David P. Wolf, PsyD
Belmont, MA
[ Up ] [ Helplessness ] [ Of what are we? ] [ Trauma ] [ For Attendants ]
[ Self Psychology Bulletin Board ]
3 October 2001
(Rev. 11/4/01)
There are two important psychological
questions arising out of the September 11 attacks. One about the perpetrators:
What motivates them? How could people commit such an act? What can be
done to help prevent such suffering? The other about the victims: What
has happened to us? What are the psychological injuries to the people,
the nation and the world? And how was this tragedy able to make people
from such diverse and varied places around the world all experience such a
similar hurt?
The first question is not particularly interesting for me at this time. I
am not very interested in the perpetrators or what was their experience of the
world. For the time being I am satisfied with knowing that they were disturbed
and distorted extremists. I am interested in addressing the root causes of
hatred against the United States but do not believe the attacks were caused by
our policies. I do not want to frame the experience as an East-West
battle as the perpetrators would like me to do. I am satisfied, at least
for now, with viewing them as individuals enacting a distorted and cult-like
perception of the world. I am comfortable with this view in part because
I have followed the rise to power of the Taliban in Afghanistan (thanks to the
BBC and NPR) and have long ago concluded that they are a disturbed and
destructive leadership, based on their treatment of women (loss of an entire
female society in Afghanistan), of human expression, such as in artistic
creativity (prohibition of music), and of cultural icons (the destruction of
the ancient Buddhist statues). I am also aware of how arrogantly we
treat other nations and peoples at times. While I believe that such
treatment is the place to start changing our behavior, I do not believe it
explains the Taliban. The Taliban appear to be another power-seeking
cult, using religion to aggrandize themselves without limits, to their own
ultimate destruction.
The most interesting question is why do we care so much about this
tragedy? Almost every single person in the United States has felt the loss
within their own sense of self. And it appears that almost as many
people in Europe and around the globe experienced the same personal sense of
loss. How can psychology explain this broad and deep affective phenomenon?
Why is everyone in the US in shock, feeling inner pain and sadness? More
amazingly, why is everyone in Europe acting as if they were Americans, as if
it happened to them? Even more amazingly, why is everyone in Japan and
everywhere in the world, with the exception, perhaps, of the Muslim world,
feeling similar feelings? Why does everyone in the capitalistic world feel
personally victimized, as if it were an "attack on civilization",
against "everyone"? What psychological explanation can account
for the almost universal feelings of loss?
The world is now, on November 4th, adjusting to the new order. The
left begins to fight with the right. But in the week after the 11th
there was shock around the globe, in almost every heart and mind.
Remember the Star Spangled Banner was played at Buckingham place, flowers
and condolences were left at every embassy, and every nation sent messages
of shared grief and true understanding. How can a single tragedy have
caused so many diverse people to all have a profound inner sense of hurt?
There must be some fundamental aspect of our psychological health tied up
in those buildings and aircraft. And not just our psychological
well-being, but the psychological functioning of people around the
world. What psychology can explain that power to effect the experience
of so many diverse people?
To begin to answer these questions we should note that the emotional reaction of the world seems to go beyond the feeling of
reacting to loss of thousands of lives. We have seen tragedies where thousands
of lives have been lost in disasters before without such a world reaction. I
don't think the damage to the Pentagon accounts for the world's shock. Nor the
terror of the diabolically cleaver multiple hijackings, as terrifying as that
is. We have experienced a multitude of horrors over the centuries, yet
none has ever effected so many people around the world so similarly at the
same time.
Kohut's bipolar sense of self, a tension between poles of ideals and
ambitions, offers insight as to why the world has reacted as it has. Only this
formulation of the self puts our need for ideals and values at the center of
our experience of ourselves, at the center of our sense of self. It was
some of these ideals and values that were symbolized in the twin towers and
aircraft. So we can understand how anyone around the world who
participated in the modern, capitalistic world of trade and travel would have
a sense of self with symbols like the jet aircraft and the skyscraper.
Kohut describes our need for ideals and idealizing selfobject experiences.
Children idealize their parents, he says, and go through a natural and gradual
de-idealization process as they develop. The need for idealizing experiences
that starts with our relationships with our parents gradually is replaced with
other idealized objects, hopefully more abstract, more perfect, and more able
to stand up under scrutiny. This process of maturation, the gradual
de-idealization of one's own power, or one's parents, is traumatic if the
de-idealization is too rapid or sudden. People need support from other
important people in their lives when they experience a
de-idealization.
The World Trade Center was a symbol of a relatively abstract, adult, mature
ideal. It stood for free markets, capitalism, perhaps democracy, and the
United States, which itself is a symbol for hope. Jet airplanes also are a
symbol of our modern, technological world. The destruction of the World Trade
Center by crashing a jet airplane into it - twice - took those symbols and
literally vaporized them before our eyes. This event, which everyone around
the world witnessed in undeniable clarity, caused what Kohut would call a
traumatically rapid de-idealization experience. We were shown the
vulnerability and weakness of something we had idealized. Our reaction to this
loss shows that the need for ideals is great within us all. It reveals the
irrational, grandiose nature of some of our abstract, supposedly mature
idealizations. But the pain of the traumatic de-idealization was felt by all
those people who uphold ideals of free markets, technology, capitalism
and democracy. These days, that is most of the world.
The loss of the irrational parts of the idealization is a healthy thing for
society in the long run, if we cope with the experience appropriately.
We have lost symbols, not the ideas. No one can touch the ideas which
are the essence of what we need for our psychological health and well
being. We will continue to uphold ideas like free markets, technology
and capitalism. Our greatest strength lies in those ideas, not their
symbols.
Our experience does not have to become a prolonged, post-traumatic injury
to the United States. Our experience can be compared to that of a child who
witnesses a parent humiliated before their own eyes. Like other childhood
traumas, there does not have to be lasting traumatic damage if the other
selfobjects in the child's world can listen, support and validate the child's
experience. The world's reaction to this event has saved the United States
from lasting psychological trauma. Practically every nation of the world has
sent extraordinary messages of understanding and sympathy. They sincerely say
they share our pain and loss. For it is truly their loss, too, as it is their
ideal as well. So we comfort and validate each other and help each other cope
and recover. And if we continue as we have been the past three weeks we will
recover without a lasting psychological wound. We can actually be stronger and
more mature as a society in the end.
© 2001 David P. Wolf and 3b.
All rights reserved.
Submit your comments, responses, thoughts and feelings on the general
bulletin board:
