I received an interesting letter from a blogger about
"primary narcissism."

Following is an example of recent technical work
in the field of narcissism. Reading psychoanalytic
theory in most instances is similar to doing crossword
puzzles- it can be extremely engrossing, but when you're
done you wonder whether any of it applies to real life.
The other aspect is, that when you read this material, you
can start to think you suffer from every syndrome. If you
think you do, probably you don't. You're just being too
conscientious. So, be careful. A little knowledge, as they say,
is a dangerous thing. With a few striking exceptions, most
people face similar dilemmas and struggle with similar
issues; it's their resources, social circumstances and support
networks that vary so much more greatly.
Also, psychoanalytic theory of this type is
like a lot of poetry, when I come to think about it.
Fascinating to contemplate, but unconnected to everyday
thought and experience. With very few exceptions, life
is more like "The Dream Life of Walter Mitty" than anything theory
or poetry tells us. Still, I enjoy reading more
than almost everything else. Who cares if it applies to
anything much. Maybe I don't want it to.

Anyway, soon I'll publish the bibliography of my course on
narcissism. Here's an appetizer, if you have the stomach
for such things:

The following is an excerpt from an excellent article about the
kind of theory I go in for. But there are as
many psychological
theories as there are varieties of Heinz soups.
They all look good on the labels, but when you taste them it's another story.

"Dark Epiphany: The Encounter With Finitude" by D. Carveth, PhD. {click here}

Anyway, Dr. Carveth, a Canadian
psychoanalyst, seems like an
interesting guy. You might check out his home page
if you are interested and have a moment.

"However, in a sense, all this is beside the point.  For whatever Freud may have meant by "primary narcissism" and Mahler by "symbiosis," by "secondary narcissism" and the "subjective object" Freud and Winnicott do not mean to refer to absolute undifferentiation at all; they are referring to a state in which the cognitively differentiated object is emotionally experienced primarily through projections of the subject's own phantasies and self and object representations and predominantly in terms of the subject's pressing needs.  And they mean to contrast this sort of narcissistic object-relation to one in which the subject is more able to get beyond such projections and egocentric demands for need-satisfaction and to recognize and make empathic contact with the real otherness of the object. "