Creating the Capacity for Attachment: Treating Addictions and the Alienated Self

Rating:
Summary: Treating addictions (esp alcohol) in a more loving way
Review: Walant undertakes one major revision of theFreudian position on infantile narcissism: the alienated personality turning to drugs (esp alcohol) didn't have a period of primary omnipotence, but rather was deprived of infantile satisfactions, so that adult narcissism is a defense of the masked self. Anyone who looks candidly at infants knows they are tiny and helpless, and need moments of success to feel empowered at all; these moments are what primary narcissism is really about. In order to address the needs of these alienated addicts who have found what AA calls their "Higher Power" in alcohol, Walant has developed a form of involved analysis in which the therapist engages in a form (albeit therapeutically protected) of love for the patient. Such patients have been deprived of what Jung called "oceanic," 'immersive,' or 'fusion' experiences. The well-developed personality needs to strike a balance between autonomy, already present to some extent even before birth, and fusion, which isn't merely ego-regression; addicts have been fusion-deprived and seek it in substance abuse. This is a healthy corrective to a more orthodox Freudian position that over-emphasizes the eventual complete independence of the patient and the detachment of the analytic observer, typical of the 'age of analysis' in which Freud lived. There are interesting passages on drug selection as reflecting the user's particular problems. My critical comments are two: 1) the book could have been more tightly written, since it has such a particular, interesting, and well considered axe to grind. 2) Walant rightly focuses on the mystical tradition as a source of 'oceanic' thinking, but mentions neither the great relevant mystics (like Meister Eckhart) nor the body of 20th century philosophy, particularly Husserl and Scheler ("The Essence of Sympathy") that could have given her a stronger theoretical foundation. Since no one can read everything, the latter shortcoming is certainly forgivable, but I hope she takes note of Husserl and Scheler in her forthcoming writings--Jonathan Ketchum, PhD (Philosophy)