Early Developmental Considerations on Narcissism
An
oft-overlooked fact is that the child is not sure that it exists. It avidly
absorbs cues from its human environment. "Am I present?", "Am I
separate?", "Am I being noticed?" – these are the questions that
compete in his mind with his need to merge, to become a part of his caregivers.
Granted,
the infant (ages 0 to 2) does not verbally formulate these "thoughts"
(which are part cognitive, part instinctual). This nagging uncertainty is more
akin to a discomfort, like being thirsty or wet. The infant is torn between its
need to differentiate and distinguish its self and its no less urgent urge to
assimilate and integrate by being assimilated and integrated.
"Just
as we know, from the point of view of the physiologist, that a child needs to
be given certain foods, that he needs to be protected against extreme
temperatures, and that the atmosphere he breathes has to contain sufficient
oxygen, if his body is to become strong and resilient, so do we also know, from
the point of view of the depth-psychologist, that he requires an empathic
environment, specifically, an environment that responds (a) to his need to have
his presence confirmed by the glow of parental pleasure and (b) to his need to
merge into the reassuring calmness of the powerful adult, if he is to acquire a
firm and resilient self."
(J. D. Levine and Rona
H. Weiss. The Dynamics and Treatment of Alcoholism. Jason Aronson, 1994)
The
child's nascent self must first overcome its feelings of diffusiveness, of
being an extension of its caregivers (to include parents, in this text), or a
part of them. Kohut says that parents perform the functions of the self for
their child. More likely, a battle is
joined from the child's first breath: a battle to gain autonomy, to usurp the
power of the parents, to become a distinct entity.
The child
refuses to let the parents continue to serve as its self. It rebels and seeks
to depose them and take over their functions. The better the parents are at
being self-objects (in lieu of the child's self) – the stronger the child's
self becomes, the more vigorously it fights for its independence.
The
parents, in this sense, are like a benign, benevolent and enlightened colonial
power, which performs the tasks of governance on behalf of the uneducated and
uninitiated natives. The more lenient the colonial regime – the more likely it
is to be supplanted by an indigenous, successful, government.
"The
crucial question then is whether the parents are able to reflect with approval
at least some of the child's proudly exhibited attributes and functions,
whether they are able to respond with genuine enjoyment to his budding skills,
whether they are able to remain in touch with him throughout his trials and
errors. And, furthermore, we must determine whether they are able to provide
the child with a reliable embodiment of calmness and strength into which he can
merge and with a focus for his need to find a target for his admiration. Or,
stated in the obverse, it will be of crucial importance to ascertain the fact
that a child could find neither confirmation of his own worth-whileness nor a
target for a merger with the idealised strength of the parent and that he,
therefore, remained deprived of the opportunity for the gradual transformation
of these external sources of narcissistic sustenance into endopsychic
resources, that is, specifically into sustaining self-esteem and into a
sustaining relationship to internal ideals." [Ibid.]
B. The
Narcissistic Personality
"When the habitual narcissistic gratifications
that come from being adored, given special treatment, and admiring the self are
threatened, the results may be depression, hypochondriasis, anxiety, shame,
self-destructiveness, or rage directed toward any other person who can be
blamed for the troubled situation. The child can learn to avoid these painful
emotional states by acquiring a narcissistic mode of information processing.
Such learning may be by trial-and-error methods, or it may be internalised by
identification with parental modes of dealing with stressful information."
(Jon Mardi Horowitz. Stress Response Syndromes: PTSD,
Grief and Adjustment Disorders. Third edition. New York, NY University Press,
1998)
Narcissism
is fundamentally an evolved version of the psychological defence mechanism
known as splitting. The narcissist does not regard people, situations, entities
(political parties, countries, races, his workplace) as a compound of good and
bad elements. He is an "all or nothing" primitive "machine"
(a common
metaphor among narcissists).
He
either idealises his objects or devalues them. At any given time, the objects
are either all good or all bad. The bad attributes are always projected,
displaced, or otherwise externalised. The good ones are internalised in order
to support the inflated ("grandiose") self-concepts of the narcissist
and his grandiose fantasies and to avoid the pain of deflation and
disillusionment.
The
narcissist's earnestness and his (apparent) sincerity make people wonder
whether he is simply detached from reality, unable to appraise it properly or
willingly and knowingly distorts reality and reinterprets it, subjecting it to
his self-imposed censorship. The truth is somewhere in between: the narcissist
is dimly aware of the implausibility of his own constructions. He has not lost
touch with reality. He is just less scrupulous in remoulding it and in ignoring
its uncomfortable angles.
"The disguises are accomplished by shifting
meanings and using exaggeration and minimisation of bits of reality as a nidus
for fantasy elaboration. The narcissistic personality is especially vulnerable
to regression to damaged or defective self-concepts on the occasions of loss of
those who have functioned as self-objects. When the individual is faced with
such stress events as criticism, withdrawal of praise, or humiliation, the
information involved may be denied, disavowed, negated, or shifted in meaning
to prevent a reactive state of rage, depression, or shame." [Ibid.]
The
second psychological defence mechanism which characterizes the narcissist is
the active pursuit of Narcissistic Supply. The narcissist seeks to secure a
reliable and continuous supply of admiration, adulation, affirmation and
attention. As opposed to common opinion (which infiltrated literature), the
narcissist is content to have any kind of attention - good or bad. If fame
cannot be had – notoriety would do. The narcissist is obsessed with his
Narcissistic Supply, he is addicted to it. His behaviour in its pursuit is
impulsive and compulsive.
"The
hazard is not simply guilt because ideals have not been met. Rather, any loss
of a good and coherent self-feeling is associated with intensely experienced
emotions such as shame and depression, plus an anguished sense of helplessness
and disorientation. To prevent this state, the narcissistic personality slides
the meanings of events in order to place the self in a better light. What is
good is labelled as being of the self (internalised) Those qualities that are
undesirable are excluded from the self by denial of their existence, disavowal
of related attitudes, externalisation, and negation of recent self-expressions.
Persons who function as accessories to the self may also be idealised by
exaggeration of their attributes. Those who counter the self are depreciated;
ambiguous attributions of blame and a tendency to self-righteous rage states
are a conspicuous aspect of this pattern.
Such
fluid shifts in meanings permit the narcissistic personality to maintain
apparent logical consistency while minimising evil or weakness and exaggerating
innocence or control. As part of these manoeuvres, the narcissistic personality
may assume attitudes of contemptuous superiority toward others, emotional
coldness, or even desperately charming approaches to idealised figures."
[Ibid.]
Freud
versus Jung
Freud was
the first to present a coherent theory of narcissism. He described transitions
from subject-directed libido to object-directed libido through the
intermediation and agency of the parents. To be healthy and functional, these
transitions must be smooth and unperturbed. Neuroses are the outcomes of bumpy
or incomplete transitions.
Freud
conceived of each stage as the default (or fallback) of the next one. Thus, if
a child reaches out to his objects of desire and fails to attract their love
and attention, it regresses to the previous phase, to the narcissistic phase.
The first
occurrence of narcissism is adaptative. It "trains" the child to love
an object, albeit this object is merely his self. It secures gratification
through the availability, predictability and permanence of the loved object
(oneself). But regressing to "secondary narcissism" is maladaptive.
It is an indication of failure to direct the libido at the "right"
targets (at objects, such as the parents).
If this
pattern of regression persists and prevails, it leads to a narcissistic
neurosis. The narcissist stimulates his self habitually in order to derive
pleasure. He prefers this mode of deriving gratification to others. He is
"lazy" because he takes the "easy" route of resorting to
his self and reinvesting his libidinal resources "in-house" rather
than making an effort (and risking failure) to seek out libidinal objects other
than his self. The narcissist prefers fantasyland
to reality, grandiose
self-conception to realistic appraisal, masturbation and fantasies to mature
adult sex and daydreaming to real life achievements.
Jung
suggested a mental picture of the psyche as a giant warehouse of archetypes
(the conscious representations of adaptative behaviours). Fantasies to him are
just a way of accessing these archetypes and releasing them. Almost by
definition, Jungian psychology does not allow for regression.
Any
reversion to earlier phases of mental life, to earlier coping strategies, or to
earlier choices is interpreted by Jungians as simply the psyche's way of using
yet another, hitherto untapped, adaptation strategy. Regressions are
compensatory processes intended to enhance adaptation and not methods of
obtaining or securing a steady flow of gratification.
It would
seem, though, that there is only a semantic difference between Freud and his
disciple turned-heretic. When libido investment in objects (esp. the Primary
Object) fails to produce gratification, the result is maladaptation. This is
dangerous and the default option - secondary narcissism - is activated.
This
default enhances adaptation (is adaptative) and is functional. It triggers
adaptative behaviours. As a by-product, it secures gratification. We are
gratified when we exert reasonable control over our environment, i.e., when our
behaviours are adaptative. Thus, the compensatory process has two results:
enhanced adaptation and inevitable gratification.
Perhaps
the more serious disagreement between Freud and Jung is with regards to
introversion.
Freud
regards introversion as an instrument in the service of a pathology
(introversion is indispensable to narcissism, as opposed to extroversion which
is a necessary condition for libidinal object-orientation).
As
opposed to Freud, Jung regards introversion as a useful tool in the service of
the psychic quest for adaptation strategies (narcissism being one of them). The
Jungian adaptation repertoire does not discriminate against narcissism. To Jung
it is as legitimate a choice as any.
But even
Jung acknowledged that the very need to look for new adaptation strategies
means that adaptation has failed. In other words, the search itself is
indicative of a pathological state of affairs. It does seem that introversion
per se is not pathological (because no psychological mechanism is pathological
per se). Only the use made of it can be pathological. One tends to agree with
Freud, though, that when introversion becomes a permanent feature of the
psychic landscape of a person – it facilitates pathological narcissism.
Jung
distinguished introverts (who habitually concentrate on their selves rather
than on outside objects) from extroverts (the converse preference). According
to him, not only is introversion a totally normal and natural function, it
remains normal and natural even if it predominates one's mental life.
But
surely the habitual and predominant focussing of attention upon one's self, to
the exclusion of others, is the very definition of pathological narcissism.
What differentiates the pathological from the normal and even the welcome is,
of course, a matter of degree.
Pathological
narcissism is exclusive and all-pervasive. Other forms of narcissism are not.
So, although there is no healthy state of habitual, predominant introversion,
it remains a question of form and degree of introversion. Often a healthy,
adaptative mechanism goes awry. When it does, as Jung himself recognised,
neuroses form.
Last but
not least, Freud regards narcissism as a point while Jung regards it as a
continuum (from health to sickness). Modern views of
narcissism tend to adopt Jung's view in this respect.
Kohut's
Approach
In a way,
Kohut took Jung a step further. He said that pathological narcissism is not the
result of excessive narcissism, libido or aggression. It is the result of
defective, deformed or incomplete narcissistic (self) structures. Kohut
postulated the existence of core constructs which he named the "grandiose
exhibitionistic self" and the "idealised parent imago" [see
below].
Children
entertain notions of greatness (primitive or naive grandiosity) mingled with
magical thinking, feelings of omnipotence and omniscience and a belief in their
immunity to the
consequences of their actions. These elements and the child's feelings
regarding its parents (whom it tars with the same brush of omnipotence and
grandiosity) coagulate and form these constructs.
The
child's feelings towards its parents are his or her reactions to their
responses (affirmation, buffering, modulation or disapproval, punishment, even
abuse). These responses help maintain the self-structures. Without appropriate
parental responses, infantile grandiosity, for instance, cannot be transformed
into healthy adult ambitions and ideals.
To Kohut,
grandiosity and idealisation are positive childhood development mechanisms.
Even their reappearance in transference should not be considered a pathological
narcissistic regression.
"You see, the actual issue is really a simple one
… a simple change in classical [Freudian] theory, which states that
autoeroticism develops into narcissism and that narcissism develops into object
love … there is a contrast and opposition between narcissism and object love.
The (forward) movement toward maturation was toward object love. The movement
from object love toward narcissism is a (backward) regressive movement toward a
fixation point. To my mind (this) viewpoint is a theory built into a
non-scientific value judgement … that has nothing to do with developmental
psychology."
(H. Kohut. The Chicago Institute Lectures 1972-1976.
Marian and Paul Tolpin (Eds.). Analytic Press, 1998)
Kohut's
contention is nothing less than revolutionary. He says that narcissism
(subject-love) and object-love coexist and interact throughout life. True, they
wear different guises with age and maturation – but they always cohabitate.
Kohut:
"It is not that the self-experiences are given up
and replaced by … a more mature or developmentally more advanced experience of
objects." [Ibid.]
This
dichotomy inevitably leads to a dichotomy of disorders. Kohut agreed with Freud
that neuroses are conglomerates of defence mechanisms, formations, symptoms,
and unconscious conflicts. He even did not object to identifying unresolved
Oedipal conflicts (ungratified unconscious wishes and their objects) as the
root of neuroses. But he identified a whole new class of disorders: the
self-disorders. These are the result of the perturbed development of
narcissism.
It
was not a cosmetic or superficial distinction. Self-disorders are the outcomes
of childhood traumas very much different to Freud's Oedipal, castration and
other conflicts and fears. These are the traumas of the child either not being
"seen" (that is not being affirmed by objects, especially the Primary
Objects, the parents) – or being regarded merely as an object for gratification
or abuse.
Such
children grow up to become adults who are not sure that they exist (lack a
sense of self-continuity)
or that they are worth anything (labile sense of self-worth and fluctuating or
bipolar self-esteem). They suffer from depressions, as
neurotics do. But the source of these depressions is existential (a gnawing
sensation of emptiness) as opposed to the "guilty conscience"
depressions of neurotics.
Such depressions: "…are interrupted by rages
because things are not going their way, because responses are not forthcoming
in the way they expected and needed. Some of them may even search for conflict
to relieve the pain and intense suffering of the poorly established self, the
pain of the discontinuous, fragmenting, undercathected self of the child not
seen or responded to as a unit of its own, not recognised as an independent
self who wants to feel like somebody, who wants to go its own way [see Lecture
22]. They are individuals whose disorders can be understood and treated only by
taking into consideration the formative experiences in childhood of the total
body-mind-self and its self-object environment – for instance, the experiences
of joy of the total self feeling confirmed, which leads to pride, self-esteem,
zest, and initiative; or the experiences of shame, loss of vitality, deadness,
and depression of the self who does not have the feeling of being included,
welcomed, and enjoyed."
(Paul and Marian Tolpin (Eds.). The Preface to the
"Chicago Institute Lectures 1972-1976 of H. Kohut", 1996)
One
note: "constructs" or "structures" are permanent
psychological patterns. But this is not to say that they do not change, for
they are capable of slow change. Kohut and his self-psychology disciples
believed that the only viable constructs are comprised of self self-object
experiences and that these structures are lifelong ones.
Melanie Klein
believed more in archaic drives, splitting defences and archaic internal
objects and part objects. Winnicott [and Balint and other, mainly British
researchers] as well as other ego-psychologists thought that only infantile
drive wishes and hallucinated oneness with archaic objects qualify as structures.
Karen
Horney's Contributions
Horney is
one of the precursors of the "object relations" school of
psychodynamics. She observed that one's personality was shaped mostly by one's
environment, society, or culture. She believed that one's relationships and
interactions with others in one's childhood determine both the shape and
functioning of one's personality.
She
expanded the psychoanalytic repertoire. She added needs to drives. Where Freud
believed in the exclusivity of the sex drive as an agent of transformation (to
which he later added other drives) – Horney believed that people (children)
needed to feel secure, to be loved, protected, emotionally nourished and so on.
She
believed that the satisfaction of these needs or their frustration early in childhood
are as important a determinant as any drive. Society came in through the
parental door. Biology converged with social injunctions to yield human values
such as the nurturance of children.
Horney's
great contribution was the concept of anxiety. Freudian anxiety is a rather
primitive mechanism, a reaction to imaginary threats arising from early
childhood sexual conflicts. Horney argued convincingly that anxiety is a
primary reaction to the child's dependence on adults for his survival.
Children
are uncertain (of love, protection, nourishment, nurturance) – so they become
anxious. They develop psychological defences to compensate for the intolerable
and gradual realisation that adults are merely human and are, at times,
capricious, arbitrary, unpredictable, unreliable. These defences provide both
gratification and a sense of security. The problem of dangerous dependence
still exists, but it is "one stage removed". When the defences are
attacked or perceived to be attacked (such as in therapy) – anxiety is
reawakened.
Karen B.
Wallant in "Creating Capacity for Attachment: Treating Addictions and the
Alienated Self" [Jason Aronson, 1999] wrote:
"The
capacity to be alone develops out of the baby's ability to hold onto the
internalisation of his mother, even during her absences. It is not just an
image of mother that he retains but also her loving devotion to him. Thus, when
alone, he can feel confident and secure as he continues to infuse himself with
her love. The addict has had so few loving attachments in his life that when
alone he is returned to his detached, alienated self. This feeling-state can be
compared to a young child's fear of monsters without a powerful other to help
him, the monsters continue to live somewhere within the child or his environment.
It is not uncommon for patients to be found on either side of an attachment
pendulum. It is invariably easier to handle patients for whom the transference
erupts in the idealising attachment phase than those who view the therapist as
a powerful and distrusted intruder."
So, the
child learns to sacrifice a part of his autonomy and of his identity in order
to feel secure.
Horney
identified three neurotic strategies: submission, aggression and detachment.
The choice of strategy determines the type of neurotic personality. The
submissive (or compliant) type is a fake. He hides aggression beneath a facade
of friendliness. The aggressive type is fake as well: at heart he is
submissive. The detached neurotic withdraws
from people. This cannot be considered an adaptative strategy.
Horney's
is an optimistic outlook. Because biology is only one of the forces shaping our
adulthood – culture and society being the predominant ones – she believes in
reversibility and in the power of insight to heal. She believes that when an
adult understands his problem (his anxiety), he also acquires the ability to
eliminate it altogether.
Yet,
clinical experience shows that childhood trauma and abuse are difficult to
completely erase. Modern brain research tends to support this sad view and,
yet, offer some hope. The brain seems to be more plastic than previously
imagined - but no one knows when this "window of plasticity" shuts.
What has been established is that the brain is physically impressed with abuse
and trauma.
It is
conceivable that the brain's plasticity continues well into adulthood and that
later "reprogramming" (by loving, caring, compassionate and empathic
experiences) can remould the brain permanently. Clearly, the patient has to
accept his disorder as a given and work around it rather than confront it
directly.
After
all, our disorders are adaptative and help us to function. Their removal may
not always be wise or necessary to attain a full and satisfactory life. We
should not all conform to the same mould and experience life the same.
Idiosyncrasies are a good thing, both on the individual level and on the level
of the species.
C. The
Issue of Separation and Individuation
It is by
no means universally accepted that children go through a phase of separation
from their parents and through consequent individuation. Most psychodynamic
theories [especially Klein, Mahler] are virtually constructed upon this
foundation. The child is considered to be merged with his parents until it
differentiates itself (through object-relations).
But
researchers like Daniel N. Stern dispute this hypothesis. Based on many
studies, it appears that, as always, what seems intuitively right is not
necessarily right.
In
"The Interpersonal World of the Infant: A View from Psychoanalysis and
Developmental Psychology" [New York, Basic Books – 1985], Stern seems to,
inadvertently, support Kohut by concluding that children possess selves and are
separate from their caregivers from the very start.
In
effect, he says that the picture of the child, as proffered by psychodynamic
theories, is biased by the way adults see children and childhood in retrospect.
Adult disorders (for instance, the pathological need to merge) are attributed
to children and to childhood.
This view
is in stark contrast to the belief that children accept any kind of parents
(even abusive) because they depend on them for their survival and
self-definition. Attachment to and dependence on significant others is the result
of the non-separateness of the child, go the classical
psychodynamic/object-relations theories.
The self
is a construct (in a social context, some add), an assimilation of the
oft-imitated and idealised parents plus the internalisation of the way others
perceive the child in social interactions. The self is, therefore, an
internalised reflection, an imitation, a series of internalised idealisations.
This sounds close to pathological narcissism. Perhaps it is really a matter of
quantity rather than quality.
D. Childhood
Traumas and the Development of the Narcissistic Personality
Traumas
are inevitable. They are an integral and important part of life. But in early
childhood, especially in infancy (ages 0 to 4 years), they acquire an ominous
aura and an evil interpretation. No matter how innocuous the event and the
surrounding circumstances, the child's vivid imagination is likely to embed it
in the framework of a highly idiosyncratic horror story.
Parents
sometimes have to be abxsent due to medical or economic conditions. They may be
too preoccupied to stay attuned at all times to the child's emotional needs.
The family unit itself may be disintegrating with looming divorce or
separation. The values of the parent may stand in radical contrast to those of society.
To
adults, such traumas do not equate abuse. Verbal and psychological-emotional
abuse or neglect are judged by us to be more serious "offences". But
this distinction is lost on the child. To him, all traumas - deliberately
inflicted or inevitable and inadvertent life crises - are of equal abusive
standing, though their severity may differ together with the permanence of
their emotional outcomes.
Sometimes
even abuse and neglect are the results of circumstances beyond the abusive or
neglecting parent's control. Consider a physically or mentally handicapped
parent or caregiver, for instance. But the child cannot see this as a
mitigating circumstance because he cannot appreciate it or even plainly
understand the causal linkage.
Where
even a child can tell the difference is with physical and sexual abuse. These
are marked by a co-operative effort (offending parent and abused child) at
concealment and strong emotions of shame and guilt, repressed to the point of
producing anxiety and "neurosis". The child perceives even the
injustice of the situation, though it rarely dares to express its views, lest
it be abandoned or severely punished by its abusers.
This type
of trauma which involves the child actively or passively is qualitatively
different and is bound to yield long-term effects such as dissociation or
severe personality disorders. These are violent, premeditated traumas, not
traumas by default, and the reaction is bound to be violent and active. The
child becomes a reflection of its dysfunctional family – it represses emotions,
denies reality, resorts to violence and escapism, disintegrates.
One of
the coping strategies is to withdraw inwards, to seek gratification from a
secure, reliable and permanently-available source: from one's self. The child, fearful
of further rejection and abuse, refrains from further interaction with others.
Instead, it builds its own kingdom of grandiose fantasies where it is always
loved, respected, and self-sufficient. This is the narcissistic strategy which
leads to the development of a narcissistic personality.
E. The Narcissist's Family
"For
very young children, self-esteem is probably best thought to consist of deep
feelings of being loved, accepted, and valued by significant others rather than
of feelings derived from evaluating oneself against some external criteria, as
in the case of older children. Indeed, the only criterion appropriate for
accepting and loving a new-born or infant is that he or she has been born. The
unconditional love and acceptance experienced in the first year or two of life
lay the foundation for later self-esteem, and probably make it possible for the
pre-schooler and older child to withstand occasional criticism and negative
evaluations that usually accompany socialisation into the larger community.
As
children grow beyond the pre-school years, the larger society imposes criteria
and conditions upon love and acceptance. If the very early feelings of love and
acceptance are deep enough, the child can most likely weather the rebuffs and
scoldings of the later years without undue debilitation. With increasing age,
however, children begin to internalise criteria of self-worth and a sense of
the standards to be attained on the criteria from the larger community they
observe and in which they are beginning to participate. The issue of criteria
of self-esteem is examined more closely below.
Cassidy's
[1988] study of the relationship between self-esteem at age five and six years
and the quality of early mother-child attachment supports Bowlby's theory that
construction of the self is derived from early daily experience with attachment
figures. The results of the study support Bowlby's conception of the process
through which continuity in development occurs, and of the way early
child-mother attachment continues to influence the child's conception and
estimation of the self across many years. The working models of the self
derived from early mother-child inter-action organise and help mould the
child's environment 'by seeking particular kinds of people and by eliciting
particular behaviour from them' [Cassidy, 1988, p. 133]. Cassidy points out
that very young children have few means of learning about themselves other than
through experience with attachment figures. She suggests that if infants are
valued and given comfort when required, they come to feel valuable; conversely,
if they are neglected or rejected, they come to feel worthless and of little
value.
In an
examination of developmental considerations, Bednar, Wells, and Peterson [1989]
suggest that feelings of competence and the self-esteem associated with them
are enhanced in children when their parents provide an optimum mixture of
acceptance, affection, rational limits and controls, and high expectations. In
a similar way, teachers are likely to engender positive feelings when they
provide such a combination of acceptance, limits, and meaningful and realistic
expectations concerning behaviour and effort [Lamborn et al., 1991]. Similarly,
teachers can provide contexts for such an optimum mixture of acceptance,
limits, and meaningful effort in the course of project work as described by
Katz and Chard [1989]."
(Lilian G. Katz – Distinctions between Self-Esteem and
Narcissism: Implications for Practice – October 1993 – ERIC/EECE Publications)
F. The Narcissist's Mother - A Suggestion for an
Integrative Framework
The whole
structure of the narcissistic disorder reflects the prototypical relationship
with frustrating primary objects (usually, the mother or main caregiver).
The
narcissist's "mother" is typically inconsistent and frustrating. She
thus thwarts the narcissist's ability to trust others and
to feel secure with them. By emotionally abandoning him, she fosters in him
fears of being abandoned and the nagging sensation that the world is a
dangerous, hostile, and unpredictable place. She becomes a negative, devaluing
voice, which is duly incorporated in the narcissist's Superego.
But there
is a less traditional view.
Our
natural state is anxiety, the readiness – physiological and mental – to
"fight or flight". Research indicates that the Primary Object (PO) is
really the child, rather than its mother. The child identifies itself as an
object almost at birth. It explores itself, reacts and interacts, it monitors
its bodily reactions to internal and external inputs and stimuli. The flow of
blood, the peristaltic movement, the swallowing reflex, the texture of saliva,
the experience of excretion, being wet, thirsty, hungry or content – all these
distinguish the child from its self.
The child
assumes the position of observer and integrator early on. As Kohut said, it has
both a self and the ability to relate to objects. This intimacy with a familiar
and predictable object (oneself) is a primary source of security and the
precursor to emerging narcissism. The mother is only a Secondary Object (SO).
It is this secondary object that the child learns to relate to and it has the
indispensable developmental advantage of being transcendental, external to the
child. All meaningful others are Auxiliary Objects (AO).
A
"good enough" SO helps the child to extend the lessons he had learned
from his interaction with the PO (his self) and apply them to the world at
large. The child learns that the external environment can be as predictable and
safe as the internal one.
This
titillating discovery leads to a modification of naive or primitive narcissism.
It recedes to the background allowing more prominent and adaptative strategies
to the fore. In due time, and subject to an accumulation of the right
positively reinforcing experiences, a higher form of narcissism develops: self-love, a
stable sense of self-worth, and self-esteem.
If,
however, SO fails or is abusive, the child reverts back to the PO and to its
primitive form of narcissism. This is regression in the chronological sense.
But it is also an adaptative strategy.
The
emotional consequences of rejection and abuse are too difficult to contemplate.
Narcissism ameliorates them by providing a substitute object. This is an
adaptative, survival-orientated act. It provides the child with time to
"come to grips with its thoughts and feelings" and perhaps to revert
with a different strategy more suited to the new – unpleasant and threatening –
data.
So the
interpretation of this regression as a failure of object love may be wrong. The
child merely deduces that the SO, the object chosen as the first target of
object love, was the wrong object. Object love continues to look for a
different, familiar, object. The child merely replaces one object (his mother)
with another (his self). The child does not relinquish his capacity for
object-love.
If this
failure to establish a proper object-relation persists and is not alleviated,
all future objects are perceived either as extensions of the Primary Object
(the self), or as external objects to be merged with one's self, because they
are perceived narcissistically.
There
are, therefore, two modes of object perception:
The
narcissistic (all objects are perceived as variations of the perceiving self)
and the social (all objects are perceived as others or self-objects).
The core
(narcissistic) self precedes language or interaction with others. As the core
self matures it develops either into a True Self or into a False Self. The
two are mutually exclusive (a person possessed by a False Self has no
functioning True Self). The distinction of the False Self is that it perceives
others narcissistically. As opposed to it, the True Self perceives others
socially.
The child
constantly compares his first experience with an object (his internalised PO,
his self) to his experience with his SO. The internalisations of both the PO
and the SO are modified as a result of this process of comparison. The SO is
idealised and internalised to form what I call the SEGO (loosely, the
equivalent of Freud's Superego plus the internalised outcomes of social
interactions throughout life). The internalised PO is constantly modified to
justify feedback from the SO (for example: "You are loved", or
"You are a bad boy"). This is the process by which the Ideal Ego is
created.
The
internalisations of the PO, of the SO and of the outcomes of their interactions
(for instance, of the results of the aforementioned constant comparison between
them) form what Bowlby calls "working models". These are constantly
updated representations of both the self and of Meaningful Others (what I call
Auxiliary Others).
The
narcissist's working models are defective. They pertain both to his self and to
ALL others. To the narcissist, ALL people are
meaningful because NO ONE really is. This forces the narcissist
to resort to crude abstractions (imagine the number of working models he
needs!).
The
narcissist is forced to dehumanise, objectify, generalise, idealise, devalue,
or stereotype
in order to cope with the sheer volume of potential interactions with
meaningful objects (i.e., with everyone!). Trying not to be overwhelmed, the
narcissist feels superior and inflated – because he is the only REAL
three-dimensional character in his mind.
Moreover,
the narcissist's working models are rigid and never updated because he does not
feel that he is interacting with real objects. How can one feel empathic, for
instance, towards a representation or an abstraction or an object of
gratification? How can such representations or abstractions grow or change?
Follows a
matrix of possible axes (dimensions) of interaction between child and mother.
The first
term in each of these equations of interaction describes the child, the second
the mother.
The Mother
can be:
·
Accepting
("good enough");
·
Domineering;
·
Doting/Smothering;
·
Indifferent;
·
Rejecting;
·
Abusive.
The Child
can be:
·
Attracted;
·
Repelled
(due to unjust mistreatment, for instance).
The
possible axes or dimensions are:
Child /
Mother
How to read this table - an example:
Attraction – Attraction/Accepting
Means that the child is attracted to his mother, his
mother is attracted to him and she is a "good enough" (accepting)
mother.
- Attraction – Attraction/Accepting
(Healthy axis, leads to self-love)
- Attraction – Attraction/Domineering
(Could lead to personality disorders - PDs - such as avoidant, or schizoid, or to social phobia, etc.)
- Attraction – Attraction/Doting or Smothering
(Could lead to Cluster B Personality Disorders)
- Attraction – Repulsion/Indifferent
[passive-aggressive, frustrating]
(Could lead to narcissism, Cluster B disorders)
- Attraction – Repulsion/Rejecting
(Could lead to personality disorders such as paranoid, borderline, etc.)
- Attraction – Repulsion/Abusive
(Could lead to DID, ADHD, NPD, BPD, AHD, AsPD, PPD, etc.)
- Repulsion – Repulsion/Indifferent
(Could lead to avoidant, schizoid, paranoid, etc. PDs)
- Repulsion – Repulsion/Rejecting
(Could lead to personality, mood, anxiety disorders and to impulsive behaviours, such as eating disorders)
- Repulsion – Attraction/Accepting
(Could lead to unresolved Oedipal conflicts and to neuroses)
- Repulsion – Attraction/Domineering
(Could have the same results as axis 6)
- Repulsion – Attraction/Doting
(Could have the same results as axis 9)
This, of
course, is a very rough sketch. Many of the axes can be combined to yield more
complex clinical pictures.
It
provides an initial, coarse, map of the possible interactions between the PO
and the SO in early childhood and the unsavoury results of internalised bad
objects.
This
PO/SO matrix continues to interact with AO to form the person's self-evaluation
(self-esteem or sense of self-worth).
This
process – the formation of a coherent sense of self-worth – starts with PO/SO
interactions within the matrix and continues roughly till the age of 8, all the
time gathering and assimilating interactions with AO (=meaningful others).
First, a
model of attachment in relationships is formed (approximately the matrix
above). This model is based on the internalisation of the Primary Object
(later, the self). Attachment interactions with SO follow and in the wake of a
critical mass of of interactions with AO, the self is formed.
This
process of the formation of self rests on the operation of a few critical principles:
- The child, as we said earlier, develops a sense
of "mother-constancy".
This is crucial. If the child is unable predict the behaviour (let alone
the presence) of his mother from one moment to another, it finds it hard
to trust anything, predict anything and expect anything. Because the self,
to some extent (some say: to a large extent), is comprised of the
internalised outcomes of the interactions with others – negative
experiences are be incorporated in the budding self as well as positive
ones. In other words, a child feels loveable and desirable if it is indeed
loved and wanted. If it is rejected, it is bound to feel worthless and
worthy only of rejection. In due time, the child develops behaviours which
yield rejection by others and the outcomes of which thus conform with his
self-perception.
- The adoption and assimilation of the judgement of
others and its incorporation into a coherent sense of self-worth and
self-esteem.
- The discounting or filtering-out of contrarian
information. Once Bowlby's "working models" are formed, they act
as selective membranes. No amount of external information to the contrary
alters these models significantly. Granted, shifts in relative positions
may and do occur in later stages of life. A person can feel more or less
accepted, more or less competent, more or less integrated into a given
social setting. But these are changes in the values of parameters within a
set equation (the working model). The equation itself is rarely altered
and only by very serious life crises.
Reprinted
with permission from:
"For
Want of a Better Good" (In
process)
Author: Alan
Challoner MA (Phil) MChS
(Attachment
Theory Researcher Counsellor in Adoption & Fostering, and associated child
development issues. MA awarded by thesis on the psychology of handicap – A
Culture of Ambiguity; 1992):
"A
developmental line for narcissism has been devised by Temeles, and it consists
of twelve phases that are characterised by a particular relationship between
self-love and object-love and occur in a precise order."
(Temeles, M.S. – A developmental line for
narcissism: The path to self-love and object love. In Cohen, Theodore, B.;
Etezady, M. Hossein; & Pacella, B.L. (Eds.) The Vulnerable Child. Volume 1;
The Vulnerable Child. International Univ. Press; Madison, CT, USA – 1993.)
Proto-Self
and Proto-Object
As the
infant is incapable of distinguishing either the self or the object as adults
do, this phase is marked by their absence. However he is competent in certain
attributes particularly those that allow him to interact with his environment.
From birth his moments of pleasure, often the instrument of infant-mother
interaction, are high points in the phase. He will try to avoid the low points of
un-pleasure by creating a bond that is marked by early maternal intervention to
restore the status quo.
Beginning
Self-Object Differentiation and Object Preference
The
second phase can begin as early as the third week, and by the fourth month the
infant has prescribed his favourite individuals (apart from mother). However he
is still not really discriminating between self and subject. He is now ready to
engage in a higher state of interaction with others. He babbles and smiles and
tries to make some sense out of his local environment. If he should fail to
make the sort of contact that he is seeking then he will turn away in a manner
that is unequivocal in its meaning. His main social contact at this stage is by
the eye, and he makes no bones about his feelings of pleasure or displeasure.
His bond
with his mother, at best, is now flowing and, if he is fortunate, there is a
mutual admiration society established. This is not however an isolated practice
for there is a narcissistic element on both sides that is reinforced by the
strength of the attachment. His continued development allows him to find an
increasing number of ways in which he might generate, autonomously, personal
pleasure. He finds delight in making new sounds, or indeed doing anything that
brings him his mother's approbation. He is now almost ready to see himself in
contrast to others.
Self-Constancy
and Object-Constancy
The
infant is now becoming able to know himself as "me", as well as being
able to know familiar others as "them". His fraternisation with
father, siblings and grandparents or any other closely adjacent person, endows
this interaction with a tone of special recognition as "one of the
gang". This is of vital importance to him because he gains a very special
feedback from these people. They love him and they shown their approbation for
his every ploy that he constructs in an effort to seal this knot. He is now at
the beginning of a period when he starts to feel some early self-esteem. Again
if he is lucky, he will be delighted at being himself and in his situation.
Also at this stage he can often create a special affinity for the same-sex
parent. He throws up expansive gestures of affection, and yet can also become
totally self-absorbed in his growing confidence that he is on a "winning
streak".
Awareness
of a Awareness: Self-Centredness
This is
an extension of the third phase and he is continuously becoming more aware of
himself and is adept at gaining the pleasures he seeks. The phase also
coincides with the beginning of the decline of maternal feeling that he is the
best thing on this earth. His activities both positive and negative have
started to draw on maternal resources to the point where they may at times be
sapping. Thus at the beginning of the child's second year the mother starts to
realise that the time has come when she must "shout the odds". She
begins to make demands of him and, at times, to punish him, albeit in a
discrete way. She may not now respond as quickly as she did before, or she may
not seem quite so adoring as she was three months ago.
The most
dynamic intervention that a child can have at this time is the fear of the loss
of love. He needs to be loved so that he can still love himself. This beginning
of a time of self-reflection needs him to be aware of being aware. It is now
possible for him to be injured narcissistically, for example, perhaps through
sibling rivalry. His relationship with his same-sex parent takes on a new
importance. It now goes beyond just a "mutuality club". Because he is
becoming aware of his limitations, he needs to know through this relationship
with the same-sex parent, just what he may become. This allows his narcissistic
image of himself to be regularly re-polished after any lapses that might have
tarnished it.
Object-Centred
Phase: The First Libidinal Disappointment
This is
what has been described as the Oedipal period, when genital and object-directed
sexuality comes to the fore. He must continue to recover whenever he receives a
blow to his self-esteem; but more, he must learn not to over-compensate. As
Temeles puts it, narcissistic supplies from both the adored Oedipal object and
also the loved rival are threatened as the child's libidinal investments are
sporadically supplanted by negative impulses. [Idem.]
The child
will refresh his relationships on a different platform, but nevertheless
maintains and is sustained by his attachments to his parents, and other
subsidiary figures. At a time when he begins to divest himself of some of the
libidinal baggage he may enter into a new "love affair" with a peer.
The normal pattern is for these to disintegrate when the child enters the
period of latency, and for the interregnum to be typified with a period of
sexual segregation. By now he is going to school and is acquiring a new level of
self-sufficiency that continues to enhance his narcissism.
Beginning
Prominence of Peer Groups: New Objects
This
phase, which begins sometime in the third year, is marked by a resolution of
the Oedipal period and a lessening of the infant ties with the parents as the
child turns his attention towards his peers and some other special adults (such
as teachers or other role models). In some respects these new objects start to
replace some of the narcissistic supplies that he continues to gain from his
parents.
This of
course has its dangers because other objects can be notoriously fickle,
especially peers. He is now at a stage where he has journeyed into the outside
world and is vulnerable to the inconstancies of those who now are around him in
greater numbers. However all is not lost for the world revolves in circles and
the input that he requires from others is shared by the input that they need
from him.
On an
individual basis therefore if he "falls out" with one person then he
very quickly will "fall in" with another. The real potential problem
here is for him to be disliked by so many others of his peers that his
self-esteem is endangered. Sometimes this can be rectified by his mastery of
other elements; particularly if they contribute a steady flow of narcissistic
supplies. However the group-ideal is of great significance and seems to have
become more so in recent times.
The
development of a burgeoning independence together with a sense of group
recognition are both in the nature of self-preservation issues. The parental
influence, if it has been strong and supportive and consistently streaked with
affection and love, will be the launching pad for an adequate personality and a
move towards eventual independence.
Beginning
Prominence of Self-Assessment: Impact on Self-Love
This
pre-adolescent phase encompasses a child who still needs the reassurance of his
peers, and hereabouts his attachments to certain individuals or groups will
intensify. The assaults on his self-esteem now come from a different quarter.
There is an increased concentration on physical attributes, and other
comparisons will be made that might diminish or raise his narcissistic
supplies. His self-confidence can be strained at this time, and whilst the
same-sex peer is still dominant, the opposite-sex peer starts to catch the
corner of his eye.
At this
time, when he needs all the support he can gather, he may find to his chagrin
that a certain ambivalence is coming to pass in his relationships with his
parents. They in turn are discovering a rapidly changing, not so compliant, and
more independent child. They may be astounded by the group ideals that he has
adopted, and whilst in reality he still needs to receive from them abundant
narcissistic supplies, the affectionate ties may be strained and the expected
or desired support may be somewhat withered.
Beginning
Sexual Maturity: Importance of the Sexual Object
At this
stage ties with parents continue to slacken, but there is an important change
taking place as the affectionate characteristics are converging with libidinal
ones. The need to be loved is still there and the adolescent version of
narcissism begins to trail its coat. Gradually the narcissistic element is
enhanced as the subject becomes more self-assured and develops the need to win
the frank admiration of a sexual object. Hormonal mood swings can underlie the
degree to which rejection reduces the narcissistic supplies. Where there is a
blatant over-valuation of the self it is often the result of a defence
mechanism coming in to play to protect the subject. Individual subjects compare
themselves with others in their group and may become aware of either
shortcomings or advantages that add to the feelings in self-assessment.
Over-inflated Ego ideals may bring about a negative assessment, and the need
arises for young people to confront themselves with reality. A failure to do
this will result in a much more severe assault on their narcissism later.
Resurgence
of Master Issues: Impact of Self-Love
Having
now experienced the change of love object, and tasted the new relations that
stem from it, there is a need to resume the issues of mastery. These are no
longer childhood fantasies but are the basic requirements for a successful
future. On them depend the acquisition of a successfully completed education,
skill training and employment. At this stage narcissistic supplies depend upon
success, and if this is not obtained legitimately then it may be sought by
other means. His culture and to some extent his peer group will tend to dictate
what the criteria of success will be. Within some societies there is still a
gender difference here but it is reducing with time. Temeles suggests that, If
the woman's narcissistic supplies are, in fact, more dependent on maintaining a
relationship with the libidinal object, then perhaps it reflects a greater need
to maintain more affectionate ties reminiscent of the past. [Idem.]
When the
time comes for parenthood earlier ties tend to be reinvigorated; parents become
grandparents and the cycle begins again.
The
Balance between Self- and Object-Generated Narcissistic Supplies
Each
culture has its unit of social characteristics. These often revolve around
family, work, leisure and on the extent to which they are successful will
depend the amount of contentment and pride that is generated. A continuance of
narcissistic supplies will continue to flow from partners, colleagues,
children, parents etc. The more success the greater the flow; and the greater
the flow the more success can be achieved and the better the subject will feel
about life. The downside of this is when things go wrong. We are in a situation
generally where many people have lost jobs and homes; where marriages have
broken up and children are separated from one of the parents. This causes great
stress, a diminution of self-esteem and a loss of narcissistic supplies. This
may result in the loss of the power to sustain an effective life style and with
a continuing diminution of narcissistic supplies the result may bring about a
negative aspect to life.
Accommodation
versus Self-Centredness
The
subject has now arrived at middle age. Whatever success has been achieved it
may well be that he will be at the summit of his personal mountain, and the
only way forward is down. From here on mastery is waning and there is a tendency
to rely more and more on relationships to supply the good feelings. The arrival
of grandchildren can herald a return to earlier mutuality and may account for
narcissistic supplies for both generations. In the long-term the threat of, or
the reality of, a reduction in physical capacity or ill-health may play a part
in the reduction of narcissistic supplies.
Self
versus Object
Advancing
age will develop its threat. Not only is this at a personal and physical level,
but often it is at an emotional level. Long gone are the inter-generational
family settings. Grand parents, parents and children now not only reside in
different houses, but in different counties or even different countries. The
more one is separated and possibly alone the more one feels threatened by
mortality which is of course the ultimate in the loss of narcissistic supplies.
When loved ones disappear it is important to try to crate substitute
associations either through re-entering into group activities or perhaps the
solitary pleasure that can be gained from a domestic pet. Loss of the good
feelings that were present in earlier times can lead to depression. This is
countered by those who have developed a degree of self-sufficiency and who have
maintained interests that provide a continuance of narcissistic supplies. Once
any or all of these start to disappear there enters a factor of dissimulation,
and we can no longer reconcile what we were to what we now are. We lose our
self-esteem, often our will to live, but even though this is not consonant with
a will to die it often leads to a failure to thrive.
Comments
Post a Comment