Terms of Endearment, Quiz Example

From an Object Relations perspective, conceptualize the characters from the movie “Terms of Endearment” with Debra Winger and Shirley Mclaine.

Conceptualizing character as well developed as those in Terms of Endearment is no easy task. The two main characters Aurora and Emma can be best understood through the prism of their mother and daughter relationship. Aurora is a sexually active yet maternal older women who is both loved and resented by her more sexually traditional married daughter Emma. Emma’s imminent demise from breast cancer forces the two characters into stark relief. Relying on Object Relations theory, Emma’s entire sexual life can be interpreted as a rejection of the instability of her mother’s as Emma tries to find a strong male presence in her college professor husband Flap. This drive results in a failed marriage and great unhappiness but as a proper way to understand her emotional drive to stay in the marriage. Vice versa, with Emma’s death Aurora adopts Emma’s children and seeks to become the mother that Emma was with Garret. If Object Relations theory can be understood as one’s world being critically shaped by those who are closest to you as a child and even as an adult then Aurora and Emma serve as excellent case studies. Object Relations theory posits that individuals come to associate certain objects with their subconscious drives as they seek to develop their personas over time and in relation to other people. The objects and people which the characters put their emotional weight is critical to understanding the overall message of Emma’s death and the actions of the other characters.

Give 4 behavioral observations for the characters: Emma, Aurora, Flap, and Garrett from an object relations perspective. An example would be their level of differentiation and sense of self. 

Aurora – This character while initially independent and not maternal evolves through her daughter’s death to seek to redo her mothering and lead a stable life. What is intriguing from an Object Relations perspective about Aurora is that it is as if she were the child being influenced rather than the adult learning from her child’s actions.

Emma – This character as a result of her mother’s upbringing craves stability and control. Therefore she marries immediately out of high school, tolerates her husband’s philandering and is generally unhappy all in the name of pursuing a stable family life for her children. This entire life trajectory can be seen as a classic Object Relations rejection of one’s upbringing.

Flap – Though less dramatic than the charge development seen in Aurora and Emma, Flap can be seen as being significantly influenced by those around him. After passing through the challenges of losing Emma in the hospital, he gains the maturity to recognize that he cannot change his ways and that his children are best served by living with their grandmother.

Garrett – One could argue that the personal transformation of this character is directly caused by his relationship with Aurora. This intense experience can be seen through an Object Relations perspective as the experience of falling in love compels him to give up drinking and to try his hand at being a father for Emma’s children.

Name 2 possible Projective Identification (PI) for each character: what would the Flap and Emma’s interjects be and how has the partner played them out? What are some of Aurora’s projective identifications? Name possible bad and good objects.

Emma – Her bed; her children

Aurora – Emma’s crib; Emma’s children

Flap – his job; his mistress

Garrett – His convertible; Aurora

Is there any projective identification going on with Garrett and Aurora?

Yes, one can view Garrett’s Corvette riding as an example of his desire to not grow old and to start over. By acting like a young man and in such a reckless fashion one can view this projective identification as fitting into the larger story of redemption that Aurora and Garrett represent. This identification helps resolves their past regrets about their former lives. Projection theory posits that within the subconscious individuals are able to overcome their emotional baggage by placing their anxiety and fear directly into the object in question. This is a defense mechanism which is normal and functions to help in the normal development of the individual’s personality.

How do Emma and Flap complement one another in their dysfunction? Aurora and her daughter Emma?

Emma and Flap complement each other in their dysfunction as they enable each other to hurt each other. By putting his entire self-worth and identity into his academic career and his mistress in Nebraska, Flap is unable to connect on a personal level with his dying wife. On the other hand, Emma’s awareness of his philandering and decision to stay for the wellbeing of his children allows the entire dynamic of their relationship to become alienated from itself. This alienated tension drives the action of Emma’s life outside of her cancer.

In regards to Aurora and Emma, the film creates a “love-hate” relationship between the two characters. Through the life-cycles of the two lead characters, there is a sense of a push and pull dialectic. This plays into the female concept of life cycles as they move from childhood bonding to adolescent separating and ultimately to marriage and childhood. This entire dynamic culminates with the role reversal of Aurora adopting the children for her infirm daughter. This dynamic is fundamental to their character development and reinforces their mutual relationship as understood by Object Relations Theory.

How does Emma and Flap collude with one another in their dysfunction?

Emma and Flap collude in their dysfunction in that the flaws and emotions of their characters serve to reinforce their character development. Despite all of Flap’s misdeeds against Emma, the concept of losing her is much worse than cheating on her. These rich and multi-dimensional characters. Their collusion is made evident by Emma’s death. We see Flap’s recognition of this during his discussion in the hospital dining room with Aurora. Flap understands that he does not have the ability to pursue his academic career, his philandering and caring for his children. Flap does not want his children to be separated and therefore give up his children. In short, the collusion between Emma and Flap functions as a literary mechanism which drives the rest of the plot as well as a Objective Theory case study for how these characters put their emotional baggage into specific objects and people outside of themselves.

References

Gomez, L. (1997). An Introduction to Object Relations Theory. London: Free Association Press.

Mitchell, S.A., & Black, M.J. (1995). Freud and beyond: A history of modern psycho analytic thought. Basic Books, New York.