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.
IN FREUD'S EARLY EMPHASIS on the economy of drives and drive derivatives, cast within the frame of reference provided by the libido theory, he put the emphasis on the biologically-derived instinctual components. In the instinctual equation based on elements of pressure, aim, source and object, Freud's emphasis fell on the elements of pressure, aim and source, while the role of the object was relatively minimized. As Freud (1915) observed:
The object of an instinct is the thing in regard to which or through which the instinct is able to achieve its aim. It is what is most variable about an instinct and is not originally connected with it, but becomes assigned to it only in consequence of being peculiarly fitted to make satisfaction possible. (p. 122)
In the ensuing three score and more years, the analytic view of the role of the object and its place in psychological functioning has undergone a radical revision. Under the stimulus provided by the object relations theorists, analysts have come to regard the impact of significant objects and the child's interaction with significant objects during the course of development as some of the most significant and central dimensions of the psychoanalytic perspective. We now recognize that the development of drives and drive derivatives in the human individual is inherently connected with and powerfully influenced by the quality of ongoing relationships that the developing individual experiences with the important objects in his life experience. The context of object relationships determines not only the patterning of the expression of drives and their derivatives, but also powerfully influences other important dimensions of the individual's developing ego, superego and self-organization.
The somewhat varied perspective offered by the object relations viewpoint within psychoanalysis is by no means a divergence from