| Abstract: | While we can explain significant differences in social mobility between different occupational categories in terms of the economic and social resources made available to them, in order to understand those who deviate from the statistical mode we need to look at the unconscious meaning of "success" and "failure." Beatrice, Dave, and Sally are all children of professional families and yet have great difficulty being successful at work. Their difficulties with work are multi-determined and there are oedipal and preoedipal issues involved. However, in the case of Beatrice the issues are predominantly oedipal, while in the other cases the issues are primarily preoedipal. It seems that while the common oedipal themes inhibiting productive work and work satisfaction have been discussed in psychoanalytic literature under the rubric "work inhibition," albeit to a small extent, the preoedipal themes have been given less attention. This is because the traditional concept of "inhibition" has taken such a central place in the psychoanalytic perspective on work. The concept of "work inhibition" has paralyzed the development of a broader psychoanalytic framework for the analysis of work problems. As long as we limit our discussions of problems with work to the term "inhibition," they will focus on the oedipal problems of neurotic patients and a large gap will remain between theory and clinical experience because a large number of our patients have difficulties with work that are rooted in preoedipal issues. Unless we can stop being "inhibited" by the very concept, our theoretical understanding of problems with work will continue to lag behind our clinical understanding. "Work inhibition" is not the only type of major problem with work patients can have--they can be the result of a variety of dynamics on either oedipal or preoedipal levels. |
