Understanding the dynamics of our intimate relationships is akin to a kayaker understanding the currents of a river. For that kayaker to navigate those waters safely and effectively, he/she must understand what is happening and how to manage the various currents at work. Likewise, each of us involved in intimate relationships (marriage, dating relationships, close friendships, family relationships) must learn the various emotional currents at play in those relationships and develop a set of skills for navigating those emotional currents. The focus for us here is on identifying the emotional currents in our relational waters and how they operate.
Murray Bowen identified two fundamental drives in all life. Those two drives are:
- The drive for individuality/autonomy
- The drive for connection/togetherness
You may notice that these two drives counterbalance one another. It’s crucial to recognize these as foundational drives that cannot be done away with. Given that they counterbalance one another, when one is emphasized at the expense of the other… problems occur. I’ll get into this a bit later, but first an example to help us understand how these work:
Example: We are able to recognize these two drives at work within an child as he/she grows. The baby is first conceived when its mother and father come together (due to their own drives for connection/togetherness). That baby grows within its mother’s womb in physical unity and togetherness with the mother until he/she is birthed, a literal process of separating from the mother physically (a process of individuation and development of physical autonomy from the mother). But in its infancy the child is completely helpless and unable to care for itself. It can’t even identify what its needs are, why they are, and how to address them. So that infant cries, a bid for outside help/intervention (connection/togetherness).
Aside from the needs for nourishment, warmth, a clean diaper, etc., the infant has a very real emotional need. This child is completely helpless to regulate itself emotionally, it requires the mother and/or father to develop this capacity. Think of how a parent holds a baby, and where it’s head rests (on the chest). Here, resting on the mother/father’s chest, that infant hears the heartbeat and syncs with the breathing patterns of his/her parent. Here, it finds rhythm in its chaotic environment, and in that rhythm it finds peace (most of the time). Resting on mom or dad’s chest, the baby is able to sync and regulate itself (develop and organize a rhythm for life).
Notice though, that if a five year old were no further along than an infant in self-regulation (calming itself when upset), there’d be a problem. Even as the connection/togetherness drive gains an infant opportunity to sync and learn to self-regulate in relation to the mother/father, the drive for individuality/autonomy is at work nudging that child forward to learn the skills for regulating itself autonomously. It is this drive (for individuality/autonomy) that moves the child to learn to walk, to feed itself, to use the bathroom… to become autonomous in meeting its own needs. Throughout childhood, one moves into unknown territory over and over again (by way of the drive for individuality/autonomy), learning the skills to navigate that terrain and to self-regulate within that new terrain… and when the child becomes overwhelmed, he/she returns to the mother/father for support, assurance, safety (connection/togetherness)… all of which help him/her to self-regulate and gain mastery over the emotions once more. As a five year old should be further along than an infant, likewise a ten year old should be further along than a five year old, that drive for individuality/autonomy propels it forward.
And then adolescence! Here in adolescence a marked shift occurs. Up to this point the child has remained largely an open book to mom/dad in seeking support (connection/togetherness), but here the adolescent begins to initiate an emotional distancing from his/her parents. And this is hard (for both the adolescent and the parent)! But it is essential. The drive for individuality/autonomy continues, and the adolescent now needs to learn how to navigate the unknowns of emotional life on his/her own (mom and dad won’t always be around). It is notable here though, that as the adolescent begins to distance from mom/dad, the drive for connection/togetherness remains (it does not go away!). Here, that drive begins to find its fulfillment in romantic interests of the opposite sex (by and large).
So now the adolescent is learning how to manage these two fundamental drives (individuality/autonomy and connection/togetherness) in the context of romantic relationships… new territory (and without a guide/ parent). And the learning curve can be quite steep, because neither the one adolescent or the other really knows what he/she is doing in these emotional waters (they haven’t been on this river before, without a guide, and these are now class 4 and 5 rapids). And they get beat up by the rapids, sometimes feeling like they’re drowning.
Reading the Currents
Ok, we’ve identified the currents, but we haven’t yet clarified how they manifest within intimate peer relationships (romantic relationships). A very good way to think of these two counterbalancing drives (for individuality/autonomy and connection/togetherness) within a romantic relationship is to recognize that the emotional field created by a relationship operates much like a magnetic field. When you place two magnets in close proximity to one another there is a reaction (because each magnet carries a charge). It’s the same with people, we all carry an emotional charge into our relationships. One kind of reaction between magnets (and people) is to be drawn together (the drive for connection/togetherness). But another kind or reaction between magnets (and people) is repulsion (the drive for individuality/autonomy).
These forces are at work in our intimate relationships throughout life, but are most clearly observed in early intimate relationships (as in adolescence). It is very common in these early relationships to undergo a pattern of breaking up and getting back together multiple times over the course of a dating relationship (an “I love you, I hate you” pattern). In these situations we can clearly identify the currents or drives at work. The feeling of euphoric love that brings a couple together is the drive for connection/togetherness at work, and like magnets attracted together the couple is inseparable (emotionally and often physically). But when this sense of connection/togetherness comes at the expense of ones individuality/autonomy, that individual feels like he/she has lost the self within the relationship. This produces what is called an enmeshed relationship (when connection/togetherness comes at the expense of individuality/autonomy). The loss of self in such a relationship is terrifying (as one literally loses the ability regulate his/her own emotions in the context of the relationship), and the drive (need) for individuality/autonomy kicks in. Like magnets that repel one another, the relationship divides for each individual to gain space and perspective (to reclaim the self). There is a tendency here for this drive for individuality/autonomy to now assert itself forcefully, excessively, even at the expense of connection/togetherness. This produces what is called a disengaged relationship (when individuality/autonomy comes at the expense of connection/togetherness). The loss of relationship in such a circumstance is lonely and isolating, and the drive (need) for connection/togetherness kicks back in. And thus, the couple rejoins enflamed with passion and love once more (until the loss of self ensues once again).
Here we come to recognize something profound about the nature of intimacy. Intimacy is not connection/togetherness at the expense of individuality/autonomy (as we often tend to think), but it is found in both individuals working to properly balance and honor both drives. Over time in our intimate relationships, intimacy grows as we are able to be in closer and closer emotional proximity to one another without losing ourselves (connection/togetherness at the expense if individuality/autonomy), and without being overcome by isolation/loneliness (individuality/autonomy at the expense of connection/togetherness). Earlier on in our experiences with intimate relationships our capacity for such close proximity is low, and we are likely to get easily overwhelmed by these forces (drives) in the emotional field of the relationship. But with time this capacity grows, and our ability to navigate these forces (drives) without being overwhelmed so easily increases. Here we are able to be in closer emotional proximity, experiencing greater intimacy.
Just as the professional kayaker’s ability to navigate class 4 and 5 rapids was built on his/her gained experience in lower grade rivers, likewise one’s ability to navigate the emotional drives/needs of intimate relationships grows with time and work, as he/she seeks to acknowledge and honor those drives/needs both within the self and the other.
*The accompanying song for this post is “In Spite of Ourselves” by John Prine and Iris Dement. Scroll to the top to find the song in the right hand side of the blog for a listen.
John Prine, In Spite of Ourselve
Life Existante 