Fairbairn, W.D. (1952). Psychoanalytic Studies of the Personality.

London: Tavistock
Publications Limited.

ChapterIII:TheRepressionandtheReturnofBad
Objects(withspecialreferencetotheWarNeuroses,)1
(1943)
1.TheImportanceofObjectRelationships

IntheearlierphasesofhispsychoanalyticalthoughtFreudwaschieflyconcernedwiththenatureandthe
fateofimpulseafacttowhichtheformulationofhisfamouslibidotheorybearseloquentwitness.Thusit
cameaboutthatmodernpsychopathologywasfoundedessentiallyuponapsychologyofimpulse;and
Freud'slibidotheoryhasremainedoneofthecornerstonesintheedificeofpsychoanalyticalthought,
albeitthistheoryisnowgenerallyacceptedonlywithsuchmodificationsaswereintroducedbyAbraham
indeferencetodevelopmentalconsiderations.ItwasalwaysforeigntoFreud'sintention,however,to
conveytheimpressionthatalltheproblemsofpsychopathologycouldbesolvedintermsofthepsychology
ofimpulse;andinthelaterphasesofhisthoughtfromatimewhichmaybeconvenientlydatedbythe
publicationofTheEgoandtheIdhisattentionwaspredominantlydirectedtothegrowthandthe
vicissitudesoftheego.Thusadevelopingpsychologyoftheegocametobesuperimposeduponanalready
establishedpsychologyofimpulse;and,whateverdevelopmentsthepsychologyoftheegomayhave
subsequentlyundergoneinpsychoanalyticalthought,theunderlyinglibidotheoryhasremainedrelatively
unquestioned.ThisisasituationwhichIhavelatelycometoregardasmostregrettable.Unfortunately,the
presentoccasiondoesnotpermitofanexaminationofthegroundsuponwhichIhavereachedthisopinion;
anditmustsufficetosaythatIhavebeeninfluencedbyclinicalandpsychotherapeutic,

1OriginallypublishedinTheBritishJournalofMedicalPsychology,Vol.XIX,Pts.3and4,andnow
republishedwithminoramendments.

59

nolessthanbytheoretical,considerations.Mypointofviewmay,however,bestatedinaword.Inmy
opinionitishightimethatpsychopathologicalinquiry,whichinthepasthasbeensuccessivelyfocused,
firstuponimpulse,andlaterupontheego,shouldnowbefocusedupontheobjecttowardswhichimpulse
isdirected.Toputthemattermoreaccuratelyiflesspointedly,thetimeisnowripeforapsychologyof
objectrelationships.Thegroundhasalreadybeenpreparedforsuchadevelopmentofthoughtbythework
ofMelanieKlein;andindeeditisonlyinthelightofherconceptionofinternalizedobjectsthatastudyof
objectrelationshipscanbeexpectedtoyieldanysignificantresultsforpsychopathology.Fromthepointof
viewwhichIhavenowcometoadopt,psychologymaybesaidtoresolveitselfintoastudyofthe
relationshipsoftheindividualtohisobjects,whilst,insimilarterms,psychopathologymaybesaidto
resolveitselfmorespecificallyintoastudyoftherelationshipsoftheegotoitsinternalizedobjects.This
pointofviewhasreceiveditsinitialformulationinmypaperentitledARevisedPsychopathologyofthe
PsychosesandPsychoneuroses.
Amongsttheconclusionsformulatedintheabovementionedpapertwoofthemostfarreachingarethe
following:(1)thatlibidinalaimsareofsecondaryimportanceincomparisonwithobjectrelationships,
and(2)thatarelationshipwiththeobject,andnotgratificationofimpulse,istheultimateaimoflibidinal
striving.Theseconclusionsinvolveacompleterecastingoftheclassiclibidotheory;andinthepaperin
questionanattemptismadetoperformthistask.ThetasktowhichIshallnowturnisthatofconsidering
whataretheimplicationsoftheviewthatlibidoisessentiallyorientatedtowardsobjectsfortheclassic
theoryofrepression.Theimportanceofthistaskwouldbedifficulttoexaggerate;forwhatFreudsaidin
1914stillremainstruethatthedoctrineofrepressionisthefoundationstoneuponwhichthewhole
structureofpsychoanalysisrests1(albeitIshouldprefertoseetheorysubstitutedfordoctrine).

2.TheNatureoftheRepressed

Itistobenotedthat,indirectinghisattentionpredominantlytoproblemsregardingthenatureandfateof
impulseintheearlierphasesofhisthought,Freudwasconcerninghimselfessentiallywiththerepressed.
Ontheotherhand,wheninTheEgoandtheIdhe

1CollectedPapers(1924),Vol.I,p.297.

60

turnedhisattentiontoproblemsregardingthenatureandgrowthoftheego,hisconcernwasdeliberately
transferredfromtherepressedtotheagencyofrepression.If,however,itistruetosaythatlibido(and
indeedimpulseingeneral)isdirectedessentiallytowardsobjects(andnottowardspleasure),themoment
isopportuneforustoturnourattentiononcemoretothenatureoftherepressed;for,ifin1923Freudwas
justifiedinsaying,Pathologicalresearchhascentredourinteresttooexclusivelyontherepressed,1itmay
nowbeequallytruetosaythatourinterestistooexclusivelycentredupontherepressivefunctionsofthe
ego.

InthecourseofhisdiscussionupontherepressivefunctionsoftheegoinTheEgoandtheIdFreudmakes
thefollowingstatement:Weknowthatasaruletheegocarriesoutrepressionsintheserviceandatthe
behestofthesuperego.2Thisstatementisofspecialsignificanceifobjectrelationshipsareas
overwhelminglyimportantasIhavecometoregardthem;for,if,asFreudsays,thesuperegorepresentsa
depositleftbytheearliestobjectchoicesoftheid,3thatendopsychicstructuremustberegardedas
essentiallyaninternalizedobject,withwhichtheegohasarelationship.Thisrelationshipisbasedupona
processofidentification,asFreudsojustlypointsout.Theidentificationoftheegowiththesuperegois,
ofcourse,rarely,ifever,complete;but,insofarasitexists,repressionmustberegardedasafunctionof
therelationshipoftheegotoaninternalizedobjectwhichisacceptedasgood.AtthispointIfeeldriven
tomaketheconfessionthatmylastquotationfromFreudwasaphrasedeliberatelytornfromitssentence
inordertoenablemetomakeapoint.Quotationstornfromtheircontextarenotoriouslymisleading;andI
thereforehastentomakeamends,nowthatthemutilationforwhichIamresponsiblehasservedits
purpose.Thecompletesentencereads:Thesuperegois,however,notmerelyadepositleftbytheearliest
objectchoicesoftheid;italsorepresentsanenergeticreactionformationagainstthosechoices(present
author'sitalics).Inthelightofthefullquotationitnowbecomesdoubtfulwhethertherelationshipsofthe
egotointernalizedobjectscanbeexhaustivelydescribedintermsofarelationshipbetweentheegoandthe
superego.Itwillbenotedthatthesuperegoremainsagoodobjecttotheego,whethertheidentification
isstrongandtheegoyieldstotheappealofthesuperego,orwhethertheidentificationisweakandthe
appealofthesuperegoisdefiedbytheego.Thequestionaccordingly


1TheEgoandtheId(1927),p.19.

2Ibid.,p.75.

3Ibid.,p.44.

61

ariseswhethertherearenotalsobadinternalizedobjectswithwhichtheegomaybeidentifiedinvarying
degrees.ThatsuchbadobjectsaretobefoundwithinthepsychetheworkofMelanieKleincanleaveus
innodoubt.Thedemandsofapsychologybaseduponobjectrelationshipswill,therefore,requireusto
inferthat,ifthecluetotheagencyofrepressionliesintherelationshipoftheegotogoodinternalized
objects,thecluetothenatureoftherepressedwilllieintherelationshipoftheegotobadinternalized
objects.

Itwillberecalledthat,inhisoriginalformulationoftheconceptofrepression,Freuddescribedthe
repressedasconsistingofintolerablememories,againsttheunpleasantnessofwhichrepressionprovided
theegowithameansofdefence.Thenuclearmemoriesagainstwhichthisdefencewasdirectedwere,of
course,foundbyFreudtobelibidinalinnature;and,toexplainwhylibidinalmemories,whichare
inherentlypleasant,shouldbecomepainful,hehadrecoursetotheconceptionthatrepressedmemories
werepainfulbecausetheywereguilty.Toexplaininturnwhylibidinalmemoriesshouldbeguilty,hefell
backupontheconceptionoftheOedipussituation.Whensubsequentlyheformulatedhisconceptionofthe
superego,hedescribedthesuperegoasameansofeffectingarepressionoftheOedipussituationand
attributeditsorigintoaneedonthepartoftheegoforaninternaldefenceagainstincestuousimpulses.In
accordancewiththispointofview,hecametospeakoftherepressedasconsistingessentiallyofguilty
impulsesandexplainedtherepressionofmemoriesasduetotheguiltofimpulsesoperativeinthe
situationswhichsuchmemoriesperpetuated.Inthelightoftheconsiderationsalreadyadvanced,however,
itbecomesaquestionwhetherFreud'searlierconceptionofthenatureoftherepressedwasnotnearerthe
mark,andwhethertherepressionofimpulsesisnotamoresecondaryphenomenonthantherepressionof
memories.Inowventuretoformulatetheviewthatwhatareprimarilyrepressedareneitherintolerably
guiltyimpulsesnorintolerablyunpleasantmemories,butintolerablybadinternalizedobjects.Ifmemories
arerepressed,accordingly,thisisonlybecausetheobjectsinvolvedinsuchmemoriesareidentifiedwith
badinternalizedobjects;and,ifimpulsesarerepressed,thisisonlybecausetheobjectswithwhichsuch
impulsesimpeltheindividualtohavearelationshiparebadobjectsfromthestandpointoftheego.
Actually,thepositionasregardstherepressionofimpulseswouldappeartobeasfollows.Impulses
becomebadiftheyaredirectedtowardsbadobjects.Ifsuchbadobjectsareinternalized,then

62

theimpulsesdirectedtowardsthemareinternalized;andtherepressionofinternalizedbadobjectsthus
involvestherepressionofimpulsesasaconcomitantphenomenon.Itmustbestressed,however,thatwhat
areprimarilyrepressedarebadinternalizedobjects.

3.RepressedObjects
Onceithascometoberecognizedthatrepressionisdirectedprimarilyagainstbadobjects,thisfact
assumesthecomplexionofoneofthoseobviousphenomenawhicharesofrequentlymissed,andwhichare
oftenthemostdifficulttodiscover.AtonetimeIusedfrequentlytohavetheexperienceofexamining
problemchildren;andIrememberbeingparticularlyimpressedbythereluctanceofchildrenwhohadbeen
thevictimsofsexualassaultstogiveanyaccountofthetraumaticexperiencestowhichtheyhadbeen
subjected.Thepointwhichpuzzledmemostwasthat,themoreinnocentthevictimwas,thegreaterwas
theresistancetoanamnesis.Bycontrast,Ineverexperiencedanycomparabledifficultyintheexamination
ofindividualswhohadcommittedsexualoffences.Atthetime,Ifeltthatthesephenomenacouldonlybe
explainedontheassumptionthat,inresistingarevivalofthetraumaticmemory,thevictimofasexual
assaultwasactuatedbyguiltovertheunexpectedgratificationoflibidinalimpulseswhichhadbeen
renouncedbytheegoandrepressed,whereasinthecaseofthesexualoffendertherewasnocomparable
degreeofguiltandconsequentlynocomparabledegreeofrepression.Ialwaysfeltrathersuspiciousofthis
explanation;butitseemedthebestavailableatthetime.Frommypresentstandpointitseemsinadequate.
AsInowseeit,thepositionisthatthevictimofasexualassaultresiststherevivalofthetraumaticmemory
primarilybecausethismemoryrepresentsarecordofarelationshipwithabadobject.Itisdifficulttosee
howtheexperienceofbeingassaultedcouldaffordanygreatmeasureofgratificationexcepttothemore
masochisticofindividuals.Totheaverageindividualsuchanexperienceisnotsomuchguiltyassimply
bad.Itisintolerableinthemain,notbecauseitgratifiesrepressedimpulses,butforthesamereasonthata
childoftenfliespanicstrickenfromastrangerwhoentersthehouse.Itisintolerablebecauseabadobject
isalwaysintolerable,andarelationshipwithabadobjectcanneverbecontemplatedwithequanimity.

Itisinterestingtoobservethatarelationshipwithabadobjectisfeltbythechildtobenotonlyintolerable,
butalsoshameful.Itmay

63

accordinglybeinferredthat,ifachildisashamedofhisparents(asisquiteoftenthecase),hisparentsare
badobjectstohim;anditisinthesamedirectionthatwemustlookforanexplanationofthefactthatthe
victimofasexualassaultshouldfeelashamedofbeingassaulted.Thatarelationshipwithabadobject
shouldbeshamefulcanonlybesatisfactorilyexplainedontheassumptionthatinearlychildhoodall
objectrelationshipsarebaseduponidentification.1Thisbeingthecase,itfollowsthat,ifthechild'sobjects
presentthemselvestohimasbad,hehimselffeelsbad;andindeeditmaybestatedwithequaltruththat,if
achildfeelsbad,itimpliesthathehasbadobjects.Ifhebehavesbadly,thesameconsiderationapplies;and
itisforthisreasonthatadelinquentchildisinvariablyfoundtohave(fromthechild'spointofviewatany
rate)badparents.Atthispointweareconfrontedwithanotherofthoseobviousphenomenawhichareso
rarelynoticed.Atonetimeitfelltomylottoexaminequitealargenumberofdelinquentchildrenfrom
homeswhichthemostcasualobservercouldhardlyfailtorecognizeasbadinthecrudestsensehomes,
forexample,inwhichdrunkenness,quarrelling,andphysicalviolencereignedsupreme.Itisonlyinthe
rarestinstances,however,(andthoseonlyinstancesofutterdemoralizationandcollapseoftheego)thatI
canrecallsuchachildbeinginducedtoadmit,farlessvolunteering,thathisparentswerebadobjects.Itis
obvious,therefore,thatinthesecasesthechild'sbadobjectshadbeeninternalizedandrepressed.What
appliestothedelinquentchildcanbeshowntoapplyalsotothedelinquentadultandnotonlytothe
delinquentadult,butalsotothepsychoneuroticandpsychotic.Forthatmatter,italsoappliestothe
ostensiblynormalperson.Itisimpossibleforanyonetopassthroughchildhoodwithouthavingbad
objectswhichareinternalizedandrepressed.2Henceinternalizedbadobjectsarepresentinthe

1ThefactthatallobjectrelationshipsareoriginallybaseduponidentificationwasrecognizedbyFreud,as
maybejudgedfromhisstatement:Attheverybeginning,intheprimitiveoralphaseoftheindividual's
existence,objectcathexisandidentificationarehardlytobedistinguishedfromeachother(TheEgoand
theId(1927),p.35).ThisthemeisdevelopedatsomelengthinmypaperentitledARevised
PsychopathologyofthePsychosesandPsychoneuroses,andindeedformsthebasisoftherevised
psychopathologywhichIenvisage.

2Thiswouldappeartobetherealexplanationoftheclassicmassiveamnesiaforeventsofearlychildhood,
whichisonlyfoundtobeabsentinindividualswhoseegoisdisintegrating(e.g.inincipientschizophrenics,
whosooftendisplayamostremarkablecapacityforrevivingtraumaticincidentsofearlychildren,asis
illustratedbyacasetobequotedlaterinthispaper).

64

mindsofallofusatthedeeperlevels.Whetheranygivenindividualbecomesdelinquent,psychoneurotic,
psychoticorsimplynormalwouldappeartodependinthemainupontheoperationofthreefactors:(1)
theextenttowhichbadobjectshavebeeninstalledintheunconsciousandthedegreeofbadnessbywhich
theyarecharacterized,(2)theextenttowhichtheegoisidentifiedwithinternalizedbadobjects,and(3)the
natureandstrengthofthedefenceswhichprotecttheegofromtheseobjects.

4.TheMoralDefenceAgainstBadObjects

Ifthedelinquentchildisreluctanttoadmitthathisparentsarebadobjects,hebynomeansdisplaysequal
reluctancetoadmitthathehimselfisbad.Itbecomesobvious,therefore,thatthechildwouldratherbebad
himselfthanhavebadobjects;andaccordinglywehavesomejustificationforsurmisingthatoneofhis
motivesinbecomingbadistomakehisobjectsgood.Inbecomingbadheisreallytakinguponhimself
theburdenofbadnesswhichappearstoresideinhisobjects.Bythismeansheseekstopurgethemoftheir
badness;and,inproportionashesucceedsindoingso,heisrewardedbythatsenseofsecuritywhichan
environmentofgoodobjectssocharacteristicallyconfers.Tosaythatthechildtakesuponhimselfthe
burdenofbadnesswhichappearstoresideinhisobjectsis,ofcourse,thesamethingastosaythathe
internalizesbadobjects.Thesenseofoutersecurityresultingfromthisprocessofinternalizationis,
however,liabletobeseriouslycompromisedbytheresultingpresencewithinhimofinternalizedbad
objects.Outersecurityisthuspurchasedatthepriceofinnerinsecurity;andhisegoishenceforthleftatthe
mercyofabandofinternalfifthcolumnistsorpersecutors,againstwhichdefenceshavetobe,firsthastily
erected,andlaterlaboriouslyconsolidated.

Theearliestformofdefenceresortedtobythedevelopingegoinadesperateattempttodealwith
internalizedbadobjectsisnecessarilythesimplestandmostreadilyavailable,viz.repression.Thebad
objectsaresimplybanishedtotheunconscious.1Itisonlywhenrepressionfailstoproveanadequate
defenceagainsttheinternalizedbadobjectsandthesebegintothreatentheegothatthefourclassic

1HereImaysaythat,inexplainingtheprocessofrepressiontomypatients,Ifinditusefultospeakofthe
badobjectsasbeing,asitwere,buriedinthecellarofthemindbehindalockeddoorwhichthepatientis
afraidtoopenforfeareitherofrevealingtheskeletonsinthecupboard,orofseeingtheghostsbywhichthe
cellarishaunted.

65
psychopathologicaldefencesarecalledintooperation,viz.thephobic,theobsessional,thehysterical,and
theparanoiddefences.1Thereis,however,anotherformofdefencebywhichtheworkofrepressionis
invariablysupported,andtowhichspecialattentionmustnowbedirected.Irefertowhatmaybecalled
thedefenceofthesuperegoorthedefenceofguiltorthemoraldefence.

Ihavealreadyspokenofthechildtakinguponhimselftheburdenofbadnesswhichappearstoresidein
hisobjects;and,atthetime,Ispokeofthisprocessasequivalenttotheinternalizationofbadobjects.At
thispoint,however,adistinctionmustbedrawnbetweentwokindsofbadness,whichIproposetodescribe
respectivelyasunconditionalandconditionalbadness.HereIshouldexplainthat,whenIspeakofan
objectasunconditionallybad,Imeanbadfromalibidinalstandpoint,andthat,whenIspeakofan
objectasconditionallybad,Imeanbadfromamoralstandpoint.Thebadobjectswhichthechild
internalizesareunconditionallybad;fortheyaresimplypersecutors.Insofarasthechildisidentifiedwith
suchinternalpersecutors,or(sinceinfantilerelationshipsarebaseduponidentification)insofarashisego
hasarelationshipwiththem,hetooisunconditionallybad.Toredressthisstateofunconditionalbadness
hetakeswhatisreallyaveryobviousstep.Heinternalizeshisgoodobjects,whichthereuponassumea
superegorole.Oncethissituationhasbeenestablished,weareconfrontedwiththephenomenaof
conditionalbadnessandconditionalgoodness.Insofarasthechildleanstowardshisinternalizedbad
objects,hebecomesconditionally(i.e.morally)badvisvishisinternalizedgoodobjects(i.e.his
superego);and,insofarasheresiststheappealofhisinternalizedbadobjects,hebecomesconditionally
(i.e.morally)goodvisvishissuperego.Itisobviouslypreferabletobeconditionallygoodthan
conditionallybad;but,indefaultofconditionalgoodness,itispreferabletobeconditionallybadthan
unconditionallybad.Ifitbeaskedhowitcomesaboutthatconditionalbadnessispreferredto
unconditionalbadness,thecogencyoftheanswermaybestbeappreciatediftheanswerisframedin
religiousterms;forsuchtermsprovidethebestrepresentationfortheadultmindofthesituationasit
presentsitselftothechild.Framedinsuchtermstheansweristhatitisbettertobeasinnerinaworldruled
byGodthantoliveinaworldruledby

1Thenatureandsignificanceofthesedefences,asalsotheirrelationshiptooneanother,aredescribedin
mypaperentitledARevisedPsychopathologyofthePsychosesandPsychoneuroses.

66

theDevil.AsinnerinaworldruledbyGodmaybebad;butthereisalwaysacertainsenseofsecuritytobe
derivedfromthefactthattheworldaroundisgoodGod'sinHisheavenAll'srightwiththeworld!;
andinanycasethereisalwaysahopeofredemption.InaworldruledbytheDeviltheindividualmay
escapethebadnessofbeingasinner;butheisbadbecausetheworldaroundhimisbad.Further,hecan
havenosenseofsecurityandnohopeofredemption.Theonlyprospectisoneofdeathanddestruction.1

5.TheDynamicsoftheInfluenceofBadObjects

Atthispointitisworthconsideringwhencebadobjectsderivetheirpowerovertheindividual.Ifthechild's
objectsarebad,howdoesheevercometointernalizethem?Whydoeshenotsimplyrejectthemashe
mightrejectbadcornflourpuddingorbadcastoroil?Asamatteroffact,thechildusuallyexperiences
considerabledifficultyinrejectingcastoroil,assomeofusmayknowfrompersonalexperience.Hewould
rejectitifhecould;butheisallowednoopportunitytodoso.Thesameappliestohisbadobjects.
Howevermuchhemaywanttorejectthem,hecannotgetawayfromthem.Theyforcethemselvesupon
him;andhecannotresistthembecausetheyhavepoweroverhim.Heisaccordinglycompelledto
internalizetheminanefforttocontrolthem.But,inattemptingtocontroltheminthisway,heis
internalizingobjectswhichhavewieldedpoweroverhimintheexternalworld;andtheseobjectsretain
theirprestigeforpoweroverhimintheinnerworld.Inaword,heispossessedbythem,asifbyevil
spirits.Thisisnotall,however.Thechildnotonlyinternalizeshisbadobjectsbecausetheyforce
themselvesuponhimandheseekstocontrolthem,butalso,andaboveall,becauseheneedsthem.Ifa
child'sparentsarebadobjects,hecannotrejectthem,eveniftheydonotforcethemselvesuponhim;forhe
cannotdowithoutthem.Eveniftheyneglecthim,hecannotrejectthem;for,iftheyneglecthim,hisneed
forthemisincreased.Oneofmymalepatientshadadreamwhichaptlyillustratesthecentraldilemmaof
thechild.Inthisdreamhewasstandingbesidehismotherwitha

1Hereitisinterestingtonotehowcommonlyinthecourseofadeepanalysispatientsspeakofdeathwhen
theresistanceisweakeningandtheyarefacedwiththeprospectofareleaseofbadobjectsfromthe
unconscious.Itshouldalwaysbeborneinmindthat,fromthepatient'spointofview,themaintenanceof
theresistancepresentsitself(literally)asamatteroflifeanddeath.

67

bowlofchocolatepuddingonatablebeforehim.Hewasravenouslyhungry;andheknewthatthepudding
containeddeadlypoison.Hefeltthat,ifheatethepudding,hewoulddieofpoisoningand,ifhedidnoteat
thepudding,hewoulddieofstarvation.Thereistheproblemstated.Whatwasthedenouement?Heatethe
pudding.Heincorporatedthecontentsofthepoisonousbreastbecausehishungerwassogreat.Inthelight
ofthisdreamthereaderwillhardlybesurprisedtolearnthatamongthesymptomsfromwhichthispatient
sufferedwasafearthathissystemwasbeingpoisonedbyintestinaltoxinswhichhadsoaffectedhisheart
thathewasthreatenedwithheartfailure.Whatwasreallywrongwithhisheartwas,however,eloquently
revealedinanotherdreamadreaminwhichhesawhisheartlyinguponaplateandhismotherliftingit
withaspoon(i.e.intheactofeatingit).Thusitwasbecausehehadinternalizedhismotherasabadobject
thathefelthishearttobeaffectedbyafataldisease;andhehadinternalizedher,badobjectthoughshewas
forhim,becauseasachildheneededher.Itisabovealltheneedofthechildforhisparents,howeverbad
theymayappeartohim,thatcompelshimtointernalizebadobjects;anditisbecausethisneedremains
attachedtothemintheunconsciousthathecannotbringhimselftopartwiththem.Itisalsohisneedfor
themthatconfersuponthemtheiractualpoweroverhim.

6.GuiltasaDefenceAgainsttheReleaseofBadObjects

Afterthisdigressionitistimethatweturnedourattentiononceagaintothemoraldefence.Theessential
feature,andindeedtheessentialaim,ofthisdefenceistheconversionofanoriginalsituationinwhichthe
childissurroundedbybadobjectsintoanewsituationinwhichhisobjectsaregoodandhehimselfisbad.
Themoralsituationwhichresultsbelongs,ofcourse,toahigherlevelofmentaldevelopmentthanthe
originalsituation;andthislevelischaracteristicallyacivilizedlevel.Itisthelevelatwhichthesuperego
operates,andtowhichtheinterplaybetweentheegoandthesuperegobelongs.Itisthelevelatwhich
analyticalinterpretationsintermsofguiltandtheOedipussituationarealoneapplicable;anditwould
appeartobethelevelatwhichpsychotherapyisoftenratherexclusivelyconducted.Thatpsychotherapy
shouldbeexclusivelyconductedatthislevelisundesirable;for,asshouldbeclearfromthepreceding

68
argument,thephenomenaofguiltmustberegarded(fromastrictlypsychopathologicalstandpoint,of
course)aspartakingofthenatureofadefence.Inaword,guiltoperatesasaresistanceinpsychotherapy.
Interpretationsintermsofguiltmaythusactuallyplayintothehandsofthepatient'sresistance.Thatthe
morecoerciveandmoralizingformsofpsychotherapymusthavethiseffectisobvious;foracoerciveand
moralizingpsychotherapistinevitablybecomeseitherabadobjectorasuperegofiguretohispatient.Ifhe
becomessimplyabadobjecttothepatient,thelatterleaveshim,possiblywithintensifiedsymptoms.If,
however,hebecomesasuperegofiguretothepatient,hemayeffectatemporaryimprovementin
symptomsbysupportingthepatient'sownsuperegoandintensifyingrepression.Ontheotherhand,most
analyticallymindedpsychotherapistsmaybeexpectedtomakeittheiraimtomitigatetheharshnessofthe
patient'ssuperegoandthustoreduceguiltandanxiety.Suchanendeavourisfrequentlyrewardedwith
excellenttherapeuticresults.Nevertheless,Icannothelpfeelingthatsuchresultsmustbeattributed,inpart
atleast,tothefactthatinthetransferencesituationthepatientisprovidedinrealitywithanunwontedly
goodobject,andistherebyplacedinapositiontoriskareleaseofhisinternalizedbadobjectsfromthe
unconsciousandsotoprovideconditionsforthelibidinalcathexisoftheseobjectstobedissolvedalbeit
heisalsounderatemptationtoexploitagoodrelationshipwiththeanalystasadefenceagainsttaking
thisrisk.Ananalysisconductedtooexclusivelyattheguiltorsuperegolevelmay,however,easilyhave
theeffectofproducinganegativetherapeuticreaction;fortheremovalofapatient'sdefenceofguiltmay
beaccompaniedbyacompensatoryaccessofrepressionwhichrenderstheresistanceimpenetrable.There
isnowlittledoubtinmymindthat,inconjunctionwithanotherfactortobementionedlater,thedeepest
sourceofresistanceisfearofthereleaseofbadobjectsfromtheunconscious;for,whensuchbadobjects
arereleased,theworldaroundthepatientbecomespeopledwithdevilswhicharetooterrifyingforhimto
face.Itislargelyowingtothisfactthatthepatientundergoinganalysisissosensitive,andthathis
reactionsaresoextreme.Itisalsotothisfactthatwemustlookinnosmallmeasureforanexplanationof
thetransferenceneurosis.Atthesametimethereisnowlittledoubtinmymindthatthereleaseofbad
objectsfromtheunconsciousisoneofthechiefaimswhichthepsychotherapistshouldsethimselfoutto
achieve,evenattheexpenseofaseveretransferenceneurosis;forit

69

isonlywhentheinternalizedbadobjectsarereleasedfromtheunconsciousthatthereisanyhopeoftheir
cathexisbeingdissolved.Thebadobjectscanonlybesafelyreleased,however,iftheanalysthasbecome
establishedasasufficientlygoodobjectforthepatient.Otherwisetheresultinginsecuritymayprove
insupportable.Givenasatisfactorytransferencesituation,atherapeuticallyoptimalreleaseofbadobjects
can,inmyopinion,onlybepromotedifcautionisexercisedoverinterpretationsattheguiltorsuperego
level.Whilstsuchinterpretationsmayrelieveguilt,theymayactuallyhavetheeffectofintensifyingthe
repressionofinternalizedbadobjectsandthusleavingthecathexisoftheseobjectsunresolved.1Itistothe
realmofthesebadobjects,Ifeelconvinced,ratherthantotherealmofthesuperegothattheultimate
originofallpsychopathologicaldevelopmentsistobetraced;foritmaybesaidofallpsychoneuroticand
psychoticpatientsthat,ifaTrueMassisbeingcelebratedinthechancel,aBlackMassisbeingcelebrated
inthecrypt.Itbecomesevident,accordingly,thatthepsychotherapististhetruesuccessortotheexorcist,
andthatheisconcerned,notonlywiththeforgivenessofsins,butalsowiththecastingoutofdevils.

7.ASatanicPact

AtthispointImustresistthetemptationtoembarkuponastudyofthemysteriesofdemoniacalpossession
andexorcism.Suchastudycouldnotfailtoproveasprofitableasitwouldbeinteresting,ifIamjustified
inmyviewthatitisintherealmofinternalizedbadobjectsratherthanintherealmofinternalizedgood
objects(i.e.therealmofthesuperego)thatwemustlaythefoundationsofpsychopathology.
Unfortunately,thepresentoccasiondoesnotpermitofsuchadivertingexcursion;butIcannotrefrainfrom
directingtheattentionofthereaderinsearchofagoodbedtimestorytoFreud'sfascinatingpaperentitled
ANeurosisofDemoniacalPossessionintheSeventeenthCentury2Herewefindrecorded,witha
pertinentpsychoanalyticalcommentary,thestoryofadestituteartist,onCristophHaitzmann,

1Thefactthatreliefofguiltmaybeaccompaniedbyanintensificationofrepressioncanonlybe
satisfactorilyexplainedintermsoftheconclusionalreadyrecordedtotheeffectthatthedefenceofthe
superegoandrepressionareseparatedefences.

2CollectedPapers,Vol.IV,pp.43672.

70

whomadeapactwiththeDevilwhileinamelancholicstateprecipitatedbythedeathofhisfather.From
thepointofviewofapsychopathologybaseduponobjectrelationships,thesigningofthepactadmirably
illustratesthedifficultyencounteredbythepsychoneuroticorpsychoticinpartingwithhisbadobjects;for,
asFreudleavesusinnodoubt,theDevilwithwhomthepactwassignedwasintimatelyassociatedwiththe
deceasedfatherofChristoph.ItisinterestingtonotetoothatChristoph'ssymptomswereonlyrelieved
whenheinvokedtheaidofagoodobjectandwasrewardedbyareturnoftheunholypact,whichhe
received,torninfourpieces,fromthehandsoftheBlessedVirgininthechapelatMariazell.Hedidnot
achievefreedomfrom,relapses,however,untilhehadbeenreceivedintoareligiousbrotherhoodandhad
thusreplacedhispactwiththeDevilbysolemnvowstotheserviceofGod.Thiswaspresumablyatriumph
forthemoraldefence;butFreud'scommentaryfailstodojusticetothesignificanceofthecurenolessthan
tothesignificanceofthedisease(whichlayinthefactthatthepoorpainterwaspossessedbyinternalized
badobjects).Freudisunquestionablycorrectwhenhewritesintheintroductiontohispaper:Despitethe
somaticideologyoftheeraofexactscience,thedemonologicaltheoryofthesedarkageshasinthelong
runjustifieditself.Casesofdemoniacalpossessioncorrespondtotheneurosesofthepresentday.Yetthe
chiefpointofthecorrespondencetowhichFreudrefersisobscuredwhenheadds:Whatinthosedays
werethoughttobeevilspiritstousarebaseandevilwishes,thederivativesofimpulseswhichhavebeen
rejectedandrepressed.Thiscommentreflectstheinadequacyoftheclassicconceptionthatlibidois
primarilypleasureseeking;forthewholepointofapactwiththeDevilliesinthefactthatitinvolvesa
relationshipwithabadobject.Indeed,thisismadeperfectlyplaininthetermsofChristoph'sbond;for,
patheticallyenough,whathesoughtfromSataninthedepthsofhisdepressionwasnotthecapacityto
enjoywine,women,andsong,butpermission,toquotethetermsofthepactitself,seinleibeignerSohnzu
sein(fortobeuntohimeuenasasonneofhisbodie).Whathesoldhiseternalsoultoobtain,
accordingly,wasnotgratification,butafather,albeitonewhohadbeenabadobjecttohiminhis
childhood.Whilehisactualfatherremainedalive,thesinisterinfluenceofthebadfatherfigurewhomhe
hadinternalizedinhischildhoodwasevidentlycorrectedbysomeredeemingfeaturesintherealperson;
butafterhisfather'sdeathhewasleftatthemercyoftheinternalized

71

badfather,whomhehadeithertoembraceorelseremainobjectlessanddeserted.1

8.TheLibidinalCathexisofBadObjectsasaSourceofResistance
Referencehasalreadybeenmadetomyattempttorecastthelibidotheoryandtotheconsiderationswhich
ledmetomakethisattempt.Arecastingofthetheoryinconformitywiththeconsiderationsinquestionis,
inmyopinion,anurgentnecessity;for,althoughtheheuristic,nolessthanthehistorical,importanceofthe
libidotheorywouldbedifficulttoexaggerate,apointhasnowbeenreachedatwhichthetheoryhas
outwornitsusefulnessand,sofarfromprovidingimpetusforfurtherprogresswithinthefieldof
psychoanalyticalthought,isactuallyoperatingasabrakeuponthewheels.Thetheoryinitsoriginalform
maybeshowntohavemanymisleadingimplications;butthecaseofChristophHaitzmannprovidesan
admirableopportunitytoillustrateonesuchmisleadingimplication,whichhasanimportantbearingonthe
conceptofrepression.Theclassicformofthelibidotheoryunquestionablyimpliesthatlibidois
irrevocablyseekingtoexpressitselfinactivitiesdeterminedbyzonalaims,andthat,ifitdoesnotalways
succeed,itisonlypreventedfromsodoingbysomeformofinhibition,andinthelastinstanceby
repression.Accordingtothisviewrepressedlibidocanonlymanifestitself,ifatall,inadisguisedform,
eitherinsymptomsorsublimationsorinamannerdeterminedbycharacterformations(i.e.inamanner
whichisacrossbetweenasublimationandasymptom).Further,itfollowsfromthisviewthattheactual
formassumedbyanysuchmanifestationwillbedeterminedbythenatureoftheoriginalzonalaim.If,
however,libidoisprimarilyobjectseeking,itwillseektheobjectbywhateverchannelsaremostreadily
availableinamannerwhichisnotprimarilydeterminedbyanypresumptiveaimsdependentuponazonal
origin.Onthisview,thesignificanceofthezonesreducesitselftothatofavailablechannelsbywayof
whichlibidomayseektheobject.Thebarrierstolibidinalexpressionwilllikewiseresolvethemselvesin
greatmeasureinto

1Itisveryfarfrommyintentiontoimplythatguiltoveraggressivewishestowardshisfatherplayedno
partinChristoph'sdepression;butitisimpliedthatthepartwhichitmustundoubtedlyhaveplayedis
secondaryfromanetiologicalstandpoint.

72

inhibitionsagainstobjectseeking.Thisbeingso,apeculiarsituationariseswhentheobjecthasbeen
internalizedandrepressed;for,inthesecircumstances,weareconfrontedwithasituationinwhichlibidois
seekingarepressedobject.Thebearingofthisfactupontheconceptofnarcissismneednotbestressed
here.ThephenomenontowhichIdesiretodirectattentionisthat,inthecircumstancesmentioned,libido
is,forpracticalpurposes,operatinginthesamedirectionasrepression.Itiscaptivatedbytherepressed
object;and,owingtothelureoftherepressedobject,itisdrivenintoastateofrepressionbythevery
momentumofitsownobjectseeking.Whentheobjectisarepressedobject,accordingly,theobject
cathexisoperatesasaresistance;andtheresistanceencounteredinanalyticaltherapyisthusmaintained,
notonlybytheagencyofrepression,butalsobythedynamicqualitiesoflibidoitself.Thislastconclusion
isinplaincontradictiontoFreud'sstatement:Theunconscious,i.e.therepressedmaterial,offersno
resistancewhatevertocurativeefforts;indeed,ithasnootheraimthantoforceitswaythroughthepressure
weighingonit,eithertoconsciousnessortodischargebymeansofsomerealaction.1Nevertheless,itisa
conclusionwhichfollowsasanecessarycorollaryfromtheviewthatlibidoisprimarilyobjectseeking;
anditpossessesthespecialadvantageofthrowingadditionallightonthenatureofthenegativetherapeutic
reaction,whichcannowbeseentoderiveitssignificancelargelyfromthefactthat,insofarastheobjectis
arepressedobject,thelibidinalaimisindirectconflictwiththetherapeuticaim.Inaword,thenegative
therapeuticreactioninvolvesarefusalonthepartoflibidotorenounceitsrepressedobjects;and,evenin
theabsenceofanegativetherapeuticreaction,itisinthesamedirectionthatwemustlookinnosmall
measureforanexplanationoftheextremestubbornnessoftheresistance.Theactualovercomingof
repressionassuchwould,accordingly,appeartoconstituteifanythingalessformidablepartofthe
analyst'sdifficulttaskthantheovercomingofthepatient'sdevotiontohisrepressedobjectsadevotion
whichisallthemoredifficulttoovercomebecausetheseobjectsarebadandheisafraidoftheirrelease
fromtheunconscious.Thisbeingso,wemaysurmisethattheanalyticaltreatmentofpoorChristophwould
haveprovedasomewhatformidablepropositioninatwentiethcenturyconsultingroom.Itwouldhave
provednoeasytask,wemaybesure,todissolvehispactwithSatan;anditisnotdifficulttoenvisagethe
emergenceofastubbornnegativetherapeuticreactioninhiscase.

1BeyondthePleasurePrinciple(1922),p.19.

73

Afterall,eventheinterventionoftheBlessedVirginwasinsufficienttoestablishhiscureuponafirm
basis.ItwasonlyafterhispactwiththeDevilwasreplacedbyapactwithGodthathisfreedomfrom
symptomswasfinallyestablished.Themoralwouldseemtobethattheappealofagoodobjectisan
indispensablefactorinpromotingadissolutionofthecathexisofinternalizedbadobjects,andthatthe
significanceofthetransferencesituationispartlyderivedfromthisfact.1

9.DissolutionoftheCathexisofBadObjects

Itfollowsfromwhatprecedesthatamongthevariousaimsofanalyticaltechniqueshouldbe(1)toenable
thepatienttoreleasefromhisunconsciousburiedbadobjectswhichhavebeeninternalizedbecause
originallytheyseemedindispensable,andwhichhavebeenrepressedbecauseoriginallytheyseemed
intolerable,and(2)topromoteadissolutionofthelibidinalbondswherebythepatientisattachedtothese
hithertoindispensablebadobjects.Sofarasconsiderationsoftechniqueaffectthefulfilmentoftheseaims,
principlestobeborneinmindwouldappeartoincludethefollowing:(1)thatsituationsshouldbe
interpreted,notintermsofgratification,butintermsofobjectrelationships(including,ofcourse,
relationshipswithinternalizedobjects);(2)thatlibidinalstrivingsshouldberepresentedtothepatientas
ultimatelydictatedbyobjectloveandas,therefore,basicallyifnotsuperficiallygood;(3)thatlibidinal
badnessshouldberelatedtothecathexisofbadobjects(sinalwaysbeingregarded,accordingtothe
Hebraicconception,asseekingafterstrangegodsand,accordingtotheChristianconception,asyieldingto
theDevil);(4)thatguiltsituationsshouldberelatedbyinterpretationtobadobjectsituations;(5)that
cautionshouldbeexercisedoverinterpretationsintermsofaggressionexceptperhapsinthecaseof
depressives,whopresentaspecialproblemforanalyticaltechnique.2

1Itisofinteresttorecordthat,sincethispaperwasoriginallywritten,thethemeofapactwiththeDevil
hasemergedquiteexplicitlyandspontaneouslyinthecaseofseveralofmypatients.

2Interpretationsintermsofaggressionareliabletohavetheundesirableeffectofmakingthepatientfeel
thattheanalystthinkshimbad.Inanycase,theybecomelessnecessaryinproportionastherepressed
objectsarereleased;forinsuchcircumstancesthepatient'saggressionmakesitselfobviousenough.Itwill
thenbecometheanalyst'stasktopointouttothepatientthelibidinalfactorthatliesbehindhisaggression.

74
10.ThePsychopathologicalReturnofBadObjects

Paradoxicallyenough,ifitisanaimofanalyticaltechniquetopromoteareleaseofrepressedbadobjects
fromtheunconscious,itisalsofearofjustsuchareleasethatcharacteristicallydrivesthepatienttoseek
analyticalaidinthefirstinstance.Itistruethatitisfromhissymptomsthatheconsciouslydesirestobe
relieved,andthataconsiderableproportionofpsychopathologicalsymptomsconsistessentiallyindefences
againstareturnoftherepressed(i.e.areturnofrepressedobjects).Nevertheless,itisusuallywhenhis
defencesarewearingthinandareprovinginadequatetosafeguardhimagainstanxietyoverathreatened
releaseofrepressedobjectsthatheisdriventoseekanalyticalaid.Fromthepatient'spointofview,
accordingly,theeffectofanalyticaltreatmentistopromotetheverysituationfromwhichheseeksto
escape.1Hencethephenomenonofthetransferenceneurosis,whichinvolvesinpartadefenceagainst,and
inpartareactionto,areleaseofrepressedbadobjects.Thereleaseofsuchobjectsobtainedinanalytical
treatmentdiffers,however,fromaspontaneousreleaseofsuchobjectsinthatithasatherapeuticaimand
ultimatelyatherapeuticeffectinvirtueofthefactthatitisareleasecontrolledbytheanalystand
safeguardedbythesecurityimpartedbythetransferencesituation.Nevertheless,suchfinedistinctionsare
hardforthepatienttoappreciateatthetime;andheisnotslowtorealizethatheisbeingcuredbymeansof
ahairfromthetailofthedogthatbithim.Itisonlywhenthereleasedbadobjectsarebeginningtolose
theirterrorforhimthathereallybeginstoappreciatethevirtuesofmentalimmunizationtherapy.Hereit
shouldbenotedthatthereleaseofrepressedobjectsofwhichIspeakisbynomeansidenticalwiththat
activeexternalizationofinternalizedbadobjects,whichisthecharacteristicfeatureoftheparanoid
technique.2ThephenomenontowhichIspeciallyreferistheescape

1Thisiswellillustratedinadreamofoneofmyfemalepatients.Inthisdreamshesawafriendofher
fatherdigginginpeatyground.Asherglancefellupononeofthecutsurfaces,thelooseandfibrousnature
ofthegroundattractedherattention.Then,asshelookedcloser,shewashorrifiedtoseeswarmsofrats
creepingoutfromtheintersticesbetweentherootsandfibres.Whateverelsethisdreammayhave
represented,itcertainlyrepresentedtheeffectsofanalyticaltreatment.Themandigginginthepeaty
groundwasmyselfdigginginherunconscious,andtheratsweretherepressedbadobjects(actually
penises,ofcourse)whichmydigginghadreleased.

2Theparanoidtechniqueconsists,notintheprojectionofrepressedimpulses,asiscommonlysupposed,
butintheprojectionofrepressedobjectsintheformofpersecutors.

75

ofbadobjectsfromthebondsimposedbyrepression.Whensuchanescapeofbadobjectsoccurs,the
patientfindshimselfconfrontedwithterrifyingsituationswhichhavehithertobeenunconscious.External
situationsthenacquireforhimthesignificanceofrepressedsituationsinvolvingrelationshipswithbad
objects.Thisphenomenonisaccordinglynotaphenomenonofprojection,butoneoftransference.

11.TheTraumaticReleaseofBadObjectsWithSpecialReferenceto
MilitaryCases

Thespontaneousandpsychopathological(asagainsttheinducedandtherapeutic)releaseofrepressed
objectsmaybeobservedtoparticularadvantageinwartimeinthecaseofmilitarypatients,amongstwhom
thephenomenonmaybestudiedonamassivescale.HereIshouldaddthat,whenIspeakofa
spontaneousreleaseofrepressedobjects,Idonotmeantoexcludetheoperationofprecipitatingfactorsin
reality.Onthecontrary,theinfluenceofsuchfactorswouldappeartobeextremelyimportant.Theposition
wouldappeartobethatanunconscioussituationinvolvinginternalizedbadobjectsisliabletobeactivated
byanysituationinouterrealityconformingtoapatternwhichrendersitemotionallysignificantinthelight
oftheunconscioussituation.Suchprecipitatingsituationsinouterrealitymustberegardedinthelightof
traumaticsituations.Theemotionalintensityandspecificityrequiredtorenderanexternalsituation
traumaticvaries,ofcourse,inaccordancewitheconomicanddynamicfactorsintheendopsychicstate.In
militarycasesitiscommontofindthatatraumaticsituationisprovidedbytheblastfromanexploding
shellorbomb,orelsebyamotoraccidentandthatquiteirrespectiveofanyquestionofcerebral
concussion;butbeingcaughtinthecabinofatorpedoedtroopship,seeingcivilianrefugeesmachine
gunnedfromtheairorshelledinacrowdedmarketplace,havingtothrottleanenemysentryinorderto
escapecaptivity,beingletdownbyasuperiorofficer,beingaccusedofhomosexuality,andbeingrefused
compassionateleavetogohomeforawife'sconfinementareallexampleschosenatrandomfromamong
thetraumaticsituationswhichhavecomeundermynotice.InmanycasesArmylifeintimeofwaritself
constitutesatraumaticexperience

76

whichapproximatestothenatureofatraumaticsituation,andwhichmayconferthequalityofatraumatic
situationuponsomelittleincidentofArmylife.Itisremarkablehowcommonamongpsychoneuroticand
psychoticsoldiersinwartimearethecomplaints,Ican'tbearbeingshoutedat,andIcan'teatArmyfood
(aremarkwhichiscommonlyfollowedby,Icaneatanythingmywifecooksforme).Theeffectofsuch
traumaticsituationsandtraumaticexperiencesinreleasingbadobjectsfromtheunconsciousis
demonstratednowherebetterthaninthewartimedreamsofmilitarypatients.Amongstthecommonestof
suchdreams,aswouldbeexpected,arenightmaresaboutbeingchasedorshotatbytheenemy,andabout
beingbombedbyhostileaeroplanes(oftendescribedasgreatblackplanes).Thereleaseofbadobjects
may,however,berepresentedinotherways,e.g.innightmaresaboutbeingcrushedbygreatweights,about
beingstrangledbysomeone,aboutbeingpursuedbyprehistoricanimals,aboutbeingvisitedbyghostsand
aboutbeingshoutedatbythesergeantmajor.Theappearanceofsuchdreamsissometimesaccompanied
byarevivalofrepressedmemoriesofchildhood.Oneofthemostremarkablecasesofthiskindinmy
experiencewasthatofapsychopathicsoldier,whopassedintoaschizoidstatenotlongafterbeing
conscripted,andwhothenbegantodreamaboutprehistoricmonstersandshapelessthingsandstaringeyes
thatburnedrightthroughhim.Hebecameverychildishinhisbehaviour;andsimultaneouslyhis
consciousnessbecamefloodedwithahostofforgottenmemoriesofchildhood,amongwhichhebecame
speciallypreoccupiedbyoneofsittinginhispramonastationplatformandseeinghismotherentera
railwaycarriagewithhisolderbrother.Inrealityhismotherwasjustseeinghisbrotheroff;butthe
impressioncreatedinthepatientwasthathismotherwasgoingoffinthetraintooandthusleavinghim
deserted.Therevivalofthisrepressedmemoryofadesertingmotherrepresented,ofcourse,thereleaseofa
badobjectfromtheunconscious.Afewdaysafterhetoldmeofthismemoryashopbelongingtohimwas
damagedbyabomb;andhewasgrantedtwentyfourhours'leaveofabsencetoattendtobusinessarising
outoftheincident.Whenhesawhisdamagedshop,heexperiencedaschizoidstateofdetachment;butthat
night,whenhewenttobedathome,hefeltasifhewerebeingchokedandexperiencedapowerfulimpulse
tosmashuphishouseandmurderhiswifeandchildren.Hisbadobjectshadreturnedwithavengeance.

77

12.ANoteontheRepetitionCompulsion
Whathasbeensaidregardingtheroleoftraumaticsituationsinprecipitatingpsychopathologicalconditions
insoldiersinwartimenaturallyrecallswhatFreudhastosayregardingthetraumaticneurosesinBeyond
thePleasurePrinciple.If,however,theviewsexpressedinthepresentpaperarewellfounded,thereisno
needforustogobeyondthepleasureprincipleandpostulateaprimalrepetitioncompulsiontoexplain
thepersistenceoftraumaticscenesinthementallifeofthoseinwhomitoccurs.Ifitbetruethatlibidois
objectseekingandnotpleasureseeking,thereis,ofcourse,nopleasureprincipletogobeyond.Apartfrom
that,however,itdoesnotrequireanyrepetitioncompulsiontoexplaintherevivaloftraumaticscenes.On
thecontrary,iftheeffectofatraumaticsituationistoreleasebadobjectsfromtheunconscious,the
difficultywillbetoseehowthepatientcangetawayfromthesebadobjects.1Thefactisthatheishaunted
bythem;and,sincetheyareframedbythetraumaticincident,heishauntedbythistoo.Intheabsenceofa
therapeuticdissolutionofthecathexisofhisbadobjects,hecanonlyachievefreedomfromthishauntingif
hisbadobjectsareoncemorebanishedtotheunconsciousthroughanaccessofrepression.Thatthisisthe
mannerinwhichtheghostsarecustomarilylaidisobviousfromtheattitudeofthosesoldiersinwhom
traumaticmemorieshavedisappearedfromwakinglife,ifnotfromthelifeofdreams.Quitecharacteristic
istheremarkofoneofthemwhomIquestionedabouthisexperiences:Idon'twanttotalkaboutthese
things.Iwanttogohomeandforgetaboutallthat.

13.ANoteontheDeathInstincts

WhatappliestoFreud'sconceptionoftherepetitioncompulsionappliesalsotohiscloselyrelated
conceptionofthedeathinstincts.Iflibidoisreallyobjectseeking,thisconceptionwouldappear
superfluous.Wehaveseenthatlibidoisattachednotonlytogoodobjects,butalsotobadobjects(witness
Christoph'spactwiththeDevil).Wehaveseen,furthermore,thatlibidomaybeattachedtobadobjects
whichhavebeeninternalizedandrepressed.Nowarelationship

1ItcannotbeacoincidencethatFreudshoulddescribetheexpressionsofarepetitioncompulsionas
having,notonlyaninstinctive,butalsoadaemoniccharacter(BeyondthePleasurePrinciple(1922),p.
43).

78

withabadobjectcanhardlyescapethealternativeofbeingeitherofasadisticorofamasochisticnature.
WhatFreuddescribesunderthecategoryofdeathinstinctswouldthusappeartorepresentforthemost
partmasochisticrelationshipswithinternalizedbadobjects.Asadisticrelationshipwithabadobjectwhich
isinternalizedwouldalsopresenttheappearanceofadeathinstinct.Asamatteroffact,suchrelationships
areusuallyofasadomasochisticnaturewithabiasonthemasochisticsideofthescale;butinanycase
theyareessentiallylibidinalmanifestations.Thismaybewellillustratedinthecaseofapatientofmine
whocametomehauntedbybadobjectsintheformofpenises.Incourseoftime,breastsbegantorival
penisesintheroleofhauntingbadobjects.Laterthebadobjectsbecamegrotesquefigureswhichwere
obviouslypersonificationsofbreastsandpenises.Laterstill,thegrotesquefigureswerereplacedby
devilishforms.Theseinturnweresucceededbynumerousfiguresofaparentalcharacter;andeventually
thesefigureswerereplacedinturnbyrecognizableimagesofherparents.They,asshealwaysdescribed
them,seemedtoforbidherunderpainofdeathtoexpressanyfeelings;andshewasconstantlysaying,
TheywillkillmeifIletanyfeelingsout.Itis,accordingly,interestingtonotethat,asthetransference
situationdeveloped,shealsobegantobegmetokillher.Youwouldkillmeifyouhadanyregardforme,
shecried,adding,Ifyouwon'tkillme,itmeansthatyoudon'tcare.Thisphenomenonseemsbest
interpretedasdue,nottotheoperationofadeathinstinct,buttothetransferenceoflibido,albeitlibido
whichstillretainedthemasochisticcomplexionofherrelationshipswithheroriginal(bad)objects.
14.ThePsychoneurosesandPsychosesofWar

Thesubjectofthepresentpapercanhardlybedismissedwithoutafinalnoteuponthepsychoneurosesand
psychosesofwartime.Myexperienceofmilitarycasesleavesmeinnodoubtthatthechiefpredisposing
factorindeterminingthebreakdownofasoldier(orforthatmatterasailororanairman)isinfantile
dependenceuponhisobjects.1Atthesametimemyexperienceleavesmeinequallylittle

1Asamatteroffact,thisalsoappliestociviliancases,notonlyintimeofwar,butalsointimeofpeace;
andindeeditisoneofthemainthesesofmypaperentitledARevisedPsychopathologyofthePsychoses
andPsychoneurosesthatallpsychopathologicaldevelopmentsareultimatelybaseduponaninfantile
attitudeofdependence.Ihadjustreachedthisconclusionastheresultofmaterialprovidedbycasesseenin
privatewhenIbegantoseemilitarycasesinlargenumbers;andIfoundmyconclusionmostopportunely
confirmedonthegrandscale.Militarycasesarespeciallyilluminatingfortworeasons:(1)becauseinsuch
casesphenomenadetectedinanarrowfieldunderthehighpowerlensoftheanalyticalmicroscopemaybe
observedinawidefieldunderalesspowerfullens,(2)becauseundermilitaryconditionsinwartimelarge
numbersofindividualsmaybeobservedinanexperimentalstateofartificialseparationfromtheir
objects.

79

doubtthatthemostdistinctivefeatureofmilitarybreakdownsisseparationanxiety.Separationanxiety
mustobviouslypresentaspecialproblemfordemocraciesintimeofwar;forunderademocraticregime
thedependentindividualcanfindnosubstituteforhisaccustomedobjectsundermilitaryconditions(the
sergeantmajorprovingaverypoorsubstitute,e.g.,foranattentivewife).Theproblemofseparation
anxietyinthesoldierisanticipatedunderatotalitarianregimebyapreviousexploitationofinfantile
dependence,sinceitispartofthetotalitariantechniquetomaketheindividualdependentupontheregime
attheexpenseofdependenceuponfamilialobjects.Dependenceuponfamilialobjectsiswhatreally
constitutesthedegeneracyofthedemocraciesintotalitarianeyes.Thetotalitariantechnique,however,
hasitsweakness.Itdependsuponnationalsuccess;foronlyunderconditionsofsuccesscantheregime
remainagoodobjecttotheindividual.Underconditionsoffailuretheregimebecomesabadobjecttothe
individual;andthesociallydisintegratingeffectsofseparationanxietythenbegintoassertthemselvesat
thecriticalmoment.Ontheotherhand,itisintimeoffailureordefeatthatademocracyhastheadvantage;
forinademocracytheindividualislessdependentuponthestate,and,therefore,lesssubjectto
disillusionmentregardingthegoodnessofthestateasanobject.Atthesametime,thethreattofamilial
objectsinherentindefeat(solongasthisisnottoodevastating)providesanincentiveforeffort,whichis
lackingunderatotalitarianregime.Consideredfromthepointofviewofgrouppsychology,accordingly,
thegreattestofmoraleinatotalitarianstatecomesintimeoffailure,whereasinademocracythegreattest
ofmoralecomesintimeofsuccess.1

Ifseparationanxietyisthemostdistinctivefeatureofbreakdownsamongsoldiers,suchbreakdownsareat
thesametimecharacterizedbyanotherfeaturewhichisofnolessimportancefromanationalstandpoint,
andwhichcanonlybeproperlyappreciatedinthelight

1Theconclusionsrecordedinthisparagraphnow(1951)appeartohavebeenjustifiedbysubsequent,no
lessthanbyprevious,events.

80

ofwhathasbeensaidregardingthenatureofthemoraldefence.NoonewhohasreadFreud'sGroup
PsychologyandtheAnalysisoftheEgocanremainindoubtregardingtheimportanceofthesuperegoasa
factorindeterminingthemoraleofagroup.Itisobvious,therefore,thatthesuperegofulfilsother
functionsbesidesthatofprovidingtheindividualwithadefenceagainstbadobjects.Aboveall,itis
throughtheauthorityofthesuperegothatthebondswhichuniteindividualsintoagroupareforgedand
maintained.Atthesametime,itmustberecognizedthatthesuperegodoesoriginateasameansofdefence
againstbadobjects.Assuch,thereturnofbadobjectsobviouslyimpliesafailureofthedefenceof
repression;butitequallyimpliesafailureofthemoraldefenceandacollapseoftheauthorityofthesuper
ego.Thesoldierwhobreaksdownintimeofwaristhuscharacterizednotonlybyseparationanxiety,but
alsobyaconditioninwhichtheappealofthesuperego,whichbadehimservehiscountryunderarms,is
replacedbytheacuteanxietywhichareleaseofbadobjectsinspires.Fromapracticalstandpoint,
accordingly,whathappensisthatforhimtheArmyceasestoperformasuperegofunctionandrevertsto
thestatusofabadobject.Itisforthisreasonthatthepsychoneuroticorpsychoticsoldiercannotbeartobe
shoutedatbythesergeantmajorandcannotbeartoeatArmyfood.Forinhiseyeseverywordofcommand
isequivalenttoanassaultbyamalevolentfather,andeveryspoonfulofgreasystewfromthecookhouse
isadropofpoisonfromthebreastofamalevolentmother.Nowonderthatthewarneurosesareso
recalcitrant!Andnowonder,perhaps,that,aftergainingsomeexperienceofpsychoneuroticandpsychotic
servicemenenmasse,Iwasdriventoremark,Whatthesepeopleneedisnotapsychotherapist,butan
evangelist;for,fromanationalpointofview,theproblemofthewarneurosesisnotsomuchaproblem
ofpsychotherapyasaproblemofgroupmorale.