Rational Parenting
Id impulses are inherently irrational. They are based on desire and emotion. Rationalization transforms an irrational impulse or emotion into an intellectual issue. By dealing with an impulse on a completely rational level, the ego avoids all the negative emotions involved in the situation. While rationalization defends the ego from bad feelings and disturbing emotions, it does nothing to solve the problem. Feelings and desires must be dealt with on an emotional level. Intellectual rationalization only detaches the ego from its unconscious feelings.
When speaking to Dr. Berger, Calvin in Ordinary People rationalizes Beth’s warm and loving disposition towards Buck and her coldness towards Conrad. He says: “His mother doesn’t show him (Conrad) a great deal of affection … Bucky got so much. I think what she felt for him (Buck) was special, you know? He was her first born—that’s not unusual, is it?” Calvin sees that there is a huge problem between Beth and Conrad, and he knows that the problem began before Buck’s death. Beth always loved Buck more than Conrad. Buck’s death only exasperated the problem. Calvin rationalizes this problem by calling it “normal.”
In a key scene in American Beauty, Lester explodes at Carolyn in an eruption of hostility. As she runs away from him, he claims: “I was only trying to help you!” Lester is clearly rationalizing, because screaming at someone at the top of your lungs is not exactly constructive criticism. The only person that Lester was helping in his violent outburst was himself. Carolyn was hurt and offended. Across the street, Frank Fitts rationalizes his own physical abuse against his son. He tells Ricky: “This is for your own good, boy!” As a marine and old-school style father, Frank is able to convince himself that physical punishment is an appropriate form of discipline. But Frank’s rationalization of his abusive behavior is clearly a mechanism to defend his own ego from the guilt of releasing all of his pent-up hostility on his son. Beating the hell out of someone is never for his “own good,” just as screaming at someone never “helps.” Rationalizing this abuse as acceptable parenting is clearly only good for Frank.
Buried Love
Isolation is when people detach themselves from negative emotions, isolating themselves in the emotionless world of surface features and external concerns. Through Beth’s memories, we see that she was a loving, warm, affectionate and happy woman when Buck was alive. Her life was a beautiful dream. But when the tragedy occurred, the dark and dismal emotions that came down upon Beth were just too much for her. She had to completely disconnect herself emotionally from the event of her son’s death. Her husband recalls Beth’s emotional isolation on the day of Buck’s funeral. Calvin could not understand why Beth seemed more concerned with the color of his tie than with the emotional state of her family. For Beth, it was much easier to focus on external issues than on internal feelings. Beth dealt with the despair of Buck’s funeral by isolating herself from her emotions. Unfortunately, after she isolated her emotions and hid them away, Beth could not find them again. To Calvin and Conrad, it seemed that on the day that Beth buried Buck, she also buried her ability to express love.
Eighteen Again
Regression is when someone reverts to childish forms of behavior in order to cope with stress or anxiety that may be damaging to the ego. The central plot line in American Beauty is Lester’s infatuation with his teenage daughter’s best friend. His infatuation is symbolic of his general dissatisfaction with his life. Lester is disgruntled with his job, he feels estranged from his wife and daughter, and he hates his body and himself. The only happy time that he can remember is an idyllic age in his distant past, when he was eighteen years old and all he did was “party and get laid.” Lester’s unrealistic desire to be eighteen again escalates into a youth fixation, which is revealed in a host of regressive behaviors—the infatuation with Angela being the centerpiece. Lester begins smoking pot. He gets a “teen-machine” sports car. He begins referring to his wife Carolyn as “Mom.” And he quits his adult profession for a job flipping burgers. By acting like an eighteen year old adolescent, Lester avoids the responsibilities of adulthood. He defends his ailing ego by abandoning his unhappy middle-aged existence and regressing back to a happier time of life.
Eighteen Again. When Lester Burnham (Kevin Spacey) regresses to an adolescent state of mind and behavior, he relates to Carolyn (Annette Bening) as if she were his mother rather than his wife. American Beauty (1999), DreamWorks SKG and Jinks/Cohen Company.
The catalyst and driving force behind Lester’s regression is his illicit desire for Angela. In his fantasies, Lester envisions Angela’s naked body covered in rose petals. The rose symbolism is especially fitting, as the rose is symbolic of the developing female genitalia. Lester is infatuated with Angela because she is in her psychosexual stage of genital development—adolescence—which is where Lester wishes to be again. For Lester, Angela is a symbol of his lost youth. His regression is a desperate and ultimately self-destructive attempt to recapture his adolescence, through the immoral and narcissistic deflowering of a beautiful young girl.
Conrad’s Slip
The Freudian slip is a “faulty action,” usually revealed in a verbal mistake, in which a repressed or hidden issue slips out unconsciously in one’s speech. In his work as an analyst, Freud focused keenly on verbal mistakes and slips of the tongue, being a firm believer in the notion that there are “no accidents” when the unconscious mind is involved. In Ordinary People, a Freudian slip turns out to be the key that opens the door to Conrad’s primary issue. When speaking of his mother and her attitude towards his suicide attempt, Conrad tells his psychiatrist: “Do you think I’m gonna’ forgive—she’s gonna’ forgive me.” The mistake, saying “I” rather than “she,” is the unconscious slip. It’s not Beth’s forgiveness that Conrad needs in order to feel better about himself, it’s his own. Both Conrad and his psychiatrist pick up on the slip, and Conrad immediately experiences an insight: “I think I just figured something out…. Who it is who can’t forgive who.” Conrad’s slip leads to his realization that he is punishing himself for surviving the accident that took his brother’s life. Conrad also realizes that he has been repressing a tremendous amount of anger towards Buck. In order to release this anger and purge himself of the guilt associated with it, Conrad must first realize that the anger exists, and then forgive Buck for not surviving. The Freudian slip was the expression of Conrad’s own unconscious, telling him about feelings and impulses that he didn’t even know he had.
Lester’s Hero
Identification is a primary mechanism in the human mind. By identifying unconsciously with others, we model our own personalities on the personalities of our heroes and mentors, and we relieve the anxiety of self-doubt by finding direction and vindication in the choices of other people. When Ricky in American Beauty casually quits his job on a moment’s whim, Lester tells him: “…you just became my personal hero.” Lester identifies with Ricky because he represents what Lester used to be and wants to be again—a free and rebellious eighteen-year-old. Throughout the rest of the film, Lester models his own behavior on Ricky’s example. He smokes pot, quits his job in a similarly brusque manner, and even courts a teenage girl. At the end of the film, Lester is finally confronted with his deepest desire, as Angela offers herself to him. But his moment of conquest is disrupted when Angela, lying naked on the couch underneath Lester, confesses: “This is my first time.” Angela’s confession rocks Lester out of his fantasy world of pseudo-adolescence, reminding him that he is not an eighteen-year-old kid, but a middle-aged husband and father. This changes his personal identification from an irresponsible teenager to a responsible father figure, and leads to an immediate change in his behavior. Lester suddenly stops lusting after Angela like a horny schoolboy, and acts in a very paternal manner. He covers her up, makes her a sandwich and even asks her about Jane—indicating Lester’s restored ability to identify himself as a father figure. Unfortunately, this reborn and mature Lester only has about five seconds to live.
&nbs
p; 13
Characters in Crisis
A sound identity is the only safeguard against the anarchy of drives as well as the autocracy of conscience.
—Erik Erikson (1968)
The issue of identity development dominated Erik Erikson’s (1902–1994) personal and professional life. Erikson was born in Frankfurt, Germany. His biological father abandoned Erikson’s mother while she was still pregnant. She remarried when Erikson was three years old, and Erikson would never know his biological father. His mother’s new husband, Theodore Homburger, adopted Erik and gave him his last name. His early years were marked by a great deal of identity confusion. While his mother and her husband were Jewish and he was raised as a Jew, Erik knew that his biological father was not Jewish. He was not accepted among the German children at school because he was a Jew, and he did not fit in among his Jewish peers because of his “Aryan” looks. His blonde hair, blue eyes and Nordic features prompted the other Jewish children to call him “the goy.”
Erikson spent his late adolescent years traveling around Europe and studying art in various cities. He would later look back upon these years of exploration as a very important time for him, in which he struggled to find a sense of personal identity. Eventually, Erikson found himself in Vienna working as an art teacher. He began studying psychoanalysis with Anna Freud, who became his mentor. Erikson fled Europe for America in 1933 to evade the Nazis. In America, Erikson finally constructed a personal sense of identity that he was comfortable with. He dedicated his professional life to clinical work with children and to scholarly work in the field of psychoanalysis. He converted to Christianity, and he changed his name from Erik Homburger to Erik Erikson (Erik the son of Erik).
Though his ideas are born directly out of Freudian theory, Erikson’s original contributions to the fields of psychoanalysis and developmental psychology were manifold. Erikson called his theories “psychosocial” rather than “psychosexual,” because he directed the study of the ego away from internal biological impulses, and focused more on the individual’s personal struggle to fit into his or her social environment. Erikson also lengthened the scope of developmental studies. While Freud ended his developmental stages at early adolescence, Erikson wrote volumes on the identity struggles people face during late adolescence, young adulthood, midlife and old age. He was one of the first theorists to promote the notion that developmental psychology must include the entire scope of human development, and not just child development. Furthermore, Erikson’s groundbreaking use of “psychohistory” and “psychobiography” expanded the palette of psychoanalytic tools available to researchers and clinicians. And finally, Erikson developed the concept of the “identity crisis,” the personal struggle that each individual undergoes in an effort to achieve psychological adjustment and existential purpose at each stage of life. The notion that times of great internal conflict are not unhealthy but rather that they are normal stages in the search for happiness and psychological well-being, is Erikson’s most enduring legacy.
Attachment
The term “crisis,” as Erikson used it, refers to “…a turning point, a crucial period of increased vulnerability and heightened potential….” The first stage of identity crisis, trust versus mistrust, corresponds to Freud’s first psychosexual stage. The theme of oral satisfaction is interpreted by Erikson as the emotional disposition of “trust.” In Erikson’s words: “By ‘trust’ I mean an essential trustfulness of others as well as a fundamental sense of one’s own trustworthiness.” The baby’s degree of trust in Mother is the barometer of the parent/infant relationship. The baby needs to trust in the fact that if he expresses the need for love and attention, these needs will be attended to. If this trust is not achieved, then a sense of mistrust will develop. If mistrust is too great, the baby will give up trying to express its need for love and attention, and he will simply let his emotional needs fester inside of him in perpetual frustration.
By applying attachment theory to Erikson’s model, we can see the relationship patterns that may emerge as a result of trust being either present or absent within the parent/child relationship. Attachment theory is a developmental model that explains how babies create either secure or insecure relationships with their parental figures. Longitudinal relationship research has shown that the attachment style people have as babies with their primary caregivers are remarkably resilient. The patterns tend to reappear later in life within their relationships with their significant others and spouses. This research has given a certain degree of credibility to psychoanalytic theory, and the notion that primary relationships with opposite sex parents are linked unconsciously with our romantic relationships as adults. For the purpose of film analysis, the theory of adult attachment patterns makes it easier to find examples for interpretation. We don’t need to look at babies to see examples of attachment patterns. We can see examples of trust and mistrust, i.e., secure and insecure attachment patterns, in every emotional relationship.
Ordinary People (revisited)
The insecure attachment between Conrad and his mother in Ordinary People is apparent in their very first scene together. Conrad is just out of the hospital and still feeling a bit nervous and jittery. He comes down to the breakfast table, and his mother tells him that she prepared his favorite breakfast, French toast. Food is an axiomatic symbol of love, especially within the mother/child relationship, which is initially consummated during the oral stage of development via the mutually satisfying act of breastfeeding. By offering or withholding the breast, the mother creates a sense of either trust or mistrust in her developing baby. Conrad tells his mother that he’s “not really hungry.” He’s reluctant to accept his mother’s offering of love. Beth immediately takes the plate away and shoves the hot, delicious French toast down the garbage disposal. Beth instantly withdraws the food and destroys every trace of it, symbolically “undoing” her offering of love so she can pretend that she never offered it in the first place.
It is clear that mother and son share an insecure attachment pattern. They are both extremely reluctant to express any affection toward each other. It has come to the point where it is excruciatingly uncomfortable for either of them to express even the smallest gesture of love to the other. If one side does make a gesture and it is not accepted, the reaction is immediate, hostile and extreme. Love, for Conrad and Beth, is a matter of extreme anxiety, because there is no trust between them. In order to express love, one must trust that the love will be accepted and reciprocated, because there is no worse feeling than love unrequited. Conrad and Beth cannot express their love for each other. So they avoid expressing love, and they avoid each other.
The heart of the film is Conrad’s emotional metamorphosis through psychoanalysis. Calvin is supportive of Conrad’s struggle to change himself, while Beth tacitly disapproves. Her disapproval is related to her own internal need for perfection, and also to her general mistrust of other people. This sense of mistrust is her legacy to her son. A sense of mistrust is evident in Conrad’s behavior with his new girlfriend, Jeannine (Elizabeth McGovern). Fortunately, Conrad is able to overcome his mistrust as a result of his trusting relationship with his psychoanalyst. He displays the beginnings of a secure attachment with Jeannine when he opens up to her, discloses his true feelings and displays an honest expression of emotion and affection. Conrad’s trust is rewarded when Jeannine reciprocates his feelings, and then invites him to breakfast—the same symbolic offering of love that Conrad received from his mother in the beginning of the film. This time, Conrad accepts the food from Jeannine, symbolizing that he has developed the capacity to trust someone else, and accept her love.
Film Noir
Just as a basic sense of trust is generalized into trust in the world and in one’s self, a basic sense of mistrust can also be generalized into a disposition of mistrust towards everyone in the world, including one’s self. People who trust no one and have no desire to be trusted by others are not very well prepared for a life of healthy interpersonal
relationships. However, these characters are perfectly suited for the role of gangster, criminal or crooked cop in film noir movies, which are especially adept at portraying a world of secondary mistrust, a wicked world of secrets, lies and paranoia.
In John Huston’s first film, The Maltese Falcon (1941), Sam Spade (Humphrey Bogart) is a private detective who exists in a dark world in which every character is shady, deceptive, paranoid and treacherous. Sam cannot trust anyone, and he often finds himself in situations where he cannot even trust his own judgment. Even the Maltese Falcon, the statuette at the center of the film, is deceitful in its own way—it is not what it appears to be. The Maltese Falcon was a seminal movie in a film genre which is not a category of setting, character or plot, but a specific emotional tone in a movie. The essence of film noir is moral uncertainty—the inability to trust anyone, because everyone is two-faced and nothing is really as it seems. Film noir is a world of mistrust.
Movies and the Mind Page 22