Running head: THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT

RELATIONS

The Self and (M)other: An Overview of Winnicottian Object Relations

Bon Ha Gu
Columbia University

1
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
Model of the Mind
When Donald W. Winnicott was forced to declare allegiance following the theoretical
maelstrom between Anna Freud and Melanie Klein, he believed that it was irrational to think
either one of them had comprehensively covered psychoanalysis (Grolnick, 1990). And although
Winnicotts conception of the mind fundamentally coincided with the structural model of the id,
ego, and superego, his misgivings were similarly shared by William Fairbairn (Lynch, 2016).
Winnicott disagreed with the Freudian and Kleinian instinctual drive theories of human
motivation; he did not accept the death instinct and considered the biological origins of
aggression as nonveridical and abstruse (Modell, 1985). Winnicott also believed that libido was
not biologically-driven and did not denote physical energy and phenomena, but was objectdriven (Winnicott, 1965). Consequently, his theoretical premises were psychologically grounded,
based primarily on the relational dynamics of the self and its direct experience with objects
(Winnicott, 1965).
In object relations theory, Winnicott believed that there was no such thing as an infant,
but only an infant and its mother (Winnicott, 1960)1. And Winnicott had confidence that the
emergence of the infants psyche and personality was a mutual process that developed with the
person caring for the child, and not as a process occurring inside the child alone (Winnicott,
1965). According to Winnicott, the infant and maternal care together form an inseparable unit;
the infants development and sense of self is inextricably tied to the biological, physiological,

For the sake of fluency, I will refer to the mother with the feminine pronoun (i.e., her/she), and the infant/child
with the masculine or neutral one (i.e., he/his & it). I will also attribute the mother as the primary caretaker, although
Winnicotts theory takes into account both male and female sexes.

2
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
psychological, emotional and social provisions provided by its mother; in general, all of
Winnicotts theory can be thought of as a theory of the parent-infant relationship (Modell, 1985).
Model of Development
The maximally dependent infant, via the instrument of his mother, journeys through the
stages of infancy or dependence: from absolute dependence through relative dependence,
and towards independence (Abram, 1996). In absolute dependence, the infant has no means of
knowing about the care it can receive; in suspended animation, the infant is unaware of causal
inference, and can do nothing but experience the good and the bad in its crudest forms; in
relative dependence, the infant becomes aware of its vulnerability, and introjects a supportive
parental environment to satisfy its needs; in towards independence, the infant develops the
faculties to do without care, because it now possesses loving memories that provides recourse to
future impingements, along with its newly developed aptitudes to maneuver within its
environment (Winnicott, 1958; 1962).
Along with the infants development promoted by the primary maternal preoccupation,
or the mothers psychophysiological preparedness and nurturance supplied to the infant
(Winnicott, 1956), Winnicott stressed the loving environment where the infants needs are met
successfully (Winnicott, 1963). The good enough maternal environment occurs when a
mother, parent or equivalent caretaker, who is usually attuned (but not always) to what the child
wants (Modell, 1985), provides the infant with its needs moments before he requests itan
epiphany-like moment of illusion as delineated by Winnicott (e.g., breastfeeding the infant
moments before it is requested); the infant will subsequently feel an illusion of omnipotence,
as though he can have influence on the external world. This type of facilitating environment is
described as the maternal act of holding, which not only functions as physiological refuge, but

3
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
also promotes the gradual unfolding and sustainment of the infants self-object and ego
(Winnicott, 1965). This ego-support prompts the infant to mature continually despite his
incapacity to control or feel accountable for the good and the bad in his environment (Winnicott,
1965; Aronson, 2000).
But the infant soon experiences demands or impingements from the external world that
are outside its control, which challenges readily its de facto state of omnipotence. In situations of
misattunement, or when the infant becomes dissatisfied with needs that are not met sufficiently
or consistently, it does not develop a sense of omnipotence and feels perpetually frustrated
(Ogden, 1985). The infants state of frustration forces it to shift focus on ways to get the
mothers attention, in order to satisfy his needs (Modell, 1985). Even if the mother is too good
and never frustrates the infant it will fail to develop a true sense of self: experiencing no
frustration will encourage the infant to continue to feel as if its mother is still a part of oneself,
enmeshed as one psychological entity, acknowledging no reason for its separation and
individuation, and inhibits its autonomy and independence (Winnicott, 1965).
Winnicott believed that healthy infancy led the infant to a painful but necessary
emotional crisis (Aguayo, 2002): since the child understands that the object he is enamored with
and has introjected is the same person to whom it has directed frustration and aggressive
impulses towards, it has to develop the ability to come to grips with its own self. In this
frolicking act of projection and introjection, the infant cultivates the ability to imagine its
mothers feelings, becomes capable of conveying generous and reparative acts, and attains the
stage of concern (Winnicott, 1963b; Abram, 1996; Nussbaum, 2006). Hence, the infants
capacity to be aloneor the paradox of being alone in the company of its mother (Abram,
1996)is reached not only when the mother meets adequately the demands of the infant, but

4
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
when its demands are not metallowing for the infants complete ego-unintegration (Winnicott,
1958; 1962; 1965). The expression of the infants true personality and ego, is therefore
contingent on the mothers failures as it serves as an indispensable impetus that prepares the
infant as an active participant of reality and eschews its collapse into a false submissive person
(Lynch, 2016). In the ubiquity of its own mother, the infant must experience being alone in order
to achieve health and ultimate emotional maturity (Abram, 1996).
Moreover, among Winnicotts best known concepts, the transitional object and
transitional phenomena, play vital roles and contribute to the overall development of a person;
these essentially involve the relations between the persons inner and outer world and the bridge
between subjective experience and objective reality (Modell, 1985). Winnicott uses several terms
to refer to this transitional plane (i.e., the third area, the intermediate area, the resting place,
and more) (Abram, 1996). The classical example regarding these concepts involves when a
mother leaves an infant, and the infant learns to compensate for the resulting anxiety by
comforting itself by imbuing an object (e.g., a soft blanket) with its mothers attributes
(Winnicott, 1953a). Winnicott believes that the object of interest embodies a paradox: it is
neither an internal object nor an external one, represents the me and not me simultaneously,
and allows for the infants prolonged illusion of omnipotence, while at the same time acting as a
conduit to the outside world that facilitates the process of disillusionmentor the merging of
the two realities. This object, under healthy circumstances, allows for the infant, through its
primary creativity, to move increasingly towards its objective perception of reality and links
hallucinatory omnipotence with the recognition of reality (Lynch, 2016).
Model of Psychopathology

5
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
Winnicott believed that all psychopathology aligned closely with his developmental
blueprint (Lynch, 2016). While environmental interruption is traditionally interpreted by the
infant as terrifying, failures of an inordinate degree lead to disruptions in the infants going-onbeingor its true unintegrated sense of selfwhich can lead to the fragmentation of the ego
(Mitchell, 1984; Blum & Ross, 1993). Consequences of defective ego-development and support
cause the infant to experience breaks in its continuity of being, and to become erratically
attuned to the requests of others and to lose touch with its own vital needs (Modell, 1985). Here,
Winnicott delineates carefully the ego as a dynamic component of the emergent personality that
integrates into a single unit under proper conditions (Winnicott, 1962; 1963). But the infant is
unable to start or achieve ego-maturation if various failures occur, such as inadequate holding,
handling and object-presenting (Winnicott, 1962; 1963).
Moreover, the infants inability to attain the three critical tasks in its development (i.e.,
integration, personalization and realization), can stultify the infants continuity of being (Lynch,
2016). In integration, the mother gathers the bits and pieces by bringing the world to the infant
in a palatable formthis organized and adroit handling allows for the infant to differentiate its
personal agency, me, with its suffused maternal nature. In personalization, the infant
becomes able to link the body and ego with its functions and is aware of its subjectivity. Finally,
in realization (or object-relating), there is a gradual development of the infants perception
of reality, and it partakes in constructing it with the aid of his mother (or reality testing)
(Winnicott, 1962; Lynch, 2016). However, ego fragmentation and inadequate maternal care
forces the infant to base its ego needs and developmental patterns on distorted provisions. For
example, the individual who misses the good-enough care in infancy prior to his creating of the
subjective me, not-me structure is not endowed the faculties to develop an integrated ego and

6
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
may be exposed to manifold degrees of personality defects leading to a psychotic sense of self
that cannot distinguish subjective from objective reality (Winnicott, 1962). If an infant does not
have the experience of a good-enough mother and the capacity to be, prolonged impingements
will be experienced as primitive agonies and unthinkable anxieties. It will doubtlessly face
two alternatives for recourse: being and annihilation (Winnicott, 1962; 1974), and although
the infant, under suitable circumstances, sustains its being and maintains ego continuity, those
in inadequate conditions react primitively to these traumas and fail to distinguish between inside
and outside, becomes unable to discern me and not-me, and ultimately results in the
annihilation of its true sense of self (Winnicott, 1960; 1960a).
Furthermore, Winnicott similarly based the origins of primitive psychopathology on his
notion of the False Self, which implies the concept of a True Self (Winnicott, 1960).
Winnicott often used self to refer to both the id and the ego, and prescribed it a vital role in
human development (Winnicott, 1960). For Winnicott, those without a coherently defined sense
of self had to search for a true selfthis authentic self-identification is what allowed people to
be genuine and empathic. The True Self development began in early infancy, when the mother
responded in hospitable and encouraging ways to the infants often impulsive behaviors and
reactions (Winnicott, 1960; 1962). The infant grows the assurance and capacity in believing that
nothing will go awry when the mother gestures this way, and feels a sense of being alive, real
and grounded in its body (Lynch, 2016).
Conversely, the false self is essentially a defense of false communicationa defensive
process occurring between the self and the object that protects the infant against unsafe or
overwhelming environments (Model, 1984). Winncott saw the False Self as one who puts on a
successful show of being real, and was developed when the parental care provided in the

7
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
infants formative years was derisory (Winnicott, 1960). One of the primary defenses of the
False Self was compliance, or behaviors driven by the wish to satisfy others rather than a
heartfelt, expression of ones own feelings (Aguayo, 2002); if a mother exhibited flat affect or
was anaclitically depressed, the infant would introject the mothers disowned feelings and forego
its illusion of omnipotence, and search for ways to elicit a positive response from her. Hence, a
False Self experiences a state of perpetual vigilance, as it pursues the demands and wishes of
others and learns to comply with them as a method of safeguarding its hidden, True Self from a
reality it deems unsafe (Daehnert, 1998).
Model of Technique
While presupposing the therapeutic axioms of empathy, creativity, maintaining a strong
therapeutic alliance, and being client-centered, Winnicott saw his role as a clinician as providing
a substitute holding and facilitating environment for individuals to attend to their unmet
needs (Winnicott, 1962a; Lynch, 2016). To achieve this, Winnicott used the aforementioned
notion of the False Self as a diagnostic indicator to encompass the continuum of
psychopathologies he experienced in his work (Crastnopol, 1999; Lynch, 2016). Considering the
compliant, disconnected and deteriorated nature of the False Self, and utilizing analytic
interpretation, Winnicott provided the lacking parental provisions and love to the client. Through
his use of regressionwhich was often elicited via transferenceWinnicott helped generate a
symbolic2 rendition of the point of or before the environmental impingement(s) (Modell, 1985;
Winnicott, 1953; 1963a). Interpretations would then be gleaned from these reenactments through

Although reiterated several times throughout his work, Winnicotts formulation that therapeutic regression is
literal was criticized by Modell (1985).

8
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
which the analysand could derive meaning to ameliorate potential pathological underpinnings
(Lynch, 2016).
Moreover, by using techniques like the Squiggle Game and Spatula Game, Winnicott
came to understand that playingwhich often accompanied a transitional objection or the
infants first creation and possessionserved an essential role in the infants living and selfdiscovery (Winnicott, 1971). Although play was not exclusive to infants or young children,
Winnicott used these games as diagnostic tools to observe an infants behavior given a set
situation. Since he believed that a good environment allowed an infant to experience as little
interruption as possible, its expressing moments of hesitationwhich is when the infant gives
thought to his interactions with an objecthelped Winnicott assess what he believed were
deviations from standard behavior which derived from healthy emotional development (Lynch,
2016). The quality of play also acted as signifiers and reflected the inner world of the infant or
adulta normal enjoyable reenactment of its inner life, or the respective denial.
Clinical Relevance
Winnicotts writings have been propounded by analytic philosopher Martha Nussbaum,
who in result viewed psychotherapy as, the highly particular transactions that constitute love
between two imperfect people" (2006, p.140, emphasis mine). This notion furnishes a conceptual
framework that emphasizes the therapeutic alliance and acts as a unique soil that promotes the
therapists obligatory qualities of being self-aware, empathetic, compassionate, creative, modest,
impartial, selfless, and analytical. It also designates the therapists role as a secondary maternal
figure who functions as an imperfect individual, and also outlines his objective, which is to
permit the gradual emergence of a clients true self by working together to provide a second
chance to resolve his developmental impediments (Winnicott, 1962a; Modell, 1985). An

9
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
experience from field that may have Winnicottian implications is the following: a four-year-old
child becomes progressively infatuated with a stuffed doll and is adamant on bringing the object
with him a few weeks after starting pre-kindergarten. He imbues the doll with the warm and
protecting characteristics of his mother, and uses the object to reconcile his precarious
subjectivity with an environment he considers unsafe.
Beatrice Beebe, a psychoanalyst from Columbia University, and company used
Winnicottian concepts like the good-enough mother and holding to investigate the effects of
coordinated vocal rhythms on mother-infant interactions (Beebe et al., 2012). Through the use of
videotape microanalysis, they found that medium range coordination is correlated with the most
secure attachment, which involves the therapists synchronous actions accompanied by
intelligible and reassuring verbalizations.

10
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
References
Abram, J. (1996). The Language of Winnicott. 1-450. Clunie Press.
Aguayo, J. (2002). Reassessing the Clinical Affinity Between Melanie Klein and D. W.
Winnicott (1935-51). International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 83:1133-1152.
Aronson, S. (2000). Re-establishing "Holding" in families of divorce. Journal of Infant, Child,
and Adolescent Psychotherapy, Vol. 1, Iss. 1, 2000, pp. 39-52.
Beebe, B., Lackmann, L., Markese, S., Buck, K., Bahrick, L., Chen, H., Cohen, P., Andrews, H.,
Feldstein, S., & Jagge, J. (2012). On the origins of disorganized attachment and internal
working models. Paper II: an empirical microanalysis of 4-month mother-infant
interaction. Psychoanalytic Dialogue, 22: 352-374.
Blum, H. P. and Ross, J. M. (1993). The Clinical Relevance of the Contribution of Winnicott. J.
Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 41:219-235.
Crastnopol, M. (1999). The Analyst's Personality. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 35:271-300
The Analyst's Personality Winnicott Analyzing Guntrip as a Case in Point*
Winnicott, D.W. (1964) The Child, the Family and the Outside World. Harmondsorth:
Penguin; Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1987.
Daehnert, C. (1998). The False Self as a Means of Disidentification: A Psychoanalytic Case
Study. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 34:251-271.
Grolnick, S. A. (1990). The work and play of Winnicott. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
Lynch, A. (2016). From Class Lectures, Discussions, Power Point Slides & Written Notes.
March 1st, 2016.
Modell, A. H. (1985). The Works Of Winnicott And The Evolution Of His Thought. Journal of
the American Psychoanalytic Association, 33(S):113-137.

11
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
Nussbaum, M. C. (2006). The Massachusetts Review Vol. 47, No. 2, The Messy Self (Summer,
2006), p. 140 & pp. 375-393.
Ogden, T. H. (1985). The Mother, the Infant and the Matrix: Interpretations of Aspects of the
Work of Donald Winnicott. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 21:346-371.
Winnicott, D. W. (1953). On Transference. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 37:386-388.
Winnicott, D. W. (1953a). Transitional Objects and Transitional PhenomenaA Study of the
First Not-Me Possession. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 34:89-97.
Winnicott, D. W. (1956) Primary maternal preoccupation. In: Through Paediatrics to PsychoAnalysis. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1975.
Winnicott, D. W. (1958). The Capacity to be Alone. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 39:416-420.
Winnicott, D. W. (1960). Ego Distortion in Terms of True and False Self, in: The Maturational
Process and the Facilitating Environment: Studies in the Theory of Emotional
Development. New York: International UP Inc., 1965.
Winnicott, D. W. (1960a). The Theory of the Parent-Infant Relationship. Int. J. Psycho-Anal.,
41:585-595.
Winnicott, D. W. (1962) Ego integration in child development, in: The Maturational Processes
and the Facilitating Environment. pp. 56-63 New York: International Universities Press,
1965.
Winnicott, D. W. (1962a). The aims of psycho-analytical treatment. In The Maturational
Processes and the Facilitating Environment. New York: Basic Books, 1965, pp. 166-170.
Winnicott, D. W. (1963). From Dependence Towards Independence in the Development of the
Individual. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 34:89-97.
Winnicott, D. W. (1963a). Regression as Therapy Illustrated by the Case of a

12
THE SELF AND (M)OTHER: AN OVERVIEW OF WINNICOTTIAN OBJECT RELATIONS
Boy whose Pathological Dependence was Adequately Met by the Parents.
Brit. J. Med. Psychol.., 36.
Winnicott, D. W. (1963b). The Development of the Capacity For Concern. Bull. Menninger
Clin., 27:167-176.
Winnicott, D. W. (1965). The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating
Environment. Int. Psycho-Anal. Lib., 64:1-276. London: The Hogarth Press
and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis.
Winnicott, D. W. (1971). Playing and Reality. London: Tavistock Publications, 1971;
repr. Hove/New York: Brunner-Routledge, 2002.
Winnicott, D. W. (1974). Fear of Breakdown. International Review of Psycho-Analysis, Vol. 1.