Back to Table of Contents
intertwined and therefore were often conflated with each other by later commentators. One of these theories was that of the death instinct, its biological speculations, and the idea that aggression as a manifest wish or behavior is actually the turning outward of the death instinct’s pull towards returning to an inorganic state. The second theory is of an aggressive drive with many similarities to the libidinal drive. It is this second theory of the aggressive drive of Freud’s that Hartmann and his colleagues follow, add to and amend. This view of the aggressive drive as on par with libido, leading to a dual drive theory, was influential in American ego psychology, being taken up by Arlow and Brenner, and by most of the other analysts working in North America in the mid 20 th Century, such as Edith Jacobson, Margaret Mahler, Peter Blos, Phyllis Greenacre, and others. It guided the theorizing and clinical work of North American adult and child analysts alike, until the beginning of the 1970’s (see separate entry EGO PSYCHOLOGY), when it opened the door for transitional and integrational thought of Hans Loewald and Otto Kernberg, and contemporary diverse conceptualizations of drives and affects to follow. 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
154
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online