Through a Lens Darkly: Transference in Today’s Marriage

In a country in which the divorce rate is the highest of any industrialized country, it would pay to take a look at Freud’s theory of transference to understand how attachments are formed. The question is why the people to whom we are romantically attached turn out to be those who may be so very wrong for us. Freud developed the theory of transference as he started to understand that his patients were relating to him as they would to a parental figure. In Freud’s words, in An Outline of Psychoanalysis (Strachey translation, 1949, p. 31):

The patient is not satisfied with regarding the analyst in the light of reality as a helper and adviser who, moreover, is remunerated for the trouble he takes and who would himself be content with some such role as that of a guide on a difficult mountain climb. On the contrary, the patient sees in him the return, the reincarnation, of some important figure out of his childhood or past, and consequently transfers onto him feelings and reactions which undoubtedly applied to this prototype.

In today’s world transference can be understood as a mostly unconscious effort to obtain in a current relationship what was missing from an earlier one. It is also a way of trying to master a past relationship in a current situation. This process distorts a relationship in many treacherous ways. An adult may use childish behaviors because he feels as powerless as an adult as he did as a child relating to an omnipotent parent. An adult may project onto a romantic partner qualities that a parent possessed. Unconscious transference also leads people toward partners who feel familiar. Unfortunately, these feelings can stop one from seeing another person clearly. A woman who was the daughter of an angry father may be unwittingly drawn to an angry partner, even though he may manage to hide that anger in the initial stages of a relationship. In a folie à deux both partners may relate to each other through a miasma of past relationships that prevent them from being able to perceive each other clearly—as who they really are. Destructive ways of managing may ensue—from self-medicating to escaping from the relationship by having an affair.

In therapy, one can hope that partners can be encouraged to

Page 309

inquire about what history they may be repeating. Is the daughter of a narcissistic mother constantly trying to obtain from her husband the attention and love she never received from her mother? Is the son of a castrating father always seeking to prove that he is better than others? Does the daughter of a martyr mother bear every difficulty in silence—leading to a failure of communication and possible resentment of her husband? Is she being the same good little girl who was never allowed to have an opinion as a child? Children of addicts often choose addicts as their partners—albeit unwittingly. People who were emotionally neglected as children may be drawn to partners who will behave in a similar fashion. The son of a mother with borderline personality disorder may find his partner’s mood swings to be perfectly normal in the beginning. But ultimately those changes may prove too disruptive to bear.

In today’s world where sharing one’s experiences, emotions and personal traumas is much more the norm than previously, both women and men have more opportunities to understand that their experiences are not unique. The stigmas of alcoholism, extramarital affairs and even sexual abuse are not such taboo subjects. Therapy itself has lost its stigma. A greater percentage of people are becoming more aware that many experiences are not so unusual, and they begin to search for clarity sooner rather than later. What can become clear in that endeavor is that one is relating to a person not according to who he is but rather as to whom he is imagined to be. Furthermore, the current relationship itself is repeating a past dynamic.

Ms. L., a patient, came into treatment with her husband because she found pornography on his iPhone. It’s worth noting that currently, with e-mail and cell phones, it is much easier for partners to discover such evidence. He was not responsive to her sexual overtures and rarely initiated intimate relations. She felt neglected and unwanted. Ms. L. had a variety of strategies to try to get his attention and she felt that she was a failure when he never reciprocated. She was initially attracted to his good looks, his business success and what appeared to be his warmth toward her.

In treatment the therapist learned that Ms. L. had a father who was quite distant, and as a child she constantly tried to get his attention and affection. Her husband, the therapist discovered, had

Page 310

an overpowering and intrusive mother. His need was to set up protective boundaries that had never worked for him as a child. Viewing pornography and masturbating was a method for him to gain control without submitting to a relationship. The repetition in his marriage set up the very dynamic that Mrs. L. had lived as a child. Both partners were relating to each other in ways that had more to do with repeating the past than moving forward in the present.

Therapy cannot undo the past. But the process of shedding light on how the past intrudes into the present can help partners relate to each other in terms of their real selves. There are fewer inhibitions in today’s world. The information highway is faster than ever. The shadows of the past turn up in unlikely places, such as cell phones and computers. Partners are more likely to learn things about each other that previously might have been able to stay under wraps. Today’s high divorce rate may be partly a reflection of this increased knowledge. With instant access may come the wish for an instant solution. Since divorce itself is no longer seen as so socially unacceptable, it can be easier to run rather than try to understand and work out solutions. Looking at relations through the lens of transference should illuminate seemingly intractable relationships.

Page 311