The Language of the Body

Physical Dynamics of Character Structure

Alexander Lowen

• Publisher: The Alexander Lowen Foundation
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781938485176
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Psychoanalysis
• Index: Psychology

The Language of the Body, originally published as Physical Dynamics of Character Structure, brilliantly describes how personality is expressed in the form and function of the body. The body is the key to understanding behavior and working with the body is the key to psychological health. The Language of the Body outlines the foundations of character structure: schizoid, oral, masochistic, hysteric, and phallic narcissistic personality types. Dr. Lowen examines the relationship between psychoanalytic theory and body therapy.

Part One

1

Development of Analytic Techniques

The history of the Development of Analytic Concepts and techniques is the story of therapeutic failures. This is true in every field of scientific endeavor; psychiatry and its related disciplines are no exceptions. Every advance is achieved through the recognition of a problem which previous methods of thinking and treatment failed to comprehend and resolve.

The very origin of psychoanalysis was in such a situation. We are familiar with the fact that Freud was interested in neurology and nervous diseases for a long time before he created the method of research and treatment for which he is known. The specific problem to which his attention was directed at the turning point in his career was the problem of hysteria. Previously, Freud had devoted himself “to physical therapy, and had felt absolutely helpless after the disappointing results experienced with Erb’s ‘electrotherapy.’” He then turned, as we know, to the use of hypnosis and especially to “treatment by suggestion during deep hypnosis” which he learned from Liebault and Bernheim. Freud later stated that he was not happy with this system of treatment in which, frequently, the hypnotist became angry because the patient “resisted” his suggestions. But Freud was also well acquainted with other therapeutic procedures for treating hysterias.

In the article which he published with Breur, “On The Psychical Mechanism of Hysterical Phenomena,” Freud (1893, p. 24) laid the basis for the scientific study of mental phenomena. True, the method he employed was hypnosis, but the analytic approach was substituted for the direct suggestion. It is described as follows: “and under hypnosis to arouse recollections relating to the time when the symptom first appeared.”

Hypnosis had its limitations. First, not every patient could be hypnotized. Second, Freud did not like to reduce the patient’s consciousness. As his insights progressed, Freud substituted free association for hypnosis as a way to the unconscious and later supplemented it with the interpretation of dreams as a source of knowledge about the unconscious.

These new techniques made possible further comprehension of the dynamics of psychic functioning. They revealed two phenomena which were concealed by the use of hypnosis. In 1914 (p. 298), in the article “On The History of the Psychoanalytic Movement,” Freud wrote that “the theory of psychoanalysis is an attempt to account for two observed facts that strike one conspicuously and unexpectedly whenever an attempt is made to trace the symptoms of a neurotic back to their sources in his past life: the facts of transference and resistance.” The method of psychoanalysis, therefore, “began with the new technique that dispenses with hypnosis.”

The importance of the phenomena of transference and resistance to the analytic concept is such that Freud (1914, p. 291) could say, “Any line of investigation, no matter what its direction, which recognizes these two facts and takes them as the starting point of its work may call itself psychoanalysis, though it arrives at results other than my own.” We would be justified at this point in seeking a definition of these terms and a further statement of how they are handled in the therapeutic situation.

In a lecture on psychotherapy, Freud (1904b, p. 261) had defined resistance as follows: “The discovery of the unconscious and the introduction of it into consciousness is performed in the face of a continuous resistance on the part of the patient. The process of bringing this unconscious material to light is associated with ‘pain’ (unlust), and because of this pain the patient again and again rejects it.” At this time, Freud considered psychoanalysis as a process of re-education in which the physician persuaded the patient to overcome the resistance and accept the repressed material.

If we ask about the nature of this pain (unlust) we find that it is the expression of a physical as well as psychical process. In one article, “Freud’s Psycho-Analytic Method,” (1904a, p. 267) the experience of a repressed memory is described as a feeling of “actual discomfort.” Freud had observed that the patient was uneasy, that he moved restlessly and showed signs of more or less disturbance.

In a lecture delivered in 1910 (p. 286), Freud spoke of the curative method of psychoanalysis as being based upon two approaches. One is the interpretation: “We give the patient the conscious idea of what he may expect to find, and the similarity of this with the repressed unconscious one leads him to come upon the latter himself.” The second, “more powerful one [lies] in the use of the ‘transference.’” We shall examine the problem of the transference more closely later. It is interesting to note, however, that as early as 1910 (p. 288), Freud described the therapeutic task in terms of resistance analysis. “Now, however, our work is aimed directly at finding out and overcoming the resistances.” And in an article on dream interpretation (1912b, p. 306) he said, “it is of the greatest importance for the cure that the analyst should always be aware of what is chiefly occupying the surface of the patient’s mind at the moment, that he should know just what complexes and resistances are active and what conscious reaction to them will govern the patient’s behavior.”

Though we are no nearer to a full understanding of the nature of the resistance, it is opportune to study the problem of transference, for we shall see that the two, resistance and transference, form two aspects of a single function. In his discussion of “The Dynamics of Transference,” Freud (1912a, pp. 312, 314) started with a basic assumption derived from his years of analytic experience. That is, “that every human being has acquired. . .a special individuality in the exercise of his capacity to love—that is, in the conditions he sets up for loving, in the impulses he gratifies by it, and in the aims he sets out to achieve in it.” But in analytic therapy the transference to the physician is marked by an excess; that is, it “is effected not merely, by the conscious ideas and expectations of the patient, but also by those that are under suppression, or unconscious.” In addition, it develops during the analysis that the “transference provides the strongest resistance to the cure.” The answer to this problem provided Freud with an understanding of the dynamics of the transference.

Freud (1912a, p. 319) distinguished two aspects of transference: positive transference and negative transference, separating “the transfer of affectionate feeling from that of hostile feeling.” Positive transference showed both a conscious element and an unconscious element rooted in erotic desire. It became obvious, then, that it was the negative transference and the unconscious erotic component of the positive transference which constituted the resistance. The conscious element of the positive transference became the vehicle for the therapeutic suggestion. So far so good, but what is the origin and function of the negative transference? In contrast to the negative transference, the erotic element of the positive transference can be more easily “raised” and resolved.

Before proceeding further, it is well to discuss the means Freud used to overcome the “resistances.” The treatment began with the patient committed to the fundamental rule; that is, to say everything that came into his mind without exercising any conscious choice over the material. Under such circumstances, a resistance may manifest itself in the cessation of flow of ideas or associations. Rarely, it may be expressed in the refusal to accept an interpretation. In both situations, experience showed Freud that the patient had made a transfer onto the person of the physician of some part of the material of the “pathogenic complex” which he either withheld from expression or “defended with the utmost obstinacy.” These are the negative forces which the analyst can counter with the true positive transference and the patient’s hope for cure. The conflicts which arise are then fought out on the field of transference and duplicate those in the emotional life of the patient.

The ambivalence which manifests itself in the transference has characterized the behavior of the patient since early childhood. How is it then, we may ask, that the analyst can upset an equilibrium which though neurotic, has maintained itself during the past life of the patient? If we consider this question seriously, we will realize that there are two factors operating in a psychoanalysis which can shift the balance of forces in favor of a resolution of the conflict. The first is the sympathetic understanding of the patient by the analyst. Despite the fact that the patient may “see” the analyst as a father image or other familial figure, it is contrary to the reality of the situation. The analyst is understanding where the true parent was not, sympathetic where the parent was intolerant and accepting where the parent was rejecting. As a general attitude, however, these qualities would not be very effective. They derive their power from the fact that the analyst is regarded as being the protagonist of sexual pleasure. It is his affirmative attitude towards sexuality which forms the bridge to the unconscious of the patient. He is at the same time the representative of the sexual instinct as he is, by virtue of the negative transference, responsible for its suppression.

We cannot over-emphasize the importance of Freud’s positive attitude towards sexuality as a therapeutic weapon in the early days of psychoanalytic therapy. One must recall the moral atmosphere between 1892 and 1912 to appreciate the full force of his position. In a time when the open discussion of sex among individuals was almost impossible Freud’s candor and honesty on this subject facilitated the breakthrough of the suppressed sexual drive with its accompanying images and affect. An interpretation which today might be accepted as a matter of course in those years provoked strong resistance and deep yearning. As the lid was removed from the boiling pot, steam began to escape. And even in these sophisticated days a valid interpretation of the sexual dreams and fantasies has potent force. On the other hand this sophistication in analytic and sexual thinking has robbed the analytic interpretation of the power it once had. We are all familiar with the patient who goes from one analyst to another and who knows “all about” his Oedipus complex and his incestuous feelings for his mother.

The transference was and still is based upon the projection onto the person of the analyst of suppressed sexual desires and fears. Freud (1914, p. 383) was very much aware of this when he discussed the problem of transference-love. With a rich background of experience Freud analyzed the problem clearly and showed how it was to be handled. One remark is very apt. “I would state as a fundamental principle that the patient’s desire and longing are to be allowed to remain, to serve as driving forces for the work and for the changes to be wrought.” Yet it is not only in the case of the female patient that the transference carries the sexual desires and hopes. The male patient, too, comes with his hopes of increased sexual potency which he expects the analyst to provide through the technique of the therapy. Here, too, the promise held out by the positive attitude towards sexuality is the magnet which draws out the unconscious thoughts.

It is also important to bear in mind that the technique of resistance and transference analysis found its greatest effectiveness in the treatment of the hysterias, the obsessive-compulsive neuroses, and those emotional disturbances in which symptom formation was the main element. These are the problems which confronted Freud in the earlier years and which are characterized by a dominance of the conflict on the genital level. Other problems were encountered which were less amenable to this technique. The problems of masochism, mania and depression, and the psychoses were posed originally as disturbances of the genital function. It soon became apparent, however, that the genital problem merely reflected a deeper conflict which had its origin in the pre-oedipal years of the patient’s life. Against these deep-rooted disturbances the technique of resistance analysis exploiting the sexual transference made slow and little progress.

With the advent of new and younger analysts, the traditional psychoanalytic technique was modified to meet these more difficult cases. Foremost among these early innovators was Ferenczi with his “activity techniques.” We know that Ferenczi’s ideas brought him into frequent conflict with Freud who resisted any change in the traditional method of psychoanalysis. However, Ferenczi maintained his allegiance to Freud and to his basic psychoanalytic concepts even though his experiences impelled him to modify in some important respects the therapeutic techniques. The recent publication in English of Ferenczi’s papers enables us to properly evaluate his contribution to analytic technique.

As we read Ferenczi’s articles and lectures we are impressed with his interest in his patients and in the technical problems of the therapeutic procedure. In her introductory note to his publications, Clara Thompson (1950) says of Ferenczi that “to the end of his life [he] tirelessly sought improvements in technique designed to produce more effective therapy.” As early as 1909, in the article “Introjection and Transference,” Ferenczi revealed how penetrating was his insight into the therapeutic relationship. Then, in 1920, Ferenczi delivered an address on the development of an active therapy in psychoanalysis.

In this article, as in preceding ones, Ferenczi (1921, p. 199) showed that while ostensibly the analyst adopts a passive attitude during the treatment, his activity is merely held in abeyance until a resistance appears. Communicating an interpretation is in itself an active interference with the patient’s psychic activity; it turns the thoughts in a given direction and facilitates the appearance of ideas that otherwise would have been prevented by the resistance from becoming conscious. And one cannot deny that the obligation to follow the fundamental rule is enforced by the analyst in an active if indirect way. Ferenczi (1921, p. 200) clearly pointed out that there has never been a question but that the analyst is active in the therapy. It is different with respect to the patient. “Analysis demands no activities from the patient except punctual appearance at the hours of treatment.” But exceptions were soon made in the case of some patients with phobias and others with compulsive symptoms. Freud, himself, had already recognized this.

Ferenczi (1921, pp. 189–198) now proposed to introduce a technique in which “certain tasks in addition to the fundamental rule” are imposed upon the patient. Previously he had described a case in which he had demanded from the patient a “renunciation of certain hitherto unnoticed pleasurable activities” with the result that “the progress of the analysis was visibly accelerated.” This case, reported in “Technical Difficulties in the Analysis of a Case of Hysteria,” shows a brilliant analysis of the dynamics of the hysterical character structure.

What activities did Ferenczi (1919, pp. 203, 206, 207) demand of his patients? In one exciting case, he required the patient to be a chanteuse, conduct an orchestra and play the piano. In another, the command to write poetical ideas on paper revealed a strong masculinity complex. Symptoms which Ferenczi forbade included the “need of urination immediately before or after the analytic session, a feeling of sickness during the session, unseemly wriggling, plucking at and stroking the face, the hands or other parts of the body, etc.” More important, however, than the specific technique is the principle which underlies the “activity” concept. For, as we shall see, the principle was greatly extended by Ferenczi’s pupil, Wilhelm Reich. Ferenczi’s remarks are, therefore, illuminating:

“The fact that the expressions of emotion or motor actions forced from the patients evoke secondarily memories from the unconscious rests partly on the reciprocity of affect and idea emphasized by Freud in tramdeutung. The awakening of a memory can—as in catharsis—bring an emotional reaction with it, but an activity exacted from the patient, or an emotion set at freedom, can equally well expose the repressed ideas associated with such processes. Of course the doctor must have some notion about which affects or actions need reproducing” (1919a, p. 216).

In a later paper, Ferenczi (1923, p. 226) discussed some contraindication to the “active” psychoanalytic technique. At the same time he extended the activity concept. Again a quote is revealing. “I have since then learnt that it is sometimes useful to advise relaxation exercises, and that with this kind of relaxation one can overcome the psychical inhibitions and resistances to association.” Ferenczi’s attention to muscular activity and bodily expression is noted constantly throughout his papers. There is the interesting article on “Thinking and Muscle Innervation” in which the parallelism and similarity of the two processes is analyzed. In a footnote to another article Ferenczi (1925a, p. 286) stated, “There seems to be a certain relation between the capacity in general for relaxation of the musculature and for free association.” One further aspect of this kind of analytic technique is given in the observation, “Speaking generally, the methods tend to convince patients that they are able to stand more ‘pain’, indeed that they can exploit this ‘pain’ to extract further pleasure gain; and from this there arises a certain feeling of freedom and self-assurance which is conspicuously absent in the neurotic” (1925, p. 267).

Since it is not my purpose to elucidate Ferenczi’s concepts but rather to study his methods as part of the historical development of analytic techniques I must forego further quotes from his most interesting observations. At this point, where we leave Ferenczi (1925b, p. 288) he has extended the analytic concept greatly. The “purely passive association technique [which] starts from whichever psychic superficies is present and works back to the preconscious cachexes of unconscious material might be described as ‘analysis from above,’ to distinguish it from the ‘active’ method which I should like to call ‘analysis from below.”’

At the time that Ferenczi extended the scope of the analytic procedure other analysts were studying and classifying patterns of behavior. This took the form of character types of which the foremost exponent was Abraham. Prior to this, analysis was mostly symptom analysis. The analyst made a pact with the patient’s ego that the character would be spared in return for a resolution of the sympto...