Stolorow - Narcisismul

8/2/2019 Stolorow - Narcisismul

1/6

lnt . J, Psyc.ho-Anal. (1975) 56, 179

irOWARD A FUNCTIONAL DEFINITION OF NARCISSISMII ROBERT D. STOLOROW, NEw BRUNSW1CK, N.J.I

TraJitional usage, within the economic modelandJpsychoanalytic drive theory, defines nar-.cissism as pert.ai~ing. to. the libi~inal.cathexis ~fth e 561f.The difficulties inherent 10 this econormcI . .. lb Iconcept of narcissism lave een cogent yreviewed in a recentpaper by Pulver (l970).

I... Citing tire W Ork of Apfelbaum (1965) and HGH';(rcpprted by Dahl, 1968), Pulver notes that the In the paragraphs which follow, I shall first'ccoqorruc model and drive theory in general have review the work of some authors who have madebccri subjected to serious criticisms. H e further .significant contributions to our understanding of.; ';X~rg4e{convincingly that the non-specific nature narcissism iii functional terms. Ishall then':.;:::oftheterms "libido" and' ielf' has introduced a attemptitovdemonstrate '.that a functional.;,:;Jg:


2/6

!i -f.,"i'j.j.,I,,

; .:\. fi \j;H~~{.!

. IiIII

I!t

180 ROBERT D. STOLOROWinto uie spec ific and unique lUlICLlOJ1 of ll:lr- imagined casLi;,_iiu'! and her resulting sense ofcissistic activity as proposed in the definition defect and inferiority. Union with a phallic idealwhich I presented above. was understood as a magic method of repairingA crucial bit of groundwork for a functional the damaged self-representation and restoring

understanding of narcissism was Hartmann's injured self-esteem. In the later paper (1960),(1950) conceptual distinction between the ego (a Reich showed how varia LI S other narcissisticstructural mental system), the self (the whole patterns (e.g. grandiose self-inflation, bodyperson of an individual, including his body and narcissism, and ceaseless cravings for admiringbody parts as well as his psychic organization attention) may represent compensatory attemptsand its parts), and the self-representation (the to repair damage done to the self-representationunconscious, preconscious and conscious endo- by early traumatic experiences. Reich clearlypsychic representations of the bodily and mental interpreted clinically observed 'narcissistic dis-self in the systemego), Taking off from Hart- turbances ' as abortive attempts to restore andmann's distinction, Jacobson (1964) was able to stabilize self-esteem .point out that narcissism is not identical with the Numerous authors have buttressed andlibidinal endowment of the system ego or of ego amplified Reich's ground-breaking formulations.functions as Freud (1914) had originally Elkisch (1957) observed that certain of herpostulated. Narcissism, according to Jacobson, patients would gaze at their images in the mirrorrefers to the libidinal cathexis of the self- in order to restore a lost sense of self-identity.representation, which is constituted in the course Referring to the myth of 1":8 .1~i:: ,su:; , Li( , ;hL\;Il~L~inof egcdevelopment. While Jacobson's form- (1964) formulated that narcissism refers not toulation remains rooted within the economic the love of oneself but to the love of one's mirrormodel, it is nevertheless very useful in delineating image, and argued that the mirror and the actthe arena in which narcissistic activity exercises of mirroring introduce problems of the erner-its function; namely, the arena of the self- gence of a primary identity, of identity confusion,representation. of loss of identity, and of identity maintenance as

ThatFreud 'himself was hazily aware of the well'. Narcissistic object relationships are to befunctional relationship .., -b etw een . narcissistic understood as. regressive ..efforts at identityactivity and the 'maintenance of. the, -self- maintenance: through mirroring-in the .object,representation' is suggested by his remark .(1 9 1 4) .' Eisnitz (1969) formulated that narcissistic 0bject .that ' the-self-regard 'has a-very intimate con- choices serve tovstabilize.cand supplement anection .with the -marcissistic+Hbido .~. _freud,weakenedself-representation.Arlow &Brennernoted 'tnatirinarci"ssiSticobje'Ctch6ice.th;e':aim :(1964)VMUr!aY{1964),'Kernberg (1970),.-andis to beloved and he stated further that-to .be -Oremland & Windholz (1971) all noted thatloved raises the -self-regard.: The clearImpli- , grandiose fantasies of magic omnipotenceandcation is that the .function of narcissistic object .unlimited entitlement may be attempts to repairchoice is to regulate self-esteem (i.e. to maintain various injuries to and degradations of thethe positive -affective -colouring of'-fhe. self- ...self-representation and to ward off the threat ofrepresentation). However-Freud was unable to . its dissolution.carry this implication further, apparently be- Perhaps the .most detailed account of howcause he did not yet have a clear concept-of the narcissistic patterns function to. maintain the

"self-representationasdistlnot from -the system self-representation-has been presented by Kohutego. (1971). The nuclear pathology in narcissisticTo my knowledge it was Reich who first disturbances, according to Kohut, is an absencespelled out with crystal clarity the way in which of or defect in internal structures that maintain

certain patterns, traditionally labelled narcis- . self-cohesiveness and self-esteem. In narcissisticsistic, function to . maintain the self~represen-" object relationships, the object functions as atation. In the earlier of two important-papers substitute for the missing or-defective self-esteem(1953), she demonstrated how a woman may regulating endopsychic structures .. Theobjectform a narcissistic object tie to -an aggrandized performs basic functions in the realm of self-phallic ideal in order to undo the trauma of her esteem regulation that the individual's own

~~~~~ ~~~-~~~~ ~'~~~~-~~-~---~ ~-~~~ --- _ . ---~----- ------- ----- -- -_ ... -----.-- ..--~ ... .. '-- ..---.-.-----~--- .. --.~ ..... ,__,_ _ ...,,__ .,_'._.r._!JiI!2iA:2 " bkiSUiU . kiA_ULI4 l! U i & 1$ 4'X1 .64'-_*26,2;, Z i J J .


3/6

DEFINITION OF NARCISSISMpsyche is unable to provide. Archaic narcissisticconfigurations are mobilized (e.g. in which theindividual requires continuous mirroring of hisgrandiose fantasies or merger with an ag-grandized omnipotent object)' in order tosolidify a fragile and precarious sense of self-cohesion and self-esteem, and to ward off theultimate threat of fragmentation and structuraldisintegration of the self-representation.It is surprising that, despite the above clinical

formulations which stress the structure-main-taining function of narcissistic activity, theauthors I listed seem unwilling to take theultimate metapsychological step of freeing the

,concept of narcissism from an economicdefinition which it has outgrown, and redefiningnarcissism in functional terms. Kohut, forinstance;. in struggling to define a narcissisticobject relationship metapsychologically, says,

. " ,~Narcissis.m .. is defined not by the target of theinstinctual investment (i.e. whether it is thesubject himself or other people) but by the natureor quality of the instinctual charge. The smallchild ... 'invests other people with narcissisticcathexes and thus experiences themnarcissistic-ally .. ','. In a narcissistic object relationship theobject is invested with narcissistic cathexes. Butwhat is a narcissistic cathexis '/ In struggling toreconcile his excellent clinical observations withan outmoded economic concept of narcissism,Kohut' presents us with either a tautology or anotion that there is a qualitative differencehf't"'~~n. T'I".rrj~


4/6

dilliculty applying the drive concept of" n.ircis- have not yet developed. According to Pulver's

i . h ( ; ; 1 1 the withdrawal may be called narcissistic, the environment. Balint suggests further that inWith regard to (b), Pulver (1970) notes, as have deeply regressive states, such as those found inmany others (Reich, 1653; Lichtenstein, 1964; schizophrenia and in dreamless sleep (see Lewin,

'Eisnitz, 1969; Kohut, 1971), that narcissistic 1954), the fixation point is not primary narcis- , "object ties' may be' characterized by' a very sism, but a primitive form of relationshipInintense overt attachment to external objects. In which a probably undifferentiated environment is other words, increased involvement with the self intensely cathected. In opposition to the theory" ','is not necessarily accompanied by a decreased of primary narcissism, Balint proposes that the 't,:cathexis of objects as implied in the drive neonate is born into a primary state of intense ','i'concept of narcissism. Freud's (1914) economic, relatedness to his environment-e- a state ofhar-: ' ,: ;>;hypothesis of a mutually excluding reciprocity moniousfusionwiththeenvironmenttermed'pri-' .'"~;~between narcissistic libido and object libido does mary love'. According to Balint, all narcissism,,;~,jj:~~

I not appear to 'hold up clinically. As mentioned is secondary to this primary love and is catised:,~;,


5/6

-.' .- - - : - , ' .~\ i ,-.,.~

on 1 y wi t h the beg: nning 0[' scl f~o bjcct c i if- multiple factors determining sell-esteem, but triesfcrcn 1iation that the issue 0 f primary narcissism in an indirect way to explain aficcts by dr ivcs "versus primary object relatedness becomes at all Pulver also cites the point made b y Joffe &.Jllcaningful. But even here the controversy is Sandler (1967) that explaining self-esteem as therendered insubstantial by a functional COIl- libidinal investment of the self introduces the:ception of narcissism. The newly differentiated economic notion that self-esteem decreases asself-representation of the infant is highly libido is invested in objects and increases as it is~ulnerable and fragile, lacking in cohesiveness withdrawn from objects and invested in the self.and stable boundaries. Hence, the infant's Obviously, such a notion is not supported byearliest object relationships of necessity serve a clinical observations that object relationshipsqasically narcissistic function-i.e. serve to can serve (with varying degrees of success) todonsolidate the infant's rudimentary self- enhance self-esteem, and that the loss of objectrbpresentation. In other words, the earliest ties can be catastrophic for the self-esteem,fanifestations of the narcissistic function occur These conceptual difficulties are eliminatedir relation to primary objects, and the earliest and the relationship between narcissisticobject relationships serve a basic narcissistic activity and self-esteem is clarified, if the drive. (unction. Primitive object relationship and concept of narcissism is replaced by the func-prim itive narcissism are two inseparable sides of tiona! definition proposed here. Narcissism, ast!he same coin. The controversy about which functionally defined, is not synonymous withcame first, an artifact of the economic con- self-esteem; which is conceived as a complexception of narcissism, fades away when narcis- . affective state multiply determined by manysism is understood in functional terms. Within factors (not the least of which is the vic is-

. the .framework of a functional definition, .situdes of aggression). Narcissism embodiesnarcissism as a developmental line pertains to those mental operations whose function is tostagesin the growth of structures that maintain regulate self-esteem (the affective colouring ofthe cohesiveness, stability,andpositiveafi'ective-the self-representation) and to maintain thecolouring of, the self-representation. Growth : cohesiveness and stability of the self-rep-,proceeds' from primitive prestructural narcis- resentation (the.vstructural "foundation uponsistic object relationships towards higher forms . which self-esteem rests). The relationship of? f narcissism by way of a gradual accretion of narcissism to self-esteem is analogous to the jnt~JZi. .J. !st ructure" .vhichtakes.en the function Q f '. ~ J.'.el8:ti()Jls!1i.p>;pf!t\y~e!l:?:,.hermostat fInd .f(),om.maintaining the .self--:representation (Jacobson, .:::temperature .:A thermostat is no{'equlvaie'nfto1964; Kohut, 1971). , room temperature, nor is it the only.determinant4. Narcissism as self-esteem. Pulver's (1970) . of room temperature. It as the function of a9riticism of equating the drive concept of thermostat to regulate and .stabilize 'roomnarclssism (libidinal cathexis of .the self) with temperature in the face of a multitude of forcesself-esteem (a complex ego state) is worth which threaten to raise 'or lower it. Similarly,quoting at some length: . self-esteem is .vulnerable to the impact Iof a

. multitude of internal and external force's (see:When the varying self images become. organized Jacobson, )964)._ . But when self-esteem isinto a more cohesive affective picture of the self, we . threatenedvsignificantly lowered o r destroyed, ..speak of self-esteem, with high self.;esteein then narcissistic activities arecalled into play in~mp]ying a predominance of pleasurable affects and an effort to protect, restore, repair and stabilize" ! low self-esteem' of un pleasurable ones. All of theseego states of affect-self-representation linkages may it. With regard to the point made by Joffe &?e either conscious, preconscious .or unconscious, Sandler (1967), narcissism functionally definedhave complex origins, and many defensive and adap- as being in the service of self-esteem regulation istive functions ... With a l l of this in mind, it should .: not incompatable with intense object relation-g e clear that the proposition that self-esteem is ships, which indeed' may be in the same service.~imply the libidinal investment of the self is woefullyi:nadequate. Its .anexplanation of a complex ego 5. Healthy versus unhealthy narcissism. Asstate in drive terms, and very nonspecific drive terms .Pulver (1970) points out, the drive. concept ofat that. Itnot onlyprecliides the consideration of the narcissism makes it difficult to differentiate4

. '1

~'-~~~.~~.-~.- .. ~.-..-. - ..- . .--.--~----.--- ..------.~.--,


6/6

betweenROBERT D. STOLOROW84

inflations of the self and a realistic good feelingabout oneself, since with the drive concept bothare conceived as being due to the libidinalcathexis of the self. Indeed, it seems to me that

~the drive concept leads to the erroneous view: that narcissism is by definition unhealthy since itj is at the expense of object cathexis, In contrast,

'1 a functional definition of narcissism (indeed, aI functional definition of any activity) contains aIbuilt-in criterion for differentiating betweenI healthy versus unhealthy narcissism; namely, thecriterion of how successful or unsuccessful agiven narcissistic activity is in exercising itsfunction. The issue of whether a piece' ofnarcissism is healthy or unhealthy reduces to the'question of whether or not it succeeds in

I maintaining a cohesive, stable and positively- , I coloured self-representation. For instance,beyond the developmental stage at which theyare phase-appropriate, attempts to maintain theself-representation through a narcissistic objecttie to an idealized external object often fail, since

. I such relationships tend to go through highly; c onf 'i ct ua l vicissitudes, and the state of the) self-representation will behighlyvulner~ble~o: the fate of the usually unstable relationshipI (Reich, 1953) . On the other hand, .self-esteem.regulation by means o f a depersonified, abstract,fully internalized and . realistically' tempered;superego-ego. ideal 'system'represents a. highly'successful. exercise of .the. narcissistic.function.' j A s ' Jacobson -(1964fp~i~ts:out;ihe d~vei~pme~tof such an autonomous central endopsychicregulatory system, independent of external

jobjects, contributes greatly to the stability of the' I i self-representation which cannot be as easilyaffected as before by experiences of rejection,

! frustration, failure and the like" and to theI successful maintenance of 'a sufficiently high"1 " average levelof self-esteem, with aIirnited m a r g i n

for its vacillations, apt to withstand to some extentI psychic or even physical injuries to the self'.I 6. Countertransference. It is my belief that theI drive concept of narcissism (and even the veryJ term narcissism', which derives from driveI theory) can exacerbate the countertransferenceproblems elicited by narcissistic patients, The.drive concept of narcissism as self-iove may lead

1 us to develop overt or. covert rejective andi contemptuous attitudes toward our narcissistic

p;il;~~lll;; in so far :1

Documents

Stolorow - Narcisismul