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 studying character formations of neurotic persons and those who are not too neurotic (sometimes euphemistically called “normal”), we are constantly confronted with cross sections of unconscious identifications. These identifications refer partly to different people in the child's environment; and every analyst is familiar with the patient's resentment and indignation on having pointed out to him the source of his identifications. Obviously, only the choice and the “mixture” of these identifications are original in the psychic make-up of each human being.
What determines this choice? If we are to believe our patients, their identifications mirror simply their specific environment. Analysis has proven time and again that such an assumption is a mirage. First of all, it does not account for the exercise of choice among possible objects of identification. For instance, a boy confronted in childhood with a severe, aggressive father and a kind, weak mother may grow up to be a sissy of the feminine, hysteric type. How are we to explain his identification with his weak mother instead of with his aggressive father? Obviously we must take into consideration the castration complex, which forced the child into his feminine position. Furthermore, we can prove in such a case that a short but futile attempt to identify with the father preceded the feminine identification but was shattered by the oedipal castration fear, as pointed out 45 years ago by Freud.
Second, the identifications are not at all photographic pictures of real persons. They all go through narcissistic modifications, and thus take on to a large degree the characteristics of the person performing the identification, a fact stressed first by Edoardo Weiss.