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 his Preface to Self and Other: Object Relations in Psychoanalysis and Literature, Robert Rogers announces a conversion experience. Once committed to Freudian drive theory and predominantly oedipal and sexual interpretations derived from it, he has come to see that a person-oriented psychoanalytic theory and an understanding of the self and its attachments ought to be central in the interpretation of both literature and persons. This is not surprising to contemporary students of psychoanalysis or literature. What is distinctive about Rogers's book is his insistent repetition of the contrast between the two theoretical commitments. Attachment theory, the work of John Bowlby, is for Rogers, the cure for drive theory. Once purged of its obsession with sexual meanings, a psychoanalysis of the self's struggle with attachment and loss reveals these themes underlying the meaning of a variety of texts ranging from Freud's case histories to Shakespeare, Melville, Dickinson, and Camus. Sexuality can then be safely relegated to its proper, minor role in the dynamics of the personality, having been exposed as the byproduct of an outmoded theoretical model. Throughout his book Rogers restates this contrast. Where sex was, there shall object relations be. Where sexuality may be, it should be subordinated to an object-relational focus on the self and its relations.