"I have sense of the term- that is, the simultaneous existence of love and hate towards the same object- lies at the root of many cultural institutions."
Freud attributed most of the origin of emotional ambivalence to our "father-complex". He believed that this phenomenon was a result of our emotional life or, more accurately, emotions towards our parents (mainly our fathers.) I feel that this is very prevalent today as the rate of single mother families has been steadily increasing since the 1940's. According to the US Census in 2009, "A majority of children living with unmarried parents are living only with their mothers and not their fathers (61 percent before age 1 and 80 percent among 12 to 17 year olds)." This statistic by it self does not directly correlate to the relationship a child has with his/her father although it shows that the percentages are much higher to not be living with ones father. Coming from a single mother household, I can attest to the emotional ambivalence towards my father personally. The overwhelming contradictions of love for my father and hatred for his actions is one that follows me daily. There is an innate love that very little can stifle completely.
This quote proves to be a cultural phenomenon today. It backs up a sort of state of emotional limbo. It points back to Freud's Oedipus Complex that is believed to be "the beginning of religion, morals, society and art." All of these categories showcase the emotional ambivalence.
I think it's interesting how the same sort of ambivalence comes from from two different situations. In Freud's case, the hatred stems from the competition with the father and in more modern cases the hatred more commonly stems from the misdeeds (or absence) of the father.
ReplyDeleteI was also raised by a single mother (who then remarried when I was 8, so the later part of my childhood was spent with two parents), so this question is personally interesting to me. On one level, I would think that the absent fathers of today could definitely be comparable to the murdered patriarch that Freud discusses. On the other hand, though, the ambivalence toward the murdered patriarch has to do with how tyrannical he was, how much power he had. The absent fathers of today don't have much power--in fact, from the child's perspective, it would be the mother who has that kind of power, leading me to wonder whether the ambivalence should be directed toward the mother now?
ReplyDeleteThat is a very good point. I did not get too in depth with my personal situation (which lead my particular interest in this topic) but my father was physically present up until a few months ago. This does play right into the part of the tyrannical father's fall from power. I guess a better example would be divorced parents instead of just completely removed ones for they had time to "run" a family before dismissing themselves from it.
ReplyDelete