Fatherhood in the Psychoanalytic Literature and Unconscious Attempts at Mastery over Dependent Introjects During Paternal Adult Development
By Karen Barna
There was a term I learned of recently in my exploration of this amazing peer-reviewed journal resource. This term is called Paterfamilias which is a Latin term for the ancient Roman conceptualization of fatherhood. As described by Colleen McCullough in her wonderful series of historical novels about Roman life, the paterfamilias was the head of the family. His right to do as he pleased with his family was rigidly protected by law. He was expected to be kind, loving, and generative, but he had the legal power to be an unchallenged dictator if he so decided; he could choose his children’s spouses, and could even put them to death for severe transgressions (Colarusso, 2005).
“Modern-day versions of the paterfamilias still exist in some cultures, but in the Western world, such total paternal power exists only in the realm of fantasy, and in film and literature (Colarusso, 2005).”
The head of the paterfamilias are characters we might associate within movies like the “Godfather.” Although expected to be kind, loving, and generative, these dominant male heads had the power to be an unchallenged dictator if they so decided, putting those in the “family” to death for severe transgressions against his will. Two classics that offer an excellent representation of aging fatherhood and the internal psychic struggles in late adulthood is William Shakespeare’s King Lear and Tennessee Williams’ Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. Both these classics do illustrate the psychoanalytic tenet that all development, healthy or pathological, has at its core internal conflict; for every father in late adulthood must struggle with his approaching mortality, his complex feelings about the appraisal of his children, and his intrapsychic response to their ambivalence toward him in caring for his aging body. It is here I’d like to explain why I am using this particular analytic. I am referring to this analytic because of the “intrapsychic response to the complex feelings of the father surrounding the appraisal or disapproval of his children and his ambivalence towards him, especially in caring for his aging body.” The material I am going to be referencing strictly is geared to the psychology of fatherhood in late adult development (age 60 to 80 and beyond) and I’m going to make a suggestion that the “children” in his perspective may not actually be his biological children, but perceived as such (that is to say, as a “child subordinate”) in derangement of perception. I reference this because I believe I am dealing with a pathological personality; a paterfamilias the like of John Gotti, a psychopath whose derangements in thinking are bent and twisted through a distorted lens of perception. Particularly relevant to this focus on late adulthood is Pollock’s comment (1998) that “development, obviously, is not the same as growth and can include progression, regression, new constructions, remodeling, and in some ways, decline.” (p. 44).
In dealing with the pathological, the paterfamilias, or head of the family exerts control and dominance over his “children” who may also be called his subjects (see Butler, 1997). From the beginning of time, sons have coveted what their father’s had — although always fearful of his power and ability to castrate and kill — and were willing to band together to take, through violence if necessary, the progenitor’s power and possessions. And it’s important to note that money and women are two possessions that are of significant interest to men lacking them. It is interesting to learn that some men unconsciously make a move to master their sons through dominance and control when they select a wife. This is because in normal male psychological development the narcissistic fear of the aging body especially in late development as it pertains to fatherhood through the age 60 to 80 and beyond, is rooted in the fear of the father’s loss of identity as being a capable PROVIDER for his wife and “children”. We can make a connection to this paternal gender role and the psychology found in Freud’s Oedipus complex as it being part of the “idealized father” or Ego Ideal.
As illustrated in King Lear and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, and in the interactions described in various case vignettes between fathers and their children by psychoanalysts, the rise of civilization may have tempered but has by no means eliminated the envy, money grasping, cajoling manipulations and violence. Scenes of this destructiveness described in Totem and Taboo, and to which Freud discovered considerable clinical confirmation to prove his theory establishing castrating fears in the human psyche, in particular in the case of Little Hans (1909).
“It was Freud who has shed enormous insight on the psychologically dangerous aspects, especially for the immature boy, regarding the boy’s relationship with his father as formulated in Freud’s Oedipus complex. Freud returned repeatedly to the consideration of violence and competitiveness underlying the relationship between fathers and their sons through the concept of the ‘primal horde (Colarusso, 2005).’”
In my culture, I have witnessed the envy, money grasping, manipulations for inheritance, cajoling manipulations, and violence and sadism rooted in narcissistic masculinities. So, I have to laugh at and shake my head at critics like Judd Marmor’s commentary regarding sadism being the recurring “myth” in psychoanalytic literature when almost every civilization that has endured; ancient, modern, and post-modern have always resorted to war and destruction as a reoccurring solution to a problem (please see Marmor and Gorney, 1999; Chessick, 1996). What’s more, is the fact that intrapsychic conflicts emerge at each stage of adult development based on our early Oedipal relationships and these conflicts constantly need to be reworked during every stage they appear in. Therapy, therefore, in this light helps to maintain neutrality towards Objects, and psychoanalysis is a medical service that is mostly unattainable for most working-class men who never acquire an understanding of the technique as well as the process behind this analytic approach and its need for continuous re-work and repair. Therefore, in many men, these unconscious psychological specters that affect men’s behavior remain hidden and undisclosed to the subjects themselves, existing never fully aware of the influence these past introjects and identifications have on their behavior. For example, there are “developmental tasks” that are expected to be completed at certain stages of adult development. In late-life development, tasks pertain to maintaining physical and mental health, sexual and emotional intimacy, conducting the life review, and preparing for death. There are a different set of tasks one is expected to complete during the third separation-individuation phase of development as well. It is important to note that the separation-individuation process can be derailed or rendered “incomplete” due to the infliction of psychic trauma or the experience of cataclysmic traumatic events such as war and earthquakes. The importance of the developmental tasks at each stage cannot be stressed enough. As many forgo the work because they are not aware of how adult development is expected to progress or they may be oppressed by poverty and psychopathic personalities.
With regard to the Operator/Controller using electronic targeting assaults over my body and mind, a female subject, I have to ask the question, What kind of unconscious attempts of mastery over the Oedipal introjects exists here in the psyche of the Operator/Controller? And were these introjects “malevolent introjects”? And have these unconscious specters been worked through as part of the psychological re-work for the continuation of normal adult masculine development? (please see Jacobs, 2007)
“A “father’s” attitude toward his “children” is also strongly influenced by internalized images he has of adult experiences with his own father, now likely dead for many years (Colarusso, 2005).” Likewise, a “mother’s” attitude toward her children is also strongly influenced by internalized images she has of her mother during childhood. Like any good investigator, the psychoanalysts want to know, “What was the nature of these relationships, both with the father as well as the mother?” As well as the question, “How was the individual’s relationship affected by their Oedipal arrangement and what was the outcome?”
In late adult development aged 60 to 80 and beyond, “a father’s attitude toward his children is determined by how each of them expresses a willingness to care for him and his wife as their realistic and emotional needs increase in late adulthood.” These are the psychic conflicts and struggles each adult father struggles with and are demonstrated in the Shakespearian play King Lear and Tennesse William’s Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. These same psychic conflicts and struggles are present for mothers/wives as well. What will be the solution for those couples who never had children? Who will take care of them? The solution to this dilemma is approached differently by the individuals. For pathological personalities who are stuck in an infantile state of development, the solution may be malign. Psychoanalysts are constantly re-working their internalized introjects in order to maintain neutrality when dealing with their patients. So, a psychoanalyst isn’t going to pass judgment as to whether a person’s actions were “right” or “wrong”. It is up to the psychoanalyst to listen and analyze, then try to re-create the symbolic relationship in an attempt to help the child re-work his perceptions and opinions. Courts of law are the entities that pass judgment in deciding whether a crime has been committed, whether someone’s actions violated the boundaries of civil law. This is not up to the psychoanalyst to decide, rather listen and understand the patient's current progress. Psychoanalysts may render opinions about the characterology of a person’s personality but to say whether that personality is “right” or “wrong” is really inconsequential to the role of the psychoanalyst, provided the person does not pose a threat to the general public, themselves, or to the analyst.
For me, in dealing with my family, I can tell you I am dealing with “mafia mentality” and the “paterfamilias.” A pathological head that needs to addressed. Anyone who wants to harness direct control over a person's body and mind through clandestine surreptitious means has issues with control and, in all likelihood, is dealing with psychic specters that persist because they are malevolent introjects. These are issues serial rapists and serial murders; serial thieves have to struggle against on a daily basis. Unconscious attempts at mastery over their internalized Objects and the identifications associated with those introjects. In short, bat shit fucking crazy!
SOURCES: (Some of these sources were referenced in the paper and some were not. All these works still provide significant importance to the subject matter at hand.)
Benjamin, Jessica. (1995). Like Subjects, Love Objects: Essays on Recognition and Sexual Differences. Binghampton, New York. Vail-Ballou Press.
Butler, Judith. (1997). The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford, CA. Stanford University Press.
Chasseguet-Smirgel, Janine. (1984). A Re-Reading of ‘Little Hans’. In Creativity and Perversion. London. Free Association Books. (pp. 35–43).
Chessick, Richard D., M.D. (1996). Archaic Sadism. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 24(4), 605–618.
Colarusso, Calvin (2000). Separation-Individuation Phenomena in Adulthood: General Concepts and the Fifth Individuation. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 48(4), 1467–1489.
Emde, Robert N. (1985). From adolescence to midlife: Remodeling the structure of adult development. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. 33:59–112.
Erikson, Erik. (1963). Childhood and Society. New York. Norton.
Freud, S. (1909) Analysis of a phobia of a five-year old boy. The Pelican Library, Vol. 8, Case Histories, (pp. 169–306).
Freud, S. (1921). Group psychology and the analysis of the ego. Standard Edition. Vol. 28. pp. 67–144.
Freud, Sigmund. (1924). “The dissolution of the Oedipus complex.” Standard Edition. Volume 19. London. Hogarth Press.
Jacobs, Amber. (2007). On Matricide: Myth, Psychoanalysis, and the Law of the Mother. New York. Columbia University Press. (pp. 78–79).
Jones, E. (1927). The early development of female sexuality. In Papers on Psychoanalysis. London. Maresfield Reprints.
Kohut, H. (1971). The Analysis of the Self. International Universities Press. New York.
Kohut, H. (1977). The Restoration of the Self. International Universities Press. New York.
Marmor, J., & Gorney, R. (1999). Instinctual Sadism: A Recurrent Myth about Human Nature. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 27(1), 1–6.
Pollock, George H. (1998). Aging or aged: Development or pathology. In The Course of Life: Completing the Journey, ed. G.H. Pollock & S.I. Greenspan. Madison, CT: International Universities Press, pp. 41–86.
Stark, Evan. (2007). Technology of Coercive Control. In Coercive Control: Entrapment of Women in Personal Life. New York. Oxford University Press. (pp. 228–288).
Walker, Michelle Boulous. (1998). Philosophy and the Maternal Body: Reading Silence. New York. Routledge.
Wallin, David J. (2007). Attachment in Psychotherapy. New York. The Guilford Press.
Weiland, Christina. (1996). ‘Matricide and Destructiveness: Infantile Anxieties and Technological Culture.’ British Journal of Psychotherapy 12, №3; 300–313.
Winnicott, D.W. (1971). “The use of the Object and relating through identifications.” In Playing and Reality. Harmondsworth. Penguin, 1980.
