embracing…feeling which corresponded to a more intimate bond between the ego and the world about it” (29). In some instances, the present ego-feeling, a distinct sense of self, exists alongside a preserved remnant of the initial ego-feeling. This conserved primary ego sensation, of being one with the world, manifests as the “oceanic” or “religious” feeling. While Freud presents this narrative principally to explain the psychological roots of religious sensation, he also folds in an indirect acknowledgement of ego relationality.
VVVIHere, in his later work, Freud continues to allude to the openness and variable nature of the ego’s boundaries. The inconsistency and permeability of these ego boundaries appear quite plainly in one particular psychological state. “At the height of being in love,” Freud claims, “the boundary between ego and object, threatens to melt away” (26). Thus Freud’s account of the primary-ego feeling clearly demonstrates an understanding of the ego as strongly receptive and responsive to relationality. Young-Bruehl correctly notes that Freud’s tendency to focus on the relationality of the ego decreases as he turns away from ego-instincts. Yet, even in his late work, Civilization and its Discontents, Freud maintains an interestingly receptive and mutable notion of the self.
VVVIYoung-Bruehl claims that Freud’s early work on the ego-instincts contains the most valuable accounts of relationality. Consequently, she develops her understanding of the primary relational ego by turning to Freud’s early theories and additionally to psychologist Takeo Doi’s notion of cherishment. Takeo Doi makes the singular claim that the infant “begins in a condition of relatedness that is predominantly ego instinctual” (Young-Bruehl, 32). From the first moments of life, the infant desires and requires cherishment, and if caregivers are present they respond by nourishing and cherishing the infant. This “elemental form of reciprocity” persists throughout life and “the growth principle of the ego” ensures that “the ego aims at growth and is met by cherishment or cherishment’s lack” (Young-Bruehl, 32-33). Thus, contrary to an understanding of the ego as aggressively self-interested, this account suggests that the ego is enriched by relational encounters, receptivity, and circular currents of affection.
68