The psycho-analytic study of the family. J. C. Flugel
be kept out of waking consciousness altogether. It would therefore seem that, on Jung's view, it is the conscious which is symbolised at a relatively unconscious level—a complete reversal of the usual order which, on the ground of the psycho-analytic knowledge already gained, must be regarded as highly improbable, at any rate in so far as it is to be looked upon as a full explanation of the phenomena under discussion.
It would thus appear that we have good reasons for Such a view cannot afford a complete explanation though it may contain certain valuable elements of truth rejecting the view that the apparently sexual manifestations of love by the child towards its parents are only symbols of the desire to return to the state of tutelage and protection enjoyed in early years. It does not follow, however, that the whole of Jung's conclusions as regards the relation of the parent complexes to the development of individuality in the child are to be rejected. On the contrary, it is almost certain that they contain valuable truths which had to some extent been overlooked, or at any rate had received less attention than they deserved, in some of the earlier investigations. Even as regards the symbolisation of the developmental tendencies in the incest fancies, Jung may be right in a number of important points. It is only so far as he would maintain that such symbolisation exhausts the whole significance of the incest tendencies that he is almost certainly in error.
The possibility of a further analysis of the incest tendencies Overdetermination and the multiple interpretation of symbols in a non-sexual sense is implied by what Freud has himself taught as regards the laws governing the formation of symbols, more especially by the doctrine of Overdetermination[23], according to which a single dream symbol or neurotic symptom may often be found to constitute a complete or partial fulfilment of two or more distinct wishes or conative tendencies. Moreover, at least two authors besides Jung have carried out analyses in this sense. Silberer[24] has shown that a number of myths and fairy tales may be interpreted in at least two ways:—first, as an expression of the Œdipus complex as outlined in our previous chapters; secondly, as the expression of certain moral or religious strivings, which he calls the anagogic aspect; the symbolism in this latter case being of the "functional" kind (i.e. expressive of mental processes and tendencies rather than of the objects of feeling and cognition), to the existence of which Silberer had already drawn attention in his earlier works[25]. Ferenczi[26] (following Schopenhauer) has seen in the Œdipus myth the existence of certain functional symbolisms in virtue of which the character of Œdipus and Jocasta (as drawn by Sophocles) stand for opposing tendencies in the mind brought out by the tragic situation, viz. the tendency, on the one hand, to bring all the facts of the case into the clear light of consciousness, even at the risk of painful discoveries; and on the other hand the contrary tendency to repress and prohibit all further inquiry for fear of such discoveries.
In so far as these attempts have been successful (and in Overdetermination in the case of the Œdipus Complex the case of Silberer's work at any rate the evidence brought forward in favour of the simultaneous existence of the two tendencies as symbolised in the same legend would appear to be very considerable) they afford some ground for accepting Jung's interpretation of the incest fancies as constituting, in one of their aspects, an expression of certain ideas and tendencies relating to the original conditions of dependence in which a child stands towards its parents—tendencies which exist alongside, and to some extent independently, of the sexual tendencies to which expression is more directly and obviously given.
The symbolic expression in this case, however, would appear to differ in some important respects from symbolic representation (in dreams and elsewhere) of the Œdipus complex proper. In the latter the symbolic form is largely, if not entirely, due to the action of Repression, which does not permit the morally tabooed incestuous and hostile tendencies to find expression in any but an indirect manner, whereas in the present case the aspects symbolised are not in any sense repressed, so that the reason for the adoption of the symbolic form must be sought in other conditions.
Among these conditions the most important is probably to as a product of repression be found in the still active repression of the Œdipus complex itself. In so far as the ideas connected with this complex can be given another meaning, such as that indicated by Jung, their offensiveness is not felt to be so great as would be the case if their only significance were that which most naturally attaches to them: the assumption of the new symbolic meaning is indeed, in all probability, largely due to the effort of the repressing tendencies to prevent their true significance from being realised in consciousness[27]. The new meaning, therefore, as interpreted by Jung, Silberer and others, obviously corresponds to a more recent and superficial (though not therefore less real) mental level than does the original significance in terms of the Œdipus complex.
Another reason for the adoption of this secondary and as serving to reinforce the moral tendencies symbolism is probably sometimes to be found in the fact that the ethical or religious strivings expressed in the anagogic aspects undergo a very considerable reinforcement through association with the primitive trends which manifest themselves in the Œdipus complex. The latter lie very much nearer to the ultimate sources of human feeling and emotion than do the former, which, by themselves in their abstract purity, are apt to be only too ineffectual as motives of desire and conduct. But when clothed in the symbolic form of the Œdipus complex, they at once acquire some of the primitive energy inherent in the latter and so become themselves more powerful at the same time as they serve to purify and elevate what remains of the grosser elements of the original love and hate that the child has felt towards its parents. Symbolisation of lofty aims and motives in terms of primitive emotions called up by the family relationships is thus, from this point of view, an example of the process of sublimation, whereby the energy of the simpler and cruder human tendencies becomes diverted to the service of ends of higher cultural and social value[28].
CHAPTER V
THE FAMILY AND THE GROWTH OF INDIVIDUAL PERSONALITY
The considerations raised at the end of the last chapter We must recognise both the sexual and the individual aspects of development were somewhat in the nature of a digression. Such a digression was however inevitable, for the questions involved in the controversy between the psychological schools of Vienna and Zürich (whose leading exponents are Freud and Jung respectively) are of fundamental importance for our present inquiry. Our whole attitude towards the psychological problems presented by the family relationships must to a very considerable extent depend upon whether we believe, as the more extreme exponents of the Zürich school would sometimes seem to do, that the whole significance of these problems lies in the fact that they are intimately concerned with the development of the vital energies and independence of the individual, or whether (following the Vienna school) we feel bound to recognise also the existence of a number of highly important sexual aspects which, directly or indirectly, play a fundamental rôle in the psychology of the family.
Our short review of the principal points concerned in this controversy (so far as they touch our present purpose) has led us to the conclusion that the sexual aspects with which we were dealing in Chapters II and III possess more than a mere symbolical significance—that they must in fact be looked upon as, for the most part, actually being that which they appear to be, i.e. manifestations of (relatively) infantile tendencies which, as regards their nature and origin, are continuous with, and comparable to, the fully developed sexual tendencies of adult life.
We concluded also, however, that besides these sexual aspects there are other important aspects of family life, which may legitimately be looked upon as fundamental factors in the psychic growth and development of individuality. These factors it is now our duty to study somewhat more closely, before we pass on (as we shall do in the next chapter) to consider the variations and abnormalities that may occur in the development of the individual's mental attitude towards the other members of his family.
Apart altogether from the questions of mysticism and Difficulties of individual development symbolism, with which Jung and his followers have tended to surround the whole matter, it is I think, abundantly clear that normal psychic development involves a gradual emergence