Digital and Synthetic Hunger

Our unconscious does not forget the “first bond” we establish and, with certain variables, transforms it into an attachment model. This first bond is an unconscious cycle that begins telepathically in the womb, objectifies itself at the mother’s breast, and completes itself as a model during the care process.

The bond formed with the mother’s breast is doomed to be forgotten and repressed by the unconscious because, as it will determine our other attachment models, it may carry the nature of the initial trauma of various neurotic symptoms, personality disorders, or some phobic disorders in later stages. According to Sigmund Freud, the history of the phobic obsession with poisoning goes back to before Oedipus and is related to the mother. Here, the mother refers to ‘mother’s milk’ (Freud, 1940:153). Mother’s milk is external reality here. In inner reality, he states that it stems from a traumatic experience, forgotten by the unconscious, in which the baby encounters a third object (blood, discharge, etc.) mixed into the milk, probably during breastfeeding, symbolising the giving of attention, and experiences fear and suspicion towards the mother. Babies understand that they are loved and cared for in the unconscious through their ‘feeding’.

If the mother feeds the baby too often and intensely, she has invaded the baby’s space and established dominance over it. If she feeds the baby too little and inadequately, the baby feels abandoned and forgotten. This initial bond becomes a three-object model in later stages, depending on the transference established with the caregiver. With Oedipus, these three objects become distinct: ‘mother-child-father’. Any object that represents a sibling, peer, or competitive threat is considered a derivative of the ‘father’ object.

Oedipus / Jean Leon Gerome.

Looking at Jean Leon Gerome’s painting of Oedipus from an analytical perspective, it beautifully symbolises the competition between father and son. Napoleon arriving on horseback and encountering the Sphinx standing before him symbolises this conflict. The discovery of the Sphinx with its broken nose may represent the child’s desire to destroy and harm his father. This rivalry takes place between father and son for the mother’s attention and affection. The world is built on this relationship between these three objects. Even in the initial bond between mother and baby, when the father is not present in this cycle, his unconscious symbol is the ‘mother’s breast.’ This is because the father object is actually the symbol of “authority” and ‘boundaries.’

In the Oedipal phase, when the child cannot receive sufficient attention from the caregiver, they form an attachment using various defence mechanisms to cope with this resentment, or, if unsuccessful, this situation can turn into hysterical symptoms. In a narcissistic attachment, the person wants to swallow all the investment made in the unconscious bond. Therefore, for them, the criterion for forming a bond stems more from the need for ‘attention and admiration’ than from emotional needs such as ‘love, affection, and loyalty.’ The other person must admire them and, by giving them all their attention, ritualistically complete the fragmented sense of self that they cannot complete within themselves. If Oedipus emerges victorious from the conflict with this attachment model, hysterical symptoms may develop. Just as a neglected little girl flutters about charmingly to get her father’s attention, the idea that the way to get something is to give something is perceived as a model of nourishment and attachment, and this evolves into symptoms of hysteria. Therefore, the need for ‘admiration and attention’ is the need that encompasses the origins of narcissism and hysterical symptoms. In the former, the person expects this from the other to complete themselves, while in the latter, the person offers it themselves. Therefore, like the narcissistic-masochistic relationship model, the narcissistic-hysterical relationship model also perpetuates the cycle of satisfaction.

Because the person does not want to give up their symptom; they are attached to it, just like a baby’s attachment to their mother. The desire to feed the other person’s hunger for attention requires idealisation. When they see them as unattainable, sublime, superhuman, and wonderful, just as a person would do anything unconditionally for God’s approval, it makes them do anything for the other person’s approval.

If you receive the approval of the object you have elevated, you too become elevated and valuable. Looking at it from the other side, the person may stray from their realities, values, and boundaries due to the void of attention. In the name of maintaining attention, they may find themselves in situations contrary to their values or tolerate people who are contradictory to their personality.

While this is known as ‘flattery’ in society, in our unconscious it is ‘insistence on approval and generosity’. This often manifests itself in professional life as well and can also be dangerous. In every profession, there will be those who try to exploit this void of attention, using it not as unconscious approval but as a disingenuous persuasion strategy. Therefore, this hunger for attention is also a great void. Just as a baby in the womb subconsciously knows and feels the ‘abdominal void’ outside its area, a person also subconsciously knows this void of attention within themselves and makes choices accordingly. Perhaps the baby carries the thought that the emptiness it senses in the womb could swallow it and destroy its safe space. Perhaps this is why humanity is curious about space, the void of space, and black holes. A black hole is like a womb, and afterwards, we hope to encounter a new life, just like a newborn baby. Perhaps the attention we need and our expectations will be validated in this new life.

ReferencesSigmund S., F. (1940). On Psychoanalysis. Istanbul: Say Publishing House.