While so many academics want to make their name by talking about how capitalism has changed into something Marx didn't see or couldn't have anticipated, it's ironic that much of their work can be dismissed as regressing to the interest in discourse and narrative found in the Young Hegelians.
Since the Young Hegelians consider conceptions,
thoughts, ideas, in fact all the products of consciousness, to which they
attribute an independent existence, as the real chains of men (just as the Old
Hegelians declared them the true bonds of human society) it is evident that the
Young Hegelians have to fight only against these illusions of consciousness.
Since, according to their fantasy, the relationships of men, all their doings,
their chains and their limitations are products of their consciousness, the
Young Hegelians logically put to men the moral postulate of exchanging their
present consciousness for human, critical or egoistic consciousness, and thus
of removing their limitations. This demand to change consciousness amounts to a
demand to interpret reality in another way, i.e. to recognise it by means of
another interpretation. The Young-Hegelian ideologists, in spite of their
allegedly “world-shattering" statements, are the staunchest conservatives.
The most recent of them have found the correct expression for their activity
when they declare they are only fighting against “phrases.” They forget,
however, that to these phrases they themselves are only opposing other phrases,
and that they are in no way combating the real existing world when they are merely
combating the phrases of this world. (German Ideology)
Monday, October 10, 2016
Sunday, October 9, 2016
'walking on eggshells' and the previous post.
I always get the feeling that there is some autism spectrum MD who reads my post and wants to universalize something when it wasn't my intention to say x accounts for every instance of y.
In the previous post I found an example of walking on eggshells that was part of a triangulation related to the primal scene. This doesn't mean that every relationship involving walking on eggshells is a primal scene of the subject altruist. As I mentioned, I've worked with many fun-loving object altruists who come home to an angry or bitchy romantic partner who chews them out.
This does in fact raise an interesting question regarding disclosure of the paternal function.
I've payed attention to depression as being projective identification with the parental imago of Death (as opposed to the parental imago of perfection). However, this imago of Death may only appear with paternal disclosure (as I've hypothesized before). Instead of Death the paternal imago involved, the altruist may have the more mundane experience of feeling hate or anger from the parental-substitute. Similarly, instead of psychopathy in the egoist, in which parental substitutes are felt to be powerful, dangerous, malicious figures, the paternal imago reduces this to a relation of the egoist to feeling contempt and judgment from the parental-substitute.
In the previous post I found an example of walking on eggshells that was part of a triangulation related to the primal scene. This doesn't mean that every relationship involving walking on eggshells is a primal scene of the subject altruist. As I mentioned, I've worked with many fun-loving object altruists who come home to an angry or bitchy romantic partner who chews them out.
This does in fact raise an interesting question regarding disclosure of the paternal function.
I've payed attention to depression as being projective identification with the parental imago of Death (as opposed to the parental imago of perfection). However, this imago of Death may only appear with paternal disclosure (as I've hypothesized before). Instead of Death the paternal imago involved, the altruist may have the more mundane experience of feeling hate or anger from the parental-substitute. Similarly, instead of psychopathy in the egoist, in which parental substitutes are felt to be powerful, dangerous, malicious figures, the paternal imago reduces this to a relation of the egoist to feeling contempt and judgment from the parental-substitute.
subject altruist in the ego and object drives and primal scene.
One of the most common repetitions in subjects altruists (SA), though it's certainly in objects altruists too, is having to "walk on eggshells" with a romantic partner who gets angry with one. This is often seen in how many altruists stay in bad jobs with bad bosses. Where other people at the job can be surprised the boss talks to subordinates the way he does and ultimately leave soon, if not get fired for standing up to him, the SA feels that this is acceptable. Often he or she ends up making small mistakes or forgetting something and provides the boss with an opportunity to be upset.
Although I've seen this for a long time, I haven't had the chance to do much individual work with someone stuck in the repetition... I've recently had the chance, and found that it shared some primal scene elements.
I've posted before about how the repetition of physical abuse in relationships, victimization, appeared as projective identification (PI) with the mother in a primal scene in which the child believed, or actually saw, the mother being beaten by the father (or some parental-substitute equivalents).
Working with one client I was able to see that this walking on eggshells with the boss also had an element of the client sacrificing herself for another employee which would also make this PI between mother and child. In other words, the client saw the mother take on her father's anger for something the client was responsible for, and now she plays this out with a coworker. And, until this coworker comes along to complete the triangle, she is paired with a bad boss, and is in wait.
I've posted on this before as well. The Electra complex of the object egoist represents aggression towards both parents (parental imagos/substitutes) and the Antigone complex is the loss of both parents (or in the SA's passive-egoism, the prohibition against becoming a parent, an adult, happily married, etc. in one's life).
So much is written on dyads in contemporary psychoanalysis, but there are so many interesting triangulations to figure out.
I also have a previous post on another SA primal scene for which I used the cartoon Inspector Gadget. It concerns the SA's rescuing impulse and how that can end with the rescued parental substitute not recognizing the Sa's help at all.
It seems that every deutero phase has the chance for the individual to have a primal scene involving their relations to the mother (which later becomes transcribed to the paternal imago) or when the half of the paternal imago, which wasn't split off to create the deutero phase, comes to ascendency, there is a chance that a trauma/fixation can occur in which the focus was the phallic mother losing her idealization to the egoist or showing her worth as the good object to the altruist. In regards to the latter, this is dramatized very well in a number of stories. Pip in Dickens' Great Expectations has his low class, father-substitute Joe who he is embarrassed of, but who it breaks his heart to leave. In the more recent Inside Out movie, there is the imaginary friend who sacrifices himself so that the protagonist, Joy, can get out of the valley of discarded memories. He's represented as kind of silly and ridiculous, as a mixture of several animals and things, which also calls to mind the chimera and other representations of symbols/mythological things that come in threes (i.e. the dad, mom, and child).
Although I've seen this for a long time, I haven't had the chance to do much individual work with someone stuck in the repetition... I've recently had the chance, and found that it shared some primal scene elements.
I've posted before about how the repetition of physical abuse in relationships, victimization, appeared as projective identification (PI) with the mother in a primal scene in which the child believed, or actually saw, the mother being beaten by the father (or some parental-substitute equivalents).
Working with one client I was able to see that this walking on eggshells with the boss also had an element of the client sacrificing herself for another employee which would also make this PI between mother and child. In other words, the client saw the mother take on her father's anger for something the client was responsible for, and now she plays this out with a coworker. And, until this coworker comes along to complete the triangle, she is paired with a bad boss, and is in wait.
I've posted on this before as well. The Electra complex of the object egoist represents aggression towards both parents (parental imagos/substitutes) and the Antigone complex is the loss of both parents (or in the SA's passive-egoism, the prohibition against becoming a parent, an adult, happily married, etc. in one's life).
So much is written on dyads in contemporary psychoanalysis, but there are so many interesting triangulations to figure out.
I also have a previous post on another SA primal scene for which I used the cartoon Inspector Gadget. It concerns the SA's rescuing impulse and how that can end with the rescued parental substitute not recognizing the Sa's help at all.
It seems that every deutero phase has the chance for the individual to have a primal scene involving their relations to the mother (which later becomes transcribed to the paternal imago) or when the half of the paternal imago, which wasn't split off to create the deutero phase, comes to ascendency, there is a chance that a trauma/fixation can occur in which the focus was the phallic mother losing her idealization to the egoist or showing her worth as the good object to the altruist. In regards to the latter, this is dramatized very well in a number of stories. Pip in Dickens' Great Expectations has his low class, father-substitute Joe who he is embarrassed of, but who it breaks his heart to leave. In the more recent Inside Out movie, there is the imaginary friend who sacrifices himself so that the protagonist, Joy, can get out of the valley of discarded memories. He's represented as kind of silly and ridiculous, as a mixture of several animals and things, which also calls to mind the chimera and other representations of symbols/mythological things that come in threes (i.e. the dad, mom, and child).
Tuesday, October 4, 2016
"thought" acts or acts in fantasying and light, dark, and fire pt 1
I've posted before about speech acts. For me these came to light in people with aggression blocks or inhibited personalities who have problems saying no or being assertive. Often they'd talk about childhood incidents in which they were wronged and displaced onto others were condemnations about parents or siblings. They wouldn't express this anger themselves and when asked to they felt resistance to do so. However, after they did say it (with affect) they felt a breakthrough and a release occurred.
With many psychotic patients I've encountered resistance to fantasying about certain things that follows the pattern of speech acts. A psychotic man mentions a woman who was smiling at him at a gas station. I ask him to use active imagination and create a story about her approaching him and how she might come into his life in some way. He won't let himself do it.
Another psychotic man brings up his childhood home and his longing for it. I ask him to imagine he's a few blocks away from it and to imagine what kind of figure or figures are in the way of him getting home. He says the devil. He goes through twists and turns, imagines his mother and brother come to aid him, but no matter what, the devil interferes with it. I ask him to imagine something happens to the devil or that he somehow makes it to the house but he can't let himself.
With these 'experiments' it's easy to imagine that it's simply a transference issue with me and that they could really imagine these things if they wanted to. However, in the instances in which things have moved forward, the resistance is attached to strong affect or anxiety.
A man in a psychotic depression represents his depressive feeling as him being in space, or utter darkness, without anything in it (a universe of total emptiness and darkness). He doesn't even have a body in this representation but is just the point at which his vision exists. The first thing he imagines to enter this universe is a single beam of light. He can imagine that it hits him and that his face emerges but he can't go farther than imagining his neck also enjoys the warmth of the light.
As with some others, he attaches the idea of God to this light and, in what appears to be a dialectic, he won't accept or trust that the light will nurture, warm, or provide for him and has his own light in the form of a fire. The fire that he can "immerse" himself in can be provided by alcohol, video games, or things of an addictive nature. He represents this fire as him "keeping control" for himself and feels turning to the light is a "surrender" he doesn't want to do. When asked to imagine the act of surrendering to the light, he changes the visual representation into accepting a hug from an unknown figure. He associates accepting it with taking the stranger's pity. We work past this resistance through the transference. He accepts it but doesn't put his own arms around the figure and feels a powerful physical urge to "retch." He then scotomizes the feeling and ends his fantasying.
With many psychotic patients I've encountered resistance to fantasying about certain things that follows the pattern of speech acts. A psychotic man mentions a woman who was smiling at him at a gas station. I ask him to use active imagination and create a story about her approaching him and how she might come into his life in some way. He won't let himself do it.
Another psychotic man brings up his childhood home and his longing for it. I ask him to imagine he's a few blocks away from it and to imagine what kind of figure or figures are in the way of him getting home. He says the devil. He goes through twists and turns, imagines his mother and brother come to aid him, but no matter what, the devil interferes with it. I ask him to imagine something happens to the devil or that he somehow makes it to the house but he can't let himself.
With these 'experiments' it's easy to imagine that it's simply a transference issue with me and that they could really imagine these things if they wanted to. However, in the instances in which things have moved forward, the resistance is attached to strong affect or anxiety.
A man in a psychotic depression represents his depressive feeling as him being in space, or utter darkness, without anything in it (a universe of total emptiness and darkness). He doesn't even have a body in this representation but is just the point at which his vision exists. The first thing he imagines to enter this universe is a single beam of light. He can imagine that it hits him and that his face emerges but he can't go farther than imagining his neck also enjoys the warmth of the light.
As with some others, he attaches the idea of God to this light and, in what appears to be a dialectic, he won't accept or trust that the light will nurture, warm, or provide for him and has his own light in the form of a fire. The fire that he can "immerse" himself in can be provided by alcohol, video games, or things of an addictive nature. He represents this fire as him "keeping control" for himself and feels turning to the light is a "surrender" he doesn't want to do. When asked to imagine the act of surrendering to the light, he changes the visual representation into accepting a hug from an unknown figure. He associates accepting it with taking the stranger's pity. We work past this resistance through the transference. He accepts it but doesn't put his own arms around the figure and feels a powerful physical urge to "retch." He then scotomizes the feeling and ends his fantasying.
Friday, September 30, 2016
The narcissist and echoist in the passive and active relation.
I had an insight the other day, and builds on a previous post about how egoists are usually attracted to egoists and altruists to altruists, until pathology seeks some compensation and "use" for the other pole.
It partly came from Trump and trying to fathom the person who would be attracted to his boastfulness and grandiosity.
I realized on the object drives (love life) that there was a pattern that would hold for the ego drives (work life).
The echoist, who instead of staying altruistic and devoted to others, becomes active-altruistic and focussed on asserting himself, often doesn't have much confidence and feels inadequate. These types of men and women often have narcissistic partners who are arrogant, vain, or grandiose in deeper ways. Such people in their work life often are drawn to bosses or coworkers (of the same sex) who represent their own ideal. Because of their lack of confidence, they are impressed by those who obviously hide inferiority feelings and have to broadcast how they are superior.
The narcissistic who becomes passive-egoistic, very often finds a total "child." This is an altruist who doesn't have good structure, time management, follow through or willpower, and is often depressive and in projective identification with the parental imago of Death (just as the egoist is with the parental imago of Perfection in his grandiosity). To be altruistic seems to tied to control of the other and a strong need to not help an equal but someone who is childlike compared to oneself.
It partly came from Trump and trying to fathom the person who would be attracted to his boastfulness and grandiosity.
I realized on the object drives (love life) that there was a pattern that would hold for the ego drives (work life).
The echoist, who instead of staying altruistic and devoted to others, becomes active-altruistic and focussed on asserting himself, often doesn't have much confidence and feels inadequate. These types of men and women often have narcissistic partners who are arrogant, vain, or grandiose in deeper ways. Such people in their work life often are drawn to bosses or coworkers (of the same sex) who represent their own ideal. Because of their lack of confidence, they are impressed by those who obviously hide inferiority feelings and have to broadcast how they are superior.
The narcissistic who becomes passive-egoistic, very often finds a total "child." This is an altruist who doesn't have good structure, time management, follow through or willpower, and is often depressive and in projective identification with the parental imago of Death (just as the egoist is with the parental imago of Perfection in his grandiosity). To be altruistic seems to tied to control of the other and a strong need to not help an equal but someone who is childlike compared to oneself.
Sunday, September 25, 2016
children as an imago II
There's another formulation that has come to mind.
One form of homosexual object choice is loving oneself from the place of one's mother. It's virtually indistinguishable, as far as I can tell, from narcissistic object choice. Except, Freud posited that the latter was a natural stage of development for everyone.
It's possible that the relations to children that I discussed in the last post is one being in projective identification with the castrated mother. This would mean that there are no natural imago relations with children (except as siblings) and that only in projective identification does one come to desire a child...
I'm not sure how strong a hypothesis this is... and it would also mean that phallic symbols would also be associated wth PI. This doesn't make sense considering myths in which the protagonist needs a magical sword or something to defeat a parental-substitute...
Maybe there is the phallus which is the symbol of fusion with the paternal imago of the state of eros, and then there are the phallic symbols that belong to the parental-substitutes or individual in PI. For example, I have worked with a woman who had the anal fantasy of the father having many penises and not having given her one.
... Thinking out loud on a Sunday.
One form of homosexual object choice is loving oneself from the place of one's mother. It's virtually indistinguishable, as far as I can tell, from narcissistic object choice. Except, Freud posited that the latter was a natural stage of development for everyone.
It's possible that the relations to children that I discussed in the last post is one being in projective identification with the castrated mother. This would mean that there are no natural imago relations with children (except as siblings) and that only in projective identification does one come to desire a child...
I'm not sure how strong a hypothesis this is... and it would also mean that phallic symbols would also be associated wth PI. This doesn't make sense considering myths in which the protagonist needs a magical sword or something to defeat a parental-substitute...
Maybe there is the phallus which is the symbol of fusion with the paternal imago of the state of eros, and then there are the phallic symbols that belong to the parental-substitutes or individual in PI. For example, I have worked with a woman who had the anal fantasy of the father having many penises and not having given her one.
... Thinking out loud on a Sunday.
Saturday, September 24, 2016
children as an imago
I've used mythology before (ex. elves and dwarves) to discuss differences between egoists and altruists.
The dwarves' pursuit of precious metals/gems in mines was contrasted with Elves' harmony with the forest, and a larger discussion of the egoist's interest in things (inanimate possessions) vs. the elves and the mystical or other-worldly was discussed.
This early relation, which at this point seems to be at the auto-erotic stage, gives us a template for looking at the roots of relation to phallic symbols at later stages of development.
Freud, Ruth Mack Brunswick, and other analysts have argued that the phallus and the child have an equivalence. Freud stated it in the baby standing for feces, gift, and phallus but the other analysts have shown that it's an important symbol/relation at other stages too.
The longer I practice psychoanalysis, the more I've come to see that the loss of a child, the aggressive wish to deprive a child from the beloved, and the use of the child as an externalization of one's own anxieties is very important in the economics of libido/punishment.
On this blog I've shared some clinical techniques for working with defenses which show the importance of the superego in conceptualizing mental pathology.
For example, in someone who compulsively feels that they must schedule and maximize their use of time there is often a conflict in which they that feel this "thou shalt be like the father (and perfectly use the reality of Time)" is a burden. They procrastinate, watch youtube videos, or do other things to distract themselves. The superego thou shalt is undermined and felt as ego alien or ego dystonic. Feeling the superego to be this way allows the patient to talk about it as a part of them that is an "asshole" or "annoying" etc. and when these are turned into you-statements, it can lead the person to an external conflict with a parental-substitute that underpins it.
I've struggled to extend this technique and have found that many dissociative states can be handled similarly.
Some people are the opposite of compulsive with their relation to Time. They have no structure, they let bills or meetings go unpaid or unmet, and generally feel like things will work out for them.
Once they can see and identify with the formulation that they act as if Time will take care of them, then you can ask them describe the relation of how Time might see them (as if Time was a person). Time might "protect" them and then you have to elicit from them, what kind of person needs protection (i.e. a weak person, a helpless person, etc.).
The words that are personal to the patient are important and though the analyst might have a sense of the relation that is going on, the proper words are needed to serve as a bridge to an external loss.
Once the relation is described and a description of the patient from the point of view of Time is constructed, it can be turned into you-statements. My experience, so far, is that it leads to the individual's loss of a child or children.
It is similar with the relation of a patient to Space.
Many echoists (altruists) can express their lives as living for others and that they don't know who they are, what they want, and often what they even feel. Their "self" doesn't exist, in their estimation, and they can talk freely about needing to "find themselves."
The important relation to Space here is the relation of being able to tolerate emotions. These people aren't flat in the way that the affect blocked egoist is flat, but rather, they aren't able to tolerate feelings.
Subjectively, they experience the feeling of emotions being pushed out of their consciousness after they get overwhelming. This something that pushes their feelings out, which doesn't allow their feelings to have any Space in their internal Space, is also a "protector," "a mother or parent," "a rescuer" who is trying to protect, take care of, or rescue the patient. This relation can be spelled out and you-statements constructed. And, again, this has consistently led to children so far.
So, instead of just interactions with parent-substitutes (those above one), sibling substitutes (those equal to one), and these considered in the variations of the proto, deutero, and trito stages that I've isolated, there is also a relation to children. Moreover, I brought up the elves and dwarves above because it's probably also a relation to the phallus too. The question is whether it is its own relation, or whether it is a defense against a parent or sibling relation.
(note: in a previous post I brought up how phallic symbols also exist for altruists. For example, all the little statues on Freud's desk and all the knick knacks that some people have on their shelves or on display in their home, are essentially little children. Similarly, in the Spike Jonze's Her, I brought up how the letters or cards that the protagonist would write for others are phallic symbols to make up for the lack of altruistic empathy and care that a husband, wife, or child may suffer from. The altruist fills this lack for the person lacking these feelings/words. However, it's also possible to read these things not just as a phallus, but as a child too. In the movie there is a scene in which a woman wants to help the protagonist have sexual intimacy with his AI girlfriend. In this relation the child wants to help the fighting or distant parents enjoy each other sexually by joining in herself. The letter or birthday card serves the same relation. Without knowing the person and their individual economics of libido/punishment, it is difficult to know if these are compromise formations between the egoistic and altruistic poles, or if for example, altruistic symbols are also expressed through 'things' on their own.)
These questions in symbols are interesting, but the important one is whether the child exists as its own true imago relation or as a derivative.
One last thought on this is Freud's observation that the wish for the phallus becomes the wish for a child in the woman. Although criticized for this, the critics often mistake the penis for the phallus. It is a fact that one can see how many women (and some men too) are most interested in finding romantic love when they are young, but after some disappointments, they begin to desire a child more than romantic love. This is the movement from phallus to baby. Penis envy is something different and is an alternative expression of Oedipal, Electral, Antigonal, Bellerophonal conflict. Triangulation can occur in love relationships, in social relationships, in sexual difference, etc. Viewed in this way, the desire for a child is a derivative. But, is this always the case?
Similarly, doesn't a man's preoccupation with cars, gadgets, or things that are phallic symbols a derivative for failures in being able to manifest one's perfection in competition with others? If one still felt he was going to be the first in his field or win admiration in his writing or become very rich through his talents, would he lose time and energy in the preoccupation with going to car shows and seeing rare cars, reading up on the latest technology and coveting something he doesn't need for his work? That being said, I know that there are very productive and intelligent people who still have idiosyncratic interest and hobbies, so, economically, we'd talk about how they had ego injuries in the past and how they have refused with the paternal imago subsequently...
The dwarves' pursuit of precious metals/gems in mines was contrasted with Elves' harmony with the forest, and a larger discussion of the egoist's interest in things (inanimate possessions) vs. the elves and the mystical or other-worldly was discussed.
This early relation, which at this point seems to be at the auto-erotic stage, gives us a template for looking at the roots of relation to phallic symbols at later stages of development.
Freud, Ruth Mack Brunswick, and other analysts have argued that the phallus and the child have an equivalence. Freud stated it in the baby standing for feces, gift, and phallus but the other analysts have shown that it's an important symbol/relation at other stages too.
The longer I practice psychoanalysis, the more I've come to see that the loss of a child, the aggressive wish to deprive a child from the beloved, and the use of the child as an externalization of one's own anxieties is very important in the economics of libido/punishment.
On this blog I've shared some clinical techniques for working with defenses which show the importance of the superego in conceptualizing mental pathology.
For example, in someone who compulsively feels that they must schedule and maximize their use of time there is often a conflict in which they that feel this "thou shalt be like the father (and perfectly use the reality of Time)" is a burden. They procrastinate, watch youtube videos, or do other things to distract themselves. The superego thou shalt is undermined and felt as ego alien or ego dystonic. Feeling the superego to be this way allows the patient to talk about it as a part of them that is an "asshole" or "annoying" etc. and when these are turned into you-statements, it can lead the person to an external conflict with a parental-substitute that underpins it.
I've struggled to extend this technique and have found that many dissociative states can be handled similarly.
Some people are the opposite of compulsive with their relation to Time. They have no structure, they let bills or meetings go unpaid or unmet, and generally feel like things will work out for them.
Once they can see and identify with the formulation that they act as if Time will take care of them, then you can ask them describe the relation of how Time might see them (as if Time was a person). Time might "protect" them and then you have to elicit from them, what kind of person needs protection (i.e. a weak person, a helpless person, etc.).
The words that are personal to the patient are important and though the analyst might have a sense of the relation that is going on, the proper words are needed to serve as a bridge to an external loss.
Once the relation is described and a description of the patient from the point of view of Time is constructed, it can be turned into you-statements. My experience, so far, is that it leads to the individual's loss of a child or children.
It is similar with the relation of a patient to Space.
Many echoists (altruists) can express their lives as living for others and that they don't know who they are, what they want, and often what they even feel. Their "self" doesn't exist, in their estimation, and they can talk freely about needing to "find themselves."
The important relation to Space here is the relation of being able to tolerate emotions. These people aren't flat in the way that the affect blocked egoist is flat, but rather, they aren't able to tolerate feelings.
Subjectively, they experience the feeling of emotions being pushed out of their consciousness after they get overwhelming. This something that pushes their feelings out, which doesn't allow their feelings to have any Space in their internal Space, is also a "protector," "a mother or parent," "a rescuer" who is trying to protect, take care of, or rescue the patient. This relation can be spelled out and you-statements constructed. And, again, this has consistently led to children so far.
So, instead of just interactions with parent-substitutes (those above one), sibling substitutes (those equal to one), and these considered in the variations of the proto, deutero, and trito stages that I've isolated, there is also a relation to children. Moreover, I brought up the elves and dwarves above because it's probably also a relation to the phallus too. The question is whether it is its own relation, or whether it is a defense against a parent or sibling relation.
(note: in a previous post I brought up how phallic symbols also exist for altruists. For example, all the little statues on Freud's desk and all the knick knacks that some people have on their shelves or on display in their home, are essentially little children. Similarly, in the Spike Jonze's Her, I brought up how the letters or cards that the protagonist would write for others are phallic symbols to make up for the lack of altruistic empathy and care that a husband, wife, or child may suffer from. The altruist fills this lack for the person lacking these feelings/words. However, it's also possible to read these things not just as a phallus, but as a child too. In the movie there is a scene in which a woman wants to help the protagonist have sexual intimacy with his AI girlfriend. In this relation the child wants to help the fighting or distant parents enjoy each other sexually by joining in herself. The letter or birthday card serves the same relation. Without knowing the person and their individual economics of libido/punishment, it is difficult to know if these are compromise formations between the egoistic and altruistic poles, or if for example, altruistic symbols are also expressed through 'things' on their own.)
These questions in symbols are interesting, but the important one is whether the child exists as its own true imago relation or as a derivative.
One last thought on this is Freud's observation that the wish for the phallus becomes the wish for a child in the woman. Although criticized for this, the critics often mistake the penis for the phallus. It is a fact that one can see how many women (and some men too) are most interested in finding romantic love when they are young, but after some disappointments, they begin to desire a child more than romantic love. This is the movement from phallus to baby. Penis envy is something different and is an alternative expression of Oedipal, Electral, Antigonal, Bellerophonal conflict. Triangulation can occur in love relationships, in social relationships, in sexual difference, etc. Viewed in this way, the desire for a child is a derivative. But, is this always the case?
Similarly, doesn't a man's preoccupation with cars, gadgets, or things that are phallic symbols a derivative for failures in being able to manifest one's perfection in competition with others? If one still felt he was going to be the first in his field or win admiration in his writing or become very rich through his talents, would he lose time and energy in the preoccupation with going to car shows and seeing rare cars, reading up on the latest technology and coveting something he doesn't need for his work? That being said, I know that there are very productive and intelligent people who still have idiosyncratic interest and hobbies, so, economically, we'd talk about how they had ego injuries in the past and how they have refused with the paternal imago subsequently...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)