Object Relations

In his introduction, Leo Rangell suggested that the panel look at the vast field of object relations from the standpoint of clinical observations with their concomitant technical aspects and examine the role of object relations in psychoanalytic theory. Of the many broad issues in the area of object relations, Rangell selected two for closer consideration in his introduction: (a) the role of attachment in the wider field of object relations; and (b) the role of object relations in the wider general theory of human behavior in the psychoanalytic theory of neurosis.

Clinical data relevant to attachment behavior are abundant and can be found in manifestations of loneliness, separation, and loss of love. Rangell reviewed his own interest in the subject starting with observations which focused on the role of the perioral zone or the snout area in bringing about the desired state of attachment. Rangell considered the snout area, which is embryologically, anatomically, and physiologically suited for the function of attachment, important for adhering to the source of narcissistic supply, together with the hand, the skin, and the musculoskeletal postural systems. Later Rangell's interest turned from a consideration of the particular executive systems involved to a more detailed study of the function itself. He then conceived of the need for attachment as the psychological counterpart of the similar physical and biological need for stability and support. In Rangell's view, the quest for attachment progresses genetically from the infant's need for contact with the mother's body, to other people, and finally to wider units, such as family, groups, and community. True object relationships occupy an integral and central part within this spectrum of relatedness and attachment. This universal need for attachment can be traced across a spectrum from the normal to the psychopathologic, and from the benign to the most malignant forms. It is seen in its most direct manifestati