Back to Table of Contents
developed in the United States. Further, these studies led the way to understanding developmental interferences in ego development, which eventually had a profound effect on the understanding of the pathology and treatment of severe character disorders. Within such widened scope, the integrative work of Hans Loewald (1960, 1962, 1974), and, in a different way, that of Otto Kernberg (1982, 2007, 2014), are most relevant. A contemporary sequel to Erikson’s bridging of the individual and cultural-social aspects of development, feminist and gender theory and racial questions continue vitally the interests in the role of culture in ego development (Chodorow, 2004, 1992, Leary 2000, Fogel 2006, Kulish and Holtzman 2003, Balsam 2013). Contemporary Freudian elaboration of the concept of Developmental Transformation can be also viewed as a specific conceptualization within Developmental Ego Psychology. Historically, it builds on studies of both psychosexual (Freud 1905) and psychosocial (Erikson 1950) development, including Freud’s transformation of pleasure ego into reality ego (1911), re-transcription of memory and transformation of meaning in Nachträglichkeit (1895,1918), and transformation of traumatic affects into signal affects (1926); Erikson’s age specific crises (1950, 1956, 1984), as a whole life extension of embryologic concept of epigenesist (successive formation of entirely new structures) throughout the life span of the relations of self with other; Anna Freud’s (1963) developmental lines, and others. Example of second generation of studies of developmental transformations of drive and affectivity, was the area of transformation of the traumatic anxiety into signal anxiety. This approach, pioneered by Max Schur (1955) and followed by number of contributors (Schmaele 1964, Krystal 1974, 1985) postulates that affect precursors undergo epigenetic developmental transformation which includes de-somatization, differentiation and verbalization. As a result, affects become usable as signals . More recently, Jack Novick (1999), and Kathy K. Novick and Jack Novick (1991, 1992, 1994, 2001) examine the multifaceted relationship between trauma, memory, nachträglichkeit/deferred action in view of post-oedipal developments of latency and adolescence, where each phase brings something unique to the mix, which may compensate for earlier difficulties or raise prior dormant issues to traumatic intensity (J. Novick and K. Novick 2001). In view of these authors, the concept of developmental transformation is to serve as a layered counterpoint to a view of adult memories of latency and adolescence having mainly a defensive screen function (Novick and Novick 1994). Similarly, Harold Blum (1994, 2008) revisited and updated Freud’s evolution of his views of trauma, memory, representational processes, and pathogenesis, in the context of analytic reconstruction. Considering the complex temporal and causal issues involved in the transformation of meaning and function throughout development, he proposes the concept of nachträglichkeit as an unrecognized precursor of the concept of developmental transformation. Focus on discontinuity of progressive organizations and reorganizations , yielding developmental transformations (A. Freud 1936/1946, Neubauer 1996, 2003) of drive and affectivity, memory, object relations, ego and self, giving rise of various inner reorganizations
265
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online