're the one capitalizing.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
I think people can benefit and want to see people
doing therapy. Yes, if it's good therapy. I think the more.
I don't know if the more the better, but more
would be better. I think it would be great for
people to watch a lot of this, to watch people thinking,
(21:21):
taking their time, thinking, analytically, listening to their unconscious, trying
to listen to their partner in a way that is compassionate,
in a way that is not about blaming or winning. Yeah,
I think it would be great if more of that
was out there.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
What's also been interesting and I don't know if you've
seen this is the way your show has taken on
a second life in social media. I constantly see clips.
Are you aware of that? Do you have any I'm aware.
Speaker 2 (21:53):
Of that because I go and sit at my regular
cafe here and people come up to me and they
say to me, like, I love your social media, and
I'm like, I don't have social media. I'm aware that
there's like a lot out there. I'm not part of it,
but yes, I'm aware that it's out there and that
(22:14):
that's where a lot of people live.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
Yeah, perhaps even more so than Showtime or Paramount Plus itself.
But it's also like you kind of have less control
over that. So I was curious, is it a double
edged sword where it's like, Okay, there's more exposure, great,
but less control.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
I don't actually know what to do with that. Do
you have any suggestions?
Speaker 1 (22:41):
Well, it would start, and I'm not advocating you get
an official account because that does not sound like your
cup of tea, And to some degree, I don't think
you can control it. I mean, I've seen I tet
to disturb you at this, but like I've seen your
voice get taken and trained with AI so that it
(23:02):
looks like there are accounts run by you. I mean,
that's got to be disturbing, though frankly it's not particularly
well done, so I don't know who would fall for this.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
Wow. Okay, that's that's.
Speaker 1 (23:16):
A lot, I know. On a less dark note, I
I don't know if you've seen there. You have imitators
meaning impressionists who people have sent me funny memes.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Yes, I love the humor. I mean the more humor
the better. Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1 (23:36):
I will shout out a gentleman on tik toktalk named
Miguel Luciano who does a flawless and flattering imitation of you.
And I was just curious if you had seen it,
and do you Are you disturbed by that or flattered?
Speaker 2 (23:50):
Or I love humor, even.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
If it's at your expense totally? What's the ill Luciano,
Miguel Luciano, Okay, I want to reward good work by
publicizing it, and I think you will not be disturbed
by it.
Speaker 2 (24:09):
No, I love humor and humor at my expense. Please
bring it on. I'm all for that.
Speaker 1 (24:15):
Well, but it's interesting to hear that I think you
know a sense of humor isn't necessarily something you get
to show off in a psychotherapy setting. And my guess is,
and tell me if I'm wrong. Producers are probably pushed like, hey,
we want to see more of you outside the office
on the show, open up your private life. You get
(24:36):
those pressures. How do you feel about that?
Speaker 2 (24:39):
I originally when we started making the show, the director's
Josh and Elise and Eli, they were like, well why not?
And I kept explaining I would I remember like I
would read them passages from LACAN to explain why it's
very important to maintain a certain wall of privacy. It's
why it's important for the trans it's important for the process.
(25:01):
It's not and I'm also private, but I also really
believe that the show will do better if it's not
about my private life. That it's not kind of cheap
idolization of the therapist. But it's the emphasis on the process,
not on the person. And they realize as we continued
(25:26):
making the show, they realize that it's true that people
don't need personal information about me. They need a way
of thinking. They need the insights I mean, not the nonsense.
Speaker 1 (25:39):
Got it? And do you correct me if I'm wrong?
You still maintain an actual, real life practice.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Yes, that is my real life. I still that's what
matters to me the most, my patience, and that's never
going to change.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
But I can't imagine, and again, correct me if I'm
wrong that your media presence doesn't somehow impact the real life.
It must your real patients must see this, and who
knows how that impacts the process.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
Yeah, First of all, not all of my real patients
see Some choose not to watch. They just know about it.
And Okay, I've said this in other interviews that I
feel like my real patients are actually the ones that
carry the most burden of this show because they didn't
(26:34):
necessarily ask for it. They didn't, I didn't. They didn't
start working with me knowing that I'm a public figure
that I'm going to be and suddenly, you know, their
mother can see their therapist on TV. It's not necessarily great,
and so I think it's not great for my private
(26:54):
practice patients. But that's the price, and I think they
realize that I'm I think a lot of people were
worried that it's going to become my primary preoccupation, that
I'm not going to care anymore about my practice. But
it's not true. I love my practice. It's really where
(27:16):
my true self lives.
Speaker 1 (27:20):
It's okay, So yeah, I mean there must be quite
a balancing act between academia, the show, the real practice.
Who know, And of course you know you have a
private life. Do you foresee a time where the show,
because of all these other demands, has to go? I mean,
or you're not even looking ahead at this point.
Speaker 2 (27:44):
I don't know. Also, you know, with the way the
networks are now operating, who knows, like how long this
go on.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
It's not up to you necessarily, definitely.
Speaker 2 (27:54):
Not only up to me. But I'm sure at some point,
but either we will stop making it or somebody else
will replace me. I mean, I'm not going to keep
doing this forever. I'm not. I'm not a young person.
Speaker 1 (28:10):
So there could conceivably be a version of this show
that continues with a different therapist. Never thought about.
Speaker 2 (28:17):
That, Yeah, I think that would be interesting.
Speaker 1 (28:20):
M m, certainly, although I would. I mean, we should
mention you're not the only therapist who appears on the show.
Your advisor, Virginia Goldner, your colleagues are seen talking about that,
and to me, it's almost as surprising, if not more
so that you're on the show in the sense that
(28:41):
so many from your typically private field are maybe not
opening up their own practices, but opening themselves up. I mean,
did that take arm twisting or.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
I think for some of my friends, I mean it's
a lot of these are friends, colleagues that are in
my peer supervision group. These are all people that I anyway,
I have like really strong professional and personal bonds with
and I think early on people felt a little nervous
to participate, but they heard from me that it's there's
(29:15):
something that's really that feels very gratifying about doing this.
You really feel like you're doing a public service and
the you know, the team we work with make make
everything feel very natural and no one's pressuring you to
think in any one or other directions. So just feels
(29:38):
like an extension of our regular life. People have just
joined happily.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
That's good to hear. Well, I'll bet I'm the very
first person to make this joke at the end of
an interview with you, But our time is up. Sweet,
thank you or enough for your time, looking forward forward
to the following season, and thanks for joining me on
Strictly Business.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
Thank you Andrew, Thank you for these awesome questions.
Speaker 3 (30:12):
Thanks for listening, be sure to leave us a review
at Apple Podcasts or Amazon Music. We love to hear
from listeners. Please go to Variety dot com and sign
up for the free weekly Strictly Business newsletter, and don't
forget to tune in next week for another episode of
Strictly Business
Welcome to another episode of Strictly Business, the podcast in
which we speak with some of the brightest minds working
in the media business today. I'm Andrew Wallenstein, and the
dog days of summer are traditionally the time psychotherapists of
all stripes take some well deserved time off. Well, Strictly
Business has managed to coax one of them back in
(00:28):
front of the couch to fill the vacuum. But this
is no average shrink. Doctor Orna Garalmik is the featured
physician on the Showtime series Couples Therapy, where she helps
relationships in crisis, letting viewers follow their progress we're lack
thereof from episode to episode. She's currently shooting a fifth season,
so we're glad she's making time today to talk about
(00:51):
what it's like to adapt her practice to the small screen.
Welcome to Strictly Business.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Auna, Thank you, thank you for inviting me, Andrew.
Speaker 1 (01:00):
We must explain for the uninitiated and maybe some cynics.
Your show features real life couples sharing real life problems
with the world, and of course you are a very
real practicing clinical psychologist and psychoanalyst. You teach An NYU's
postdoctoral psychoanalysis program, So you're not just playing one on TV,
(01:22):
so to speak.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
I'm not playing one at all.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
I'm myself okay, But it begs a question, what is
a nice, pre eminently qualified therapist like you doing on
a medium like this, What motivates you to open up
what is a very private process typically?
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Well, first of all, I join in the question because
I asked myself that question still, But it was it
didn't It happened kind of gradually. It was not at
all my plan. I mean, most people who choose to
be psychoanalysts, including myself, are generally very private people. We're
(02:04):
usually in a profession that privacy is like the number
one frame or rule of the game, right, And we
like to sit behind our patients and not even look
at them face to face. So we're typically very private people.
But I have become gradually somewhat more public being in academics.
(02:26):
So I teach, and I write, and I write not
only for academics, I write kind of beyond the scope
of psychoanalysts. So I've already had somewhat of a public
reach before, and that's probably what got the makers of
the show to got to me. Somehow. They reached out
(02:49):
to me, and first I thought I would consult to
them just to make sure kind of they're keeping in
like doing a good job in representing my profession. Sure,
but we really hit it off and they convinced me
to actually try and do it myself, which was a
(03:09):
total strange idea to me, to try to do something
so private on camera, and none of us knew it
was going to work. We didn't know that function on camera,
we didn't know that the work could be done on camera,
and it was all like one big experiment.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
So what made you, you know, give this a world?
Speaker 2 (03:30):
Many things. First of all, I guess just kind of
an adventurous spirit, something about the adventure of it. And
I really liked the filmmakers. They're just incredible people, and
they felt like I could do something with these people.
It would be good, it would be of high quality,
it would be ethical, it would be a real project,
(03:50):
it wouldn't be some kind of fake representation. But I
also feel in ways compelled to represent the prefetsion well.
And I think the world kind of needs a lot
more psychological and psychoanalytic thinking nowadays. I think it's and
(04:13):
I think that's one of the reasons the show became
so successful. It just hit a spot that is desperately needed,
which is like deeper, slower thought into like the underlying motivations.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
So I mean, I couldn't agree more in terms of
that public need. But you know, I've also wondered, are
you want a mission of sorts, maybe even to sort
of preserve the world of psychoanalysis, which you know is
often described And please dispute my characterization if you take
(04:49):
issue with it as something of a dying art approaching obsolescence?
Did you am? I off both there?
Speaker 2 (04:57):
I have two things to say about that. Honestly, I'm
not doing the show to promote psychoanalysis or to promote psychotherapy.
I don't. I mean, there are not enough therapists out
there in the world. There's obviously a great need, but
I'm not there to promote therapy. I'm there mostly to
promote psychological thinking. See, I want people to come out
(05:24):
of the show thinking about themselves in a deeper way,
thinking about fellow humans in a deeper way, thinking psychologically,
not oh, how do I go and find a therapist
right now? So that's my objective as far as, like
you know, since I became a psychoanalyst, which was quite
some time ago. There's always been talk about like the oh,
(05:46):
it's a dying field, it's a dying profession. That is
not true. I mean, especially not in New York. Sure,
you constantly people looking for therapy. They are not enough
therapists around. People want to do real deep work. They
start with regular therapy, then they want to go deeper
into analysis. It is not a dying profession. And there
are other ways that psychoanalysis is relevant in the world,
(06:09):
not only by way of therapy. It's it's it's a
it's a way of thinking. It's a way of analyzing
the world, and we need it.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
I get it. And so you mentioned that you had
to be sort of coaxed into trying this out. We
should mention the names of the producers, by the way,
Elise Steinberg, Josh Kriegman, and forgive me if I'm miss
to pray.
Speaker 2 (06:31):
You like to pray?
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Yeah, Okay, there you go. And so they put you
in the saddle, and I'm curious what that first experience
was like and were you hooked or maybe still a
little skeptical.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
I was definitely skeptical. We started with kind of a
few test sessions with Actually the cameras were still in
the room when we were doing that, and part of
what happened was oddly, even though I was nervous and
(07:06):
confused about how this is all going to play out,
the work is the work. That was Like I remember
coming out of the few test sessions and saying, wow,
I feel like a baker. I know how to make bread.
Doesn't matter the conditions, you always have to do the
same thing. So the material just presents itself and you
(07:27):
know what to do. I've been doing it for so
many years, so that was like a first surprise. But
then even the people I was kind of working with,
even though they were nervous and confused and not exactly
knowing what's going to happen here, it just you know,
you listen to people and they want to tell you
(07:47):
their stories, and then you think together about how to
problem solve and it just happens.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
It's like, got it.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Yeah, it's stronger than the artific context.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
And but you mentioned artificial context. And so the question
that arises for me is it certainly looks like what
you're doing is actual therapy, but is it? I mean,
do you have to explain to participants, perhaps that this
is maybe like a similacrum of therapy, or you're saying, no,
(08:23):
this is the real deal, and there's something about I mean,
I guess I wonder if somehow the cameras corrupt the
process despite the best of intentions.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Yeah, really really good questions. It is not therapy per
se in the sense that, first of all, you know,
as I mentioned earlier, like the iron frame of confidentiality
is gone. So whoever starts this work knows that this
(08:56):
is not private information between them and me. It's potentially
going to be broadcast to the world. So in that
sense it's definitely not regular therapy. But also part of
the contract of therapy is the patient pays the analyst,
and we don't do that. I mean, this is free,
(09:18):
so it's not it's a different The whole frame of
it is not the frame of therapy, right, not that
aren't pro bono therapies, but the entire frame of it
is different. So we call them participants, not patients, the couples,
and it is in its in its contract and its
(09:40):
ens in its essence, it is a similar croom in
the sense that certain aspects of the therapy of original
therapy continue. I think as a therapist, the work we're
doing is therapeutic. It's hopefully helpful, but the basic tenants,
the base frame is gone, so it's a similar room,
(10:06):
but many aspects of the therapeutic process continue and are
very powerful. So we're sitting together, I'm thinking analytically and
systematically about what they're presenting me with. They're talking about
their problems. We're trying to problem solve. Together. We build
a relationship of a certain kind of trust and mutual care,
(10:29):
and good things happen, like people get better with the
material they bring.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
So that's certainly clear to anyone who has watched the
past four seasons. And I'm actually curious, as you're currently
shooting the fifth season, has the process changed as your
approach evolved. Does it get easier because you sounded initially
almost as if like you still need a little coaxing
to even do this.
Speaker 2 (10:55):
Yeah, I don't know if it gets I mean, I'm
convinced now that what we're doing is an incredibly useful
thing for the public, which is kind of an amazing
thing to be involved in nowadays. I mean, there's so
many things that are going wrong with our world and
(11:16):
to be part of something that is actually helpful for
the world and pushes whoever is like watching it is
pushing them towards more compassion and slowness and empathy and goodwill.
To be part of that is an incredible experience. And
(11:37):
the team I'm working with is just, you know, just
the best people on earth. But it's not easy. It's
not It didn't get easier. No, it's hard work. We
take our job and we take the mission very seriously.
So there's like an enormous amount of like thought and
(11:58):
intention and presence that goes into this project by everyone.
It's kind of a very intense commitment. Like every season
that we shoot, it's like a full on dive into
a few months of just full on commitment to the
well being of the people to like a dignified representation
(12:21):
of who they are. It's it's not easy. It's very satisfying,
and I think we all feel just incredibly lucky to
be part of this. But it's hard work.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
I do wonder though, you know, I can't help but
think about the field in which you operate and the
fundamentals that many insist on, and so I know you've
gotten compliments. I'm curious though, if you've gotten criticism people
who say that, well, once you pull out certain frameworks,
(12:57):
this is not something that is this cheapen or distort
what the actual process is.
Speaker 2 (13:04):
Yeah, you know, I oddly I did not get a
lot of criticism. To my face, I don't want.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
To know how that works.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Yeah, I don't know what's happening behind closed doors. But
what I have heard and what I've read are legitimate questions,
really legitimate questions about you know, big ethical questions like
even people who agree to participate and are supposedly benefiting
from the show, do they end up regretting it? Do
(13:36):
they feel exploited? And those are always big questions that
we take super seriously, and I think it would be
dishonest to say that there isn't some degree of compromise
for at least some of the participants experience privacy, and
(13:59):
they may you know, they consent is like a funny thing.
They might feel totally gung ho while they're doing it,
but a year later they might feel very differently about
it and have regrets or feel like, oh, it would
have been very different if I did it now, or
and that's real. So you know, my way of thinking
(14:24):
about it is that and I think the participants feel
that way, is that the benefit to the public ultimately
fit it outweighs this this kind of sacrifice. But yeah,
they're they're they're ethical questions here. I mean, I were
(14:46):
super sensitive when when people during the filming, if anyone
is feeling uncomfortable about what they're going through, they're always
free to like drop out and stop. It's people are
always doing it with like a great degree of like
wanting to do it, being grateful for doing it. There
(15:07):
there there's never any kind of pressure on them. So
but it's it's it's a complicated issue.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
How involved are you in choosing which participants participate. I
assume the producers have their thoughts, but I'm curious if
you know, producers can say, hey, here's a couple with
an interesting dilemma, and you may find, you know, what,
these people need the real deal and maybe aren't suitable
for TV.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
Yeah. There, there's there's a whole team that is that
they recruit people and they interview people, and there's there's
a team of psychologists that interview people before I meet them.
So I'm not involved in any of that. I basically
meet the people for the first session on camera. Oh,
(16:00):
but if I meet people and I feel like, I mean,
it's been very rare. But if I feel like people
are too vulnerable or there might be kind of an
issue that we didn't think about or that didn't come
up in earlier interviews, I can say I don't think
this is a good idea, this is too vulnerable a couple,
or let's say there's a vulnerable kid that's involved in
(16:20):
the family or something like that, And then I say,
this is not a good idea. But it's rare because
usually they do a really good job of screening.
Speaker 1 (16:29):
Sure, I guess I find as I watch that I
want to pay you the compliment of saying you really,
you know, you radiate a genuine integrity and it really
comes across. But it's also a bit of a backhanded
compliment because I worry about that. I worry about as
you become a more and more public figure, how you
(16:52):
protect that integrity and how you preserve it. I mean,
do you ever fear as you I mean, you're several
years into this now sort of a corruptive influence, because
sometimes I see a lot of no one does typically
what you do, but there are certain people whose names
I won't name, who are you know, therapists who go
(17:12):
into various modalities of this in the media, and I'm
amazed at the transformation over time, let's put it that gently.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
Totally agree. And I'm very aware of the corruptive nature
that is lurking every corner, whether it's the corruptive nature
of money, you know, being offered to do something that
will pay you a lot of money but will be
kind of a real compromise to the profession, or the
(17:42):
corruptive nature of like somehow, you know, I don't know,
somehow fame seems to have some kind of pull for
people I don't. That doesn't do much for me. But yeah,
there's always there's always, you know, on the corners of things.
There's always way that you can forget about your ethical principles.
(18:04):
And I'm very aware of it, and i try very
hard to protect myself. And I'm also just like you're
saying that you're worried, I'm worried too my own. I
think about it a lot. I'm it's I mean, especially nowadays,
there's there's just such a sliding slope where like ethics
(18:27):
and morals are like so cheap. Now, wow.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
Well, but the thing is success always in in the
biz begets more opportunity. And I'm curious, you know, do
you have ambitions beyond this show in the media space.
Speaker 2 (18:47):
I don't have ambitions in the media space. I have
I have, you know, somewhat ambitious mcgallu Mannic hopes to
contribute something to making the world a better place. That's
(19:09):
my real ambition is to somehow add to the forces
that are going against this kind of doggy dog world
we're facing. You know, I have things that matter to
me that I want to use this whatever engine I'm
getting behind me to contribute to things that matter.
Speaker 1 (19:34):
So, you know, I could play Devil's advocate here and say,
I hear what you're saying. The media is the place
to advance that cause. If you want to reach the
most people, So do this other show or produce this
other thing. How does that strike you?
Speaker 2 (19:51):
If it's something I don't know, if I can produce
a show that will somehow help people deal with their
denial about climate or about what's going on, and or
I would do it. I'm open to doing things about
to participating in things that matter to me, and I
will I'm going to join an international peacemaking organization. I will,
(20:18):
and I want to, and I appreciate kind of having
the opportunity to do that if I'm asked to join
in selling a product that doesn't help anyone, No.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Okay, but how do you think about the prospect of
what you do and the way you are doing it
on TV being done elsewhere? I guess I asked the
question because often when I watch your show, which I love,
I say, oh my god, I could watch this all day.
This could be a whole network. Do you feel like
(20:54):
there's an untapped appeal regardless of whether you're the one capitalizing.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
I think people can benefit and want to see people
doing therapy. Yes, if it's good therapy. I think the more.
I don't know if the more the better, but more
would be better. I think it would be great for
people to watch a lot of this, to watch people thinking,
(21:21):
taking their time, thinking, analytically, listening to their unconscious, trying
to listen to their partner in a way that is compassionate,
in a way that is not about blaming or winning. Yeah,
I think it would be great if more of that
was out there.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
What's also been interesting and I don't know if you've
seen this is the way your show has taken on
a second life in social media. I constantly see clips.
Are you aware of that? Do you have any I'm aware.
Speaker 2 (21:53):
Of that because I go and sit at my regular
cafe here and people come up to me and they
say to me, like, I love your social media, and
I'm like, I don't have social media. I'm aware that
there's like a lot out there. I'm not part of it,
but yes, I'm aware that it's out there and that
(22:14):
that's where a lot of people live.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
Yeah, perhaps even more so than Showtime or Paramount Plus itself.
But it's also like you kind of have less control
over that. So I was curious, is it a double
edged sword where it's like, Okay, there's more exposure, great,
but less control.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
I don't actually know what to do with that. Do
you have any suggestions?
Speaker 1 (22:41):
Well, it would start, and I'm not advocating you get
an official account because that does not sound like your
cup of tea, And to some degree, I don't think
you can control it. I mean, I've seen I tet
to disturb you at this, but like I've seen your
voice get taken and trained with AI so that it
(23:02):
looks like there are accounts run by you. I mean,
that's got to be disturbing, though frankly it's not particularly
well done, so I don't know who would fall for this.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
Wow. Okay, that's that's.
Speaker 1 (23:16):
A lot, I know. On a less dark note, I
I don't know if you've seen there. You have imitators
meaning impressionists who people have sent me funny memes.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Yes, I love the humor. I mean the more humor
the better. Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1 (23:36):
I will shout out a gentleman on tik toktalk named
Miguel Luciano who does a flawless and flattering imitation of you.
And I was just curious if you had seen it,
and do you Are you disturbed by that or flattered?
Speaker 2 (23:50):
Or I love humor, even.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
If it's at your expense totally? What's the ill Luciano,
Miguel Luciano, Okay, I want to reward good work by
publicizing it, and I think you will not be disturbed
by it.
Speaker 2 (24:09):
No, I love humor and humor at my expense. Please
bring it on. I'm all for that.
Speaker 1 (24:15):
Well, but it's interesting to hear that I think you
know a sense of humor isn't necessarily something you get
to show off in a psychotherapy setting. And my guess is,
and tell me if I'm wrong. Producers are probably pushed like, hey,
we want to see more of you outside the office
on the show, open up your private life. You get
(24:36):
those pressures. How do you feel about that?
Speaker 2 (24:39):
I originally when we started making the show, the director's
Josh and Elise and Eli, they were like, well why not?
And I kept explaining I would I remember like I
would read them passages from LACAN to explain why it's
very important to maintain a certain wall of privacy. It's
why it's important for the trans it's important for the process.
(25:01):
It's not and I'm also private, but I also really
believe that the show will do better if it's not
about my private life. That it's not kind of cheap
idolization of the therapist. But it's the emphasis on the process,
not on the person. And they realize as we continued
(25:26):
making the show, they realize that it's true that people
don't need personal information about me. They need a way
of thinking. They need the insights I mean, not the nonsense.
Speaker 1 (25:39):
Got it? And do you correct me if I'm wrong?
You still maintain an actual, real life practice.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Yes, that is my real life. I still that's what
matters to me the most, my patience, and that's never
going to change.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
But I can't imagine, and again, correct me if I'm
wrong that your media presence doesn't somehow impact the real life.
It must your real patients must see this, and who
knows how that impacts the process.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
Yeah, First of all, not all of my real patients
see Some choose not to watch. They just know about it.
And Okay, I've said this in other interviews that I
feel like my real patients are actually the ones that
carry the most burden of this show because they didn't
(26:34):
necessarily ask for it. They didn't, I didn't. They didn't
start working with me knowing that I'm a public figure
that I'm going to be and suddenly, you know, their
mother can see their therapist on TV. It's not necessarily great,
and so I think it's not great for my private
(26:54):
practice patients. But that's the price, and I think they
realize that I'm I think a lot of people were
worried that it's going to become my primary preoccupation, that
I'm not going to care anymore about my practice. But
it's not true. I love my practice. It's really where
(27:16):
my true self lives.
Speaker 1 (27:20):
It's okay, So yeah, I mean there must be quite
a balancing act between academia, the show, the real practice.
Who know, And of course you know you have a
private life. Do you foresee a time where the show,
because of all these other demands, has to go? I mean,
or you're not even looking ahead at this point.
Speaker 2 (27:44):
I don't know. Also, you know, with the way the
networks are now operating, who knows, like how long this
go on.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
It's not up to you necessarily, definitely.
Speaker 2 (27:54):
Not only up to me. But I'm sure at some point,
but either we will stop making it or somebody else
will replace me. I mean, I'm not going to keep
doing this forever. I'm not. I'm not a young person.
Speaker 1 (28:10):
So there could conceivably be a version of this show
that continues with a different therapist. Never thought about.
Speaker 2 (28:17):
That, Yeah, I think that would be interesting.
Speaker 1 (28:20):
M m, certainly, although I would. I mean, we should
mention you're not the only therapist who appears on the show.
Your advisor, Virginia Goldner, your colleagues are seen talking about that,
and to me, it's almost as surprising, if not more
so that you're on the show in the sense that
(28:41):
so many from your typically private field are maybe not
opening up their own practices, but opening themselves up. I mean,
did that take arm twisting or.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
I think for some of my friends, I mean it's
a lot of these are friends, colleagues that are in
my peer supervision group. These are all people that I anyway,
I have like really strong professional and personal bonds with
and I think early on people felt a little nervous
to participate, but they heard from me that it's there's
(29:15):
something that's really that feels very gratifying about doing this.
You really feel like you're doing a public service and
the you know, the team we work with make make
everything feel very natural and no one's pressuring you to
think in any one or other directions. So just feels
(29:38):
like an extension of our regular life. People have just
joined happily.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
That's good to hear. Well, I'll bet I'm the very
first person to make this joke at the end of
an interview with you, But our time is up. Sweet,
thank you or enough for your time, looking forward forward
to the following season, and thanks for joining me on
Strictly Business.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
Thank you Andrew, Thank you for these awesome questions.
Speaker 3 (30:12):
Thanks for listening, be sure to leave us a review
at Apple Podcasts or Amazon Music. We love to hear
from listeners. Please go to Variety dot com and sign
up for the free weekly Strictly Business newsletter, and don't
forget to tune in next week for another episode of
Strictly Business
Popular Podcasts
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com