Despite these and other criticisms, there is no doubt that Freudian theory makes an important contribution to our understanding of the unconscious processes involved in falling in love. The most important conclusion we can derive from his theory is that it is it is not by chance that we fall in love with a particular person; not by chance that we fall in love with a particular person; we fall in love with careful, even if unconscious, consideration. Our romantic choices, even if we are not fully aware of them, are influenced by childhood experiences. And these childhood experiences are different for boys and for girls. we fall in love with careful, even if unconscious, consideration. Our romantic choices, even if we are not fully aware of them, are influenced by childhood experiences. And these childhood experiences are different for boys and for girls.

SUGGESTIONS FOR THOSE SEEKING LOVE.

People who have a sense that there is something wrong with their romantic relationships, or the type of a person with whom they fall in love with over and over again, may want to consider the possibility that the cause of the problem is primarily in them, or more specifically in their romantic choices. This does not mean that the problems are their fault. After all, the original causes for their romantic choices are encored in early childhood experiences beyond their control. But, for this very reason, the problems are also not the fault of their partners.

Problems in romantic relationships are often related to people's romantic choices, even if these choices are unconscious, and therefore they are responsible for them. King Oedipus understood at the end of his life that although killing his father and marrying his mother were not his fault, still, he was responsible for his actions. We, too, need to take responsibility for our romantic choices even if they are not our fault. Taking responsibility is always a recommended strategy, because it is far more likely to bring about positive change than is blaming the partner. Once people decipher their romantic attraction codes, they can choose to follow the same scripts or alter them.

THE SON FALLS IN LOVE WITH "MOTHER"

161.

Freud's theory suggests one approach. Try to find similarities between your romantic partner and your opposite s.e.x parent.

When you make a list of all the notable characteristics-physical, emotional, behavioral, and mental-of your parent and compare it to a list of your romantic partner's characteristics, are there similarities between them? What does this say about you?

10.T H E I N T E R N A L RO M A N T I C I M A G E.

This is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united with is wife, and they become one.

-Genesis We will be happy together, drink deep, and lose ourselves in love.

My lover is mine and I am his.

- The Song of Songs, The Song of Songs, Old Testament Old Testament "I think he is like my father in the good ways, like he's think he is like my father in the good ways, like he's very hard working, he's honest, he's on time, he's trustworthy. very hard working, he's honest, he's on time, he's trustworthy.

But he is also very affectionate that my father is not. He is very affectionate and my mother is very affectionate. He cares a lot about affectionate and my mother is very affectionate. He cares a lot about me and supports me like my mother. He's got a lot of my mom's me and supports me like my mother. He's got a lot of my mom's qualities." qualities."

"She is a good combination of both of my parents rolled into one.

She can be very compa.s.sionate, very loving, very tender, very understanding, always smothering you with love and just patting you understanding, always smothering you with love and just patting you all the time like my mother. Then like my dad she's got her really set all the time like my mother. Then like my dad she's got her really set ideas. You cannot make her change her mind on some things." ideas. You cannot make her change her mind on some things."

"I need to feel special and feel that the person I'm with is dedicated to me. Actions speak louder than words proving that someone is to me. Actions speak louder than words proving that someone is dedicated to me. With my dad, he always told me he loved me but he dedicated to me. With my dad, he always told me he loved me but he surely didn't act it. With [my boyfriend] it's similar in that he tells surely didn't act it. With [my boyfriend] it's similar in that he tells it to me but things don't add up to prove it to me. I question it it to me but things don't add up to prove it to me. I question it because of the way he acts. With both of them I hear it but it doesn't because of the way he acts. With both of them I hear it but it doesn't add up. Also it's easy for me to get into the position of "you've hurt add up. Also it's easy for me to get into the position of "you've hurt me," or "I'm being hurt." It's almost as if I'm looking for it. Some me," or "I'm being hurt." It's almost as if I'm looking for it. Some day they'll realize what they've done to me. With my parents I day they'll realize what they've done to me. With my parents I didn't talk about how I felt. I was afraid of conflict. I didn't want to didn't talk about how I felt. I was afraid of conflict. I didn't want to deal with the tension in my family. I still have a hard time defining deal with the tension in my family. I still have a hard time defining my feelings and expressing them. When I was little I didn't let my feelings and expressing them. When I was little I didn't let 163 163 164.

myself feel things so I couldn't name them. I didn't have practice in saying what I saying what I feel and I can still see myself doing that." feel and I can still see myself doing that."

"She's kind of similar to my dad in that she's as stubborn as h.e.l.l.

But she's a genuinely nice person and in that she's like my mom."

Is your romantic relationship similar to the relationship you had with your parents when you were growing up? The majority of the young men and women who were asked this question, 70 percent, responded affirmatively.1 In some cases, people described a similarity in terms of the quality of the relationship. "The similarity between my relationship with him and with my parents is in the suffocating love." "[I have] the same sense of not quite living up to someone's expectations." In other cases, the young people described a similarity in the individual's appearance, personality, or behavior. "He is similar to my father in the way he's built, tall and skinny." "My mother is pa.s.sive and he is pa.s.sive." "She can be nice like my mother, and when she gets angry she gives me 'the look' that my mother used to give me."

It is not surprising that people who described an adult romantic relationship as similar to a childhood relationship with their parents were also likely to note a similarity between a partner and a parent.

What is surprising is that noting this similarity has a positive impact on intimate relationships. The more similarity people saw between a childhood relationship with their parents and an adult romantic relationship, the more likely they were to describe themselves as feeling secure in the relationship, to be themselves in the relationship, to have fewer conflicts and to handle well the conflicts that came up.2 Clinical experience, mine as well as others', suggests that the childhood relationships with parents have a much a greater influence on people's adult romantic relationships than even these data, based on people's subjective perceptions, might suggest. One of the important revelations for couples in therapy is just how powerful and profound the connection is between their childhood relationships with their parents and their romantic relationship with each other.

The discovery of this kind of a connection is helpful in getting people to understand qualities they may have had difficulty comprehending and accepting about each other and about their intimate relationships. Examples are presented in the next chapter in which four people describe their childhood stories and their adult romantic relationships. What becomes very clear when reading those stories is the lack of people's awareness of the obvious effect their childhood experiences have on their romantic relationships.

THE INTERNAL ROMANTIC IMAGE.

165.

When I conduct an in-depth examination of a couple's relationship in therapy, I most often discover that the romantic choices are based to a large extent on the internal romantic images of both partners. The previous two chapters dealt with readiness for love and similarity between the romantic partner and the parent of the opposite s.e.x. In the present chapter we will see how these subjects relate to the internal romantic image.

Falling in love is a powerful emotional experience. The dominant component in it is the feeling of togetherness, of bonding, of being like one. "My lover is mine and I am his" says the woman in the biblical Song of Songs Song of Songs and her words are echoed in love songs of all ages. Lovers feel as if their ego boundaries have melted away as they blend into one ent.i.ty. In many respects it is possible to see in this melting-into-one a return to the primal symbiotic bond with mother. and her words are echoed in love songs of all ages. Lovers feel as if their ego boundaries have melted away as they blend into one ent.i.ty. In many respects it is possible to see in this melting-into-one a return to the primal symbiotic bond with mother.

Both partners feel that all their emotional needs are totally satisfied, the way they were in their infantile Garden of Eden. Even the bible tells us that this is as it should be. "This is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united with his wife, and they become one" (Genesis, 2:22). Man needs to leave his mother and father, and become an independent individual, before he can be united with, and have a truly intimate relationship with, his wife. We choose very carefully the person with whom we fall in love. Our main guide in making this choice is an internal, largely unconscious, romantic image.

We develop our internal romantic images very early. As we saw in the previous two chapters, the romantic image is based on powerful emotional experiences children have in their first years of life. Mother and Father, and anyone else who played a significant role during the childhood years, influence the development of the internal romantic image in two primary ways: * by the way they expressed, or did not express, love toward the child. "My dad, he always told me he loved me but he surely didn't act it. With [my boyfriend]

it's similar in that he tells it to me but things don't add up."

* by the way they expressed, or did not express, love toward each other. "Something in my relationship with him reminded me of the way my mother treated my father: A lot of patience, a lot of listening."

While Freud emphasized the role that the parent of the opposite s.e.x plays in falling in love, in fact, the internal romantic image appears to be quite broad. It encompa.s.ses a reenactment of the positive and 166 negative elements of both parents, their relationship, and the relationship each of them had with the child. As we will see, while the s.e.x of the parent has an effect, unresolved issues with either parent have far greater impact.

There are several theories that explain how this reenactment happens. Amongst them are evolutionary theory that emphasizes the role of "imprinting"; Jungian theory that emphasizes the role of certain "archetypes"; and object relations theory that emphasizes the role of internal "objects," our relationships to them and to the people they represent. In the following pages, we will discuss these theories with an eye to how each contributes to the understanding of the central topic of this chapter: the influence of childhood experiences on the internal romantic image and, through it, on the experience of falling in love.

HOW WE CHOOSE WITH WHOM TO FALL IN LOVE.

ACCORDING TO OBJECT RELATIONS THEORY.

More than the other theories, Object Relations Theory Object Relations Theory addresses falling in love. The word "object" conjures up an image of something inanimate. But the meaning of the word in object relations theory is very different. The addresses falling in love. The word "object" conjures up an image of something inanimate. But the meaning of the word in object relations theory is very different. The object object is an internal representation of a person, a thing, a relationship, or an event that has become part of an individual's psyche. The hungry baby has no internal picture of Mother and so it cries. Once Mother is "internalized," the baby can handle her temporary absence. Her internalized image says she will come back. In adults, the internalized mother object includes both a concrete representation of their own mothers, the way she was in different stages of their lives, and an abstract image that is influenced by cultural stereotypes and mythologies of motherhood. is an internal representation of a person, a thing, a relationship, or an event that has become part of an individual's psyche. The hungry baby has no internal picture of Mother and so it cries. Once Mother is "internalized," the baby can handle her temporary absence. Her internalized image says she will come back. In adults, the internalized mother object includes both a concrete representation of their own mothers, the way she was in different stages of their lives, and an abstract image that is influenced by cultural stereotypes and mythologies of motherhood.

The screen that filters objects is dictated by age, genetics, and past experiences. A baby perceives Mother differently than a person of fifty does. All internalized images are stored in the psyche simultaneously. This is why people are surprised when they notice how old and feeble their mothers or fathers look in old age. The new images contradict their childhood images of the parent as young and powerful.

Object relations theorists a.s.sume that our inner world consists of objects and object relations object relations-our internal perception of the relationships between different objects. The relationships between romantic partners, as well as all other intimate relationships, are always "object relations."

THE INTERNAL ROMANTIC IMAGE.

167.

One of the most prominent among object relations theorists is Margaret Mahler.3 As noted in the detailed discussion of her work in chapter eight, Mahler (1974) believes that a newborn human infant has no personality. Rather, the personality results from a developmental process she termed "psychological birth." The experience of oneness oneness with mother, during the first symbiotic stage of the baby's development, is the building block for the ability to form romantic love relationships. Psychological birth happens in stages between the ages of six months and three years. When the child pa.s.ses these stages successfully the result is "the first level of self-ident.i.ty." The process of "separation-individuation" continues throughout life and is notable especially in adolescence, marriage, and parenthood. A person who pa.s.ses through this process successfully is a person with a with mother, during the first symbiotic stage of the baby's development, is the building block for the ability to form romantic love relationships. Psychological birth happens in stages between the ages of six months and three years. When the child pa.s.ses these stages successfully the result is "the first level of self-ident.i.ty." The process of "separation-individuation" continues throughout life and is notable especially in adolescence, marriage, and parenthood. A person who pa.s.ses through this process successfully is a person with a differentiated differentiated personality capable of stable love relationships. In other words, in order to be able to truly love and be intimate with another person, rather than some reflection of ourselves in that person, we need to be personality capable of stable love relationships. In other words, in order to be able to truly love and be intimate with another person, rather than some reflection of ourselves in that person, we need to be individuated. individuated. We all struggle to achieve a balance between a need to be part of something larger than ourselves-a couple-and a need to be separate, a struggle between togetherness and individuation (Blatt & Bla.s.s, 1996). We all struggle to achieve a balance between a need to be part of something larger than ourselves-a couple-and a need to be separate, a struggle between togetherness and individuation (Blatt & Bla.s.s, 1996).

The "level of differentiation" that partners can achieve from their families of origin has a critical influence on the quality of their relationship. Actually, it can be said that if the early dyadic experience with mother is loving and warm, "the first, and perhaps essential step toward a good marriage will have been taken" (d.i.c.ks, 1967).

The Roots Of Obsessive Love What happens when the initial bond with mother is not warm and loving? When the behavior of a parent is perceived by a child as rejection, abandonment, or persecution, the child cannot give up or change the "frustrating object" that is the parent. The child deals with the frustration by internalizing parts of the loved/hated parent and attempting to control the parent in his or her inner world. The frustrating object undergoes various "splits" that are repressed and remain as unconscious introjects introjects that become part of the individual's personality structure (Givelber, 1990). that become part of the individual's personality structure (Givelber, 1990).

The introjects include both the remainders of infantile needs and the parent's response to these needs. The ego develops and gets organized around these introjects in different ways. The ego may develop a sense of inferiority and worthlessness, which reflects the baby's helplessness, as well as a sense of grandiosity and omnipotence that reflects the baby's perception of the parent's omnipotence. The 168 self develops around these unconscious introjects and both their extremes can be found in it. When we see in the arrogant and sn.o.bbish behavior of a person, evidence for the presence of an introject of a grandiose self, we can safely a.s.sume that we are also going to find an introject of an insecure and inferior self that was repressed. When we see a person who always feels taken advantage of and abused, we can be sure that in addition to the introject of a victim, we are also going to find a hostile, aggressive, and destructive introject that has been repressed.

In most cases the individual is only aware of one part of this duality; in the last case, the individual is likely to be aware of the victimized self and unaware of the hostile aggressive self. In the familiar example of the paranoid, the introject of the persecuted victim controls the internal organization of the self, whereas the denied and repressed introject of the aggressive persecutor is projected onto other people. People with whom the individual has a relationship are perceived as fitting those unconscious introjects of aggressive, abandoning, or persecuting. In other words, the people a person comes in contact with are perceived and understood in the light of the person's internal world of objects and object relations.

Falling in love is an unconscious choice of a partner who fits a repressed, split-off part split-off part of the self (d.i.c.ks, 1967). Once the partner expresses, or is perceived as expressing, that repressed part in the self, there is no need to admit its existence in the self. A woman who feels unlovable, because she felt unlovable as a child, is likely to choose a man who does not show love. This way she can blame him for her bad feelings about herself. A man who feels inferior, because he felt that way as a child, is likely to choose a critical and judgmental woman. This way he can blame her for his feelings of inferiority. of the self (d.i.c.ks, 1967). Once the partner expresses, or is perceived as expressing, that repressed part in the self, there is no need to admit its existence in the self. A woman who feels unlovable, because she felt unlovable as a child, is likely to choose a man who does not show love. This way she can blame him for her bad feelings about herself. A man who feels inferior, because he felt that way as a child, is likely to choose a critical and judgmental woman. This way he can blame her for his feelings of inferiority.

While the woman will continue to complain that her husband doesn't show her love and the man will continue to complain about his wife's cruel criticism, both are likely to remain with their partners.

The reason? It is far easier to be with a partner who provides an external justification for your bad feelings about yourself than to confront those feelings directly in yourself. Furthermore, when partners are undifferentiated as a result of traumatic experiences of rejection, abandonment, or persecution in their childhoods, their feelings toward these suppressed and denied parts in themselves are especially negative or ambivalent. Because the need to deny the existence of these repressed parts is especially strong, so is the need to find a partner who will express them.

When they discover that part in a potential partner, they fall "madly in love." Their love may appear to others excessive, THE INTERNAL ROMANTIC IMAGE 169.

destructive, or even crazy, but it makes perfect sense given their unconscious needs. After having fallen in love, they unconsciously encourage their partners to express these repressed and denied parts.

This enables them to criticize and try to control these split-off parts in their partners, not in themselves.

When both partners of a couple are differentiated and reasonably integrated people, their personality differences are perceived as complementary, valuable, and enjoyable. The slightly compulsive husband in such a couple may enjoy the spontaneity and impulsiveness of his wife, whereas the wife values her husband's attention to detail and careful planning.

Among the interviewees whose remarks appeared at the opening to this chapter, there was a listless and sad-faced man who said that he fell in love with his girlfriend because "she is full of joy, sure of herself, attractive. She is one of those people who always makes me happy when I see her. She is one of those optimistic people who always smiles." A slow-speaking and slow-moving woman said she fell in love with her boyfriend because he was "dynamic."

Contrary to the familiar dictum that in order to be able to love others we first need to love ourselves, psychoa.n.a.lyst Theodore Reik observed that the more negative our self-perception, the more likely we are to fall in love. People sense something lacking in themselves and seek the missing quality or qualities in a mate. When they fall in love, writes Reik, they project onto the beloved their unfulfilled fantasies (1964).

The projection of split-off parts of the self, split-off projection, split-off projection, happens in both partners, with each partner trying to express denied and repressed parts through the partner. For example, a woman who has internalized traumatic, childhood experiences of violent conflict between a victim and an abuser, sees herself as a victim. She has split the two parts of the conflict, repressed the violent abuser part, and projected it onto her partner. The internalized conflict, in this case between abuse and victimization, becomes an ongoing conflict between the partners. The split self becomes a split couple. The woman needs a hostile and aggressive man in order to project onto him the unconscious and primitive, violent, repressed, split-off part of herself. The internalized conflict pushes her to find a partner who can fill that need, to the shock and dismay of her family and friends who cannot understand what a sweet and gentle woman finds in an aggressive and hostile brute. The answer is simple. She finds in him her split-off part. happens in both partners, with each partner trying to express denied and repressed parts through the partner. For example, a woman who has internalized traumatic, childhood experiences of violent conflict between a victim and an abuser, sees herself as a victim. She has split the two parts of the conflict, repressed the violent abuser part, and projected it onto her partner. The internalized conflict, in this case between abuse and victimization, becomes an ongoing conflict between the partners. The split self becomes a split couple. The woman needs a hostile and aggressive man in order to project onto him the unconscious and primitive, violent, repressed, split-off part of herself. The internalized conflict pushes her to find a partner who can fill that need, to the shock and dismay of her family and friends who cannot understand what a sweet and gentle woman finds in an aggressive and hostile brute. The answer is simple. She finds in him her split-off part.

Her lover has also internalized a violent conflict from childhood between an abuser and a victim. However, in his case the part that was split-off and repressed is the part of the victim. In his relationship with her he can experience this part and deal with it. In this way, 170 undifferentiated partners import troubled early object relations into their romantic relationships (d.i.c.ks, 1967).

Since projection represents a primitive unconscious need, the individual who is projecting often "doesn't see" behaviors that do not fit the projection. Consequently, the woman is likely to see the man's behavior as hostile and aggressive even when it is not. Similarly, the man is likely to see the woman as a victim even when she is not.

As this example demonstrates, partners tend to have the same internalized conflicts and, in a mutual process, project onto each other the complementary, unconscious, and suppressed split-off parts of themselves. Furthermore, each partner identifies with the parts the other partner projects onto him or her. The result is a dynamic called projective identification. projective identification. 4 4 Projective identification is probably object relations theory's most important contribution to the understanding of falling-in-love and a couple's dynamic. The man, whose wife projects onto him her aggressive, powerful, parental, authoritative split-off part, internalizes this projection, identifies with it, and sees himself as his wife sees him. Similarly, the woman identifies with, and sees herself as, her husband's projection of his victimized, weak, infantile, and powerless split-off part. In this way, internal, unconscious conflicts in each partner become externalized as patterns of conflict in the couple.

Stated differently, a couple's conflicts are a reenactment of internal conflicts in each one of the partners. The less integrated couples are, the more infantile their needs and the more intense their conflicts.

When two people fall in love, they project onto each other their split-off and repressed parts. A woman who learned to deny her urge for autonomy and independence projects it onto her husband.

This causes him to appear even more independent than he really is.

A man who learned to deny his dependence and need for intimacy projects them onto his wife who then seems even more needy and dependent than she really is. Projective identification makes both of them identify with the respective projections. In most cases, all we see is a traditional marriage in which the man and the woman are playing their so-called natural gender roles very comfortably. In a number of cases, however, these stereotyped s.e.x roles can be rather costly for one or both of the partners. An example is a woman who as a result of such projective identification loses her ability to judge what is happening around her, especially her husband's behavior.

Another example is a dominant husband who acts as if his wishes and needs ought to be the single most important basis for what his wife does (Low, 1990).

A similar process explains why certain women fall in love and THE INTERNAL ROMANTIC IMAGE 171.

stay with men who abuse them. Many of these women, says psychoa.n.a.lyst and family therapist Virginia Goldner (1998a), grew up with the message that being loved and lovable is contingent upon feminine self-abnegation, so they split-off and disavow their "masculine" power and their rage. Such a woman tends to fall in love with the boy-man whose mix of vulnerability and masculine posturing is enormously gratifying to them. Being needed and adored by this "wounded soldier" creates the illusion of a new beginning that can completely overshadow the abuse that eventually explodes.

The abusive man splits off and disavows his "feminine" vulnerable victimized self. Together such couples tie a Gordian knot around each other's hearts in a closed system of object addiction.

Family therapist Murray Bowen (1978) contends that people tend to fall in love with romantic partners at similar levels of differentiation but opposing defensive, or character, styles. Defensive styles Defensive styles are patterns of behavior that protect the self from awareness of anxiety; members of couples tend to compliment each other's styles. Let us take, for example, a man who copes with the anxiety of being flooded with emotions by suppressing his feelings. Bowen's theory predicts that this man would be attracted to women at similar levels of differentiation but whose defense mechanisms are the opposite of his-that is, women with hysterical tendencies to dramatize and excessively express emotions. A woman who deals with her anxieties by becoming phobic is likely to be attracted to men who defend against their anxieties by denying them and engaging in daredevil sports and adventures. are patterns of behavior that protect the self from awareness of anxiety; members of couples tend to compliment each other's styles. Let us take, for example, a man who copes with the anxiety of being flooded with emotions by suppressing his feelings. Bowen's theory predicts that this man would be attracted to women at similar levels of differentiation but whose defense mechanisms are the opposite of his-that is, women with hysterical tendencies to dramatize and excessively express emotions. A woman who deals with her anxieties by becoming phobic is likely to be attracted to men who defend against their anxieties by denying them and engaging in daredevil sports and adventures.

The different defensive or character styles mask the underlying similarity. Thus, one partner may appear dependent and the other quite independent, one active the other pa.s.sive, one rational the other emotional. There are common patter ns to couples'

complementary defensive styles. The most common complementary patterns, according to Mittelman's pioneering work (1944), are: * One of the partners in the couple is dominant and aggressive, the other is submissive and m.a.s.o.c.h.i.s.tic.

* One of the partners is emotionally distant, the other needs affection.

* One of the partners is helpless and needs to be taken care of, the other is omnipotent.

* Both partners are in a continuous and hostile struggle for control.

Despite the ubiquity of certain patterns, every couple relationship has a unique emotional pattern that is based on the interplay between 172 conscious and unconscious, internalized, repressed, and projected parts of both partners.

When romantic partners are differentiated, the intimacy between them happens without the loss of individuality. These couples feel very close to each other and encourage each other's personal growth.

This is almost impossible when partners are undifferentiated. When a couple's level of differentiation is low, every effort to develop an independent ident.i.ty by one of the partners is perceived as a threat to the relationship. Partners respond by feeling hurt and either attack or withdraw; emotional flooding is frequent and communication is poor. The lack of security from an undifferentiated ident.i.ty prevents the partners in such a couple from taking responsibility for their feelings of insecurity and inadequacy. Instead, they tend to blame each other in the utter conviction that if only the partner were different the feelings of insecurity, inadequacy, and pain would be relieved (Meissner, 1978).

Since undifferentiated partners are trying to satisfy unconscious infantile needs and frustrations through a partner who cannot possibly satisfy them, the inevitable result is hurt, despair, disappointment, frustration, hostility, and endless conflicts. A pattern of angry, frustrated, hurt love develops when neither one of the partners is willing to give in. A hostile life and death dependence develops.

Every conflict, even the most trivial, is escalated and imbued with great significance. These couples say that they love each other desperately, that they can't live without each other, but they also can't live with the pain they cause each other.

A failure of differentiation can also result in an inability to disconnect from the family of origin and has serious consequences for romantic love relationships. Because the sense of a separate and independent self is missing, all the emotional energy is focused on the family. This can be expressed in an invisible loyalty to the family; a "ledger of unpaid debts" binds the individual to the parents, so that a full investment in the partner is perceived as a disloyalty to the family (Boszormeny-Nagy & Ulrich, 1980). For example, a man can feel compelled to visit his mother every day, call her several times a day, and eat at her house, despite the protests of his wife. The fact that the wife complains but stays with him suggests that her level of differentiation is similar to his, but probably manifests itself by completely severing contact with her family of origin. In other words, she has a good reason, even if unconscious, to stay with him.

Another example of a failure in the process of differentiation is an individual who feels like the "deprived child" in the family of origin. This person expects romantic partners to compensate for all THE INTERNAL ROMANTIC IMAGE 173.

childhood injuries and deprivations and provide the love that was not given as a child. It is clear to see that this person is in fact "collecting from the wrong source," trying to settle a childhood debt within the romantic relationship (Boszormeny-Nagy and Ulrich, 1980). Such a "deprived child" is likely to fall in love with a person who sees him- or herself as a "a kind and nurturing parent."

The level of differentiation in a couple reflects, of course, the level of differentiation in the childhood relationships of both partners.

When the level of differentiation is low, both partners bring with them to the relationship problematic object relations that carry over from their childhoods. An undifferentiated man is likely to attract and be attracted to similarly undifferentiated women. He creates, with all the women with whom he falls in love, relationships that are characterized by the same conflicts and stresses that he had with his mother as a child.

Problematic internalized objects, pathogenic introjects, pathogenic introjects, can result from relationships with both parents and the relationship between them. can result from relationships with both parents and the relationship between them.

For example, a woman who as a child witnessed her father's infidelity and her mother's pain and helpless rage, internalizes both the role of the "betrayed victim" and the role of the "unfaithful villain." As an adult, both these introjects play a significant role in her romantic relationships. She can play one role in one relationship, the other role in another relationship, or, play both in a relationship and never notice the paradox between being unfaithful to her partner and having jealous tantrums at his suspected infidelities.

Pathogenic introjects and unconscious motivations help explain behaviors that are otherwise difficult to understand-such as why people fall in love with romantic partners who seem so inappropriate for them. The reason? The partner represents a repressed part of the self. Or why a person stays with a partner who makes life an apparent living nightmare. The reason? It is easier to blame the suffering on the partner than to look inside and touch the pain. Both these concepts help explain obsessive loves in which a romantic partner becomes a drug for an individual's addiction. Such obsessive love relationships generate an intensity of feeling and a seeming irrationality in the romantic choice. Despite tremendous pain, rage, disappointment, and never-ending conflicts, the lovers insist that they are madly in love with each other and seem unable to let go of the relationship.

In summary, according to object relations theory: * People actively, albeit unconsciously, create their romantic relationships. Childhood exper iences, especially those of depr ivation, rejection, and abandonment, exert the greatest influence on the choice 174 of a romantic partner. The explanation is linear: childhood experiences are reenacted in adult love relationships.

* A couple's relationships are "object relations" that are most powerfully influenced by the childhood relationships both partners had with their parents. Falling in love does not happen by chance. People choose a person who fits an internalized "object" and "object relation." The reason? Only such a person can help them re-enact childhood experiences and gratify needs that were not satisfied in their childhood. When they find such a person, they experience tremendous excitement, joy, and hope-and fall in love.

* The unconscious needs of couples reflect the introjects of both partners and tend to complement each other.

Couples collude in gratifying these unconscious, complementary, psychological needs by creating such unwritten contracts as: "I will express your anxiety if you will keep me calm"; and, "I will think for you, if you will express my emotions."

* The ability to love and function successfully in a romantic love relationship reflects an individual's level of differentiation, which depends on childhood love experiences. When the childhood relationships with the parents were warm and loving, the person will become a differentiated individual capable of mature and satisfying love relationships. When the childhood relationships with the parents were frustrating or injurious, the person will grow up with a low level of differentiation capable only of immature love relationships. Relationships in which both partners are undifferentiated tend to arouse very powerful emotions, both positive and negative, and be experienced as obsessive love.

* People tend to fall in love with partners who are in a level of differentiation similar to their own, but whose defensive style is opposite-abuser and victim, s.a.d.i.s.t and m.a.s.o.c.h.i.s.t. When a certain conflict or pathology is found in one of the partners, it can be a.s.sumed that it is also found in the other.

Criticism of Object Relations Theory and the contribution of Heinz Kohut A number of theorists have criticized object relations theory for positing an ideal of autonomy, differentiation, and individuation, THE INTERNAL ROMANTIC IMAGE 175.

and suggest instead, the importance of affiliation and connectedness for a healthy development and ability to love (e.g., Klein, 1976; Josselson, 1992).

Self-psychologist Heinz Kohut (1977) also believes that people's self-esteem and well-being are derived from and embedded in relationships. The need for the affirming echo of the mother's approval is never outgrown, says Kohut, but transferred to a lover. Kohut views falling in love as a state in which the beloved is a perfect, primal "self-object" and gratifies completely the lover's narcissistic needs. At the beginning of life, parents are experienced as parts of the self, or "self-objects." Once the child's empathy and identification needs are satisfied, the child gradually experiences the parents and other people as separate.

If these basic needs are not satisfied, other people will always remain self-objects, viewed as parts of the self. For this kind of person, someone new triggers no curiosity about who that person is and what is special and unique about him or her. Rather, what effect will that person have on one's self image? The idealization of the beloved fills the desperate need for experiencing oneself as part of an admired self-object. All the traits of power, wisdom, and beauty that the person feels lacking in him- or herself are attributed to the beloved. Merging with the beloved provides security and peace. The merging that couples in love experience results from their being self-objects for each other (Kohut, 1971).

HOW WE CHOOSE WITH WHOM TO FALL IN LOVE.

ACCORDING TO JUNGIAN THEORY.

I seem to have loved you in numberless forms, numberless times, In life after life, in age after age forever...

Today it is heaped at your feet, it has found its end in you, The love of all man's days both past and forever: Universal joy, universal sorrow, universal life, The memories of all loves merging with this one love of ours- And songs of every poet past and forever.