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 author notes a difference between primitive pregenital infantile love and mature love. He regards as complementary the various explanations of the difference between the two forms of love. In his view the important element in primitive love is the proper and timely satisfaction of all needs because of the individual's almost absolute dependence on the object; object and gratification are all-important. No consideration can be paid to the object's interests, sensitivities, or well-being. The object is taken for granted. Gratification brings only a state of tranquil comfort.
The sense of omnipotence is a desperate attempt to overcome a feeling of helplessness and impotence. Omnipotence and 'oral greed' are almost constantly associated.
All primitive object relations contain three ingredients: 1, despondent dependence; 2, denial of the dependence by omnipotence; and, 3, taking the object for granted, treating it as a thing. In this primitive relationship, only one partner can make demands. The basis for all such pregenital object relations is faulty reality testing. We must learn in our development that we can no longer expect automatic satisfaction by our objects but have to give something to change the object into a coöperative partner. The object must be induced to enjoy giving and getting satisfaction in the same mutual action. The author calls this 'the