Having internalized the social restraints by means of which they formerly sought to keep possibility within civilized limits, they feel themselves overwhelmed by an annihilating boredom, like animals whose instincts have withered in captivity. A reversion to savagery threatens them so little that they long precisely for a more vigorous instinctual existence. People nowadays complain of an inability to feel. They cultivate more vivid experiences, seek to beat sluggish flesh to life, attempt to revive jaded appetites.
|Published (Last):||28 January 2012|
|PDF File Size:||8.69 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.42 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email. There is much to admire in the work of Christopher Lasch. He has constructed wonderfully exact criticisms of the presumptions and intrusions of those agencies of social control which are called, in the current jargon, the human services. A man of the Left, Lasch has distanced himself from many of the follies of the contemporary Left.
He has, for instance, defended the family against its present-day detractors and he has ridiculed assaults on high culture and rational inquiry. Such heterodoxies have made him frequently the object of those venomous and unrestrained attacks which the Left reserves for its wayward own.
Moreover, he is—and today these virtues can no longer be taken for granted—an intellectually honest writer of marked civility. What distinguishes Lasch from others who have used psychoanalysis to inform their social analysis and criticism is that he has not relied on those psychoanalytic thinkers, such as Reich, Fromm, and Freud himself, whose work incorporates a social theory. He has turned, instead, to recent technical, clinical works whose focus is personality development. Such works rarely reflect the broad cultural interests which were so characteristic of the first generations of psychoanalysts.
In particular, Lasch has taken a clinical entity, the narcissistic personality disorder, as virtually a cultural type. These are self-absorbed people, but the self that absorbs them is painfully weak and fragile.
They are harried by unrealistic expectations and driven to search for substitutes for those satisfactions which reality can never provide. Our society, Lasch believes, tends to produce this disorder and, more importantly, affects all of us with its traits. In The Minimal Self , Lasch provides a much fuller account than he did in The Culture of Narcissism of the psychoanalytic principle upon which he bases his critique of American social life.
It is America about which Lasch is always writing. And more so than in his previous book, Lasch seeks to answer the question, what are the social conditions which generate these masses of impoverished selves in lifelong pursuit of a chimera? The roots of our woes, he finds, are to be discovered in the world of mass consumption, mass production, and technology forced upon us by the directors of advanced industrial capitalism. The Minimal Self begins with an account of the destructiveness of 20th-century life which culminates in a chapter on the Holocaust.
Lasch respects the integrity of this history and understands the danger of reducing Auschwitz to a metaphor. But he believes that the Holocaust exemplifies the dangers of modern society:.
But if it is unwise and even morally obtuse to make facile comparisons, it seems equally unwise to ignore the growing destructiveness in modern society as a whole or the possibility that all these atrocities—however incommensurable in their origins and specific effects—prefigure even more radical atrocities, including, perhaps, the annihilation of humanity itself.
Lasch includes in his list of atrocities not only those perpetrated by the Nazis but those perpetrated by Stalin and the Khmer Rouge. But Stalin was not a capitalist and Pol Pot did not preside over a modern society. Frequently, when reading Lasch, one must wonder whether the social phenomena and historical events he describes are peculiar to capitalist societies or are common to modern social life.
Or are they linked only by the fact that they happened to occur in the 20th century? The point is that Lasch does not support his own position. He has yet to show that what he criticizes is the result of the specific social system epitomized by the United States. Let me carry the argument a step forward.
It is difficult to recover the initial reactions of those who lived through the calamities of our century. But many of them sensed not that something new and monstrous but that something old and monstrous was occurring, and the fact that it was old added to its horror.
As he describes it:. I realized, dimly and incompletely, what the situation was that had been confronting us; namely what I should now describe as a new form of barbarism. Hostility toward civilization: the effort, conscious or unconscious, to become less civilized than you are, either in general or in some special way, and, so far as in you lies, to promote a similar change in others.
For such writers, and for large numbers of their readers, the destructiveness of the 20th century was not a logical outcome of modern society but a betrayal of the civilized values which it incorporated. Those generations may have been naive to believe in the first place that they had left mass destruction behind them, but that they so believed is testimony to what they thought was the real nature of the modern world.
The social and political institutions of totalitarianism are new. But unrestrained mass slaughter does not belong only to our age. The women were taken to be slaves and the city razed to the ground. To balance the account, Thucydides later tells of the Athenian treatment of Melos.
All the men of military age were put to death and the women and children reduced to slavery. It is difficult to find a time and a place where such things did not happen.
And we find that people manage to get the gruesome job done even without the benefit of modern technology. But if mass murder is not new, what may be new is that we have come to think that such acts are wrong. I am not suggesting that moderns have become, in their conduct, morally superior to their ancestors, rather that we insist upon giving moral content to acts that were until recently regarded as the way things are.
Perhaps I am wrong in this matter. Nevertheless, it points to an obligation which Lasch has skirted in his steadily growing body of indictments of modern society, namely, the obligation to show clearly and persuasively that the institutions and practices he condemns are indeed distinctively modern and are precisely the causes of the evils that he perceives in our society.
It is in this critique that his quiet Marxism makes itself felt. Technology, according to Lasch, is the mode of production which determines all social relations. Technology robs people of their freedom and self-confidence as they become dependent upon complex mechanisms of whose fundamental structures they remain ignorant.
Technology concentrates power in the hands of those who control its production and use. Technology, which makes people less independent, paradoxically and insidiously suggests to them unrealistic possibilities of mastery of their environment. Finally, adaptation to technology sets the stage for that mode of deference to experts which enables agencies of social service and social control to expand their power.
Harder is it still to resist when I summon up images of how my grandparents lived. The crowning indictment of industrial civilization is not merely that it has ravaged nature but that it has undermined confidence in the continuity and permanence of the man-made world by surrounding us with disposable goods and with fantastic images of commodities. If this is so, then is it any less so that men need some measure of continuity and permanence in their social relations?
Surely one of the things that gave people that independence and confidence in their own judgment that Lasch cherishes was that, with time and experience, they grew to know the ways of the world; they came to know what was done and what was not done. Clearly, however, as social change becomes more frequent and cuts more deeply, one ceases to move through a world whose boundaries are familiar. Few today perpetuate the 19th-century conviction that there is a technological solution to every human problem.
Technology, like most things humans do, solves some problems, creates some, and leaves many untouched. But what many today persist in believing is that there is a social solution to every problem, and only ignorance or malice prevents us from enacting it. Lasch is a thoughtful, reflective, serious man who wishes better for mankind, but so are many of the reformers and planners who have been the objects of his severest criticisms. Like them, he has not paused to ask, what is it we can and cannot do and what are the consequences for human freedom of the policies we propose?
Login Access your Commentary account. Email address. Remember me. Forgot your password? Username or email. Reset password. Go back. Share via: More. You may also like. Samuel Beckett, by Deirdre Bair by C. David Heymann. Share via. Facebook Messenger. Copy Link. Copy link. Copy Copied.
The Minimal Self: Psychic Survival in Troubled Times
The Minimal Self, by Christopher Lasch
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Other editions. Enlarge cover. Error rating book.
The Minimal Self : Psychic Survival in Troubled Times