You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
My interest in Kohut's theory of narcissism has developed not just because I find his approach conceptually interesting and because his work has had an enormous impact on clinical practice, but because I think he illustrates, more than any other theorist I can think of, the political dimension within psychoanalytic theorizing. To highlight this aspect of his work, I would like to do three things in this presentation; first, to track the basic principles of Kohut's approach to narcissism and personality functioning in general; second, to place Kohut's work in the larger context of the history of psychoanalytic ideas and the range of strategies taken by various theorists for positioning themselves within that tradition; and third, to examine the implications of Kohut's ancestry in and political affiliation with drive theory for his formulations concerning narcissism.
In presenting Kohut's views, I want to focus mostly on his most recent book, The Restoration of the Self.1 However, I would like to begin by briefly summarizing the major lines of his argument in his earlier book, The Analysis of the Self,2 published in 1971, since his fundamental innovations were introduced there. What has changed since 1971 are not Kohut's basic concepts, but the way he positions them vis-à-vis classical theory—in other words, his politics.
In the earlier work Kohut takes as his terminological starting point Freud's original distinction between narcissistic libido and object libido, although he radically alters the meaning of these terms. Kohut suggests a conceptual framework in which narcissistic libido and object libido are conceived of as independent energy sources, reflecting different kinds of experiences and undergoing independent lines of development and transformation. Both