Echoism

The Silenced Response to Narcissism

Donna Christina Savery

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• eBook ISBN: 9781000026290
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

This book introduces the importance of echoism as a clinical entity and a theoretical concept. In Ovid's version of the myth of Echo and Narcissus, the character Echo receives equal attention to her counterpart, Narcissus, yet she has been completely marginalised in the pervasive literatures on narcissism.

The author draws upon her work with patients who have experienced relationships with narcissistic partners or parents, and have developed a particular configuration of object relations and ways of relating for which she uses the term echoism. She uses psychoanalytic theory and existential philosophical ideas to underpin her formulations and inform her clinical thinking.

Donnna Savery explores the question 'Am I an Echoist?' and introduces the concept of Echoism in the following YouTube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEyjolXL7lA

Part I
Important theories in understanding echoism

Chapter 1
The myth of Echo and Narcissus

Deconstructing dominant readings

Lost Echo sits amid the voiceless mountains

And feeds her grief

Percy Bysshe Shelley, “Adonais”, Stanza 15, 1821

This chapter argues for a repositioning of the marginalised narrative of the nymph Echo and her clinical counterpart. As Emslie (2012, p. 86) reminds us:

In the end, one sees that the phallocentric narrative is paradoxically the most fruitful category open to the woman. It becomes the site of a feminine unpicking, a poststructuralist deconstruction that tackles the discourse on the levels of its deepest assumptions … the dominant masculine narrative is always vulnerable to subversion.

Returning to the source material (Ovid, 2004), I apply a close reading to the myth of Echo and Narcissus, and critique dominant readings that focus primarily on the character of Narcissus. I highlight parts of the myth that are particularly relevant to the echoist as a basis for understanding her marginalisation and consider the consequences of this in the therapeutic situation and on her relationships in the world. I consider how Wilfred Bion’s theory (1962, p. 6) of alpha-function, concerning the discharge of what he terms beta-elements into the mother in the container-contained process, might be applied to understanding myth as a container and a transformative process. I clarify how I apply this to inform my understanding of the echoist’s particular needs in treatment. Finally, I draw attention to the need for acknowledgement concerning the very real experience of encountering the echoistic patient and the need for recognition and dialogue amongst analysts and therapists in order to further understanding.

The plethora of theories and clinical practices concerning narcissism purport to have their origins in the well-documented myth of Narcissus and Echo. In this chapter I draw attention to the ways in which the prevailing literatures have followed one dominant reading of the text, that which favours the narrative of Narcissus. I hope to reposition Echo as a subject equally worthy of our interest by returning to the myth itself, yet the task of doing so is made particularly difficult when such dominant ideas regarding narcissistic relating persist. To begin with Echo, when so much has been written of Narcissus, feels almost impossible, as the temptation is to use Narcissus as the touchstone, the subject, against which ideas, theories, and clinical observations of Echo must be bounced and tested. And yet to do so would be an act in its own right that reinforces the very essence of what we encounter in the narcissist – an important individual, entitled to special attention, over and above others. And so, in order to make her the subject of our enquiry, I begin with a detailed exploration of the character of Echo, through deconstructing and analysing her representation and manifestation in the myth. I then go on to compare this to more dominant readings in which Echo is viewed as secondary to Narcissus and in relation to him rather than as a subject in her own right.

There are many versions of the myth but, as Levy et al. (2011, Ch. 1) tell us, “Ovid’s version […] is undoubtedly the best known and most detailed, and contains elements that resonate with later developments on Narcissism.”

The first clinical applications of narcissism, which appear as early as 1898 in the work of Havelock Ellis, and Paul Näcke (1899) [see Freud (1917, ftn1, p. 73], are based upon this version of the myth.¹ In their original contribution to the study of narcissism, the character of Narcissus becomes the symbol for a phenomenon, observed in certain individuals with difficulties relating to others, as “self-love”. Psychoanalysis, psychiatry, and psychology have since amassed a vast quantity of literature, clinical diagnostic criteria, and clinical applications in which this phenomenon has become ubiquitous. While Echo is mentioned in various clinical papers, there are few references to Echo as a character of importance in her own right, and a complete absence of enquiry relating to echoism as a phenomenon in its own right.

1 Cited in Freud, S. (1905d, p. 218). Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, with the following ftn. added by Strachey, in 1920: “The term ‘narcissism’ was not introduced, as I erroneously stated in that paper [‘On Narcissism: an Introduction’] by Naecke, but by Havelock Ellis.” (Ellis himself subsequently discussed this point in detail and considered that the honours should be divided).

For those unfamiliar with the myth itself I will provide a summary, after which I offer a close reading and analysis of the parts of the myth in Ovid’s text specifically relevant to understanding and interpreting Echo’s narrative.

The myth of Echo and Narcissus²

2 For the purposes of this book the Greek names will be used for the gods to replace Roman ones where they occur..

Echo, a young and talkative nymph, leaves a clearing where Zeus, the thunder god, ruler of the gods on Mount Olympus, is cavorting with other nymphs. Suddenly she encounters the goddess Hera, wife of Zeus. Known for her loquaciousness, Echo uses her verbal prowess to charm the unsuspecting Hera with words, distracting the goddess from sounds of laughter emanating from her husband’s antics in the glade. On learning of this, the jealous goddess wreaks vengeance upon Echo, cursing her: “You shall no longer use your tongue to manipulate and deceive, from this moment you will be struck mute.” As an afterthought she adds, “Since you are so fond of having the last word, I will grant you that. You may repeat the last words of another, and your echo shall be a reminder to all of the power of the gods.” Echo is immediately struck dumb and loses the ability to communicate her original thoughts in words. Horrified at her loss of identity she hides away, unable to express her pain in words, with increasing resentment towards the goddess. Over time she begins to withdraw and fade from forest life. Without another with whom to converse, she begins to forget the sound of her own voice and she begins to lose the ability to make her thoughts manifest, and in so doing loses her connection to humanity. As she does so, her life force dwindles and she starts to fade away. One day there appears a youth, blessed with beauty and confidence, command and presence. He sees a movement in the trees and calls out, “Is anybody here?”

“Here,” replies a voice. “Come out and let me see you,” he calls, to which Echo appears with the words, “Let me see you.” “Young beauty,” calls Narcissus, to which Echo, suddenly filled with a voice, becomes enlivened, crying out enthusiastically as she runs towards the youth, “Young beauty!” But as she does so he notices the hollowness of her words, and sees the faded shell, asking her, “What do you want?” She is able only to repeat his last words and he becomes repulsed by this imitative creature in whom he sees no spirit, no challenge, with no life force of her own. “Go away,” he says, “you repulse me”, and as he pulls away Echo reaches out and clings all the more, knowing that without him she will again be reduced to a non-being. She is left to pine, and as she does, the life seeps out of her and her skin and bones meld into the rocks and shrubs where she lies, leaving her barely distinguishable from the insentient beings with whom she shares her existence. Narcissus, meanwhile, is cursed for his cruel treatment of Echo and others by Nemesis – so that he would love only himself and never another – following a prophecy made at his birth by Tiresias, the blind seer, that Narcissus would live a long life, “so long as he never knows himself.” (Ovid, 2004, Book 3.347).

Following this, one day he returns from hunting and drinks from a pool, in which he sees the most beautiful image of a young man. Unable to recognise himself in the reflection, he tries to speak with it. Reaching out his arms to it, as his hands enter the water, the youth disappears from him, only to reappear as he pulls back. Tormented by love and the wish to possess this unavailable and beautiful creature, Narcissus becomes mesmerised. Unable to eat, and sleep, he focuses only on the youth. Eventually, he too begins to fade away and with each cry there is an echo from the woods, reminding him of his cruel treatment of the nymph. As he dies, Echo laments the loss of he who gave her an existence and a voice, and a deep howl of resentment is heard in the grove as she surveys the tragic state of their remains and joins him in his death cries. Eventually, Narcissus, too, ceases to retain his human form, leaving only a flower, a symbol of his fate, in his place.

Critical theory

Given the plethora of analyses and interpretations of Narcissus originating from Ovid’s myth, we might question the need to subject it yet again to another close reading. I would argue, however, that the absence of engagement with Echo’s experience in the myth, in the literature of psychoanalysis, needs to be investigated. The role of critical theory in literary practice has focused on considering how dominant readings reinforce a power structure where certain individuals’ experiences are prioritised over all others. It argues that formerly unquestioned assumptions that maintain the idea that there is an absolute truth must be interrogated to challenge that which is presented as true when seen through a dominant cultural lens. Critical theory has helped draw attention to all the narratives and voices, and therefore unrepresented and unvoiced truths, that may have become marginalised through this hegemonic process. It helps to explain, in the first instance, why the experience of Narcissus may not only have been regarded as more important than that of Echo, but that those charged with the task of writing about the myth may well have identified more with the character of Narcissus, as it resonates much more strongly with their own identity and experiences. Interesting questions arise, therefore, regarding the degree to which the marginalisation of Echo’s importance is culturally determined. For our purpose, I propose to offer an alternative close reading of the myth, which prioritises the experience of Echo over that of Narcissus and, in so doing, challenges many assumptions formerly made, and not questioned. This goes some way to understanding why Echo herself may have become marginalised, not just in analyses of the myth but in the psychoanalytic thinking that has prevailed.

Close reading of Ovid’s version of the myth

The first description given of Echo is that she is manipulative and talkative. In Ovid’s account she uses speech to hide truth, and prioritises the male god’s hedonistic and self-serving behaviour over his wife’s feelings:

The goddess [Hera] would be all ready

to catch her husband Zeus making love to some nymph, when crafty Echo

would keep her engaged in a long conversation, until the nymph could scurry to safety.

(Ovid, 2004, Book 3. 362)

The words “scurry” and “safety” reveal how powerless and fearful the nymphs are in relation to the gods, belying representations of Echo as influential and manipulative of Hera. I suggest that where words and actions appear contradictory, there is a need for probing and exploration to understand exactly whose narrative is being represented and whose remains unheard, and why there is an experience of incongruity for the witness to the phenomenon. I will discuss in detail in Chapter Five the corresponding experience for the therapist as it is encountered in the clinical situation. It is important, however, to draw attention to its occurrence here in the myth, because the incongruence has largely been ignored, and is crucial to my understanding of echoism.

When Saturn’s daughter perceived what Echo was doing, she said to her,

“I’ve been cheated enough by your prattling tongue.

From now on your words will be short and sweet!” Her curse took effect at once.

Echo could only repeat the words she heard at the end of a sentence and never reply for herself.

(Ibid., Book 3. 366)

While this shows Echo’s ability to dissemble, it is easy to see how Hera is locating her angry feelings towards her husband in Echo, whom she has some power to punish and damage. While Hera’s punishment is perhaps a fitting one – the ability to speak her own truth is withheld from Echo – it seems unnecessarily harsh to curse her for protecting the most powerful god in existence. It demonstrates Echo’s dilemma, and perhaps goes some way in justifying her choice to offend instead the god with the lesser power. The curse has the effect of rendering Echo to a mere fragment of her former self, and Ovid likens her to a parrot, one who mimics and imitates but has nothing original to contribute.

Echo … could only … parrot the last few words of the many spoken by others.

(Book 3. 359)

We might see this as the de-humanising effect of her punishment, leaving her with an inability to relate to another person as a human being in her own right. Whilst an objection may be raised on the basis that Echo is indeed a nymph, and not a human woman, I would argue she certainly fulfils the function of a woman in the myth, and has recognisably human emotions and feelings, and for our purposes we can therefore treat her as human. It is interesting to speculate that she has already been somehow ‘transformed’ before we meet her in the myth, but I leave this path of enquiry for further consideration elsewhere.

When Echo finally encounters the youth Narcissus, Ovid draws attention both to her lack of a voice and to her absence of Being:

her nature imposed a block and would not allow her to make a start. She was merely permitted

and ready to wait for the sounds which her voice could return to the speaker.

(Ibid., Book 3. 376)

We can see in this extract how she requires the other in order not just to be able to speak, but to be. This is fundamentally important, as it points to the requirement of, and the depende...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of clinical vignettes
• Acknowledgements
• About the author
• Foreword
• Introduction
• PART I Important theories in understanding echoism
• PART II Types of echoism
• PART III Over-valued ideas, god-like objects, and faith
• PART IV A dynamic understanding of an echoistic-narcissistic complex
• PART V Conclusions and future directions
• References
• Index