Difference between revisions of "Frustration"
(→References) |
(The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles).) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Psychoanalysis== | ==Psychoanalysis== | ||
| − | The English term "[[frustration]]" came into increasing prominence in certain branches of [[psychoanalytic theory]] in the 1950s, together with a shift in emphasis from the [[Oedipus complex|Oedipal]] [[structure|triangle]] to the [[mother]]-[[child]] [[dual relation|relation]]. | + | The [[English]] term "[[frustration]]" came into increasing prominence in certain branches of [[psychoanalytic theory]] in the 1950s, together with a shift in emphasis from the [[Oedipus complex|Oedipal]] [[structure|triangle]] to the [[mother]]-[[child]] [[dual relation|relation]]. |
==Biological Need== | ==Biological Need== | ||
| − | In this context, [[frustration]] was generally understood as the [[act]] whereby the [[mother]] denies the [[child]] the [[object]] which would satisfy one of his [[biology|biological]] [[need]]s. To [[frustrate]] a [[child]] in this way was thought by some [[analyst]]s to be a major factor in the aetiology of [[neurosis]]. | + | In this context, [[frustration]] was generally [[understood]] as the [[act]] whereby the [[mother]] denies the [[child]] the [[object]] which would satisfy one of his [[biology|biological]] [[need]]s. To [[frustrate]] a [[child]] in this way was [[thought]] by some [[analyst]]s to be a major factor in the aetiology of [[neurosis]]. |
==Sigmund Freud== | ==Sigmund Freud== | ||
==''Versagung''== | ==''Versagung''== | ||
| − | "[[Frustration]]" is also the term which the ''[[Standard Edition]]'' uses to translate [[Freud]]'s term ''[[Frustration|Versagung]]''. While this term is not extremely prominent in [[Freud]]'s work, it does form part of his theoretical vocabulary. At a first glance, indeed, it may appear that [[Freud]] discusses [[frustration]] in the way described above. For example he certainly attributes to [[frustration]] an important place in the aetiology of [[symptom]]s, stating that "it was a frustration that made the patient ill."<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of Sigmund Freud|Lines of Advance in Psycho-Analytic Therapy]]," 1919a [1918]. [[SE]] XVII, 162.</ref> | + | "[[Frustration]]" is also the term which the ''[[Standard Edition]]'' uses to translate [[Freud]]'s term ''[[Frustration|Versagung]]''. While this term is not extremely prominent in [[Freud]]'s [[work]], it does [[form]] part of his [[theoretical]] [[vocabulary]]. At a first glance, indeed, it may appear that [[Freud]] discusses [[frustration]] in the way described above. For example he certainly attributes to [[frustration]] an important [[place]] in the aetiology of [[symptom]]s, [[stating]] that "it was a frustration that made the patient ill."<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of Sigmund Freud|Lines of Advance in Psycho-Analytic Therapy]]," 1919a [1918]. [[SE]] XVII, 162.</ref> |
==Jacques Lacan== | ==Jacques Lacan== | ||
| − | Hence when [[Lacan]] argues that the term "[[frustration]]" is "quite simply [[absent]] from Freud's work,"<ref>{{S3}} p.235</ref> what he means is that the [[Freud]]ian concept of ''[[Frustration|Versagung]]'' does not correspond to the concept of [[frustration]] as described in the above paragraph. [[Lacan]] argues that those who have theorized the concept of [[frustration]] in this way have, by deviating from [[Freud]]'s work, led [[psychoanalytic theory]] into a series of impasses.<ref>{{S4}} p. 180</ref> Thus in the [[seminar]] of 1956-7 he seeks a way of reformulating the concept in accordance with the logic of [[Freud]]ian [[psychoanalytic theory|theory]]. | + | Hence when [[Lacan]] argues that the term "[[frustration]]" is "quite simply [[absent]] from Freud's work,"<ref>{{S3}} p.235</ref> what he means is that the [[Freud]]ian [[concept]] of ''[[Frustration|Versagung]]'' does not correspond to the concept of [[frustration]] as described in the above paragraph. [[Lacan]] argues that those who have theorized the concept of [[frustration]] in this way have, by deviating from [[Freud]]'s work, led [[psychoanalytic theory]] into a series of impasses.<ref>{{S4}} p. 180</ref> Thus in the [[seminar]] of 1956-7 he seeks a way of reformulating the concept in accordance with the [[logic]] of [[Freud]]ian [[psychoanalytic theory|theory]]. |
=="Lack of Object"== | =="Lack of Object"== | ||
| − | [[Lacan]] begins by classifying [[frustration]] as one of the three types of "[[lack|lack of object]]," distinct from both [[castration]] and [[privation]]. | + | [[Lacan]] begins by classifying [[frustration]] as one of the [[three]] types of "[[lack|lack of object]]," distinct from both [[castration]] and [[privation]]. |
==Demand for Love== | ==Demand for Love== | ||
| − | Although he concedes that [[frustration]] is at the heart of the primary relations between [[mother]] and [[child]],<ref>{{S4}} p. 66</ref> he argues that [[frustration]] does not concern [[biology|biological]] [[need]]s but the [[demand]] for [[love]]. This is not to say that [[frustration]] has nothing to do with a [[real]] [[object]] capable of satisfying a [[need]] (e.g. a breast, or a feeding bottle); on the contrary, such an [[object]] is certainly involved, at least at first.<ref>{{S4}} p.66</ref> | + | Although he concedes that [[frustration]] is at the heart of the primary relations between [[mother]] and [[child]],<ref>{{S4}} p. 66</ref> he argues that [[frustration]] does not concern [[biology|biological]] [[need]]s but the [[demand]] for [[love]]. This is not to say that [[frustration]] has [[nothing]] to do with a [[real]] [[object]] capable of [[satisfying]] a [[need]] (e.g. a [[breast]], or a feeding bottle); on the contrary, such an [[object]] is certainly involved, at least at first.<ref>{{S4}} p.66</ref> |
==Symbolic Function== | ==Symbolic Function== | ||
| − | However, what is important is that the [[real]] function of this [[object]] (to [[satisfaction|satisfy]] a [[need]], such as hunger) is soon completely overshadowed by its [[symbolic]] function, namely, the fact that it functions as a [[symbol]] of the [[mother]]'s [[love]].<ref>{{S4}} p.180-2</ref> The [[object]] is thus valued more for being a [[symbolic]] [[object|gift]] than for its capacity to [[satisfy]] a [[need]]. | + | However, what is important is that the [[real]] function of this [[object]] (to [[satisfaction|satisfy]] a [[need]], such as hunger) is soon completely overshadowed by its [[symbolic]] function, namely, the fact that it functions as a [[symbol]] of the [[mother]]'s [[love]].<ref>{{S4}} p.180-2</ref> The [[object]] is thus valued more for [[being]] a [[symbolic]] [[object|gift]] than for its capacity to [[satisfy]] a [[need]]. |
==Legal Order== | ==Legal Order== | ||
| − | As a gift, it is inscribed in the [[symbolic order|symbolic network]] of [[law]]s which regulate the circuit of exchanges, and thus seen as something to which the [[subject]] has a legitimate claim.<ref>{{S4}} p. 101</ref> [[Frustration]], properly speaking, can only occur in the context of this [[law|legal]] [[order]], and thus when the [[object]] which the [[infant]] [[demand]]s is not provided, one can only speak of [[frustration]] when the [[infant]] senses that it has been wronged.<ref>{{S4}} p. 101</ref> In such a case, when the [[object]] is eventually provided, the sense of wrong (of broken promises, of [[love]] withheld) persists in the [[child]], who then consoles himself for this by [[enjoyment|enjoying]] the sensations which follow the [[satisfaction]] of the original [[need]]. | + | As a [[gift]], it is inscribed in the [[symbolic order|symbolic network]] of [[law]]s which regulate the circuit of exchanges, and thus seen as something to which the [[subject]] has a legitimate [[claim]].<ref>{{S4}} p. 101</ref> [[Frustration]], properly [[speaking]], can only occur in the context of this [[law|legal]] [[order]], and thus when the [[object]] which the [[infant]] [[demand]]s is not provided, one can only [[speak]] of [[frustration]] when the [[infant]] senses that it has been wronged.<ref>{{S4}} p. 101</ref> In such a [[case]], when the [[object]] is eventually provided, the [[sense]] of wrong (of broken promises, of [[love]] withheld) persists in the [[child]], who then consoles himself for this by [[enjoyment|enjoying]] the sensations which follow the [[satisfaction]] of the original [[need]]. |
==Refusal of Love== | ==Refusal of Love== | ||
| − | Thus, far from [[frustration]] involving the failure to [[satisfy]] a [[biological]] [[need]], it often involves precisely the opposite; a [[biological]] [[need]] is [[satisfied]] as a vain attempt to compensate for the true [[frustration]], which is the refusal of [[love]]. | + | Thus, far from [[frustration]] involving the failure to [[satisfy]] a [[biological]] [[need]], it often involves precisely the opposite; a [[biological]] [[need]] is [[satisfied]] as a vain attempt to compensate for the [[true]] [[frustration]], which is the [[refusal]] of [[love]]. |
==Psychoanalytic Treatment== | ==Psychoanalytic Treatment== | ||
| − | [[Frustration]] plays an important role in [[psychoanalytic treatment]]. [[Freud]] noted that, to the extent that distressing [[symptom]]s disappear as the [[treatment]] progresses, the [[patient]]'s motivation to continue the [[treatment]] tends to diminish accordingly. In order, therefore, to avoid the risk of the [[patient]] losing motivation altogether and breaking off the [[treatment]] prematurely, [[Freud]] recommended that the [[analyst]] must "re-instate [the patient's suffering] elsewhere in the form of some appreciable privation."<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of Sigmund Freud|Lines of Advance in Psycho-Analytic Therapy]]," 1919a [1918]. [[SE]] XVII, 163.</ref> | + | [[Frustration]] plays an important [[role]] in [[psychoanalytic treatment]]. [[Freud]] noted that, to the extent that distressing [[symptom]]s [[disappear]] as the [[treatment]] progresses, the [[patient]]'s motivation to continue the [[treatment]] tends to diminish accordingly. In order, therefore, to avoid the risk of the [[patient]] losing motivation altogether and breaking off the [[treatment]] prematurely, [[Freud]] recommended that the [[analyst]] must "re-instate [the patient's suffering] elsewhere in the form of some appreciable privation."<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of Sigmund Freud|Lines of Advance in Psycho-Analytic Therapy]]," 1919a [1918]. [[SE]] XVII, 163.</ref> |
This technical advice is generally known as the rule of [[frustration|abstinence]], and implies that the [[analyst]] must continually [[frustrate]] the [[patient]] by refusing to gratify his [[demand]]s for [[love]]. In this way, "the patient's need and longing should be allowed to persist in her, in order to serve as forces impelling her to do work and to make changes."<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of Sigmund Freud|Observations on Transference Love]]," 1915a. [[SE]] XII, 165</ref> | This technical advice is generally known as the rule of [[frustration|abstinence]], and implies that the [[analyst]] must continually [[frustrate]] the [[patient]] by refusing to gratify his [[demand]]s for [[love]]. In this way, "the patient's need and longing should be allowed to persist in her, in order to serve as forces impelling her to do work and to make changes."<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of Sigmund Freud|Observations on Transference Love]]," 1915a. [[SE]] XII, 165</ref> | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
While [[Lacan]] agrees with [[Freud]] that the [[analyst]] must not gratify the [[analysand]]'s [[demand]]s for [[love]], he argues that this [[act]] of [[frustration]] is not to be seen as an end in itself. Rather, [[frustration]] must be seen simply as a means to enable the [[signifier]]s of previous [[demand]]s to appear. | While [[Lacan]] agrees with [[Freud]] that the [[analyst]] must not gratify the [[analysand]]'s [[demand]]s for [[love]], he argues that this [[act]] of [[frustration]] is not to be seen as an end in itself. Rather, [[frustration]] must be seen simply as a means to enable the [[signifier]]s of previous [[demand]]s to appear. | ||
| − | <blockquote>"The analyst is he who supports the demand, not, as has been said, to frustrate the subject, but in order to allow the signifiers in which his frustration is bound up to reappear."<ref>{{E}} p. 255</ref></blockquote> | + | <blockquote>"The analyst is he who supports the demand, not, as has been said, to frustrate the subject, but in order to allow the [[signifiers]] in which his frustration is bound up to reappear."<ref>{{E}} p. 255</ref></blockquote> |
| − | The aim of the [[analyst]] is, by supporting the [[analysand]]'s [[demand]]s in a state of [[frustration]], to go beyond [[demand]] and cause the [[analysand]]'s [[desire]] to appear.<ref>{{E}} p. 276</ref> | + | The aim of the [[analyst]] is, by supporting the [[analysand]]'s [[demand]]s in a [[state]] of [[frustration]], to go beyond [[demand]] and [[cause]] the [[analysand]]'s [[desire]] to appear.<ref>{{E}} p. 276</ref> |
==Communication== | ==Communication== | ||
| − | [[Lacan]] differs from [[Freud]] in the way he theorizes the rule of [[frustration|abstinence]]. For [[Freud]], the rule of [[frustration|abstinence]] primarily concerned the [[analysand]]'s [[frustration|abstinence]] from sexual activity; if a [[patient]] implores the [[analyst]] to make [[love]] to her, the [[analyst]] must [[frustrate]] her by refusing to do so. While [[Lacan]] agrees with this advice, he stresses that there is a much more common [[demand]] that the [[analyst]] can also [[frustrate]] -- the [[analysand]]'s [[demand]] for a reply. The [[analysand]] expects the [[analyst]] to follow the rules of everyday [[communication|conversation]]. By refusing to follow these rules -- remaining silent when the [[analysand]] asks a question, or taking the [[analysand]]'s [[word]]s in a way other than that in which they were intended -- the [[analyst]] has a powerful means at his disposal for [[frustrating]] the [[analysand]]. | + | [[Lacan]] differs from [[Freud]] in the way he theorizes the rule of [[frustration|abstinence]]. For [[Freud]], the rule of [[frustration|abstinence]] primarily concerned the [[analysand]]'s [[frustration|abstinence]] from [[sexual]] [[activity]]; if a [[patient]] implores the [[analyst]] to make [[love]] to her, the [[analyst]] must [[frustrate]] her by refusing to do so. While [[Lacan]] agrees with this advice, he stresses that there is a much more common [[demand]] that the [[analyst]] can also [[frustrate]] -- the [[analysand]]'s [[demand]] for a reply. The [[analysand]] expects the [[analyst]] to follow the rules of everyday [[communication|conversation]]. By refusing to follow these rules -- remaining silent when the [[analysand]] asks a question, or taking the [[analysand]]'s [[word]]s in a way [[other]] than that in which they were intended -- the [[analyst]] has a powerful means at his disposal for [[frustrating]] the [[analysand]]. |
==Anxiety== | ==Anxiety== | ||
| − | There is another way that the [[analyst]] [[frustrates]] the [[analysand]] which [[Lacan]] mentions in 1961. This is the [[analyst]]'s refusal to give the [[sign]]al of [[anxiety]] to the [[analysand]] - -the [[absence]] of [[anxiety]] in the [[analyst]] at all times, even when the [[analysand]] [[demand]]s that the [[analyst]] experience [[anxiety]]. [[Lacan]] suggests that this may be the most fruitful of all forms of [[frustration]] in [[psychoanalytic treatment]]. | + | There is [[another]] way that the [[analyst]] [[frustrates]] the [[analysand]] which [[Lacan]] mentions in 1961. This is the [[analyst]]'s refusal to give the [[sign]]al of [[anxiety]] to the [[analysand]] - -the [[absence]] of [[anxiety]] in the [[analyst]] at all [[times]], even when the [[analysand]] [[demand]]s that the [[analyst]] [[experience]] [[anxiety]]. [[Lacan]] suggests that this may be the most fruitful of all forms of [[frustration]] in [[psychoanalytic treatment]]. |
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
Latest revision as of 08:13, 24 May 2019
| French: frustration |
Psychoanalysis
The English term "frustration" came into increasing prominence in certain branches of psychoanalytic theory in the 1950s, together with a shift in emphasis from the Oedipal triangle to the mother-child relation.
Biological Need
In this context, frustration was generally understood as the act whereby the mother denies the child the object which would satisfy one of his biological needs. To frustrate a child in this way was thought by some analysts to be a major factor in the aetiology of neurosis.
Sigmund Freud
Versagung
"Frustration" is also the term which the Standard Edition uses to translate Freud's term Versagung. While this term is not extremely prominent in Freud's work, it does form part of his theoretical vocabulary. At a first glance, indeed, it may appear that Freud discusses frustration in the way described above. For example he certainly attributes to frustration an important place in the aetiology of symptoms, stating that "it was a frustration that made the patient ill."[1]
Jacques Lacan
Hence when Lacan argues that the term "frustration" is "quite simply absent from Freud's work,"[2] what he means is that the Freudian concept of Versagung does not correspond to the concept of frustration as described in the above paragraph. Lacan argues that those who have theorized the concept of frustration in this way have, by deviating from Freud's work, led psychoanalytic theory into a series of impasses.[3] Thus in the seminar of 1956-7 he seeks a way of reformulating the concept in accordance with the logic of Freudian theory.
"Lack of Object"
Lacan begins by classifying frustration as one of the three types of "lack of object," distinct from both castration and privation.
Demand for Love
Although he concedes that frustration is at the heart of the primary relations between mother and child,[4] he argues that frustration does not concern biological needs but the demand for love. This is not to say that frustration has nothing to do with a real object capable of satisfying a need (e.g. a breast, or a feeding bottle); on the contrary, such an object is certainly involved, at least at first.[5]
Symbolic Function
However, what is important is that the real function of this object (to satisfy a need, such as hunger) is soon completely overshadowed by its symbolic function, namely, the fact that it functions as a symbol of the mother's love.[6] The object is thus valued more for being a symbolic gift than for its capacity to satisfy a need.
Legal Order
As a gift, it is inscribed in the symbolic network of laws which regulate the circuit of exchanges, and thus seen as something to which the subject has a legitimate claim.[7] Frustration, properly speaking, can only occur in the context of this legal order, and thus when the object which the infant demands is not provided, one can only speak of frustration when the infant senses that it has been wronged.[8] In such a case, when the object is eventually provided, the sense of wrong (of broken promises, of love withheld) persists in the child, who then consoles himself for this by enjoying the sensations which follow the satisfaction of the original need.
Refusal of Love
Thus, far from frustration involving the failure to satisfy a biological need, it often involves precisely the opposite; a biological need is satisfied as a vain attempt to compensate for the true frustration, which is the refusal of love.
Psychoanalytic Treatment
Frustration plays an important role in psychoanalytic treatment. Freud noted that, to the extent that distressing symptoms disappear as the treatment progresses, the patient's motivation to continue the treatment tends to diminish accordingly. In order, therefore, to avoid the risk of the patient losing motivation altogether and breaking off the treatment prematurely, Freud recommended that the analyst must "re-instate [the patient's suffering] elsewhere in the form of some appreciable privation."[9]
This technical advice is generally known as the rule of abstinence, and implies that the analyst must continually frustrate the patient by refusing to gratify his demands for love. In this way, "the patient's need and longing should be allowed to persist in her, in order to serve as forces impelling her to do work and to make changes."[10]
Jacques Lacan
While Lacan agrees with Freud that the analyst must not gratify the analysand's demands for love, he argues that this act of frustration is not to be seen as an end in itself. Rather, frustration must be seen simply as a means to enable the signifiers of previous demands to appear.
"The analyst is he who supports the demand, not, as has been said, to frustrate the subject, but in order to allow the signifiers in which his frustration is bound up to reappear."[11]
The aim of the analyst is, by supporting the analysand's demands in a state of frustration, to go beyond demand and cause the analysand's desire to appear.[12]
Communication
Lacan differs from Freud in the way he theorizes the rule of abstinence. For Freud, the rule of abstinence primarily concerned the analysand's abstinence from sexual activity; if a patient implores the analyst to make love to her, the analyst must frustrate her by refusing to do so. While Lacan agrees with this advice, he stresses that there is a much more common demand that the analyst can also frustrate -- the analysand's demand for a reply. The analysand expects the analyst to follow the rules of everyday conversation. By refusing to follow these rules -- remaining silent when the analysand asks a question, or taking the analysand's words in a way other than that in which they were intended -- the analyst has a powerful means at his disposal for frustrating the analysand.
Anxiety
There is another way that the analyst frustrates the analysand which Lacan mentions in 1961. This is the analyst's refusal to give the signal of anxiety to the analysand - -the absence of anxiety in the analyst at all times, even when the analysand demands that the analyst experience anxiety. Lacan suggests that this may be the most fruitful of all forms of frustration in psychoanalytic treatment.
See Also
References
- ↑ Freud, Sigmund. "Lines of Advance in Psycho-Analytic Therapy," 1919a [1918]. SE XVII, 162.
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p.235
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre IV. La relation d'objet, 19566-57. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 180
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre IV. La relation d'objet, 19566-57. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 66
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre IV. La relation d'objet, 19566-57. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p.66
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre IV. La relation d'objet, 19566-57. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p.180-2
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre IV. La relation d'objet, 19566-57. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 101
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre IV. La relation d'objet, 19566-57. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 101
- ↑ Freud, Sigmund. "Lines of Advance in Psycho-Analytic Therapy," 1919a [1918]. SE XVII, 163.
- ↑ Freud, Sigmund. "Observations on Transference Love," 1915a. SE XII, 165
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 255
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 276
