Tag: Melanie Klein

  • Regression Isn’t a Breakdown. Your Mind Is Just Going Home.

    The alarm goes off and you turn the phone face down. Nothing bad has happened. Nobody shouted at you, nothing broke, and the day in front of you is perfectly ordinary. Still, the only thing you really want is to stay under the covers and be nobody for a while.

    The voices in the next room sound far away, as if they were coming through glass. Your list of things to do is sitting right there on the kitchen table, and somehow it feels like somebody else’s. So you ask yourself what you always ask. What’s wrong with me? Am I just lazy?

    Before you call yourself lazy, ask why your mind responds to the ordinary demands of the day, like that list on the table, by withdrawing, putting off decisions, and wanting someone else to take over. The psychoanalyst Melanie Klein’s theory suggests that this is not random. Under pressure, the mind goes back to a way of coping from much earlier in life, when pulling back made you feel less afraid and someone else carried the responsibility for you.

    Which came first — the world, or your picture of it?

    Most of us assume a baby first gets to know the world as it really is, and only later, with more words and more years behind it, starts to imagine.

    Klein turned that around.

    Long before a baby can speak, she said, its mind is already full of pictures of what the world is like, built from what its body feels. She called these pictures unconscious fantasy, but she did not mean daydreaming or making things up. Fantasy, for her, is how a mind that has no words yet first makes sense of the world. When the baby is hungry, it feels as if no one will ever come. When it is held and fed, the whole world feels safe.

    For the infant, these unconscious fantasies are not occasional thoughts. They shape the baby’s whole experience of hunger and fullness, danger and safety, long before it has words or can check what it feels against what is really there.

    In Klein’s view, then, you did not begin with an accurate understanding of reality and add imagination later. You began with unconscious fantasy and gradually corrected it through experience. Each time someone close to you turned out differently from what the picture inside you expected, and your bond with them survived the surprise, that picture moved a little closer to the world as it really is.

    What does a good home actually give a child?

    If life begins in fantasy, that changes what we mean by a good home. We usually think of how much love a child was given, or whether there was enough money in the house. But part of what makes a home good is how much of the real world it lets a child take in — how often, and how safely, the child can check the picture inside against what is really happening.

    Put plainly: the worse the home, the less of the real world a child can afford to let in.

    That may sound backwards, but the reasoning behind it is simple. Children learn to swim in water they can stand up in. A steady home hands a child small, survivable disappointments — the promise kept a day late, the answer that turns out to be no — and every one of them is a chance to check the picture in their head against what actually happened and find out it was slightly off. Nothing collapses when that happens. The child learns that a disappointment is not the end of the world, corrects that part of the picture, and goes back to playing.

    When home is too painful — when the adults are unpredictable or frightening — a child has no room to calmly check the picture against what is real. Every look on an adult’s face can read as a sign of danger. So the child retreats into the world inside, which at least feels like something they can control. And the more time the child spends in that inner world, the less often the picture inside gets tested against someone safe, and so the less it gets corrected.

    Children are not the only ones who retreat into that inner world. Most of us go there for a while and then find our way back out. At the extreme are people who cannot find their way back out at all. That is the territory of psychosis: in schizophrenia, for example, a person stays shut inside their own private world. This does not mean that a painful home is the single cause of any particular illness. But it can shape how a person handles stress later in life.

    Why is the pull to retreat strongest at certain times in life?

    There are three times in life when people are most likely to feel they are coming apart: the teenage years; the early twenties, when many people leave home; and the years after marriage, or after setting up a household with someone.

    Why those three? Because that is when the demands of real life arrive all at once, from every direction. Your body changes, or your address does. The people around you change, and so does what they expect from you. You’re handed a role that nobody bothers to explain. There are more decisions to make, and more of the blame falls on you when one goes wrong. Worst of all, the way you’ve always coped stops working — quietly, and completely.

    At times like these, there is more to carry than you can manage all at once, and carrying it simply hurts too much. So the mind slides backward, into that inner world of early pictures. Every human mind begins there, which makes it the mind’s first home — a home inside you, not the house you grew up in. When you retreat like this, in a sense your mind is simply going home.

    If this is the year you feel like you’re coming apart, look at where you are in life before you go looking at your character. Check whether this moment falls on one of those three times, or on another big change in your life, such as starting a job, having a baby, or going through a divorce. You may not have gotten weaker at all. Reality may have just started asking for far more than it used to.

    So what is this pull backward, exactly?

    You live out in the real world for a while, it hurts, and something in you wants to be a small child again. No decisions. No judgment calls. Somebody else handling the difficult parts, the way somebody once did.

    The name for this return is regression. The mind is not inventing a new response. It is returning to an earlier state in which withdrawing, becoming passive, or waiting for someone else to act once provided relief.

    Why is it so hard to come back out?

    Regression feels familiar because you learned this way of coping early and used it many times. Avoiding a message, staying in bed, or waiting for someone to tell you what to do takes the pressure off right away. That relief makes the old way hard to leave, even while the unanswered messages and postponed tasks pile up and the anxiety grows with them. The safer it feels under the covers, the harder it becomes to come out.

    It shows up in ordinary ways, too. The afternoon that disappears into your phone. The message you could answer in four lines and somehow cannot. The steady, quiet wish that somebody would arrive and simply tell you what to do next. None of those look like much from the outside, and every one of them is the same short walk back to the mind’s first home. The pull is never loud when it arrives, and it usually comes dressed as tiredness, or as a small and very reasonable decision to deal with the whole thing tomorrow.

    When ordinary tasks feel far away and you want to pull back from every demand, you may be falling back on an old way of protecting yourself, not showing some permanent flaw in your character. Once you see it as regression, you can ask a more useful question: what is pressing on me right now that set this off?

    Does that mean you should get rid of the old picture inside you?

    No, and you couldn’t manage it even if you tried. The picture isn’t a part you can unbolt and throw away — it’s the place you started from. Adult life is the slow work of checking it against whatever is really in front of you and correcting it a little at a time.

    Stop revising the picture, and your trips back into that inner world get longer and longer. Keep revising it, and your time out in the real world gets longer instead. That is the choice, and the work is never quite finished.

    So pick one scene from the past week that felt heavier than it had any business being. A message that has been sitting there unanswered. A room that went quiet the moment you walked into it.

    Then write down, in a single line, what you were quietly expecting. “He should know without me having to say it.” “After everything I did, somebody should have noticed.” One sentence is plenty. Don’t tidy it up, and don’t argue with it. If the line makes you wince a little, you’ve probably written the real one down instead of the polite version.

    Once it’s sitting there on paper, you can slowly begin to see where it came from — the situation you were actually in, or a much older picture you’ve been carrying since before you had words for anything. Some of those lines will turn out to be fair. Others were formed a long time ago, to fit a house you no longer live in.

    That’s where the revising starts. One line at a time.

    References

    • Klein, M. (1946). Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 27, 99–110.
    • Klein, M. (1935). A Contribution to the Psychogenesis of Manic-Depressive States. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 16, 145–174.

    Related


    Written by Kim Hyung-keun — Director, Seoul Addiction Psychology Institute · Director, Institute for Contemporary Psychoanalysis · Object relations psychotherapist and supervisor, 26 years in practice and teaching. Counselling Board

  • Why That One Person Gets Under Your Skin

    There’s one person you can’t let slide. Everybody else in the room lets it go — they roll their eyes, they move on, they’ve forgotten about it by the time they get to the parking lot. You haven’t. Something about the way that person takes credit, or opens a sentence with “no offense, but,” goes into you like a splinter and stays there. Their name comes up in conversation and your voice changes, and the strange part is you can hear it changing while it happens. Then you’re driving home and the question arrives: why did I go that hard? Nobody else did.

    That difference between your reaction and everyone else’s matters. The person may really be irritating. But when you react far harder than anyone else, it can be a sign that their behavior has touched something in you — a desire or anger of your own that you find hard to admit. So to understand why you stay angry for hours while everyone else moves on, you have to ask not only what they did, but why it hits you so hard.

    Where does your mind put a feeling it can’t stand?

    Some feelings belong to you and you still won’t look at them straight on. The small ugly jealousy when a friend gets the news you wanted for yourself. The mean, calculating thought you’d never say out loud to anybody. Anger that arrives at a size the situation obviously doesn’t deserve.

    When a feeling is too uncomfortable to admit as your own, the mind may hand it to someone else — and then find it in them. It’s a bit like tossing your own garbage over the fence into the neighbor’s yard, then looking over the next morning and complaining about how filthy their yard is. You feel competitive but accuse a colleague of turning everything into a contest. You want attention but become preoccupied with how desperately someone else seeks it. You haven’t stopped seeing the competitiveness or the hunger for attention. You just see it in them, and only in them.

    This is called projection. Your judgment of the other person feels completely true, partly because it may be true: they may really be competitive, or really hungry for attention. Projection doesn’t need you to make up something that isn’t there. It makes you stare at that trait in them, and keeps you from seeing the same thing in yourself.

    I call this an uncomfortable truth. It isn’t pleasant to hear, and there’s no gentle way to say it. But you can’t see yourself without bearing that discomfort. You can recognize the feelings you’ve been handing to other people only as far as you can stand to know they’re yours. Not an inch past that.

    What did Melanie Klein see in the first months of life?

    The psychoanalyst Melanie Klein described in close detail what goes on in the mind of a very young baby. In her account, the first thing in that mind is terror.

    Not fear of something in particular — not dogs or strangers or the dark. A baby has no strength, no words, and no way of making anything at all happen. What it has instead is the raw sense that it could simply stop existing. Blink out, gone, nothing left where it used to be. Klein called this annihilation anxiety. It isn’t a fear of dying the way you or I think about dying, as something that will happen someday. A baby has no sense of “later,” so hunger doesn’t feel like a delay it can wait out. It feels like the end of everything.

    Terror like that is more than a baby can bear, and the baby’s mind finds a way to make it smaller.

    To see how, you need one more piece: there’s also destructiveness inside the baby, and it isn’t mild — hot, wrecking, wanting to smash whatever is nearest. Klein never believed infants were sweet blank pages waiting to be written on. But the baby can’t accept that this fury is its own, any more than it can bear the terror. So the fury gets thrown out, away, into the first outside thing the baby has ever met: its mother’s breast, the one that feeds it. Psychoanalysts call that first outside thing the object — their word for whoever or whatever our feelings are aimed at.

    This is how the terror gets smaller. The fury no longer seems to be inside the baby; now it seems to come at the baby from out there, from the breast. It’s a terrible bargain — the very breast that feeds it now feels threatening — but it is still easier to bear than the alternative. A baby is far too small and too new to hold the thought “this savagery is mine.”

    Why does the fault always seem to be in someone else?

    The habit of throwing out what we can’t bear stays with us into adulthood. In an adult, though, it doesn’t look like throwing anything. It looks like a confident judgment about someone, backed by a list of examples. And because you can list everything that person did, you never ask why this one fault takes up so much of your mind.

    Here’s something that sounds backwards until you check it against your own life: the more badness you find in other people, the more of it may be quietly sitting in you.

    Say “they’re all selfish” often enough, with enough conviction, and you make a rule without noticing you made it: selfishness is a thing other people have. So the next time you take the last of something without asking, the thought can’t arrive as “that was selfish of me.” It has to arrive as “I was in a hurry,” or “they didn’t really want it.” Once selfishness belongs only to other people, your own selfishness has no place to show openly, so you hide it more deeply — even from yourself. The more you hide it, the less of yourself you get to see.

    That’s the real cost of saying “they’re all selfish.” The cost isn’t that you’re being unfair to them. You may be entirely right about them — plenty of people really are selfish, and saying so isn’t a crime. The cost is that you become harder to see. To yourself.

    So who is the mature one here? Not the person with no dark side. Nobody is free of one, and anybody claiming otherwise is bluffing. The mature one is whoever can say, quietly and without making a show of it, “yeah, some of that is in me too.”

    The sentence doesn’t feel good, and saying it fixes nothing on its own — it certainly won’t make you nicer by Tuesday. Saying it takes strength, though. You have to be able to think “some of that is in me” without it flattening you for the rest of the night — and then get up and finish the dishes. When you don’t have that strength yet, the mind falls back on what the baby did: throw it out, find it in someone else, feel better for an hour or so.

    Why does a fight make you more certain instead of less?

    Projection is also why fights break out in close relationships. Two people can do this to each other at the same time: each one places their own unwanted feelings on the other, and then finds them there. Each now sees the badness in the other person, so a clash is hard to avoid.

    Now think of a fight of your own, and watch what happens to both of you as it heats up. You’d expect an argument to introduce a little doubt — more information, more of the other person’s side, more room to wonder. It does the opposite. The louder it gets, the more badly you need to prove the fault is theirs: “That’s not mine. You did this.” Every time you say it, you believe it a little more.

    That’s why an argument about something small, like the dishes, so quickly stops being about the dishes. It turns into a contest over who the bad one is, and neither of you can afford to lose it.

    By this point, each of you is treating a picture in your own head as the complete truth. Psychoanalysis calls this kind of picture a fantasy. In this sense a fantasy is not a lie you’ve made up. To you, the picture feels like plain fact, and that is what makes it so hard to shift. Your mind has arranged what happened so that the other person carries all the badness and you carry none of it. That is why nothing new gets through. Accepting even part of the other person’s side would mean admitting that some of the badness is yours, and that is exactly what the picture protects you from.

    And the firmer that picture becomes, the less you can see of what’s inside you. So the next time you’re absolutely sure about somebody, the certainty itself is worth a second look.

    Were you ever really alone, even as a newborn?

    Here’s the heart of Klein’s idea, and it starts with something almost too obvious to notice.

    Projection needs an object — someone or something to place the feeling in. You can’t throw something at someone who isn’t there. So if a newborn is already throwing its fury into the breast, then someone else is already in the baby’s world from the first weeks of life. The baby’s mind is turned toward its mother from the very beginning, long before it can recognize that the breast it knows belongs to a whole, separate person.

    Klein followed this simple point all the way through, and it led her to disagree with Freud.

    Freud had pictured the newborn as a sealed little world, wrapped up in itself, only bumping into other people later on. Klein said no. We don’t start out alone and then pick up relationships as a skill, the way we eventually pick up walking. We start out already in a relationship. The very first thing a baby ever does with its mind, it does toward somebody.

    That’s where the term object relations comes from. It names this way of understanding people: a person begins life not alone, but in a relationship with an object — someone to aim feelings at. You were never a closed room that later grew a door.

    Who got to you today?

    You know exactly who. Bring that person to mind.

    Name what you couldn’t stand about them, and keep it to a single word, because one word is more than enough. Selfish. Cold. Fake. Careless.

    Then take the word — just the word, not the person, not the history, not the list of everything they’ve done — and ask yourself one question about it: Is any of this in me?

    Now don’t try to answer it — I mean that seriously. If something surfaces on its own, fine, but don’t go hunting for it. Finding an answer matters less than the turn itself: the finger you’ve been pointing at them swings back toward you for one second. For that one second, the picture in your head — all the badness is theirs, none of it is mine — starts to crack. One crack is plenty for tonight.

    References

    • Klein, M. (1946). Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 27, 99–110.

    Related


    Written by Kim Hyung-keun — Director, Seoul Addiction Psychology Institute · Director, Institute for Contemporary Psychoanalysis · Object relations psychotherapist and supervisor, 26 years in practice and teaching. Counselling Board