What does direct observation of the child at the time of the selection

of its object, before the latent period, show us concerning the

Oedipus-complex? One may easily see that the little man would like to

have the mother all to himself, that he finds the presence of his

father disturbing, he becomes irritated when the latter permits himself

to show tenderness towards the mother, and expresses his satisfaction

when the father is away or on a journey. Frequently he expresses his

feelings directly in words, promises the mother he will marry her. One

may think this is very little in comparison with the deeds of Oedipus,

but it is actually enough, for it is essentially the same thing. The

observation is frequently clouded by the circumstance that the same

child at the same time, on other occasions, gives evidence of great

tenderness towards its father; it is only that such contradictory, or

rather, _ambivalent_ emotional attitudes as would lead to a conflict in

the case of an adult readily take their place side by side in a child,

just as later on they permanently exist in the unconscious. You might

wish to interpose that the behavior of the child springs from egoistic

motives and does not justify the setting up of an erotic complex. The

mother provides for all the necessities of the child, and it is

therefore to the child's advantage that she troubles herself for no one

else. This, too, is correct, but it will soon be clear that in this, as

in similar situations, the egoistic interest offers only the opportunity

upon which the erotic impulse seizes. If the little one shows the most

undisguised sexual curiosity about his mother, if he wants to sleep with

her at night, insists upon being present while she is dressing, or

attempts to caress her, as the mother can so often ascertain and

laughingly relates, it is undoubtedly due to the erotic nature of the

attachment to his mother. We must not forget that the mother shows the

same care for her little daughter without achieving the same effect, and

that the father often vies with her in caring for the boy without being

able to win the same importance in his eyes as the mother. In short, it

is clear that the factor of sex-preference cannot be eliminated from the

situation by any kind of criticism. From the standpoint of egoistic

interest it would merely be stupid of the little fellow not to tolerate

two persons in his services rather than only one.

I have, as you will have noticed, described only the relation of the boy

to his father and mother. As far as the little girl is concerned, the

process is the same with the necessary modifications. The affectionate

devotion to the father, the desire to set aside the mother as

superfluous and to take her place, a coquetry which already works with

all the arts of later womanhood, give such a charming picture,

especially in the baby girl, that we are apt to forget its seriousness,

and the grave consequences which may result from this infantile

situation. Let us not fail to add that frequently the parents themselves

exert a decisive influence over the child in the wakening of the Oedipus

attitude, in that they themselves follow a sex preference when there are

a number of children. The father in the most unmistakable manner shows

preference for the daughter, while the mother is most affectionate

toward the son. But even this factor cannot seriously undermine the

spontaneous character of the childish Oedipus-complex. The

Oedipus-complex expands and becomes a family-complex when other children

appear. It becomes the motive force, revived by the sense of personal

injury, which causes the child to receive its brothers and sisters with

aversion and to wish to remove them without more ado. It is much more

frequent for the children to express these feelings of hatred than those

arising from the parent-complex. If such a wish is fulfilled, and death

takes away the undesired increase in the family, after a short while we

may discover through analysis what an important experience this death

was for the child, even though he had not remembered it. The child

forced into second place by the birth of a little brother or sister, and

for the first time practically isolated from his mother, is loathe to

forgive her for this; feelings which we would call extreme bitterness in

an adult are aroused in him and often become the basis of a lasting

estrangement. We have already mentioned that sexual curiosity with all

its consequences usually grows out of these experiences of the child.

With the growing up of these brothers and sisters the relation to them

undergoes the most significant changes. The boy may take his sister as

the object for his love, to replace his faithless mother; situations of

dangerous rivalry, which are of vast importance for later life, arise

even in the nursery among numerous brothers who court the affection of a

younger sister. A little girl finds in her older brother a substitute

for her father, who no longer acts towards her with the same affection

as in former years, or she takes a younger sister as a substitute for

the child that she vainly wished of her father.

Such things, and many more of a similar character, are shown by the

direct observation of children and the consideration of their vivid

childish recollections, which are not influenced by the analysis. You

will conclude, among other things, that the position of a child in the

sequence of his brothers and sisters is of utmost importance for the

entire course of his later life, a factor which should be considered in

every biography. In the face of these explanations that are found with

so little effort, you will hardly recall without smiling the scientific

explanations for the prohibition of incest. What inventions! By living

together from early childhood the sexual attraction must have been

diverted from these members of the family who are of opposite sex, or a

biological tendency against in-breeding finds its psychic equivalent in

an innate dread of incest! In this no account is taken of the fact that

there would be no need of so unrelenting a prohibition by law and

morality if there were any natural reliable guards against the

temptation of incest. Just the opposite is true. The first choice of an

object among human beings is regularly an incestuous one, in the man

directed toward the mother and sister, and the most stringent laws are

necessary to prevent this persisting infantile tendency from becoming

active. Among the primitive races the prohibitions against incest are

much more stringent than ours, and recently Th. Reik showed in a

brilliant paper that the puberty-rites of the savages, which represent a

rebirth, have the significance of loosing the incestuous bonds of the

boy to his mother, and of establishing the reconciliation with the

father.

Mythology teaches that incest, apparently so abhorred by men, is

permitted to the gods without further thought, and you may learn from

ancient history that incestuous marriage with his sister was holy

prescript for the person of the ruler (among the ancient Pharaohs and

the Incas of Peru). We have here a privilege denied the common herd.

Incest with his mother is one of the sins of Oedipus, patricide the

other. It might also be mentioned that these are the two great sins

which the first social-religious institution of mankind, totemism,

abhors. Let us turn from the direct observation of the child to analytic

investigation of the adult neurotic. What does analysis yield to the

further knowledge of the Oedipus-complex? This is easily told. It shows

the patient up in the light of the myth; it shows that each of these

neurotics was himself an Oedipus or, what amounts to the same thing,

became a Hamlet in the reaction to the complex. To be sure, the analytic

representation of the Oedipus-complex enlarges upon and is a coarser

edition of the infantile sketch. The hatred of the father, the

death-wish with regard to him, are no longer timidly suggested, the

affection for the mother recognizes the goal of possessing her for a

wife. Dare we really accredit these horrible and extreme feelings to

those tender childhood years, or does analysis deceive us by bringing in

some new element? It is not difficult to discover this. Whenever an

account of past events is given, be it written even by a historian, we

must take into account the fact that inadvertently something has been

interpolated from the present and from intervening times into the past;

so that the entire picture is falsified. In the case of the neurotic it

is questionable whether this interpolation is entirely unintentional or

not; we shall later come to learn its motives and must justify the fact

of "imagining back" into the remote past. We also easily discover that

hatred of the father is fortified by numerous motives which originate in

later times and circumstances, since the sexual wishes for the mother

are cast in forms which are necessarily foreign to the child. But it

would be a vain endeavor to explain the whole of the Oedipus-complex by

"imagining back," and as related to later times. The infantile nucleus

and more or less of what has been added to it continues to exist and may

be verified by the direct observation of the child.

The clinical fact which we meet with in penetrating the form of the

Oedipus-complex as established by analysis, is of the greatest practical

importance. We learn that at the period of puberty, when the sexual

instinct first asserts its demands in full strength, the old incestuous

and familiar objects are again taken up and seized anew by the libido.

The infant's choice of an object was feeble, but it nevertheless set the

direction for the choice of an object in puberty. At that time very

intense emotional experiences are brought into play and directed towards

the Oedipus-complex, or utilized in the reaction to it. However, since

their presuppositions have become unsupportable, they must in large part

remain outside of consciousness. From this time on the human individual

must devote himself to the great task of freeing himself from his

parents, and only after he has freed himself can he cease to be a child,

and become a member of the social community. The task confronting the

son consists of freeing himself from his libidinous wishes towards his

mother and utilizing them in the quest for a really foreign object for

his love. He must also effect a reconciliation with his father, if he

has stayed hostile to him, or if in the reaction to his infantile

opposition he has become subject to his domination, he must now free

himself from this pressure. These tasks are set for every man; it is

noteworthy how seldom their solution is ideally achieved, i.e., how

seldom the solution is psychologically as well as socially correct.

Neurotics, however, find no solution whatever; the son remains during

his whole life subject to the authority of his father, and is not able

to transfer his libido to a foreign sexual object. Barring the

difference in the specific relation, the same fate may befall the

daughter. In this sense the Oedipus-complex is correctly designated as

the nucleus of the neurosis.

You can imagine how rapidly I am reviewing a great number of conditions

which are associated with the Oedipus-complex, of practical as well as

of theoretical importance. I cannot enter upon their variations or

possible inversions. Of its less immediate relations I only wish to

indicate the influence which the Oedipus-complex has been found to exert

on literary production. In a valuable book, Otto Rank has shown that the

dramatists of all times have taken their materials principally from the

Oedipus-and incest-complexes, with their variations and disguises.

Moreover, we will not forget to mention that the two guilty wishes of

Oedipus were recognized long before the time of psychoanalysis as the

true representatives of the unrestrained life of impulses. Among the

writings of the encyclopedist Diderot we find a famous dialogue, _The

Nephew of Ramau_, which no less a person than Goethe has translated into

German. In this you may read the remarkable sentence: "_If the little

savage were left to himself he would preserve all his imbecility, he

would unite the passions of a man of thirty to the unreasonableness of

the child in the cradle; he would twist his father's neck and bed with

his mother_."

There is also one other thing of which I must needs speak. The

mother-wife of Oedipus shall not have reminded us of the dream in vain.

Do you still remember the result of our dream analysis, that the wishes

out of which the dream is constructed so frequently are of a perverse,

incestuous nature, or disclose an enmity toward near and beloved

relatives the existence of which had never been suspected? At the time

we did not trace the sources of these evil impulses. Now you may see

them for yourselves. They represent the disposition made in early

infancy of the libidinous energy, with the objects, long since given up

in conscious life, to which it had once clung, which are now shown at

night to be still present and in a certain sense capable of activity.

But since all people have such perverse, incestuous and murderous

dreams, and not the neurotics alone, we may conclude that even those who

are normal have passed through the same evolutionary development,

through the perversions and the direction of the libidio toward the

objects of the Oedipus-complex. This, then, is the way of normal

development, upon which the neurotics merely enlarge. They show in

cruder form what dream analysis exposes in the healthy dreamer as well.

Accordingly here is one of the motives which led us to deal with the

study of the dream before we considered the neurotic symptom.

TWENTY-SECOND LECTURE

GENERAL THEORY OF THE NEUROSES

_Theories of Development and Regression--Etiology_

We have learned that the libidio goes through an extensive development

before it can enter the service of reproduction in a way which may be

regarded as normal. Now I wish to present to you what importance this

fact possesses for the causation of neuroses.

I believe we are in harmony with the teachings of general pathology in

assuming that this development involves two dangers, inhibition and

regression. In other words, with the universal tendency of biological

processes toward variation, it must necessarily happen that not all

preparatory phases of a given function are equally well passed through

or accomplished with comparable thoroughness. Certain components of a

function may be permanently held back in an early stage of development

and the complete development is therefore retarded to a certain extent.

Let us seek analogies for these processes from other fields. If a whole

people leaves its dwellings to seek a new home, as frequently happened

in the early periods of the history of mankind, their entire number will

certainly not reach the new destination. Setting aside other losses,

small groups or associations of these wandering peoples would stop on

the way, and, while the majority passes on, they would settle down at

these way-stations. Or, to seek a more appropriate comparison: You know

that in the most highly evolved mammals, the male seminal glands, which

originally are located in the far depths of the abdominal cavity, begin

to wander during a certain period of intra-uterine life until they reach

a position almost immediately under the skin of the pelvic extremity. In

the case of a number of male individuals, one of the paired glands may

as a result of this wandering remain in the pelvic cavity, or may be

permanently located in the canal through which both glands must pass in

their journey, or finally the canal itself may stay open permanently

instead of growing together with the seminal glands after the change of

position has taken place normally. When, as a young student, I was doing

my first piece of scientific research under the direction of von Bruecke,

I was working on the dorsal nerve-roots in the spinal cord of a small

fish very archaic in form. I discovered that the nerve ganglia of these

roots grow out from large cells which lie in the grey matter of the

dorsal column, a condition no longer true of other vertebrates. But I

soon discovered that such nerve cells are found outside the grey matter

all the way to the so-called spinal ganglion of the dorsal root. From

this I concluded that the cells of this group of ganglia had traveled

from the spinal cord to the roots of the nerves. This same result is

attested by embryology. In this little fish, however, the entire path of

the journey was traceable by the cells that had remained behind. Closer

observation will easily reveal to you the weak points of these

comparisons. Therefore let me simply say that with reference to every

single sexual impulse, I consider it possible for several of its

components to be held back in the earlier stages of development while

other components have worked themselves out to completion. You will

realize that we think of every such impulse as a current continuously

driving on from the very beginning of life, and that our resolving it

into individual movements which follow separately one upon the other is

to a certain extent artificial. Your impression that these concepts

require further clarification is correct, but an attempt would lead to

too great digression. Before we pass on, however, let us agree to call

this arrest of a partial impulse in an early stage of development, a

_fixation_ of the instinct.

_Regression_ is the second danger of this development by stages. Even

those components which have achieved a degree of progress may readily

turn backward to these earlier stages. Having attained to this later and

more highly developed form, the impulse is forced to a regression when

it encounters great external difficulties in the exercise of its

function, and accordingly cannot reach the goal which will satisfy its

strivings. We can obviously assume that fixation and regression are not

independent of each other. The stronger the fixations in the process of

development prove to be, the more readily will the function evade

external difficulties by a regression back to those fixations, and the

less capable will the fully developed function be to withstand the

hindrances that stand in the way of its exercise. Remember that if a

people in its wandering has left large groups at certain way-stations,

it is natural for those who have gone on to return to these stations if

they are beaten or encounter a mighty foe. The more they have left on

the way, however, the greater is their chance of defeat.

For your comprehension of the neuroses it is necessary to keep in mind

this connection between fixation and regression. This will give you a

secure hold upon the question of the cause of neuroses--of the etiology

of neuroses--which we shall soon consider.

For the present we have still to discuss various aspects of regression.

With the knowledge you have gained concerning the development of the

function of libido, you must expect two kinds of regression: incestuous

return to the first libidinous objects and return of the entire sexual

organization to an earlier stage of development. Both occur in the

transference neuroses and play an important part in its mechanism.

Especially is the return to the first incestuous objects of libido a

feature that the neurotic exhibits with positively tiresome regularity.

We could say far more about regression of libido if we took into

consideration another group of neuroses: neurotic narcism. But we cannot

do this now. These conditions give us a clue to other stages of

development of the function of libido, which have not been mentioned

previously, and correspondingly show new kinds of regression. But I

think the most important task before me at this point is to warn you not

to confuse _regression_ and _suppression_, and aid you to see clearly

the connection between the two processes. Suppression, as you know, is

the process by which an act capable of becoming conscious, in other

words, an act that belongs to the fore-conscious system, is rendered

unconscious and accordingly is thrust back into the unconscious system.

Similarly we speak of suppression when the unconscious psychic act never

has been admitted into the adjoining fore-conscious system but is

arrested by the censor at the threshold. Kindly observe that the

conception of suppression has nothing to do with sexuality. It describes

a purely psychological process, which could better be characterized by

terming it _localized_. By that we mean that it is concerned with the

spatial relationships within the psyche, or if we drop this crude

metaphor, with building up the psychological apparatus out of separate,

psychic systems.

Through these comparisons we observe that up to this point we have not

used the word regression in its general, but in a very special sense. If

you accord it the general meaning of return from a higher to a lower

stage of development you must include suppression as a form of

regression, for suppression may also be described as the reversion to an

earlier and lower stage in the development of a psychic act. Only in

regard to suppression, this tendency to revert is not necessarily

involved, for when a psychic act is held back in the early unconscious

stage we also term it suppression in a dynamic sense. Suppression is a

localized and dynamic conception, regression purely descriptive. What up

this point we have called regression and considered in its relation to

fixation, was only the return of libido to former stages of its

development. The nature of this latter conception is entirely distinct

and independent of suppression. We cannot call the libido regressions

purely psychical processes and do not know what localization in the

psychological apparatus we should assign to them. Even though the libido

exerts a most powerful influence on psychic life, its organic

significance is still the most conspicuous.

Discussions of this sort, gentlemen, are bound to be somewhat dry. To

render them more vivid and impressive, let us return to clinical

illustrations. You know that hysteria and compulsion-neurosis are the

two chief factors in the group of transference neuroses. In hysteria,

libidinous return to primary, incestuous sexual objects is quite

regular, but regression to a former stage of sexual organization very

rare. In the mechanism of hysteria suppression plays the chief part. If

you will permit me to supplement our previous positive knowledge of this

neurosis by a constructive suggestion, I could describe the state of

affairs in this manner: the union of the partial instincts under the

domination of the genitals is accomplished, but its results encounter

the opposition of the fore-conscious system which, of course, is bound

up with consciousness. Genital organization, therefore, may stand for

the unconscious but not for the fore-conscious. Through this rejection

on the part of the fore-conscious, a situation arises which in certain

aspects is similar to the condition existing before the genitals had

attained their primacy. Of the two libido regressions, the regression to

a former stage of sexual organization is by far the more conspicuous.

Since it is lacking in hysteria and our entire conception of the

neuroses is still too much dominated by the study of hysteria which

preceded it in point of time, the meaning of libido regression became

clearer to us much later than that of repression. Let us be prepared to

widen and change our attitude still more when we consider other

narcistic neuroses besides compulsion-neurosis and hysteria in our

discussion.

In contrast to this, regression of libido in compulsion-neurosis turns

back most conspicuously to the earlier sadistico-anal organization,

which accordingly becomes the most significant factor expressed by the

symptoms. Under these conditions the love impulse must mask itself as a

sadistic impulse. The compulsion idea must therefore be reinterpreted.

Isolated from other superimposed factors, which though they are not

accidental are also indispensable, it no longer reads: "I want to murder

you"; rather it says "I want to enjoy you in love." Add to this, that

simultaneously regression of the object has also set in, so that this

impulse is invariably directed toward the nearest and dearest persons,

and you can imagine with what horror the patient thinks of these

compulsion ideas and how alien they appear to his conscious perception.

In the mechanism of these neuroses, suppression, too, assumes an

important part, which it is not easy to explain in a superficial

discussion of this sort. Regression of the libido without suppression

would never result in neurosis but would finally end in perversion. This

makes it obvious that suppression is the process most characteristic of

neurosis, and typifies it most perfectly. Perhaps I shall at some future

time have the opportunity of presenting to you our knowledge of the

mechanism of perversions and then you will see that here also things do

not work themselves out as simply as we should best like to construe

them.

You will most readily reconcile yourself with these elucidations of

fixation and regression, when you consider them as a preface to the

investigation of the etiology of neuroses. Towards this I have only

advanced a single fact: that people become neurotically ill when the

possibility of satisfying their libido is removed, ill with "denial," as

I expressed myself, and that their symptoms are the substitutes for the

denied gratification. Of course, that does not mean that every denial of

libidinous satisfaction makes every person neurotic, but merely that in

all cases known of neurosis, the factor of denial was traceable. The

syllogism therefore cannot be reversed. You also understand, I trust,

that this statement is not supposed to reveal the entire secret of the

etiology of neurosis, but only emphasizes an important and indispensable

condition.

A General Introduction to Psychoanalysis · 第 27 / 38 段