Betty Joseph on Psychic Change

As so often happens, my friends on Twitter [some insolent rabble in the gallery: "He has friends?"] convince me finally to read people of whom I have been aware, often for decades, without having actually read their works. In this case, it was a quotation from Betty Joseph. Finding it compelling, I ordered, and have now read, Psychic Equilibrium and Psychic Change: Selected Papers of Betty Joseph, eds. Michael Feldman and Elizabeth Bott Spillius (Routledge, 1989).  

Joseph lived to nearly 100, dying just a decade ago after a very long clinical career in England. (A short biographical sketch is available here.) My first analyst in Canada was a Kleinian and I vaguely recall her mentioning Joseph at one point but I never investigated farther. 

The Hard to Reach Patient:

Like all collections, Psychic Equilibirum is uneven. It contains papers originally published as far back as the late 1950s. Every chapter is fairly brief and follows a standard format. I perused the table of contents and decided, after reading the editors' introduction, to jump around, beginning with the chapter that first grabbed me most strongly, viz., no.5, "The Patient Who Is Difficult to Reach." I have at least one such right now and whenever I read a chapter like this--or any chapter by clinicians citing their own case material--I always hope (surely I am not alone in this?) that what they describe will be exactly what my patient is like so that, at last, I can stop thinking and reading and wondering and working to figure out the treatment they need, and instead copy the example cited by this manifestly masterful clinician. Thus does one see the very real attractions of manualized therapy!

But, of course, my patient is at least 90% different from Joseph's. (And thus does one see the massive limitations of manualized therapy!) So I ended this chapter somewhat disappointed, to be honest, finding it only partially useful. (That is also true of much of the book: I found only 2 or 3 chapters particularly useful, but read all of them, and found threaded through each and every one a common theme, noted below.)

But then, trying (at risk of sounding pious or sycophantic, both of which I abhor) to reflect over the whole chapter by means of a kind of reverie, which 'method' I learned from reading the great Thomas Ogden, I put the book down and stared across the coffee shop and out the window to the river, and found myself focusing on nothing in particular but allowing my mind to range back over the entire chapter as it tried to weave in one case in particular. At that moment I came to a rather startling insight about what now seems to me a technical mistake or perhaps an 'enactment' I have allowed to happen. I was aware of what I was doing, and thought it justified, but now in light of Joseph's chapter I see differently.

What, in particular, provoked this small epiphany? There are three lines in the chapter that were bracing to me.

First, she begins by talking (as others I have read would later do--I think in particular of Christopher Bollas here) about those patients eagerly proffering "pseudo-cooperation aimed at keeping the analyst away from the really unknown and more needy infantile parts of the self" (p.76). That latter phrase--more needy infantile parts--especially struck home and inched me toward greater understanding of a case in which my countertransference imagery has been utterly plagued for months with nothing but images of my cradling my (adult) patient as a babe-in-arms. 

This first line of Joseph's I immediately linked up with a passage a few paragraphs later in which, continuing the theme, Joseph speaks of the really needy part of the patient needing "the experience of being understood, as opposed to 'getting' understanding" (p.79). That, of course, echoes one of her contemporaries, Frieda Fromm-Reichman, and the latter's famous observation that the patient needs an experience, not an explanation. Here I came uncomfortably close to a second acknowledgment of a near-mistake in a case in which I have sometimes found, in my impatience, doing what Joseph warns against: offering 'an explanation,' a thing, rather than an overall experience--and doing so prematurely, in a way the patient could not use at the time. 

In doing so, I am now rebuked not just by her, but also by a passage of Winnicott I have not always heeded. In "The Aims of Treatment" from 1962, he speaks of the necessity of "economical" interpretations, rightly warning that "I never use long sentences unless I am very tired. If I am near exhaustion point I begin teaching." In my case it's not just a moment of exhaustion but also sometimes of frustration which I have done a poor job of controlling. At such a moment I lapse into professor and academic mode, giving a paragraph-length explanation, an understanding, an interpretation: these rarely go over well. 

At the very end of the chapter in the third passage of Joseph that I found challenging, she advises that with patients hard to reach, we must keep our interpretations, our understandings, "immediate and direct" (p.87; her emphasis). In other words, she explictly says, do not offer some kind of historical explanation or interpretation, linking together themes or events from years or months or even weeks past: stick closely to what is going on in that moment in that session in your consulting room. Here is where (as she'll make clear elsewhere in the book) Bion is handy: abandon memory of past events and sessions, and a desire to escape the present moment, and instead plunge right in to your immediate experience of and with the patient, and they of you. (Bion's famously difficult and confusing counsel is examined in a bit more detail here.)

I admit this--discussing what is happening in the moment--was enormously hard for me to do for a time, but working with borderline patients has in essence forced me to do it. I remember very clearly the first time, with enormous trepidation, I attempted it and how it proved to be so pivotal to treatment. Once I figured out my own idiom for doing it after that, and became (in part thanks to my own analyst) much more comfortable with the risks I felt I was running in doing this, it has begun to flow more easily now. I think the key for me was once again Winnicott. In that most invaluable of essays, "The Use of an Object," he helped me to see that I could allow patients to bring their rage out into the open of the immediate moment and try to destroy me but that I would not in fact be destroyed. 

The Patient Addicted to Near-Death:

The other outstanding chapter in this collection is "Addiction to Near-Death." Here she refers to patients engaged in "a type of mental activity consisting of a going over and over again about happenings or anticipations of an accusatory type in which the patient becomes completely absorbed." (In my experience this is characteristic of certain obsessional-compulsive personality styles, about whose treatment I wrote in some detail here.) For such patients their "seeing of the self in this dilemma [as] unable to be helped is an essential aspect." 

As a Kleinian, Joseph mentions projective identification and splitting in every chapter, and here notes that the splitting characteristic of these patients is such that "the pull towards life and sanity" (p.128) is projected almost entirely into the clinician. (I have found myself in this position but, being an ignorant fool at least once a day, rather blithely told myself--here vaguely calling to mind some exculpatory aphorism of Yalom--that it was simply me being "the bearer of hope" until such time as the patient could be more hopeful.....except they never assumed one bit of that burden, and acidly disdained any expressions of hope!) 

Joseph returns to this later in the chapter, speaking in more forthright terms than in many other chapters as she speaks of this splitting, and the clinician taking up the role of one who is hopeful about and pushing for change, as being a "collusion" in which a "major piece of psychopathology is acted out in the transference." If you are put into this position of bearing the hope and desire for change then "the patient constantly is pulling back towards the silent kind of deadly paralysis and near-complete passivity" in significant measure to avoid having to recognize and deal with their own "ambivalence and guilt" (p.136). 

The "patient's apparent extreme passivity and indifference to progress" is based in part on, and heavily reinforced by, the fact that "the near-destruction of the self takes place with considerable libidinal satisfaction." These patients enjoy the "deeply addictive nature of this type of masochistic constellation" (p.128). At the chapter's end, she will return to this in graphic terms, speaking of the patient as having "withdrawn into a secret world of violence, where part of the self has been turned against another part" and where "this violence has been highly sexualized" (p.137).  

A word is here introduced by Joseph, giving an excellent definition to a term I first encountered I don't know where some time back: chuntering. The chuntering patient goes "over and over again in some circular type of mental activity" that consists of endless grumbling, complaining, fault-finding. Sometimes, however, such chuntering is silent: Joseph mentions those patients who, passively and silently, will destroy whatever you are doing, apparently listening to your thoughts but all the while mocking them with silent contempt.

Given such powerful libidinal rewards for their self-destruction, it is no wonder that working with such patients is going to be very difficult. Joseph ends this chapter with no clear or simple fixes, saying simply that "it is very hard for our patients to find it possible to abandon such terrible delights for the uncertain pleasures of real relationships" (p.138). 

Once more the only thing Joseph counsels is taking a "moment to moment" approach in the session, monitoring the changes in transference (which for her is never static, never fixed, never permanent, but a live thing, a dynamic, living, changing experience) and counter-transference.  As a result the same behavior can have a difference transferential import: Sometimes the patient may be engaged in what appears to be chuntering, but doing so out of real psychic pain at some legitimate thing they need you to know about; at other times they may be trying to drag you into a masochistic enactment. You need to get clear as to which is which, and these can even shift within the same session.

Finally: What is the Change We Seek?

If it is hard for these patients to change, which patients find it easy? For Joseph the answer is itself easy: none. Nobody finds it easy to change for we are all shot through with ambivalence and conflicting desires, and all our struggles--whatever they are--are bound up with our personality structures (a point so helpfully made more recently by Jonathan Shedler and Nancy McWilliams, inter alia). Our personality defenses, Joseph notes here, are "very tightly and finely interlocked elements" (p.193). To change even one thing is to risk a cataract of other changes, and thus to provoke multiple defenses at every step: this is the theme of Joseph's fourteenth chapter ("Psychic Change and the Psychoanalytic Process"), the last on which I shall comment. 

How might we define change? What are its hallmarks? Here Joseph is very reluctant to get into details or to over-promise. Indeed, throughout this book one gets the sense that she is in constant, unwavering control of her omnipotent and omniscient desires, never overpromising or indulging in messianic fantasies about dramatic changes. 

"Moment-to-moment shifts and change" in the transference is what we should be paying attention to, Joseph says, without much regard for anything outside it. If such changes happen, then we are permitted to "hope" that such are "eventually going to lead to long-term, positive psychic change. I do not think that the latter long-term psychic change is ever an achieved absolute state but rather a better and more healthy balance of forces within the personality, always to some extent in a state of flux and movement and conflict" (p.194). This last sentence, to my mind, sounds very much like Philip Bromberg avant la lettre. (This chapter was originally published in 1986, a dozen years before Bromberg's Standing in the Spaces, an outrageously rich collection I hope to finish and write about next week. Bromberg cites this passage of Joseph's on p. 272.) 

From here Joseph expands somewhat outward, first noting what Freud said about change ("where id was, there ego shall be") before adducing what Klein added to this, and then, in sum, writing that psychic change consists in "greater integration between ego and impulses, love and hate, superego and ego" and that as an analysand moves toward greater health, this will be seen in an ability "to bear both his love and his hate at the same time and towards the same person. His perception of human beings then becomes more real, more human....This step, or rather, minute series of steps, forward and backward, towards integrating love and hate, brings with it momentous changes within the personality." (This theme of taking up love and hate will find powerful expression in Glen Gabbard's book of that name.)

Such changes may be seen in a greater ability to acknowledge and not flee from "guilt and concern" for others as we come to "take responsiblity" for our "own impulses" and how we may have harmed or attempted to destroy the objects of our life. If we take such responsibility, "there opens up the possibility of feeling for and repairing the object. With this there is also relief and a deepending of emotions" (pp.194-95). All of these changes emerge, Joseph stresses again and again, not in grand Damascus-like moments of blinding conversion, but often in the very minute, moment-by-moment changes in the transference, where it all begins; and if it doesn't begin here, it will never begin. 

This is a humbling note on which to end, but a salutary one. If we are always looking for external affirmations and grand signs of change and progress, we may risk overlooking, perhaps even disdaining, the quotidian ones in the transference.  We need to be content eating bread and butter as a regular diet rather than lusting after prime rib every day. 

We also need to be comfortable recognizing that the mind, Joseph says in conclusion, is a scene of perpetual conflict--even when progressing in the 'right' direction. If we leave our patient pretending otherwise, even as they progress in change and grow in freedom, then we have returned them to a very primitive form of splitting which, to Joseph, is anathema. 

Sadomasochism in Everyday Life

During the fall of 2018 I was on sabbatical and set aside plans to finish my book on Freud, and instead wrote what became Everything Hidden Shall Be Revealed: Ridding the Church of Abuses of Sex and Power, published the following year. 

Freud still featured in that unexpected book in important ways. I made the case for why Freud's theory of moral masochism was very helpful in explaining some of the continued cringe-making deference, indeed submission and subservience, to the "Holy Father" and pope of Rome and to all others bearing the title "Father" in the Catholic Church. Such submission is not a small factor in seeking to understand how and why this crisis of sexual abuse has gone on for so long and been so widespread across every continent on earth. 

Freud's 1924 essay "The Economic Problem of Masochism" was very helpful here, along with his other, better known works. That essay is available in this very rich collection: Essential Papers on Masochism. 

Since reading that book, and writing my own, I have had on my list of things to return to and investigate in more depth the topic of sadomasochism. Part of this is driven by clinical work with sexual offenders. 

But part of this is also driven by trying to understand certain dynamics within contemporary America, including contemporary American Christianity in its reactionary and "conservative" guises where the levels of cruelty have been revealed in the past few years in ways I still find astonishing both in number and degree. I am far from finished thinking through all these issues so I will say no more about them here.

Instead the purpose of this note is to draw your attention to a book I just finished this week which is very much worth your time if you are interested in these issues whether to understand your own life, or the life of your patients, or of parts of our culture, or perhaps all three. 

Before doing so, however, let me draw your attention very briefly to two other works I have found useful, and then a longer note about a third book in particular. 

The first book is one that R.A. Glick and D.I Meyers edited: Masochism: Current Psychoanalytic Perspectives, which was first published in 1988 and has a number of useful and insightful chapters by such well-known figures as Otto Kernberg and Roy Schafer. 

The second book is also an edited collection: The Clinical Problem of Masochism, eds. D. Holtzman and N. Kulish (Jason Aronson/Rowman & Littlefield, 2012). This work contains chapters again by Kernberg, alongside others such as Glen Gabbard, Stanley Coen, Harold Blum, and others. 

The book I want to focus on now has been published for nearly a quarter-century now, so some of its cultural references are a bit dated, but the overall discussion and analysis stands up very well indeed to the passage of time. The book is by a clinical psychologist and psychoanalyst in New York, John Munder Ross, and was published in 1997 by Simon & Schuster as The Sadomasochism of Everyday Life: Why We Hurt Ourselves--and Others--and How to Stop.

The sub-title and the fact of being brought out by a commercial publisher both suggest a certain "self-helpish" nature to the book, but the author, to his credit, largely steers clear of that. As author he's more a sober clinician than a gushing guru bidding for a spot on Oprah, and we can be thankful for that. At the same time, however, he manages to write as a clinician in a way that makes abundant use of examples from modern culture and describes them in ways those with little clinical or psychoanalytic background could easily grasp. 

Before diving into Ross, I went back to Freud's Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, and he does not equivocate in there when he argues that "the tendency to cause pain to the sexual object and its opposite, [is] the most frequent and most significant of all the perversions." And a little further on in this section he notes reassuringly that "sadism can be readily demonstrable in the normal individual" not least by looking at the forms of its "displacement" through aggression. And masochism, too, is equally widely to be found: "Masochism is nothing but a continuation of sadism directed against one's own person." (These views, of course, would be modified by some of Freud's later works, including the essay mentioned above, but the general point still stands in my view.) 

This is clearly where Ross picks up, too, as when, on the first page, he claims that "Scratch the most normal surface and you will find a little fundamental erotic sadomasochism in just about everybody" (p.11). Before we all run furiously to issue disavowals of this, note that Ross uses terms in the same way as Freud: "erotic," like "libidinal," is not the same thing as "sexual" and does not necessarily entail "genital activity." The former terms are used much more diffusely, and Ross gives examples that reassure us of this: the scab we were fascinated with picking as a child, or the neck-craning we do as adults at the scene of a motor wreck on the highway. Pain and suffering, both our own and that of others, often elicits a certain frisson in us, a soupçon of Schadenfreude if you will, however much admitting so is uncomfortable to us. But admitting so does not thereby entail copping to all of us having bondage dungeons in our basements! Ross's title here is important: everyday life. Dungeons are still a little outré for most of us!

Ross then brings to our attention people who, knowing what they are doing, and knowing the need to change, still engage in self-sabotage. In dramatic and large terms we know such people as, e.g., alcoholics who have lost jobs, children, marriages, even housing. But in smaller and more everyday terms, whom does he not describe? Which of us has not done this a little bit ourselves, and probably as recently as, oh, this week? Self-sabotage seems very much to be an everyday and a universal phenomenon. (It could have been something as banal as skipping on your workout this morning even though you know you need it after scarfing that entire bag of chips last night watching that old horror flick that always gives you nightmares and leaves you feeling anxious and fatigued the next day.)

Work with a patient once brought me back to Freud's little-known 1916 essay "Those Wrecked by Success" as a means of helping to understand how and why it is a person in the prime of life, who has achieved very widespread success and recognition, would descend into a fit of self-destruction. Ross also avers to this essay, which deserves more attention than it seems to have gotten.

Since the pandemic started, and more recently as it appeared to be winding down, how many stories have we been bombarded with about workers not returning? Restaurants are notoriously desperate for staff, truck-haulage companies as well, daycare institutions across the country, and just this morning a local story about 70 unfilled positions in the Indiana State Police after a rash of retirements and resignations. Everyone rightly focuses on the low wages in many of these occupations but in these and many (most?) other occupations, how much attention have we given to the power structures and their abuses? If, writing in 1997, Ross could claim this, it is surely a fortiori applicable today: "Nowhere in daily life is sadomasochism more constantly in evidence than in the institutions that constitute the workplace" (p.44). He expands on this a little later, noting that "surreptitious sadomasochism is to be found everywhere in the life of ordinary individuals and the institutions that organize their social lives" (p.47). 

Overt sadists are rare; so too masochists. Ross draws our attention to how often such phenomena are masked and only manifest clinically in compromise formations, therapeutic enactments, and of course the transference. For some particularly recondite sadomasochistic dynamics, I would follow Nina Coltart's lead and pay attention to whatever images, nicknames, or reveries thrown up in the counter-transference.

Much of sadomasochism, he says later in the book, must be seen as "obeying two basic principles of mental functioning: 'overdetermination' and 'multiple function.' In other words, it has many causes and, once it is in place, serves many ends" (p.160). Some of these manifestations and causes--and here Ross avers to the famous "third ear" of Reik--have to be listened and watched for in particular ways. 

Sadism and masochism may once have played a useful role in the child's development (Ross is familiar with the work of Klein and Winnicott in particular, and cites them later in the book), but he recognizes how "maladaptive" (96) such things usually become later in life. One manifestation in adulthood may be the lack of self-love: "Sadomasochists...lack the basic self-self with which to withstand the fact of their own repugnant but naturally ordained desires" (102). 

The reference here to self-love indicates that Ross is also familiar with, and occasionally quotes from, Heinz Kohut. I have not read as much Kohut as I feel I should, but Charles Strozier's biography is lovely and a worthy introduction to Kohut's life. (I suppose I should confess a bias here in that Strozier has been kind and helpful to me on a number of occasions in sending me drafts of stuff he was working on, and reviewing an article I was working on. It was through Strozier, moreover, that I was introduced to the enormously valuable work of Vamik Volkan.)

When I was on my fellowship at the Chicago Psychoanalytic Institute in 2018-2019, we did devote a day to Kohut and our teacher was very helpful in breaking down some of the recondite terminology and opaque jargon that Kohut seems to have unhelpfully delighted in. 

In addition to Kohut and the others, Ross also rightly draws on the work of Robert Stoller, to whom I was first introduced a few years back by the great Adam Phillips, from whom I have learned so much. Stoller's book Perversion: the Erotic Form of Hatred is one of the most insightful things I have read in this whole area. For Stoller many manifestations of masochism and sadism are "reparative" attempts by the adult self to turn childhood traumas into triumphs. 

Later in the book, Ross returns to Freud's views on moral masochism, and claims that "since neurosis is inevitable and universal, so, too, is moral masochism" (p.152). Here Ross links this back to one of Freud's last works, Civilization and its Discontents, suggesting that in some ways the price of civilized order is that we all must tolerate a certain degree of moral masochism. 

Moral masochism preoccupies the last two chapters of Ross' book. Chapter 9 ("Sadomasochism in the Treatment Setting: the Cure") argues that "the universality of moral masochism makes almost every course of treatment harder and longer than might otherwise be the case" (p. 185). Here, of course, our attention is drawn to negative therapeutic reactions, retrenchment, and so-called resistance. Here we are confronted, in some patients, with a high enough level of masochistic guilt that they keep themselves from betting better. (As Winnicott famously observed, "health is ever so much more difficult to deal with than disease.")

The therapeutic challenges are many, and Ross does not shy away from discussing them. He notes that people who punish themselves and are unable to allow themselves to get better do so because such reactions have many "internal and external masters" whose job is always to seek to maintain "the social status quo" (187). Thus for some, they really do prefer to remain in "an oppressive but contained and secure" environment of their own making--however painful it is to them and others. 

For the therapist inclined here, when faced with such patients, to resort to moral exhortation to grow past their masochistic masters, Ross rightly cautions us in no uncertain terms that 

The very act of offering advice runs counter to the ingenuity of psychoanalytic method [that]...is devised to draw out & then call into question the omniscience & omnipotence attributed to the practitioner by the patient & to analyze the sources of these illusions (191).

In saying this, Ross is echoing and in fact anticipating Adam Phillips, not least in the latter's recent book The Cure for Psychoanalysis (but see also his Terrors and Experts). 

What then, can the clinician, tempted to despair, actually do? Ross offers two things worth considering. The first has very strong echoes of Winnicott: "What is most significant for the resolution of masochistic conflicts...is the psychoanalyst's growing emphasis on the patient's capacity to be alone and to tolerate tension and uncertainty" (192). In increasing such an emphasis, the therapist has to find ways of gently but firmly thwarting the patient's desire for a panacea, for a clear-cut "fix" to all their problems. 

An additional way forward is here suggested by Ross: "in order to be free or independent, one must mourn one's past, refrain from taking the path of least resistance, and constantly act to impose one's will on oneself" (193). In saying this, Ross is rightly pointing out that the work rests on the patient. Here he reminds me of that constant refrain supervisors have given down through the ages: do not work harder than your patient. Ross makes this explicit thus when addressing the reader directly at the very end of his book The Sadomasochism of Everyday Life: Why We Hurt Ourselves -- and Others -- and How to Stop: "the responsibility for making changes is your own, and in a sense nobody changes anybody else's mind or heart" (220). 

Sadomasochism and Pseudo-Christian Culture

Since writing, in 2018, and publishing, in 2019, my book on the sex abuse crisis in the Catholic Church, I have been increasingly convinced of the utility of an analysis of sadomasochistic dynamics to understanding certain aspects of Christian life and practice, not least by so-called American Christians who have perversely and gleefully submitted themselves to the sadism of the present presidential regime which all right-thinking and truly devout people hope will come to an end in a few weeks. 

Such an application of psychodynamic theories of sadomasochism has not been widely or skillfully done before as far as I can tell. (I am prescinding here from discussions of S&M sexual practices, which have garnered a lot of often tawdry attention over the last decade in a frequently sensationalistic way which is very tiresome.) As our author says, "our culture is not only immensely infantile, but also completely blind to sadomasochism in the adult world" (p.12). I was therefore especially interested in his recent book for its attempt to analyze sadomasochism while situating the discussion in a wider context much informed by clinical practice. The result is a fascinating, if often uneven, book by the English psychologist and psychoanalyst J.F. Miller, The Triumphant Victim: A Psychoanalytical Perspective on Sadomasochism and Perverse Thinking (Routledge, 2013), 275pp. What follows are some notes I have drawn from this book which I will probably make use of in a chapter for my own book (if it ever gets done) on Freud and Christianity. 

The author begins by noting that a baby is born out of the physical womb but into the mental-emotional womb of the mother. As the infant develops the mother is more and more internalized and the infant more and more attached for a time. Here, of course, as Winnicott first recognized and Bowlby and others picked up and elaborated, there is a delicate balance: the mother who is too receptive or not receptive/attached enough to a baby can do damage in either way. 

As the child develops her instincts of contrariness and aggression, these actually help her gradually to dissolve the bonds of maternal attachment. Once again this must proceed carefully. If the dissolution is forced upon the child too soon for whatever reason, then very likely an unhealthy and ultimately maladaptive form of precocity of mind will often result. This was first brilliantly described in D.W. Winnicott's fascinating 1949 essay "Mind and its Relation to the Psyche-Soma."

Neither in Winnicott nor in any other developmental scheme is any notion of sadomasochism usually to be found. As Miller says, it has no place in most developmental schemes, but instead seems to be "an emotional mutation where the passive and aggressive aspects of normal development become twisted into a pathological shape," not unlike a cancer. The reasons for this will vary widely.  

Early in the book, Miller goes back to Freud's "A Child is Being Beaten," which I also drew on in my recent book. The point of that clinical paper is to reveal some of the underlyind dynamics involved in fantasizing about someone else being beaten who can bear the fantasies and desires of the one doing the beating: this, of course, takes us straight to Melanie Klein's crucial insight of projective identification. As Miller puts it, this is "the avoidance of an unwanted emotional experience by projecting oneself into the fantasy of being someone or something else" (p.4). 

If, for whatever reason, the mother is unavailable or insufficient, the baby may well (this was Bion's point) develop illusions of the good enough mother. "Crucially, the main thing that happens here is that the baby learns not to be spontaneously demanding but to behave in a way that brings out the best of the mother, so to speak" (p.5). In other words, what we have here is an aboriginal masochistic submission by the child to the painful inadequacies of the mother. Here some of the earliest seeds of sadomasochistic dynamics may be found. 

Miller illustrates this development with the example of a 3-year-old child who is fiercely independent and rebellious. One night, the tired mother grabbed the child roughly in an angry moment, but the child eludes her grasp and then falls, slightly injuring her head. Immediately the mother switches to being soothing, comforting, compassionate, all anger having fled. In some children this can create the realization that submitting to a bit of pain brings shockingly, sometimes thrillingly strong emotional rewards. As the child grows, she learns how to manipulate situations to appear a victim. This, Miller says, can happen in otherwise healthy families--it is not necessarily nefarious or even indicative of major pathology. But in situations where there is serious psychopathology, then the SM dynamics can be much worse, even leading to what he openly calls "evil."

There is much clinical material in the book of interest, along with a lot of social critique, much of which I found surprisingly waspish, sometimes bordering on the reactionary. Let us skip ahead to some of the later chapters that treat explicitly of religion. 

Miller argues along very similar lines to what I did in my book on the Catholic Church's abuse crisis and its often pathological paternal dynamics. Thus he says:

The question of religion is also very pertinent here. When someone has experienced serious, emotional deprivation in childhood, it is common for them to look for some kind of maternal experience of a collective or group variety. Organised religion, such as the Christian church, particularly lends itself to this, as is reflected in the concept of 'Mother Church' where the priests are called 'Father' and assume a parental attitude towards the congregation (p.44). 

Much later in the book he returns to this, noting that "In fact, one of the most important issues in the understanding of sadomasochism involves a concept that is more associated with religion than psychology, and that is pride. We need to be clear here, at the outset, that we are referring to pride as the problem of arrogance or superiority" (p.191), and such feelings are often manifested by those motivated by an adamantine sense of superiority coming from the illusion of possessing absolute (and ostensibly divinely revealed) truth. 

My respect for Miller increased yet further when he realized, and explicitly comments on, the fact that sadomasochistic dynamics have existed in psychoanalytic institutes and their rivalries and internal power politics. He also flatly admits--and here openly contradicts Freud--that "In fact, it is difficult to conceive of psychoanalysis being other than religious in the deepest, truest sense of the religious being concerned with ethics, value systems, and their place in healthy emotional development" (p.147). 

A final note made toward the end of the book confirms what is well known among clinicians: the dangers, and reality, of treatment collapse are real. Such failure can happen for several reasons, but Miller suggests that underlying it all much of the time will be an at least mild form of masochism: "It is, to some extent, always the case that people prefer to go on having their problems more comfortably rather than to solve them" (p.259). 

As time allows, I hope to offer some thoughts on at least one other book in my pile: Battling the Life and Death Forces of Sadomasochism: Clinical Perspectives by Harriet I Basseches, Paula Lisette Ellman, and Nancy R Goodman (Routledge, 2018), 318pp.

Cometh the Hour, Cometh the Man--Again: Erich Fromm

I'm working feverishly to get an essay done before month's end for a project at Cambridge University on the sex abuse crisis in the Catholic Church, about which last year I published Everything Hidden Shall Be Revealed: Ridding the Church of Abuses of Sex and Power, which drew extensively on psychoanalytic thought.

For my current project I'm going beyond what I wrote last year thanks to a re-immersion in thought of Erich Fromm, to whom I will return again on this blog, but some of whose books I wanted to draw to your attention even now. I think he's perhaps more relevant than at any time since the 1940s when he made his breakout into the anglophone world. 

March 2020 passed--for obvious reasons--without much attention being given to the fact that it marked both the 120th anniversary of the birth, and the 40th anniversary of the death, of Erich Fromm (23 March 1900–18 March 1980). He was wildly popular for much of his life, his books regularly selling millions of copies and being read or quoted by popes and presidents and policy-makers, inter alia. If anyone demonstrated the sociopolitical uses of psychoanalytic thought, well beyond the consulting room, it was and is Fromm. 

Today what he may lack in popularity he more than makes up for in ongoing relevance, not least to the politics of these United States but also, as I will soon suggest elsewhere, the politics of the Catholic Church. In some ways we need to return to his thought now more than ever for his insights into the problems of power, authority, freedom, and submission remain perennially relevant. 

I bought his Escape from Freedom in the mid-1990s in a cramped used bookstore down the street from my psychoanalyst in Ottawa, where I was an undergraduate student in psychology at the time. That book, Fromm's first of many runaway best-sellers when it came out in 1941, has never left me, and within the past couple of years has come to inform my thinking more and more, aided in part by some similar themes in Adam Phillips. 

Like most of Fromm's books, Escape from Freedom was written in a rather loose, breezy, and, if you will, "popular" style, which goes some way to explaining why, as his most perceptive biographer Lawrence Friedman has shown, he was largely ignored at least by North American academics. 

But, says Friedman--who has been reading and writing about Fromm since the late 1950s--the 1941 book was and is “the deepest and most important of Fromm’s books.” 

I would not dissent from that, but only put in a bid to claim that his posthumously published 1981 book On Disobedience: Why Freedom Means Saying “No” to Power is a crucial, and more concrete, "second volume" if you will to the 1941 book. It is a very short book, but what it lacks in length it makes up for in more concrete and pointed insights, it seems to me, than those found in Escape from Freedom. 


In addition to these two books, I have for the first time just finished Fromm's The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness. It is an extremely wide-ranging book, but its sections on sadism and masochism are especially valuable. I will return to this S&M theme in the coming days with some further thoughts on Fromm and also on an outstanding collection, Essential Papers on Masochism, ed. Margaret Ann Fitzpatrick Hanly (NYU Press, 1995).