Trauma and the origin of aggression
Issue of the actuality of trauma is closely related to
another important problem: where aggression of the patients comes from? What
Freud had in his mind was that the repression of sexual and aggressive drives
would cause neurotic symptoms and these drives naturally derive from within.
However, if we acknowledge the actuality of trauma, we need to consider the
origin of the aggression somewhat differently.
One of the early papers that deal with the origin of
aggression was Ferenczi’s seminal paper “Confusion of Tongues” (1936). He
discussed the issue of the “identification with the aggressor”. However, what Ferenczi
discussed was not exactly the way the victim turns to be another aggressor. He
rather described the process of the victim’s identification with the
aggressor’s wishes and desires in a masochistic way. He states that the most
destructive is the “victim’s introjection of the guilt feelings of the adult”
(p.162) and the resultant masochism of the victim (Frankel, 2002). Ferenczi
stressed rather the way that the victim hurt him/herself instead of aggressing
others.
Frankl explains this nature of Ferenczi’s description of
the “identification with the aggressor” as follows. While discussing this topic,
Ferenczi mainly talks about “concordant identification” with the aggressor
based on Heinrich Racker’s classification of the two types of identification
process (Racker, 1968). However, there should be another type of
identification: “complementary identification” where the victim identifies with
his aggressive nature and becomes the one. In this context, Okano (2018) also
discussed this process in his discussion of “shadowy personality”. It is of
interest to mention the notion of the “identification with aggressor” proposed
by Anna Freud (1936). This notion describes more closely to the way this
complementary identification with the aggressor, but in a quite different
context.
Let
us look at the way modern analysts conceive the issue of aggression in DID.
Dissociative personalities with aggressive nature have been described generally
as “the internal persecutor” or “persecutory personality” by various
authorities (Kluft, Putnam, Ross, Howell, van der Hart, etc.). Putnam suggests
that some persecutor personalities can be recognized as introjects of the
original abuser (1989, p.108).Van der Hart et al（2006）states that the persecutory part of the personality is at
least one type of EPs (emotional part of personalities) and that has some
protective role, and recommends clinicians that they pay respect to them (2006).
Howell (2011) also stresses defensive purposes when one of these “persecutory
personalities” are formed and states: “having persecutory and abuser identity
states is like having an internal Al Qaeda or Taliban that punishes you for the
slightest infraction of bizarre and arcane rules. It involves being emotionally
attached to inner and perhaps outer persecutors, even though you were tortured
by them” (2011, p.211). Howell further states that the “system depends for its
safety, on the inhibition of expression or the exclusion from consciousness of
powerful overwhelming affects, such as terror and rage.” (Howell, 2016, p.211).
