Back to Table of Contents
represented within the subject himself that assumes the role of the repressing Ego and is at the same time the object of his own repressed sexual drives. It can also be represented as an interactive bond with an ‘other’ from external reality. In this case it can play the role of the aggressive ego drive that kills the sexual drive in the other, or also of the sexual drive that kills the ego or self-preservation drives of the individual, thus destroying the processes of symbolization and eventually, life itself. Aggression plays here only a secondary role in the dynamic and economic process of the sexual, ego or self-preservation drives. Marcano follows the fate of aggression through the evolution of the drive theory, from aggression as a partial component of all drives, through its rendering in the context of the subject-object relations, the relations between the ego and external reality, between pleasure and displeasure, including the affects of love and hate that such relations generate. Within this evolution, as the role of the object becomes increasingly more prominent, transformative and ‘trans-mutative’ properties of aggression become highlighted as well. When the object is the source of displeasure, it is rejected and hated, which can increase to the point of containing the purpose of its annihilation. But in the annihilation of the object, source of the displeasure, also killed are those aspects of the displeasing drive internal stimuli dissociated from the subject and projected or reprojected to the external world. The hate that kills the object is not the result or the expression of an original instinct that tends towards destruction to restore an original inorganic state, as is suggested in his last drive theory, but it is rather secondary to the emergence of the displeasure contained in the external world that stimulates the wish. Its aim, in any case, is to make displeasure disappear and with it, the feeling of hate, giving room to love by finding objects that provide pleasure. From there, the bonds of love and hate that adopt different forms develop. According to Marcano, what defines the different points of view is their emphasis on what happens at the level of the constitution of the psyche, where there would be a movement from ‘narcissistic’ mental state , as Freud calls it, or ‘autistic’, as Bleuler, called it, to an object relation , when emerging from an initial biological state into a mental state, into the extra uterine world, where the Object, with all its psychic history, provides the nascent Subject with its identificatory model. Freud said as much in “Group psychology and the analysis of the ego” (1921), defining identification “as the earliest expression of an emotional tie with another person” (ibid, p. 105), which follows the statement “In the individual’s mental life someone else is invariably involved, as a model, as an object, as a helper, as an opponent” (ibid, p. 69). Marcano then wonders if the psychic is pertinent to a mythology, or to a psychoanalytic theory of affects that are constituted in the Object (Other) and that would constitute the Subject by identification. In a highly theoretical derivation, including also Klein’s work on identification (1955), Marcano theorizes that acts perhaps also represent a language that expresses the vicissitudes of love and hate, which can later, following psychic integration, be communicated through a thing and a word presentation that reveal the result of the Intersubjective bond, which, through identification, becomes Intra-subjective.
201
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online