Pure relationship: a social relation which is
internally referential, that is, depends fundamentally on
satisfactions or rewards generic to that relation itself.
In the reflexive project of the self, the narrative of
self-identity is inherently fragile. The task of forging a
distinct identity may be able to deliver distinct psychological
gains, but it is clearly also a burden. A self-identity has to
be created and more or less continually reordered against the
backdrop of shifting experiences of day-to-day life and the
fragmenting tendencies of modern institutions. Moreover the
sustaining of such a narrative directly affects, and in some
degree helps construct, the body as well as the self.
These stresses have a direct impact on the sphere of personal
life. Pure relationships, like many other aspects of high
modernity, are double-edged. They offer the opportunity for the
development of trust based on voluntary commitments and an
intensified intimacy. Where achieved and relatively secure, such
trust is psychologically stabilising, because of the strong
connections between basic trust and the reliability of caretaking
figures. Given that these connections embrace feelings of
security in the object-world, as well as in the sphere of
personal relations as such, their importance is very
considerable. The pure relationship is a key environment for
building the reflexive project of the self, since it both allows
for and demands organised and continuous self-understanding --
the means of securing a durable tie to the other. Of course,
many actual relationships exist and endure where little symmetry
is found, and where each person is held in thrall by traits in
the other which on the surface repel them (co-dependency). But
the tendencies towards symmetry in the pure relationship are more
than just an ideal: they are in large degree inherent in its
nature.
The rise of therapy is closely tied to the emergence of the
pure relationship, but not only, or even primarily, because
therapeutic work can help heal the psychological damage which
such relationships can bring about. The centrality of therapy
expresses the fact that the more that pure relationships become
dominant, the more crucial becomes an in-depth understanding
which allows one to feel 'all right' with oneself.
For self-mastery is the condition of that opening-out process
through
which hope (commitment) and trust are generated in the pure
relationship.
Yet pure relationships, and the nexus of intimacy in which
they are involved, create enormous burdens for the integrity of
the self. In so far as a relationship lacks external referents,
it is morally mobilised only through 'authenticity': the
authentic person is one who knows herself and is able to reveal
that knowledge to the other, discursively and in the behavioural
sphere. To be in an authentic relation with another can be a
major source of moral support, again largely because of its
potential integration with basic trust. But shorn of external
moral criteria, the pure relationship is vulnerable as a source
of security at fateful moments and at other major life
transitions.
Moreover, the pure relationship contains internal tensions and
even contradictions. By definition, it is a social relation
which can be terminated at will, and is only sustained in so far
as it generates sufficient psychic returns for each individual.
On the one hand it demands commitment, not only to the other
individual, but to the social relation itself: this is again
intrinsic to the pure relationship. On the other hand, the
relationship can be voluntarily broken, and is acknowledged by
both parties to be only 'good until further notice'. The
possibility of dissolution, perhaps willingly brought about by
the individual in question, forms part of the very horizon of
commitment. It is not surprising that rage, anger and depressive
feelings swirl through the contexts of pure relationships and, in
concrete circumstances, intimacy may be psychically more
troubling than it is rewarding.