Back to Table of Contents
work of North American adult and child analysts alike, until the beginning of the 1970’s (see separate entry EGO PSYCHOLOGY). Hartmann, Kris and Loewenstein (1949) argued against frustration as the unique cause for aggression, since in so many other ways it behaves like a drive, seeming to have a continuously operating pressure. In this continuous pressure, they saw the aggressive drive as very similar to the sexual drive. In terms of their action and satisfaction, each drive, and differently at different stages, has certain discharge patterns. They suggested that one can observe a fore pleasure also in the mounting tension with aggression, and that one can also see clear signs of pleasure upon the final discharge of aggression. The whole issue is complicated by the frequent fusion of the two drives. They noted that the discharge patterns of aggression often follow the patterns of particular stages of the libido, especially from the oral and anal stages. They felt that as far as rage is concerned, the imprint of anality on aggressive discharge patterns is long lasting and easy to observe. They suggested that while aggression to some extent follows the phases of libido in its connection to specific zones such as the oral, anal, and phallic ones, the main organ of discharge for the aggressive drive is the skeletal musculature, and as such the development of the drive follows also the development of this musculature in such things as biting, grasping, hitting, walking, and running. In terms of the interaction of the drives and the ego , Hartmann (1950, 1952) and his collaborators (Hartmann, Kris and Loewenstein, 1949, Kris 1955) proposed the concept of drive neutralization as an ego function. They felt that observations led to the inference that this capacity was present in some form from very early infancy, even before there was an organized ego, and that it matured from there. Neutralization involves the changing of drive aims and intensity, so that the drive energy becomes more capable of being used for various purposes. (This was an elaboration of Freud’s (1900) idea of the binding of libido marking the transition to the secondary process, as compared to its unbound, freely displacing nature in the primary process.) Hartmann distinguished drive neutralization from drive displacement and drive fusion. A child who wants to hurt and kill a recently arrived sibling, but instead rips the wings off flies, is displaying displacement with no neutralization or drive fusion. If she teases the little sibling, or hugs it extra hard, she is displaying at least the beginnings of the fusion of libido and aggression in relation to one object. If she competes in tests of strength or in games with the younger sibling, she would be displaying partial neutralization of the aggression with no displacement and little drive fusion. Hartman and his collaborators especially theorized about the use of neutralized aggression in building up structures within the ego and its use for other purposes as well. They argued that neutralized aggressive drive energy is used in the setting up of self/other boundaries, as well as boundaries within the mind such as the repression barrier. In regressive states, such as incipient psychosis, borderline regressions, and trauma, where there is a partial breakdown in self/other boundaries and of repressions, there is also a regressive freeing up of large quantities of raw aggression, which Hartmann (1953) points to as one piece of evidence that the building up of these boundaries, both with others and within the mind, uses partially neutralized aggressive drive energy.
153
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online