From
Lipot Szondi, Ich-Analyse [=
Ego
Analysis]
Translated by
Arthur C. Johnston
© 2008
By Arthur C. Johnston, PhD
Please Observe: The copyright of this article (in German or =
in
English) belongs to the Szondi Institute and to Dr. Arthur C. Johnston. Thi=
s means
you may not duplicate this article without their permissions.
Introjection.
Incorporation.
=
Introjection is the unconscious, original
elementary striving of the ego to take possession and to incorporate the va=
lued
objects, valued representations, and all valued contents of the outer and i=
nner
world. The
unconscious final goal of each introjection is the original human's aspirin=
g to have everything.
=
Concept
and Forms of Introjection
=
As with most concepts of psycholog=
y,
introjection also appears first in philosophy.
=
(a)
Introjection as a Philosophical Concept
=
The
word introjection coined originally by the well-known inhabitant of =
=
=
With
Avenarius and also with other philosophers of that time, the word introj=
ection
however possessed still a double sense.&nb=
sp;
On the one hand it means the
"putingt in" as representations within the soul of components from
the external world. On the
other hand “introjection,” according to him, means also the put=
ting
one's own perceptions into other fellow men. "Through introjection&quo=
t; --
writes Avenarius -- "the natural unity of the empirical world becomes =
split
into two directions: Into an external world and an internal world and into =
that
of the object and the subject. Of
both opposition positions, the first term is still always the factual exper=
ience
of humans; and the second term belongs to one's fellow men. The inner
world is the world, as far as it becomes projected into other fellow me=
n; the
subject is the inside of the fe=
llow
man himself.2
=
As a result of introjection the individual finds himself first=
on one
side as “objects”[or
“things”] of the “environment components” and
second on the other side as individ=
uals
“who perceive the objects.” Thus “objects” on one s=
ide
and “perceptions of objects” on the other side.
The person however puts unknowingly,=
unwillingly
and indiscriminately inner perceptions from things that he has previously f=
ound
into another fellow man. But not only empirically found things but also per=
ceptions,
feelings and will from one man, according to Avenarius, are put inside one’s fellow m=
en.
Humans experience through introjection that other humans have perceptions, feelings, will… experience, knowledge. Therefore Avenarius says that in=
trojection
for humans performs itself at the same time as experience.
Already from these short discussions it becomes clear that Ave=
narius
uses the word introjection as a primal word [Urwort] ambivale=
ntly
and that he designates with the same word two polar opposite processes: Int=
rojection
and projection. Introjection is with him, on the one hand, the putting in o=
f ideas
of things and persons, which originate from the external world, into one=
217;s
own ego. Thus this is about what we understand today generally by introject=
ion.
On the other hand also the shifting out and respectively inserting of our
experiences and the contents of our own subject into persons of the external
world. Thus: Projection. Getting in the external world into one’s own=
ego
and also inserting one’s own subject contents into fellow men is call=
ed
with Avenarius introjection.
=
(b) Introjection as a Psychological
Concept
=
=
The
opposition between introjection and projection was first emphasized by the
psychoanalyst Sandor Ferenczi.3 According to him, projection means a shifting out of subjective contents into the object; introjection in opposition is the =
inclusion of objects into one's
subjective interest circle.
=
=
S.
Ferenczi clarified this difference between the two ego functions as follows:
"While the paranoid pushes outward the excitements becoming unpleasura=
ble out
of the ego (that is, projects), the neurotic helps himself out in the manner
that he takes large parts of the outer world as possible into his ego and c=
reates
unconscious fantasies about an object."4 That means that he introjects.
=
=
Thus in
this definition the particular function of introjection appears clearly in
relation to projection.
=
=
C. G.
Jung took over the definition of projection and introjection of Fere=
nczi
and lined up projection with dissimulation [breaking down]; introjection, on
the other hand with the assimilation [taking in] process. "Introjection means,"
according to C. G. Jung, &quo=
t;an alignment
of the object with the subject; projection means, on the other hand, a dist=
inction
of the object from the subject by means of subjective contents shifted onto=
an
object."5
=
=
For today’s
psychology, projection is "a d=
isposal
or alienation of inner
processes." (Freud). Introjection, on the other hand, is an internalization of an outer object=
and
respectively a mental process.
=
Fate psychology [Schicksalspsychologie] holds the opinion th=
at
everything that is capital in
character and in occupation, in knowledge and ability; everything that is t=
hat
are laid down as capital in material property of the individual and of the
community; everything that is "have
ideal," that is, all that which I will have from individual to
individual and from people to people in each case is placed as the object ideal of having and of possessi=
ng
-- all that is the result of introjection.=
The expression of unconscious introjective ego functions are
consequently of a very diverse nature.&nbs=
p;
We find introjection:
(1) in build up of the perceptive world
[world formation];
(2) in build up of possessions or have id=
eals
[ideal formation, identification];
(3) in build up of character [character
formation];
(4) in build up of professional and offic=
ial
personality -- that is, in the persona formation,
=
and finally
(5) in symptom formation.
=
=
This
enumeration illuminates the importance of introjection in the drive fate, the social fate, and the me=
ntal fate
of the individual and in that of the community.
=
= We will next explain the forms of introjection on the basis of the origins of introjective contents in three categories: (1) personal, (2) collectiv= e, and (3) familial introjection.<= o:p>
=
1.
Personal Introjection
=
We
call in general an introjection per=
sonal,
when the contents incorporated into the ego belong to the most narrow
experience circle and capital of the person.
=
=
When
the ego thus incorporates objects -- which it has personally held occupied with libido for awhile -- or experienc=
es
and perceptions that bear a personal note, then and only then is it justifi=
ed
to speak of a personal introjec=
tion.
=
=
With
this definition it is to be noted that we do not emphasize here the derivation of contents out of the repressed personal unconscious, as=
we
have indeed done with the personal form of projection and inflation. We must justify somehow this posit=
ion. In the case of personal projection=
we
have emphasized that the ego through projection may actually make the repre=
ssed
to come back. That means that=
the
ego brings back the libido repressed and detached from the former object wi=
th a
projected representation (hate, persecution) again to the object. The preoccupation with the object =
[Objektbesetzung] is consequently restored through projection.
=
=
With personal
inflation, the ego work consists in that the libido freed from the repressi=
on
has struck one’s own ego.=
It is thus evident that with perso=
nal
projection and inflation, repressio=
n precedes
as the obligated form of detachment of libido.
=
=
Different
however are the conditions with personal introjection. Here a libido detachment appears f=
irst
in any case. (This separation
moment expresses itself in the test in the reaction m-). Only in the =
manner
how this libido detachment has occurred is different from that of repressio=
n.
=
=
We
find this striking difference, according to Freud, in the following: With
repression, libido detachment happens in the manner that the ego lets the
libido-filled object with all the representations and experiences belonging=
to
it sink into the unconscious. That is the well-known process in the case of=
the transference neuroses, in part=
icular
with hysteria, and partially also with the compulsive neurosis.
=
With introjection, on the other hand, the
lost object is not repressed into the unconscious but is erected again in o=
ne’s
own ego. Freud calls this detachment from the object through this setting it up in=
the
ego identification. That =
means
that preoccupation with the object is removed by an identification.6&nb=
sp;
The libido detachment through identification
-- respectively through introjectio=
n
-- is, according to Freud, characteristic for the narcissistic affections -- that is, for melancholia and for def=
inite
types of schizophrenia (thus, for example, for k schizophrenias that are healed defectively).
=
=
Only
later did Freud discover the important role of introjection also in character formation. He writes, "Since that time we
understood" -- namely since the analysis of mourning and melancholia --
"that such compensation has a great part in the formation of the ego a=
nd
essentially contributes to what is produced and what is called character."7
=
=
Consequently,
Freud differentiated two different processes in the fate of separation of
libido:
=
=
1. Preoccupation
with the object and its defense
through repression.
=
2. Preoccupation
with the object and its defense
through setting up of the object in=
the
ego, that is, through identification.
=
=
Since
however with repression preoccupation with the object actually continues, F=
reud
places preoccupation with the object in relation to identification and ment=
ions
the following historically important facts.
=
=
"In
the earliest beginnings in the primitive oral
phase of the individual, preoccupied with the object and identifications are
not well distinguished from one another.&n=
bsp;
Later one can assume that preoccupation with the object proceeds from
the id, which feels the erotic strivings as need. The ego still weak at the beginning
receives knowledge from preoccupation with the object, and it lets itself f=
all
or seeks to defend itself through the process of repression."
=
=
"Should
or must such a sexual object be given up, thus because of that fairly
frequently appears the ego change, which one must describe as setting up of=
the
objects in the ego as is in the case of melancholia; the particular
circumstances of this process of setting up are still not known by us. Perhaps the ego through this
introjection, which is a kind of regression to the mechanism of the oral st=
age,
is the giving up of objects.
Perhaps this identification is actually the condition under which th=
e id
gives up its object. In any c=
ase
the process is all the more so very frequent in earlier development phases =
and
makes possible the interpretation that the character of the ego is a precip=
itation
of the given up preoccupation with the object and contains a history of this
object choice."8
=
=
*
=
=
From
this classic description of Freud, we can learn the following about the
personal manner of introjection and identification:
=
=
1. Personal introjection brings into
existence identifications and
assimilations, which are interpreted as ego
changes.
=
=
Identification
is not synonymous with identity=
. Identification rests on the proces=
s of
introjection; identity, on the other hand, rests on participation -- that is, primary projection.
=
=
2. Identification occurs through the
setting up of the lost objects in the ego.=
They are thus “ego-lik=
e”
substitute formations for the lost object. By the test and by experiment we
record this process in the reaction coupling of m- and k+.
=
=
3. The process of the ego-like substi=
tute
formation consists in the incorpora=
tion
(k+) of the lost object (m-) and represents thus a regressi=
on to
the oral phase.
=
Therefore
Freud calls introjection -- respectively the introjective identification --=
a
"psychic cannibalism."
=
=
4. Personal
introjection solves the question of separation of the person from the l=
ost
object through identification -- that is through incorporation of the object
and not through repression.
=
=
5. Introjection
(k+) is consequently the polar
opposite manner of libido detachment in relation to repression (k-).
=
=
6. Personal introjection is a substit=
ute
formation for the lost object through incorporation into the ego. It is the most important process i=
n (a)
the build up of character and (b) in the symptom formation of the narcissis=
tic
affections -- thus with melancholia and k
schizophrenia.
=
=
7. The form of identification, which =
occurs
through personal introjection, we call with Graber "active, introjective identification."9
=
=
According
to Freud this manner of identification is always narcissistic. He =
says,
"When the ego accepts the character traits of the object, he forces hi=
s self,
as it were, upon the id as a love o=
bject
and seeks to compensate himself for his loss by saying, "See, you can =
also
love me; I am so similar to the object."10 Love
to the ego replaces the lost love to the object.
=
We
must however emphasize that there is another kind: The passive, projective -- respectively participative -- form of identification (also archaic or quasi-=
identity
according to Lévy-Bruhl), which however is not introjective narcissi=
stic
and not through incorporation of the object but through being one, the same=
and
related with the object, thus occurring through participation. Th=
ere is
even a third so-called inflative form
of identification, which occurs through "being both" -- that is,
through the following inflation: "I am thus as I am, but thus also like
the other object."
=
=
We
must thus similarly accept like Graber two different categories and ways of=
identification:
=
=
(a) A materialistic "k" identifica=
tion
(k+), which occurs through incorporation, through personal
introjection. Graber calls it=
the active, introjective identification.
=
=
(b) A spiritual "p" identification=
,
which occurs either by the way of p=
articipation
or however through inflation.
=
=
The
following example will explain the process of introjection in a practical
manner.
=
Case 4: A 45 year old single language teacher suffers =
from
a severe depression. It appeared after a disillusionment in love within two
years. His fiancé, who before was always giving and tender, changed
suddenly her behavior. She became aggressive toward him, accusing and degrading<=
/i> him. Then she abandoned him and marri=
ed
another man.
=
=
The
impact snatched our good teacher from the very foundation of his existence.=
He
felt uprooted like a child and abandoned; wretched all day long, retreating
into his room, unable to work, he b=
egan to
accuse himself as the lost bride did before the separation: "He is=
not
a man. He is completely incapable of love and of marriage" and so on. =
He
did not dare any longer to appear among people since he was "nothing,&=
quot;
"a miserable fellow," the worst; he developed suicidal thoughts. =
The
condition lasted about two years long, until he decided finally to consult a
psychiatrist.
=
=
In
this case the steps of the mechanism of the melancholia developed by Freud =
are
shown clearly12:
=
=
1. The
teacher had bound himself to a woman with libido.
=
=
2.
This preoccupation with the object was shattered within two years by a disi=
llusionment.
=
=
3. He
had now incorporated the lost object, i.e. the picture of the bride again e=
rected
in his ego.
=
=
4.
Since he however carried out the introjection of the bride in a phase in wh=
ich she
behaved toward him aggressively, ac=
cusingly,
and disparagingly, he identifie=
s
himself from now on only with this picture of the lost bride and=
thus turned
his sadism against his own person. He complained against himself with the s=
ame
words that the bride had used toward him before the separation. Since she h=
ated
him at the conclusion of the relationship, he hated himself henceforth. The narcissistic identification put h=
im,
thus, by the introjection in the place of the hating, accusing and degradin=
g of
him by the bride and thus to that of the lost object.
Sub Classes of Personal Introjecti=
on
=
=
On the
basis of the intensity of
incorporation and the time factors<=
/i> we
have divided personal introjection into three sub classes:
=
=
(a)
Hyper Introjection
=
(b)
Detail introjection
=
(c) Ad-Hoc
Introjection
=
(a) Hyper Introjection
=
This
disturbed manner of introjection occurs through a hyper identification, thr=
ough
a super sharp incorporation of =
a former
object, which one has lost. T=
he
person introjects the lost object so "photographically" accurate =
that
he or she may never find a new object on the basis of this too sharp have i=
deal. Simply on the grounds that indeed =
the
lost unique object does not have a doppelgänger (double) in the
world. The introjecting perso=
n has
incorporated however the unique object so realistically from top to toe tha=
t he
or she can seek only this unique object and no other. This disturbance of introjection i=
s in
the test characterized by this syndrome:
=
=
Hyper
identification and hyper introjection: k+!
=
Perpetual
unquenchable, unsuccessful seeking of the lost, unique object: d+!
=
Tormenting
himself with this hopeless seeking: Masochism: s-!.
=
=
This
process is characteristic for melan=
cholia
and masochism.
=
(b) Detail Introjection
=
The
second manner of introjection disturbances consists in the incorporation of=
the
individual part and not the com=
plete
lost object. This means that =
not a
whole object is incorporated by the introjecting person but only an objective unimportant, moderat=
ely
experienced but overestimated individual part, a detail of the object, =
and then
only this "little piece" of the object does the person want to ha=
ve
and to possess; thus, this detail is raised up as he sole exciting object a=
nd searched
for henceforth. This is the
situation with fetishers.
=
(c) Ad-Hoc or Instant Moment Intro=
jection
=
Both
with hyper introjection and detail introjection, the instant -- thus the moment in time in which the incorporation of
the object happens -- is fate determining.=
One has the impression that the unconscious introjection mechanism in
the ego functions as a "photo automaton," that is, as an automatic apparatus=
for
the acceptance of photographic pictures.&n=
bsp;
This photo apparatus in the ego is set up and thus released into
activity in a normal manner automatically at the moment in which the carrie=
r of
this apparatus loses the love or hate object. Each
separation releases automatically the introjection apparatus and places in =
the
ego a mental picture "of the lost object."
=
=
Each person
carries in his or her ego therefore a complete "picture album" of=
all
lost objects. We call these p=
ictures
"have ideals" or &quo=
t;possession ideals," and on the
basis of these pictures are later sought new objects to be taken into
possession.
=
=
The
sharpness of these individual pictures depends partly on the constitutional,
inherited, individual variable precision strength of the introjection mecha=
nism
and partly however on the instant o=
f the "admission” -- that =
is,
the moment of separation. The more full of affect and traumatic and the
more immediate the losing of the object, the sharper and more intense is the
object as a “picture” incorporated into the ego.
=
=
Therefore
the different strengths of the individual pictures in "the picture
album" of the ego. And t=
hus
naturally the well-known phenomena that certain pictures can play a leading
role in seeking after new objects. <=
/span>
=
=
The more
blurred a have ideal picture is taken up in the ego, the more easily can the
carrier of this picture find an approximately similar new object. Thus this is the case with normal
everyday person.
=
=
On the
other hand, the person finds it extremely difficult to find a new object wh=
en
the lost object leaves behind a unique too-sharp mental picture in the
ego. This is the case in
melancholia, with fetishism, and, in general, with perversions.
=
=
Decisive
for the fate of the individual is naturally the mental instant moment situation, thus the "scenery of the mental scene" =
in
which the separation scene was played out.=
The circumstances, thus, whether the introjecting person at the
instant-moment of separation stood in a love or hate relationship to the
object, whether he is treated sadistically or lovingly at this time by the
separating object, furthermore whether the introjecting person himself has
caressed or mistreated the object at the moment of separation, or whether h=
e was
excited and by what excited him momentarily. All these instant momentary scene
pictures and excitements are decisive for the fate of the individual.
=
=
Why? The
introjection apparatus then "fixes" this instant moment scenery a=
nd
these momentary excitements; after which the person seeks compulsively and
unconsciously again and again to repeat this "fateful" instant mo=
ment
scene and all that accompanies it.
=
=
If,
for example, the love object is lost and incorporated in a moment of hate, =
then
a "hate object ideal picture" is established. As a result of this incorporated
"hate picture" the introjecting person seeks henceforth exclusive=
ly
such an object, by whom he himself is hated, tortured, devalued, and
humiliated. This is the case =
with
masochism and also with melancholia.
=
=
Or if
the first sexual excitation is evoked through catching sight of an
old-fashioned woman's panties or through stroking a sweating woman's hand or
through a naked foot or through a foot in a shoe with high heels; and if the
person has precisely introjecting these details, then the introjecting pers=
on
must incorporate these individual parts of this unique exciting object so
strongly as a have-ideal that in the future these details function as the
possession ideal and are sought.
Thus this is the case with the fetisher.
=
=
The
phenomena of fixing on a defini=
te
object in a particular situation -- respectively on an individual detail of=
the
object -- occurs precisely through this "snapshot," that is, by t=
he
ad-hoc introjection.
=
=
In
volume I of Triebpathology we have given two examples for ad-hoc
introjection.
=
=
In the
Case 5 (Case 39, p. 441 and fol=
lowing
pages, Vol. I) we presented a 55 year old gynecologist and morphine addict,=
who
was part transvestite and also part fetisher. His fetish was the old-fashio=
ned
lady pants, which during sexual intercourse either he put on or compelled h=
is
wife to do so.
=
=
This drive
is based historically on an experience that he had in puberty and that enti=
ced him
for the first time to masturbation. He stood at the window and looked on the
street down below, where immediately a thunderstorm broke out. Suddenly the=
wind
raised the skirt of a woman up, and he, petrified and fascinated, saw the u=
nderpants
of the woman, who struggled against the thunderstorm on the road. From now =
on
he always masturbated with the fantasy that he
himself had on the fateful lady pants. Then he stole the pants from his
sister, which he put on secretly, and masturbated in this way. Often he tho=
ught
of the underpants of his mother, but that remained taboo for him. Thus the
female pants became his fetish, which he needed for sexual excitation, and =
no
more was he able to do without it. He had to carry the fetish forward also =
into
the marriage bed. When his first wife revolted against this unnatural habit=
, he
fell into a deep depression, which drove him gradually to drinking and morp=
hine
addictions.
&nb=
sp; =
=
The ad-hoc
introjection of the lady underpants thus had a fate-determining effect.
=
In the
case 6 (case 32, Triebpathol=
ogie,
Vol. 1, p. 375 and following pages) a sweaty
hand fetish developed by ad-hoc introjection. The patient, a 20 yea=
r old
student, becomes excited sexually only by the thoroughly soaked sweaty and =
foul
smelling hand of his colleagues. One took him for a homosexual, which howev=
er he
was not, since he wished only the hand and otherwise however wished nothing=
at
all from the partner.
=
=
The
analysis solved the history of this strange anomaly. As a child he clung to=
his
mother, who however gave him very little tenderness. Thus he transferred hi=
s love
to a 20 year old cook, who he always ran after in the kitchen and who ̴=
9;-
inadvertently ‑- also sexually excited him. When he got an erection o=
nce when
nine years old in the kitchen and when this was noticed by the cook, she st=
ruck
him with a dirty, damp kitchen wash=
cloth
in the face. This experience for the testee became fate decisive through th=
e ad-hoc
introjection. From then on he struck the dirty
vile-smelling wash cloth on his face and nose, thereby excited himself =
and became
a slave of masturbation. Then he developed fantasy pictures of the hand and=
of
the arm of this cook with the appropriate smell and wetness. At the time of
puberty ‑- in a boarding school ‑- he alternated the person of =
the
cook with those of his colleagues. In order to be able to smell the hand of=
the
partner, he provoked scrapes and wrestling. Often he seriously fell in love=
with
one of these partners, but no one ever excited him as a whole person, alway=
s only the hand. A substitute action=
for
the hand was smelling gloves and di=
scarded
shirts and underpants, which he himself then wore.
=
=
Ad-hoc
introjection plays a quite similar role according to our experience in the
origin of criminality. This is elucidated from the following case of H. Wal=
der13,
about which we present additional material here on the basis of the
investigation of Binder.
=
Case 7. The 24 year old gardener and hotel emplo=
yee
was condemned by the court because of “attempted murder” to five
years prison. The act was as follows:
=
=
The accused
lured a twelve-year-old school boy on the pretext that he would like help to
get a shot deer from the forest and promised the boy five franks for doing
this. He sent the boy on ahead into the thick part of the forest; then he f=
ell
upon him from behind with both hands at the neck and choked him so strongly
that the boy sank into unconscious. When the perpetrator believed him dead,=
he suddenly
became conscious of his action, and thus he became incapable to carry out h=
is
plan to the end. According to statements of the perpetrator, he preserved t=
he
desire for "violating a handsome boy," i.e. for murder out of pas=
sion.
He was possessed of the need to have "a boy completely for himself alo=
ne; he
must kill him in order to extract the love of another from him." The p=
erpetrator
was so much possessed by this demand for a “having-pleasure-with
object” that he had already wandered about before the act in the area
around the school and looked for his pleasure object. This person had to we=
ar
however according to the statement of the perpetrator blue
=
&=
nbsp;
=
When he
wandered now in W., he saw a boy among the returning pupils, who wore the
fateful blue
=
&=
nbsp;
=
The
psychiatric investigation stated that the perpetrator is a manifest homosex=
ual fetisher
and transvestite. As a child he was educated as an effeminate woman by his =
mother
and his sister; soon he adopted a girl-like behavior and developed patholog=
ical
narcissistic and transvestite actions; in particular at this time he was
separated from his mother and was active with a farmer. Thus he became a
passive homosexual. Later, however, after an encounter with a sadist, he al=
so developed
in himself the inclination to the perversions of masochism and sadism. His
fantasy was occupied by metatropic pictures, playful strangling scenes, per=
verse
scenes in concentration camps for boys with sadistic actions that were pain=
ted out
fully by him in his fantasies. Decisive to his act however was a newspaper
report about a passion murder, in which a twelve-year-old boy had fallen
victim. This case mobilized in him all his abnormal sexual demands. He deci=
ded under
all circumstances to have a boy only for himself alone, to violate him, and=
to
commit suicide afterwards. Then he prepared everything in the forest for the
act. He looked for a suitable place, marked the way with broken off branche=
s,
provided pieces of an iron hook as a striking tool, and only then did he go=
on
the search for a boy with blue
=
*
=
The
drive psychological question here is: Why
was this perpetrator fixed so fatally on the blue
=
=
First
of all that the perpetrator wore blue
=
=
Secondly
that the mother, when he had made these blue
=
=
We
must assume that this experience had led to an ad-hoc introjection and that=
the
blue
=
=
The
personal ad-hoc introjection plays a double role in this case.
=
=
First
of all by the fact that after the separation from the mother he identified =
himself
with this mother. Since the mother loved him so much at this time and since=
he
still wore blue
=
=
Secondly,
the experience with the wet
=
=
The
case proves now the fate forming meaning of the personal ad-hoc introjectio=
ns
in a phase of development tha=
t becomes
later disastrous for the person who incorporated this ad-hoc picture.
=
=
The
next case is less tragic, nevertheless an example of how threatening for a life time an ad-hoc introjection can become f=
or
the bearer of these pictures.
=
Case 8. For instance a 40 year old artist, who in
European cities produced a vaudeville act for reading thoughts, consulted me
with the following question: He was actively homosexual since his youth, ne=
ver
had sexual intercourse with women, and nevertheless doubt torments him whet=
her he
was indeed "mentally" homosexual because he had, as he says, neve=
r had
the need to be a woman. On the contrary constantly he always clung to the
desire to marry, to have a family, and as a family father to lead a puritan=
and
bourgeois life. Although he already had gotten engaged several times, he fe=
lt
unable to sleep with a woman, and in the particular he could not do without=
the
love for men.
=
=
There
is an incomprehensible discrepancy between what he wants consciously and ho=
w he
behaves nightly in life. And there is still more. He loses any desire for m=
en
and his work in the course of years and has suicidal thoughts.
=
I
could take the man only for a short analysis since he had to continue his s=
tage
tour. The analysis uncovered that this artist is not inverted mentally, thus
homosexual, but metatropic and thus is sadomasochistic perverted. An encoun=
ter with
an artist happened at the time he came to analysis for help; this sadomasoc=
histic
perversion was able to lead back to a long forgotten experience in youth, w=
hich
had released the original ad-hoc introjection.
=
=
The object
of the encounter was a mechanic apprentice in a greasy pair of overalls, who
had worked in his hotel room during his settling in. The man attracted him =
so
much that he followed him even onto the roof area. Here the man pressed him
brutally against the wall and began sex play with him. The patient continued
commented on this meeting: "It was a horror for me to be with him. He =
was
wild and looked just like a lustful murderer; I had enormous fear of him, a=
nd
nevertheless I had to follow him."
=
=
We interpreted
this encounter like a dream and obtained insights about the individual elem=
ents
of the experience.
=
=
On the
mechanic apprentice, the patient indicated that this kind of young man was
extraordinarily attractive to him. The more crudely and more roughly the yo=
ung
man behaved, all the weaker his resistance becomes; in particular the greasy
pair of overalls of this apprentice attracted him. On the instigating words=
"roof,
roof area," suddenly the=
following
memory from his childhood was awakened: he was about four or five years old,
when an apprentice in a muddy pair of overalls took him up once into a room
under the roof. He sees clearly the window of the room; he still smells the=
odor
of the wood still stacked there. He sees how the apprentice takes his tape
measure out, opens and unfolds it, loosens the chain of the measure and with
the chain binds his hands, places him with his head against the wall with h=
is
lower legs spread out ‑- and he become powerless.
=
=
He had
completely forgotten this scene, yet now he sees clearly that he always sea=
rched
to repeat this experience in al=
l his encounters
with apprentices in a pair of overalls.
Now he actually understands why mechanics, who behave roughly and crudely,
affected him so significantly and why his last meeting on the roof with the=
mechanic
in a pair of overalls overcame any power of resistance from him. Because of=
this
pressing him exactly the same against the wall, as it has happened before, =
and
because the youth also wore a pair of overalls. His eyes had the same lustf=
ul
looking eyes of a murderer as those that had starred at him when a child.
=
=
From
these confessions it becomes now clear that our artist is indeed no "b=
orn"
homosexual. His sexuality remained fixated to the "sadomasochistic&quo=
t;
scene suffered in the youth. The picture, which he incorporated into his ego
through the ad-hoc introjection, forces him night after night to go on the
search for such apprentices in a pair of overalls, with whom he repeats the
forgotten original scene. He looks thus for his lustful murderer.
=
=
*
=
These
and similar experiences permit us to add the following complements to the
Freudian repression doctrine:
=
=
1. Complex
forming experiences and scenes are first ad-hoc introjected and only afterw=
ards
repressed.
=
=
2. Presumably
an ad-hoc introjection precedes most repressions. This statement will naturally not =
weaken
the making-ill meaning of repression but only completes it.
=
=
3. In psychoanalytical therapy one sh=
ould
notice the formation path of complexes reversed analytically. That means the repressed leads back
first into the phase of ad-hoc introjection, which analyzes the ad-hoc orig=
inal
identification and by this means facilitates making it conscious.
=
=
4. Complex
formations are almost all primary and personal ad-hoc introjections.
=
=
5. Probably definite character traits=
-- exactly
like complexes -- can be traced back to ad-hoc introjections in youth.
=
=
6. The rigidity of the pictures, which
originates from the ad-hoc introjection, causes the fixation and the often
insurmountable difficulty in the elimination of definite complexes,
perversions, and character anomalies.
=
=
7. We will indicate here only briefly=
the
important and disturbing effect of ad-hoc introjection in each education
situation. So many education =
errors
originate on the basis of ad-hoc introjection. Parents, infant nurses, pediatrici=
ans,
teachers, pastors, etc. must themselves be made conscious of these dangers =
and
consider therefore their behavior in relation to small children.
=
Personal Introjection and Symptom
Formation
=
In the
chapter "The Language of the Unconscious" we mentioned Freud's
classic definition of symptoms: "The symptom is a sign and substitute =
of a
frustrated drive satisfaction and a result of the repression process."=
14
=
=
According
to Freud the symptom thus originates from the personal repression. He
emphasizes that the symptom represents the "ego-strange" that is
found in the soul.
=
=
With
good reason one can therefore ask: If the symptom is actually a legitimate
substitute and descendent of the personal repressed
unconscious, as psychoanalysis affirms, why do we then speak of a
relationship between the symptom and introjection?
=
=
If introjection still has to do wi=
th the
identification -- that it has to do with the assimilation into the ego --
should the "ego-strange" be represented in the soul according to
Freud?
=
= Freud himself must have come across this contradiction and indeed in the symptom analysis of compulsion neurosis.15 Certainly the compulsion neurosis = -- exactly as with hysteria -- begins with the repression of the Oedipus complex. This repression symp= tom remains, however, according to him, in the lowest layer of the symptom fabric. In the symptom format= ion of compulsions however, according to him, the ego and the superego play completely special roles and, indeed, in the form of "reaction-formations." = About such ego changes he conceives the following symptoms of the