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.
The divisive topic which exercises the psychoanalytic world today is the question whether human behavior is drive motivated or activated by object relations. The issue is whether interior or exterior plays the dominant role. The British school appears to be more object relations oriented, the American school more drive oriented. It is striking that neurology has never been troubled by this problem; the neurologist knows a response to the external world, and that settles the issue.
Common sense would tell the psychoanalyst that both views are correct; the engine of behavior needs to be driven into action, and the world will tell it where to go. Accordingly, the psychoanalyst will often enough find it easy to reconcile the seemingly divergent views. In this book Jacob Arlow's exposition shows clearly that no dispute is necessary, and his is a superb demonstration of the merging of the two views. Others, however, seem to regret that the issue has arisen at all. Loewald says (p. 399), “It is unfortunate that the development of ego-psychology had to take place in relative isolation from instinct-theory.” Developments, he feels, have “vitiated the understanding of the object-relationship between patient and analyst in psycho-analytic treatment” (p. 400). If there is a common meeting ground between the two schools of thought, one feels it will not be discerned by this form of attack. His effort to base real objects only on transference phenomena is not convincing.
The book is divided into three parts: (1) Instincts versus Relationships: The Emergence of Two Opposing Theories; (2) Object Relations and the Development of the Child; (3) Object Relations, Psychopathology and the Clinical Situation. The second part, with its papers by Bowlby, Mahler, Winnicott, and the Sandlers, will probably find the readiest acceptance.
Anthologies of papers on specific areas of a scientific field generally have contributions of more uniform caliber than is the case in the present collection. So