Toward a Science of Social Character1Michael Maccoby, Washington DC, USAMaccoby M. Toward a Science of Social Character. Int ForumPsychoanal 2002;11:3344.Stockholm. ISSN 0803-706XTofullydevelopascienceof social character, threeaspectsof Frommssocial character theoryneed to be claried. The rst has to do with the difference between individual and social character.FrommexpandedonFreudsdescriptionofnormal types: erotic(receptive), obsessive(hoarding)andnarcissistic(exploitative). Besidestheconcept of social character, Frommmadethreemajorcontributions to the psychoanalytic theory of character: the concept of productiveness, socio-political modes of relationship, andthe marketing character. Social character is aninteractionbetween internalized culture (values) and individual character. This interaction results in variationsinsocialcharacterandhelpsexplainthesecondissue,howsocialcharacterchanges.Theconceptof socialselectionexplainshownarcissistic entrepreneursrestructure socialinstitutionsto shape anewsocial character. Thethirdissueconcernshowsocial characterdevelopsthroughout thelifecycle. Frommneverofferedadevelopmental theory.ErikEriksonsmodel ofdevelopment tthesocial character of America at the mid-century. Arevision of this model provides a usefulconstruct for understandingchangesinthekindof problemsbeingbrought topsychoanalysisatthe start of the 21st century and also changes in psychoanalytic practice.Key words: Individualcharacter,social character,development, socialchange.Michael Maccoby, Ph.D., 1634IStreet, NW;Suite704, WashingtonDC20006, USA. michael@maccoby.comSocial character is a difcult concept, particularlybecause it crosses academic boundaries of psy-chology,sociology,anthropologyandeconomics.Yet, it canprovideabetter understandingof theproblems people bring to psychoanalysis andchangesin practicethatwill improvethe psycho-analytic encounter. Three aspects of social charac-ter need to be claried, if we are to fully develop ascienceofsocialcharacter. Theseare:thediffer-ence between individual and social character; howsocial character changes; and how social characterdevelops.Character and Social CharacterFrommusedFreudscharacter typesasbuildingblocks for his theory of social character. However,Frommleft someconfusionabout thedifferencebetween individual and social character. Freuddescribes normal psychological types ina 1931paper(1).Hecallstheselibidinal types, butinfact, hedescribesthemmoreinterms of objectrelationsthanlibidinal syndromes. Thus, Freudserotictypewhoseekslovingrelationshipsandisvulnerabletodependencybecomes Fromms re-ceptive type. Freuds obsessive type (formerly theanal character) whoisconservativeandcautiouswitha strongmoral attitude becomes Frommshoarding type. And Freuds narcissist who isaggressiveandinnovativebecomesFrommsex-ploitative type. None of Fromms types contradictFreudsdescriptions. However, theydoelaborateon them.In Man For Himself (1947), Fromm (2)described these types and added three newelements to Freuds normal typology, signicantlyenriching it. The most important is the concept ofproductiveness , with roots in Spinozas conceptionof activeness in The Ethics. Productiveness,according to Fromm meansthe active exercise ofones powers based on reason. It implies freedomfromboth external constraint and unconsciousimpulsesthatdonotserverationalpurposes. Thedegreeof productiveness is the extent towhichthere is active interest and understanding in work,knowledge and other people, and clearly, produc-tiveness can modify and transforma character1Paper presented at the XI International Forum of IFPS, May 2000,in Brooklyn, NY, USA. 2002 Taylor & Francis. ISSN 0803-706XInt Forum Psychoanal 11:(3344), 2002type. There is a major difference between theobstinate and stingy unproductive obsessive orhoarding personality and the orderly, hardworkingproductive obsessive personality. For example,comparethenarrowbureaucrat tothecompetentprofessional. Frommsconcept of theproductivecharacter is more problematic, an ideal for humandevelopmentratherthanapersonalitytypebasedonobservation. (ForfurtherdiscussionseeMac-coby,3)ThesecondofFrommscontributionsisthe concept of the socio-political relationships,especially,the authoritarian mode of relationship.Thethirdcontributionisanewpersonalitytypeposited by Fromm, the marketing character.Theconfusioncomeswhensocial character isdescribed solely in terms of individual character. Apeasant farmer andanaccountant maybothbemoderately productive obsessive hoardingcharacters, but becausetheir social contexts aredifferent, their social characters arealsosigni-cantlydifferent. For example,while the farmerisindependent and patriarchal, the accountant is ruledriven within a bureaucracy. Furthermore, the twodiffer in ideals and beliefs.Thus, social character differs fromindividualcharacter, because it must be understood in relationtoitssocial or cultural context. Social characterdescribes the dynamic values or emotional atti-tudes shared by a group. This can be conceived asinternalized culture, interacting with individualcharacter. The culture provides not only ideals butalso meanings of behavior. It allows differentvariations of asocial character, for exampletheobsessivebureaucrat or stubbornexpert andthehelpful, receptive but careful and systematicprofessional.Crucialinteractionshaveto dowiththe t, or lack of it, between individual character,culture and the socio-economi c environment.Some character types t a social environmentbetter than others. Since culture changes moreslowly than the socio-economicenvironment, andcharacter changes even more slowly when thesocio-economic environment changes rapidly,some people will suffer a sense of meaninglessnessor lack of connection to their environment . Astrong individual character which meshes with thesocialcharacter and is rmly adapted to a culturewill resist change. This is particularly true forpeople with moderate to low productiveness;changeupsetseffectiveadaptationandcancauseextreme anxiety and resentment. People inthissituationbecomevulnerabletoleadershipwhichpromisesto reinstatethelostcultureorprovideanewonewhichreconnectstheircharacter givingtheirlivesasatisfyingsenseofmeaning. Frommrst showed howHitler provided this kind ofleadership in Germany. Fromm described theGerman lower middle class as a hardworking,frugal patriotic social character rooted in anobsessive-hoarding personality whose savingshadgoneupinsmokewiththe inationof the20s andwhohadbeenhumiliated bydefeat inWorldWarI(4).Forthisgroup,Hitlerofferedapotent mixtureof regainingGermangloryandafocus for resentment directed against the Jews. Heoffered to reconnect a social character that had lostits moorings to a new society.In studying Mexican campesinos, Fromm soughtto understand the roots of alcoholism and violenceamong villagers who had received ejido land aftertheMexicanrevolutionof191020.Hehopedtodiscover ways to treat these pathologies, social aswell as individual.InSocial CharacterinaMexicanVillage(5).FrommandMaccobydiscoveredthattheoppres-sion of the past perpetrated by the hacienda systemhadformeda passive andfatalistic male socialcharacter, vulnerabletoalcoholismandviolence.The womenwhowere more hoardingrantheirfamilies. These submissive, fatalistic, unproduc-tive receptive men lacked the independencerequired by peasant farming. They rented out theirlands to the entrepreneurs (productivenarcissists)and became heavy drinkers.For some villagers, whose families had re-mained freeofthe haciendas,the socialcharacterneededfor independent farmingmeshedwithaproductive obsessive individual character. Butmany of the villagers studied were a mix of types.This was also the case for 75 percent of the Germanworkers andwhite collar employees studiedbyFromm in 1930 (6).Although only 10 percent of the Germansshowedanauthoritariancharacter, nomorethan15percent hadthedeepdemocraticconvictionsthat wouldmotivate themtooppose the Nazis,once they were legally in power. Given therevolutionary social conditions that existed inGermany, a relatively small groupwas able tochangetheculture, restructuringinstitutions thatwould shape the social character of the future.For most people, the social character is not34 M. Maccoby Int Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002deeply rooted in their individual character. Rather,it is an internalization of cultural norms thatdetermine social attitudes and give meaning tosocial behavior. Most people goalongwiththeprevailing consensus, and the more productivepeople of anytype are best able toadapt toachanging social environment.How Social Character ChangesSocial Character in a Mexican Village (5),introducedthe concept of social selection. Thisdescribes a process analogous to Darwins naturalselection, in which people with a certain individualcharacter type prosper in a particular socialenvironment , especially in times of social change.Ultimatelythesepeoplegaincontrolofasocietyandareabletochangesocial institutionssothattheyshapethesocial character that supportsthenew institutions.Thus, productive narcissistic villagers who wereentrepreneursexploitednewcapitalisticopportu-nities to increase their wealth and transform villageculture. Theystrengthenedschools anddivertedfunds from traditional estas to building new roadsandinstitutingbasketball andsoccer, gamesthatstimulated teamwork and a competitive spirit. Themore productive traditional peasants, especiallythe younger generations, who were descendants offree compesinos went along with the new leaders.The unproductive, especiallythe descendants ofpeons, were unable to adapt and became unhappycultural mists. Thechart Social CharacterinaMexican Village presents these three social charac-ter types, with different socio-economic roots anddifferent ideologies.Modern history suggests that a similar process ofsocial selection has periodically caused changes inthesocial character. Acenturyago, intheU.S.,productive narcissists emerged to exploit newtechnologies in steel, railroads, automobiles, elec-tricityandoil. Theseindustrialists, likeAndrewCarnegie, Henry Ford, Thomas Edison and John D.Rockefeller crushedcompetitors andbuilt greatcompanies. Their companies became relativelystable bureaucracies which became models forgovernment organization and schools. Familiesraisedchildrentoadapt totheseinstitutions.Theindustrialists endowedfoundations anduniversi-ties to enshrine their names and also to develop theskills and attitudes required by the bureaucracies.At the middle of the 20th century, the productiveobsessive bureaucratic character dominatedAmerican institutions. However, the rise of aservice society began to select and shape themarketingcharacter. Inthe60s, increasedafu-ence and revolutionary social movements for civilrights and womens liberation and against the warin VietNambeganto loosenuptheconservativebureaucratic social character and challenge thelegitimacy and authority of the established elite. Inthe 70s and 80s, the culture continued to move inthe directionofservice, which nowcomprises75percent of work. Aswomenincreasinglyenteredthe workplace and became wage earners, thehierarchical paternalistic family was transformed.These changes were intensied and given a newdirection in the 90s as another revolution intechnologytransformedworkandorganizations.As inthe past, productive narcissistic entrepre-neurs, like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Steve Case andJack Welch, to name the best known, created newindustries, using the discoveries of information andcommunications technology. Those leaders andothers like them are now shaping how people work,learn and how they dene themselves (7, 8).Impatient withbureaucracies, thenewproduc-tive narcissists downsized organizations and auto-mated work to cut costs, maximizeexibility andInt Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002 Toward a science of social character 35institutionalize continuous change in order toimproveprots. Loyaltyandyearsof servicenolonger guaranteedlife-time employment. It wasalsomorecost-effectivetocontract out services,sometimes to small entrepreneurial rms or reducelabor costsbyexportingworktoAsiaandLatinAmerica. The model for information age workbecame Silicon Valley where managers andprofessionals reinvented themselves as freeagentsreadytochangejobsiftheycouldget abetter deal. They identied themselves in terms oftheir skills and projects rather than as belonging toa company.To become more productive, organizationsbegan to redesign work. Newmodes of workrequired not only new skills but also new values. Aneworganizational ideologyemphasizedinnova-tion, interactive networks, customer responsive-ness, teamwork, and exibility. The economicorganizationscreatingthegreatest wealthhadtobecomeinteractiveinsteadof bureaucratic. Theyhad to manage intelligence rather than energy.Insteadofthepaternalisticbureaucraticmanager,the interactive managers were expected to becoachesof empoweredindividualsandteams, ofyoung employeeswho knewmoreabouttechnol-ogy than their elders.To describe this shift, consider the chart:Organizational Social Character. It summarizeschangesinsocio-economicbase, thesocial char-acter, and the ideals, ideology, or social self rootedinthebureaucraticandinteractivesocial charac-ters.Social Character and the Life Cycle Bureaucratic vs. InteractiveThe social character does not appear full-blown inchildhood but is formed throughout the life cycle.AlthoughSocial CharacterinaMexicanVillage(5), describeshowschooling and patternsofplaycontributetoformingthesocial character of thecampesino, Frommsconcept of social characterlacks a developmental framework.A psychoanalyst who proposed a developmentalframework for character was Erik Erikson (9). Hiseight stages of lifecanbeemployedtoexploresocial character development in the United States.Eriksonbasedhisstagesontheideathat peoplehad to respond to the challenges of both theirbodiesand cultural expectations atdifferentages.Howtheymet thesechallengesor accomplishedthese life tasks formed their competencies, values,emotional attitudesandsenseof identityor self.Fromm considered Eriksons psychosocial ap-proachtobeconsistent withhisthinking, exceptforEriksonsuseoflibidotheory, whichFrommconsidered inconsistent with Eriksons ownob-servations.However, the descriptions of stages Erikson rstwrote in 1950 and revised in 1963 now seem datedandsexist. Thisisbecausethedifferent culturalroles Erikson describes for men and women t thebureaucraticera of that timeand, not theinter-active era of the present. Furthermore, conceivingpsychosocial development instagespresentstwoproblems. First of all, like most social scientists, heuses the concept of development without deningit. What dowemeanbydevelopment ?Isit justmaturation? Or growth? Maturation is a biologicalprocess that occurs in all living organisms. Growthcanbeeitherpositiveor chaoticasincancerousgrowth. Analternative operational denition ofhumandevelopment isgrowthof competence, aprocess in which individuals increase their abilityto both determine and satisfy their needs. In termsof this denition, human development impliesincreasedawarenessandabilitytofrustratecom-36 M. Maccoby Int Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002pulsive needs that weaken a person, while reinfor-cingthose needs that are consciouslyembracedandarestrengthening. Inthissense,developmentimpliesincreasedproductiveness. Optimalindivi-dual development for any social character requiresfreedom from oppression and opportunit y tosatisfycreative needs. Asupportive communityhelps. Forthebureaucraticandinteractivesocialcharacters, boththepositive developmental out-comes and the typical psychological problems aredifferent.2Secondly, while Eriksons eight stages can be auseful construct tothinkabout psychosocial lifetasks, these stages should not be consideredmechanistically as thoughpeople move throughlife on a track, stopping at xed stations to wrestlewith these challenges. Development is a continualprocess of adaptation to both the external environ-ment and internal biological changes.Although success in mastering a life cycle taskincreases the chancesofsuccess at the next level,failure at a particular stage does not mean that anindividualhasforever lost thechanceto develop.Somepeoplemaster psychosocial tasksor chal-lenges despite early failure, with help from others,includingpsychotherapists. Correspondingly, thestresses of life mayundermine development. Inresponding to traumatic events or driven byunconsciousneeds, anindividual maybeforcedto wrestle with old issues.Withthesecautionsinmind, Eriksonsframe-workcanbeappliedtocomparethebureaucraticand interactive social characters throughout the lifecycle in terms of both positive developmentaloutcomes and typical psychological problems.1. Basic Trust vs. Basic MistrustInthebureaucraticfamily, theinfant is focusedalmostexclusivelyonthe mother. The attitude ofbasic trust and love of life grows from developing asecure base with a loving mother with theexpectationthatones basic needswillbe metbyher. Ideally, thebondbetweenmother andchildincludes a deep sense of knowing each other,sensing and responding to each others needs.The typical developmental problems at thisstagehavetodowithover-dependency, inabilityto break the umbilical cord, sometimes because themother who is so intensely focused on her childrenwants tomaintainthe relationshipinwhichshefeels needed by the child. Of course, problems withbasic trust also stemfroma cold, frightened,inadequate mother or a professionallyfrustratedmother who resents the mothering role, whichkeeps her trapped at home.In the interactive family, the mother usuallystarts out as themain infant caretaker,continuingthe physical symbiosis of child bearing. But earlyon, others share this role, since she needs to returntoherpaidwork. Ideally, thefatheralsopartici-pates. As soon as is feasible, babies are put in daycare centers or in the care of hired nannies.On the positive side, as infants receive care fromothers, thesenseoftrustisexpandedbeyondthemother. Onthenegativeside, childrenmaylackthe security of deep maternalattachment. Feelinginsecure and abandoned, they become moredistrustful, anxious, and self protectively avoidant.Later in life, this makes it harder for themtodevelop intimate relationships and accept the deepfeelings of need for others that they haverepressed.2. Autonomy vs. Shame and DoubtAbout the age of 2, children show a rebelliousnesstoadult authoritythat isthestart of achievingasenseof autonomy. Theywant tobeabletodothings for themselves, to express themselves with-out losing loving support from parents.By this self-expression, children try to avoid theshameofbeingseenasbabieswhocant controltheir bodily functions, dress themselves, or handleafork and spoon. Theywantto beableto dotherightthingstomaintaina senseofdignityorselfesteem. Ideally, parents treat this rebelliousnesswith a combination of play and setting limits.In the bureaucratic family, some parents respondto the childs self-expression with overly strictdemands, such as tooearlytoilet training. Thedanger isthat thechildwill resolvetheconictbetween impulse and conformity by obsessivecompliance, the up-tight, super clean anal charac-ter described byFreud. Alternatively, thechildisplaguedbydoubtandneedsconstantreassurancethat heor sheisdoingtheright thing. Extremeshaming of a child at this age can cause deep hurtand anger, which may be repressed. However,without some homeopathic shaming, the child does2Maccoby, M. The Self in Transition: FromBureaucrati c toInteractive Social Character. Paper presented to American Academyof Psychoanalysis . Washington, D.C.; May 14, 1999.Int Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002 Toward a science of social character 37not learn to conform to socialexpectations and isvulnerable tomore serious humiliations later inlife.The child in the interactive family is often facedwith various parenting gures, less consistency intreatment and less certainty on the part ofauthorities. Sensingtheparents insecurityaboutstandards and their guilt about not being therewhen needed, the two-year old child learns tonegotiate with parents for more freedom, things, ora later bedtime.Thedangeristhat lackofparental boundariesresults in the childs failure to internalize adaptiveelements of the social character. Uncontrolledimpulsiveness and denial of shame makes it moredifcult for the child to learn and to interacteffectivelywith others. Ideally,thechild startstolearn that increased freedom requires greaterpersonal responsibility and that the grown-upsdont have all the answers.3. Initiative vs. Guilt and AnxietyPre-school boys and girls separate for group play.Boysaremoreaggressiveandhierarchical, whilegirlsemphasizeharmonyandresolvingconicts.This is an age where children must learn to controltheir competitiveness and envy.Inthe bureaucratic family, boys resolve theirconicts with authority by identifying with thefather and hisoutlook on life, while girls identifywiththemother andinternalizeher values.How-ever, over-identication and obsessive conformitydampenspontaneityandexibilityandincreaseguilt.Piagetdescribesthisagein termsofmoralde-velopment. While the child accepts the command-mentsofauthorityaslaw,otherchildrenbecomerivalsfortheauthoritysloveandapproval. Thisauthoritarian egocentric attitude becomes proto-typicalfor thebureaucrat,submissive to thoseupthe hierarchy and competitive with peers.Children ofinteractivefamiliesare lessdepen-dent emotionally on adults and already by this age,more interactively competent, provided they havehadsecureattachments. Thepsychologicalpitfallfor these children is not fear of parents whichbecomesinternalizedasguilt, but rather anxietyabout being accepted by the group. This anxiety isespecially strong if secure attachment has not beenachieved in infancy. Anxiety can cause over-conformitytopeers, sacriceof self inorder tot in. Orthechildmayreject thepeer grouporformalliances with other outcasts who turnrejection into resentment and fantasies of revenge.Theseattitudesmayreturninadolescencewithavengeance as was the case in Littletown, Coloradointhe springof 1999, whentheyresultedinamurderous and suicidal rampage.While bureaucratic conformity results in identi-cationwithanolderrolemodel, theinteractivechildbecomesincreasinglyalert tothechangingfadsandfashionsof thepeergroup. Inhis1950book, The Lonely Crowd (10), Riesman contrastedthe inner directed individual as having an internalgyroscopewhiletheother-directedpersondevel-oped interpersonal radar. When Riesman wrote hisbook, other-direction was a new phenomenon. Bythe 90s, it had become the dominant form of socialcontrol.What Riesman did not predict was the growingdiversity in American society. This is the age whenchildrenbegintoidentifythemselvesintermsofraceor national origin. Theseidenticationscanseparate groups of children from each other,increasing feelings of resentment of those who donot t into cliques. Nor could Riesman havepredictedhowtheInternetwouldprovidearouteof escape from failure at forming relationships intoa world of unreal relatedness.Theinteractivechildmayndan identitywithothers by consuming cool products advertised onTV and showcased by the ctional characters, whohave been adopted as the models of the moment bya peer group.By the end of this stage, children of both sexesshould be able to become more competent atmaintaining cooperative relationships. Throughplay, theybegintoworkout their conictswithoppressive authority. They should be able to win atgameswithoutbeingobnoxiousandlosewithoutfeeling devastated.4. Industry vs. InferiorityWhenchildrenreachtheageof 6or 7, theyareready to become workers. The rst work dependsontheculture.Inpeasantvillages,boys followedtheir fathers to the elds, while girls helped in thekitchen and cared for animals and youngersiblings. In bureaucratic society, children mustperform in school to get good grades and move upthescholasticladder. Ratherthanlearningtouse38 M. Maccoby Int Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002agriculturaltools, the challengeofthisstage is touse the tools of the schoolroom.Development requires internal discipline,strengtheningneedsforlearningandself-expres-sion, deferring immediate gratication. This devel-opment can be stunted either by punishingauthoritarian discipline on the one hand, or onthe other, over-indulgence.In bureaucratic society, boys also were expectedto play team sports and develop what Piaget calledasenseof reciprocity, theabilitytounderstand,follow and design fair rules. This capabilitytempersegocentriccompetitionandauthoritarianhierarchy. It also introduces children to theprinciplesthat support ademocraticsociety. Theideals of Americanbureaucracydevelopat thisstage. They combine accepting the goals andobjectives of authority, but havingautonomyincarrying them out. This includesthecapability offorming teams to face a challenge, but returning tobureaucratic roles when the crisis is over. A primeexample of these ideals inactionwas the BellSystem, thetelephonemonopolyuntil 1984. Thesystem was almost a caricature of extreme bureau-cracy. Atthefrontline, technicianshadtofollowstrictrulesandprocedures. However, whentherewas a re, ood or hurricane which disruptedservice, teamworkproducedquick, effective re-sponse.By this stage, children of the interactive era arealready prepared for teamwork with advancedinterpersonal skills. Use of computers and theInternet provides themwith a greater scope toexperiment. The linebetweenworkandplayisblurredas theysurf the net or engage inteamprojects.Even in the interactive organization, there is stilltension in the American social character aboutbeing a team player vs. individual achievement. Inprofessional sports, this tension is resolved bymaintaining both team and individual statistics, aswell as evaluating individuals on their contributionto the team. Furthermore, competent coaching thathelps individuals both sharpen their skills andestablishes trust makes a signicant difference.This kind of sophisticated management is alsorequired in companies, so that interactive freeagentswill work cooperativelyand feel rewardedfor their work.Industriousfuturebureaucratsriskedbecomingnarrowlyfocusedandunimaginative. Industriousinteractivechildrenriskbecomingglibandshal-low, with theillusion ofknowing morethan theydo because knowledge seems the click of a mouseaway.Inthe bureaucraticclassroom, the unsuccessfulchildwouldloseself-condenceandself-esteem,triggeringa vicious cycle of poor performance.While this might alsohappentothe interactivechild, denial of failureissupportedbytheanti-bureaucraticpopularcultureandpoppsychology,whichinatestheselfandputsdown authorities.Defendingagainst the loss of self-esteem, thesechildren overestimate their capabilities and be-come imperviousto coaching. Teacherswho careandhelpthesechildrenunderstandthedisciplinerequiredforlearningandself-expressionmakeahuge difference in their future ability to learn andplay a productive role in the interactivesociety.5. Identity vs. RoleDiffusionErikson writes:With the establishment of a good initial relationship totheworldof skillsandtools, andwiththeadvent ofpuberty, childhood proper comes to an end. Youthbegins. But in puberty and adolescence all samenessesand continuities relied on earlier are more or lessquestioned again, because of a rapidity of body growthwhich equals that of early childhood and because of thenewaddition of genital maturity. The growing anddevelopingyouths,facedwith thisphysiological revo-lution within them, and with tangible adult tasks aheadof themarenowprimarilyconcernedwithwhat theyappear to be in the eyes of others as compared with whattheyfeel theyare, andwiththequestionof howtoconnecttherolesandskillscultivatedearlierwiththeoccupational prototypes of the day.Youthisatimeof exuberanceandexperimenta-tion. Inner discipline, acquiredearlier, guides ayoungpersonawayfromexcessiveandextremebehavior and toward an approach to life thatbalances work and play, that measures presentenjoyment with future consequences.Youth is also a time of connecting self with thelarger society and its opportunities. In the bureau-craticage,themostcompetentyoung menofthemiddle class preparedthemselves for careers inlargebusiness, government or theprofessionsoflaw and medicine. They paid attention to how onemust behave and dress for success. A smallpercentage of women, usually identied with theirfathers, did the same, but most thought aboutInt Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002 Toward a science of social character 39makingthemselvesattractivetothosemenmostlikely to succeed.Youth is a time of idealism, committing oneselfto an ideology or religion. The enlarged cohort ofbabyboomer youthinthe60sbegantheunder-mining of the bureaucratic character by contrastingdehumanizing rules, roles and technology withideals of freedomand democracy. Its winnersavoided falling into the temptations of rigidideologyordrug induced excess.Theywereablesomehowtocombinepleasureseekingandprag-matism. The losers were the ideological extremists,revolutionaries who became the disillusionedcynics, tribalistic cultists and addicts.Thesocietythat emergedinthe80sand90sfavoredentrepreneurial free agentsofboth sexes.The challenge for youth was to turn vocations intocareers, play into business and to nd meaning inwork. For some, this involved caring for others inthe helping professions like medicine and nursing.For others, itmeantbecomingexpertswho couldworkinmanydifferent organizations. For somefuture entrepreneurs, being a winner at the game ofbusiness andgettingrichbecomes the goal andmeaning of their intense activity. Increasingly, forthe interactive character, meaning is found incontinual self-development, both in work andinterpersonal competencies.Large companies and government are nowviewed as post-graduat e training for more freewheelingcareers. Theidentityof theinteractiveindividual nolonger emphasizesbeingpart of agreat company, but rather being a respectedprofessional, able to commit oneself to meaningfulprojects rather than powerful organizations.In the vibrant, dynamic labor market, thoseyoungpeoplewithoutstrongvaluesandsenseofself have adaptedbytryingtobe whatever themarket has seemed to value. Those who are unableto adapt may seek an identity in cults, racial, ethnicorreligiousextremismthat demonizestheglobaleconomy and the winners. Many Americans appeartohavelost their moral bearings, substitutingatepid tolerance for moral convictions (11).6. Intimacy vs. IsolationAchieving an intimate relationship requires trust inoneselfasmuchasinanotherperson. Without astrongsenseof self asanactiveagent, intimacythreatens loss of self-determination, beingtakenover by another person. An essential psychologicaltask of maturity is to establish a loving relationshipto overcome loneliness and create a family.In the bureaucratic era, this meant forming a unitfor mutual careandsuccess, withclearlydiffer-entiated male and female roles. This intimate familymight become isolated fromthe community, atribalistic haven, held together by narcissistic self-ination. We are better than everyone else.Thedevelopmental interactivefamilybuildsanetworkthatgoesbeyondbloodrelationstocon-nect with others who share values and aspirations.The pathology of intimacy in the interactive eraresults from fears of the strong needs for motheringrepressed in childhood. The detached, avoidantadult is both driven by these needs and repelled bytheirthreat tooodtheselfwithinfantileyearn-ings. Because of this, there is supercial couplingand frequent break-ups.Furthermore, two careers puts pressure on arelationship and requires mutual understanding,care, andcompromise. If thepartnerslackemo-tional security and trust, conicts are more likely tobreak up the relationship, especially when womennolonger needhusbands tosupport themecon-omically.In the interactive era, each family must dene itsrole and the role of its members. Ideally, the familysupports positive development. Developmentalneedsexpandfreedomandchoice. Theyincludeunderstanding, knowledge, creative self-expres-sion, competence and love. As individuals achievematurity, theyshouldbecomemoreconsciousoftheir needsandvaluesandmoreresponsibleforshaping them, therefore more committed not onlytoothers, buttoaconcept ofoneself, whoIam,what I stand for, who I want to become.Erikson reports that Freud once described what anormal person should be able to do as lieben undarbeiten, to love and to work. Beyond normality,perhaps happiness requires love in ones work andsome working at love. Fromm taught that there is ageneral lackof understandingabout thekindoflove which strengthens the self and deepens trust.7. Generativity vs. StagnationWith age and the achievement of a productive roleat work and sustainable intimate relationshipscomes the challenge of bringingalongthe nextgeneration, as a teacher, parent, or institutionbuilder whoarticulatesanddefendsvalues. Thismeans taking responsibility for building ones40 M. Maccoby Int Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002societyrather thanmerelyenjoyingones rightsand complying with the laws.Thisrole, at least at work, wasclearer inthebureaucratic era, especially for menwhocouldmoveupthehierarchyandexpandtheirrolestomentor promisingyoungmen, whointurnwereattracted to them as father gures. The productivebureaucrat wasanexpert at somethinghecouldteach. Mentorandmenteeenjoyedtheemotionalrelationship and helped each other succeed. Whenwomen rst entered bureaucracies, the ones able tocreate father-daughter relationships were best ableto nd mentors.The interactive social character distrusts par-ental relationships as stiing independence andthreatening self-determination. The interactiveindividual seeksthosegenerativeadultswhocanhelpandcoachthemwithoutdemanding submis-sionor layingonthemaheavyemotional tripthat demands they become like the coach. Further-more, interactive people feel more comfortableseparating relationships at work from those outsideof work. They believe that mixing the two spheresdetracts from good relationships in both.The new social character has a hard timebecoming generative. Thetraditionalbureaucracyallowedmiddlemanagerstobementorsat workand in volunteer organizations. There was lesspressure, more time for bonding. The market pres-sure of the interactive organization leaves littletime and even less energy for these forms ofsociability.The most generative individuals are leaders whoexpress anddefendmoral as well as productivevalues. Some create new institutions or companies.Thesegenerativeindividualshavefaithinothersand their capabilities. They experience deep satis-faction in helping others to realize their talents andvocations. Religious faith and belief in democracymay inuence their sense of meaning and self.The interactive character may respond to leader-ship that engages and involves a person in shapingan enterprise, but he or she is uneasy in the role ofprotective authority. Beyond success, these peopleplace tolerance as their highest value. Their moralcode: judge not that you be not judged. They donot see themselves as defending organizationalvalues. They say those are not my values and I amnot a policeman.The most generative of the interactive canaccept theroleof coachor facilitator but thisisgenerally limited to a particular project. Theinteractive philosophy is that each person isresponsible for self-development.Some interactive entrepreneurs treat their lifeandworklikeagame. Theyenjoythestrategy,tactics and the excitement of the contest. Winningbecomes the overriding meaning of life. Thesepeople treat others as players to be moved aroundand replaced if need be.Those of both social characters who fail the testof generativitystagnate. The bureaucrat becamehis narrow role, like a character in one of Kafkasnovels. The interactive character never deepensknowledge and has nothing to teach.The well-being of the next generation and that ofsociety as a whole will depend on whether those oftheinteractivegenerationunderstandandacceptthe challenge of generativity. So far, the signs arenot good.8. Ego Integrity vs. DespairAccording to Erikson, thelast stage oflifehastodo with accepting ones life as it has been lived andfacing death withoutfearorregret.Hewrotethiswhen he was in his forties and writing now, in mysixties, it seems rather incomplete.People are livinglonger nowadays, andevenafter they retire froman active career, stayinghealthy calls for exercising mind and body.Generativity can last longer.Integrity means one has not betrayed ones idealself, or if so, has repented and found the path again.Despair means losingones wayandlosingthehope of nding it. Those who have betrayedthemselveslivewithself-disgust andrationaliza-tions that do not overcome their depression. But asense of integrity is gained by a mature realism, asenseof what it has beenpossibletodo, givenonesopportunitiesandabilitiesandtakingluckintoaccount. It includes givingbacktosocietymore than one has received. Yet, the older person,or senior citizen, stays productive and vigorous solong as he or she remains engaged and generative,concerned and hopeful about the future as opposedto resigning from life and living in the past.The integrity of the bureaucrat meant playing hisrole with dignity and effectiveness, resistingillegitimate commands andcorruptingpressures.After retirement, it meant continuation of learningthrough reading, traveling and voluntary activities.For women, it meant providing care and emotionalInt Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002 Toward a science of social character 41support while maintaining an intellectualcapabil-ity through participation in voluntary organizationsand cultural activities.The despairingbureaucrat was like TolstoysIvan Illich who only realizeson his deathbed thathe has never really been himself, only what othersexpected him to be. Perhaps, the despairinginteractive character will be more like IbsensPeer Gynt, who confuses self-indulgence with selfexpression, self-marketing with intimacy and endsup alone and burnt out.However, fewwith the newsocial characterhave reached old age. Maintaining integrity in themarket dominated world seems to call for apragmatic development and testing of ones ideas.For those who have been engaged in the complexmarketworld, itmeanslivingwith contradictionsand uncertainty without losing hope. I believe thisrequires a faith that gives meaning to individuationandcreative engagement withones communitywhichintheinteractiveagemayincludepeoplethroughout the world who share developmentalvalues.The charts Positive Life-cycle Development andTypicalDevelopmentalProblems&Causessum-marize the outcomes for Eriksons eight stages.Thebureaucratic social character struggledwithissues of independence, startingwithseparationfrommothers whowere stuckinthe home andmight try to live through their children. For males,the resolution of Oedipal struggles with the fatherbegan in childhood but continued with father-gure teachers andbosses inthe hierarchies ofschool and work. The challenge of intimacy couldleadtoasolutionthat submergedtheindividual,especiallyfemales, within a semitribalistic familythat stied independence. In the bureaucraticworkplace, individuals t their selves innarrowroles, oldagemight bringadespairingsenseofnever having been oneself, only what othersexpected him to be.In contrast to the bureaucratic social charactersoverdependence on authority, the interactive socialcharacter maystrugglewithalackof condentparenting, fromchildhood through adolescenceanda lackof leadershipthereafter. Rather thansufferingfromobsessiveconformity, theinterac-tivechildlackscontrols.Ratherthanover-identi-fying with a parent, he or she feels part of adifferent worldinwhichissuesof groupaccep-tancedominate.Rejectionbythegroupcanevencausedestructiveanger. Ratherthanconstructing42 M. Maccoby Int Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002identityfromtraditional categoriesof professionand class, the interactive adolescent also factors inissues of ethnic, racial, andsexual identity, andidentity as a consumer of style in clothes and music(like hiphop). Rather than feeling inferior, when hedoes badly on tests, the interactive child mayoverestimate the self as a defense against low self-esteem. Rather thanlosingthe self inlove andwork, theinteractivecharactermaysufferfrom aconstructedfalse self, intimate relationships be-come supercial and too easily dissolved. Theadult interactive character may lack generativevalues andfeel no responsibility tomentor theyoung. Compulsively driven to succeed, he or shemay lose a sense of meaning and become a victimof burnout.Finally, psychologicalissuesshouldbeviewedin terms of a changing concept of positivedevelopment throughout thelifecycle. Thepro-ductiveinteractiveindividual isfocusedoncon-tinual learningandcompetency increating andsustaining networks of mutual development . Lack-ing a sense of stability in organizations andrelationships, heorshebecomesmoreconcernedwithdiscoveringand expressing anauthenticselfas opposed to being what others want him or her tobe. This canbeanaiveafrmationof ideals, agroup identity based on shared life-stages, anexpression ofgrandiosity oraserious explorationof the inner life that leads to new commitments.The differences between these social charactershave signicant implications for psychotherapyand psychoanalysis. Not only do they sensitize theanalyst todifferent issuesandtheir signicance,but theyalsoimplydifferent approaches tothepatient. Thetraditional psychoanalyticmethodisbased on bureaucratic rules that t the expectationsof the bureaucratic character. The interactivecharacter seeks a therapist who offers sharedlearning and mutual development.3While thebureaucratic character acceptedtheanalysts re-lative anonymity and neutrality, the interactivecharacter values transparencyandjudicious dis-closure. Analysts have been learning to analyze thetransference not only as an obstacle to remember-ingbut alsoasameanstodevelopanauthenticrelationship. This also requires increased attentionto counter-transferential attitudes and to seeinginterpretations not as expert reconstructions of thepast but as co-constructions of meaning. ThesechangesareconsistentwithFrommsviewofthedirection psychoanalytic therapy should take.Inconclusion,ErichFromm,buildingonFreudsinsightsanddiscoveries, gaveus theconcept ofsocial character. Ofcourse, other social analystshaddescribednationaltraits,notably TocquevilleinDemocracyinAmerica(12) andKarl Marxsdescribing of French peasants and communards inThe Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon (13).However, Fromm not only described character; hepresented a theory of howsocial character isshaped, and its function for society. He alsodeveloped a method to study social characterthrough an interpretative questionnaire. As weclarifyandexpandonthistheoryandmethodol-ogy, we stand on his shoulders just as he stood onthoseofFreud. Andindoingso, weexpandourunderstanding of changes in the needs that peoplebring to psychoanalysis and the kind of encounterthat will best facilitate their development.References1. FreudS. Libidinaltypes. (1931)London:HogarthPress, 1953.SE 21. p. 215.2. Fromm F. Man for himself. New York: Rinehart; 1946.3. Maccoby M. The two voices of Erich Fromm: the prophet and theanalytic. In: CortinaM, MaccobyM, eds. A propheti canalyst .Northvale, N.J.: Jason Aronson; 1995.4. EriksonEH. Children&society(1950). NewYork: Norton;1963.5. FrommF,MaccobyM. Social characterinaMexicanvillage.EnglewoodCliffs, N.J. Prentice-Hall : 1970, reprintedwith newintroduction by Michael Maccoby. New Brunswick, NJ Transac-tion Publishers; 1996.6. Fromm E. Escape from freedom. New York: Rinehart; 1941.7. Maccoby M. Why work? New York: Simon and Schuster; 1988.Why Work? Motivating the New work force. 2nd ed. Alexandria,VA: Miles River Press; 1995.8. Narcissistic leaders: The incredible pros, the inevitabl e cons.Harvard Business Review JanuaryFebruary 2000: pp. 6877.9. Fromm E. The working class in Weimar Germany. Cambridge:Harvard 1984.10. Riesman D. The lonely crowd. New Haven, Conn: YaleUniversity Press; 1950.11. Wolfe A. One nation, after all: what Americans really think aboutGod, country, family, racism, welfare, immigration, homosexu-ality, work, theright, theleftandeachother. NewYork, NY:Viking; 1998.12. Tocquevill e A. Democracy in America (1945). NewYork:Vintage Books; 1990.13. MarxK. Theeighteent hbrumaireofLouisNapoleon. Written:Dec1851Mar 1852. FirstPublished:FirstissueofDieRevo-lution. New York: 1852.3Cortina M. From Bureaucratic to Interactive Psychoanalysis . PaperpresentedtoAmericanAcademyof Psychoanalysis . Washington,D.C.; May 14, 1999.Int Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002 Toward a science of social character 43Summaries in German and SpanishMaccoby, M: Fur eine Wissenschaft vom SozialcharakterUmeineWissenschaft vomSozialcharakter zubegrunden,mussendrei AspektevonFrommsCharaktertheoriegeklartwerden. Der erstebezieht sichauf dieDifferenzzwischenindividuellemund sozialemCharakter. FrommerweiterteFreudsBeschreibungder normalenTypen: erotisch(rezep-tiv), zwanghaft (sammelnd) undnarzisstisch(ausbeutend).Neben dem Konzept vom Sozialcharakter machte Fromm dreigroere Beitrage zur psychoanalytischen Charaktertheorie:Das Konzept der Produktivit at, soziopolitischeWeisenderBeziehungsgestaltungunddenCharakterderVermarktung.Sozialcharakterist eine Interaktion zwischen internalisiertenkulturellen Werten und individuellem Charakter. DieseInteraktion variiert den sozialen Charakter und hilft diezweite Frage zu klaren, wie sich der Sozialcharakterverandert. DasKonzept der sozialenSelektionerklart, wienarzisstischeUnternehmersozialeInstitutionenrestrukturie-ren und einen neuen Sozialcharakter formen.Die dritte Frage bezieht sich darauf, wie der Sozial-charaktersichimLebenszyklusverhalt. Frommliefertenieeine Entwicklungstheorie. Erik Eriksons Modell der Entwick-lungs-Passung trifft den Sozialcharakter Amerikas in derMitte des 20. Jahrhunderts. Eine Revisiondieses Modellsliefert eine nu tzliche Konstruktion, um die Veranderung jenerProbleme zu verstehen, mit denen die Psychoanalyse zuBeginn des 21. Jahrhunderts konfrontiert ist.Maccoby M. Hacia una ciencia de caracter socialPara desarrollar una ciencia de caracter social se necesitan serclasicadostresaspectosdelateoriadel caractersocial deFromm.El primerotienequeverconladiferenciaentreelcaracterindividual ysocial. Frommextendio ladescripcio nde Freud de tipos normales: ero tico (receptivo), obsesivo(accumulative)ynarcissistic(explotador).Ademasdel con-cepto de caracter social, Frommhizo tres contribucionesimportantes a la teoria psicoanalitica del caracter: el conceptode productividad, formas soci-politicas de relacio n y elcaracterdel marketing. El caratersocial esunainteraccio nentre la cultura internalizada (valores) yel caracter. Estainteraccio n produce variaciones en el caracter social y ayuda aexplicar elsegundoaspecto, esdecir comoel caratersocialcambia. El concepto de seleccio n social explica comoempresarios narcisistas reestructuran instituciones socialespara formar un nuevo caracter social. El tercer aspectoconcierne a como el caracter social se desarrolla a lo largo delciclo de la vida. Frommnunca ofrecio una teora deldesarrollo. El modelo de desarrollo de Erik Erikson se adaptaal caracter social de America enla mitaddel siglo. Unarevisio n de este modelo provee de una estructura util para lacomprensio n de los cambios en los tipos de problemas que setraen al psicoanalisis a comienzos del siglo 21y tambien loscambios dentro de la practica psicoanalitica.44 M. Maccoby Int Forum Psychoanal 11, 2002