Back to Table of Contents
In “The Outline of Psychoanalysis”, Freud (1940 [1938]) Freud makes a terminological distinction between Eros (the love and life drives), libido and sexuality: Sexuality is now a function of Eros, and the libido is the “exponent” (energy at the service) of Eros (ibid, p. 151). The principle underlying the Eros is the principle of binding: “The aim of Eros is to establish ever greater unities and preserve them thus – in short to bind together; the aim of the [destructive instinct] is, to the contrary, to undo connections and to destroy…” (p.148). Therefore, the death drive takes over the ‘daemoniac’ force which, Freud reiterates, is the essence of instinct (1920), and sexuality is on the side of the binding process. (1940 [1938]) Many post-Freudian thinkers (Loewald, Kulish, Green, Scarfone below) would develop this notion, in various ways, further. III. Ac. Evolution of Libido and Libido Theory Throughout, the central component of Freud’s evolving drive theory was the concept of Libido. Libido Theory , for its part, also underwent numerous transformations. The term ‘libido’ (Latin for ‘wish’ or ‘desire’) denotes in Freud’s theorizing either sexual desire or appetite, or more specifically mental energy of the sexual drive, as distinct from the ideational content of the drive (Auchincloss and Samberg 2012). Freud used the term first in 1894 in the draft to Fliess, where he described libido as a mental representation of an underlying somatic process, involved in sexuality (Freud 1894). After earlier explication of the concept of libido in “Three Essays” (1905a), as sexual energy of the sexual drive/instinct, as part of his broadened conception of sexuality, consisting of wishful ideas (libidinal aims), associated with exciting sensations (libido), that have as their source the intimate sensual stimulation of the erotogenic zones in the course of caretaking by parents/caretakers, who become the libidinal objects of such wishes, Freud (1914) formally describes his libido theory in “On Narcissism: An Introduction”. Here, he presents libido as a mental energy that can be invested in various representations or structures of the mind. In this vein, he postulates a reciprocal relation between the amount of libido invested in oneself (ego libido) and in one’s objects (object libido). Failure to discharge libido results in a ‘dammed up state’ (p. 85), resulting in symptom formation, most pathological of which is narcissistic neurosis (psychosis). Here, the ego defensively withdraws object libido back into itself, as the individual disinvests in, withdraws form, reality and the external world altogether. Overall, taking into consideration also later work of Freud (1923) and Karl Abraham (1924), Libido Theory rests on the following propositions (Akhtar 2009): (1) Libido is a form of mental energy; (2) Libido may be discharged via instinctual activities or get ‘dammed up ‘ and give rise to neurotic symptoms; (3) Libido may be invested in objects (‘object libido’), or in the self (‘ego libido’ or narcissistic libido’); (4) Libido may be pliable and shift from object to object (mobility) or it can be ‘adhesive’ and show rigidity in its attachments (fixation); (5) Libido may be directed towards loving investment in self and others or be used to ‘bind’ aggression and infuse ego activities (‘libidinization’); (6) Libido follows erotogenic zones as they become psychically ascendant over the course of development; hence, there are ‘libidinal
140
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online