View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE
provided by South East Academic Libraries System (SEALS)
AN ERIKSONIAN PSYCHOBIOGRAPHY OF MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR
Sheri-Ann Pietersen
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Magister Artium In Counselling Psychology
in the
Faculty of Health Sciences
at the
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
January 2014
Supervisor: Prof. C.N. Hoelson
Co-supervisor: Ms. A. Sandison
i
DECLARATION
I, Sheri-Ann Pietersen (nee Kemp), 203054601, hereby declare that the treatise An Eriksonian
Psychobiography of Martin Luther King Junior for the Magister Artium in Counselling
Psychology is my own work and that it has not previously been submitted for assessment or completion of any postgraduate qualification to another university or for another qualification.
Sign
Sheri-Ann Pietersen Date
ii
Photograph of Martin Luther King Junior
Source:http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html
iii
Acknowledgements
I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. Philippians 4:13
I would not have been able to complete this without the support of the following people:
All glory and honour is due unto my Saviour, Jesus. I know that with you all things are
possible.
To my absolutely amazing husband, Gerald. Love, thank you so much for your enduring
support and unwavering faith in me. Thank you for keeping me strong and sane throughout
this process. I am so blessed.
Samantha Naicker, thank you for all the sacrifices you made in support of me. I truly hold you
dear.
Melissa Romain, Ronique Brecht and Giselle Naidoo, thank you for encouraging me and
listening to my research talk. Thank you for also understanding. And thank you to your
husbands, of course.
To my parents, George and Elda Kemp, You have always believed in me, and you have
undoubtedly supported my every initiative. I am so grateful. Thank you to my brother,
George. Your hugs made the world of a difference.
To Aunt, Charline Witbooi, thank you for providing the inspiration of this research and for
coming to the rescue when you did.
To my grandmother, Ma Yvonne, thank you for your prayers and encouragement throughout
my life. I am really so blessed.
To all my family who listened, encouraged and supported me, I am grateful for that.
iv
To my Disability Unit team: Prof Iona Wannenburg, Ruth Sauls and Tanita Kemp. You guys
are the best cheerleaders. Thank you for listening to my frustrations and encouraging me to
keep going.
A huge thank you to my supervisor Prof. Hoelson and co-supervisor, Alida Sandison. You
have truly gone out of your way to help me get this research done. Thank you for your
guidance, your professional advice and for accommodating me in the way that you did.
v
Table of Contents
Declaration i
Photograph of Martin Luther King Junior. ii
Acknowledgements iii
Table of Contents v
List of Appendices xi
Abstract xii
Chapter 1
Introduction
Chapter Preview 1
Orientation to the Research Study 1
The Psychobiographical Approach 1
The Life of Martin Luther King Junior 2
Overview of the Theoretical Framework 5
Aim of the Research 6
Overview of the Treatise 6
Chapter 2
Erikson’s Psychosocial Development Theory
Chapter Preview 7
Significant Life Events which Contributed to the Development of
Erikson’s Theory 7
The Development of Personality: Erikson’s Perspective 11
The Fundamentals of Erikson’s Psychosocial Approach 12
The epigenetic principle. 12
vi
Lifespan development. 13
Ego development and identity. 14
The Eight Psychosocial Stages 15
Trust versus mistrust (birth to about 18 months). 15
Autonomy versus shame and doubt (18 months to about three years). 17
Initiative versus guilt (three years to five years). 18
Industry versus inferiority (five years to 13 years). 20
Identity versus role confusion (13 years to 21 years). 21
Intimacy versus isolation (21 years to 40 years). 22
Generativity versus stagnation (40 years to 60 years). 24
Integrity versus despair (60 years and onwards). 25
Critique of Erikson’s (1950) Psychosocial Theory 26
Erikson the idealist and theory too idealistic. 27
Gender assumptions in Erikson’s work. 27
The developmental stages. 28
Conclusion 29
Chapter 3
The Life of Martin Luther King Junior
Chapter Preview 30
The Life of Martin Luther King Junior 30
The Childhood Years (1929-1947). 30
Family of origin. 30
Fatherly influence. 31
King as a boy. 32
King at school. 33
vii
Questioning. 34
Tough experiences. 34
College years. 35
Influences during college. 36
Becoming a man (1947 - 1950). 37
Minister after all. 37
Continued studies. 37
Influences and beliefs while at seminary. 38
Philosophy of nonviolence. 39
The emergence of King (1950 – 1953). 40
King as the diligent student. 40
King on a social level. 41
King meets Coretta Scott. 42
Leader in reverend’s cloak (1953 - 1957). 44
Where to go and what to do. 44
Life as a reverend. 45
Thought and word into action. 47
Freedom with responsibility leaves a legacy (1957 - 1968). 49
Fame and its challenges. 49
The movement. 52
I have a dream. 54
Peace at a price. 58
The Legacy Lives On 58
Conclusion 59
viii
Chapter 4
Psychobiographical Research Design and Methodology
Chapter Preview 60
Overview of the Psychobiographical Research Design 60
Methodological Considerations of Psychobiographical Research 62
Analysing an absent subject. 62
Researcher bias. 64
Reductionism. 65
Elitism and easy genre. 66
Inflated expectations. 67
Psychobiographical Ethical Considerations 67
Research Design 68
The Psychobiographical Research Subject 68
Data Collection 69
Data Analysis 70
Alexander’s guidelines for the extraction of salient data. 71
Primacy. 71
Frequency. 71
Emphasis. 71
Uniqueness. 72
Negation. 72
Omission. 72
Error or distortion. 72
Isolation. 72
Incompletion. 72
ix
Questioning the Data 73
Developing a Case Description 74
Reflexivity 75
Conclusion 75
Chapter 5
Findings and Discussion
Chapter Preview 76
Findings 76
Basic trust versus mistrust (birth to 18 months). 77
Discussion of the first stage. 77
Autonomy versus shame and doubt (18 months to three years). 78
Discussion of the second stage. 78
Initiative versus guilt (three to five years). 79
Discussion of the third stage. 80
Industry versus inferiority (five to 13 years). 80
Discussion of the fourth stage. 81
Identity versus role confusion (13 to 21 years). 82
Discussion of the fifth stage. 83
Intimacy versus isolation (21 to 40 years). 86
Discussion of the sixth stage. 86
Conclusion 90
Chapter 6
Conclusion, Limitations and Recommendations
Chapter Preview 91
Conclusions of the Study 91
x
Limitations of Current Research Study. 91
Value of the Study 93
Recommendations for Future Research 94
Final Conclusion 95
References 96
xi
List of Appendices:
Appendix A
A Matrix of Martin Luther King Junior’s Life and Erikson’s Theory of
Psychosocial Stages 103
xii
Abstract
The aim of the current study was to conduct a psychobiography of the life of Martin Luther
King Junior, who was born in 1929 and died in 1968. He was an American clergyman, husband, father, activist, and prominent leader in the African-American civil rights movement. King fought for civil rights for all people. His “I Have a Dream” speech raised public consciousness of the civil rights movement and established him as one of the greatest orators in the United States of America. His main legacy was to secure access to civil rights for all Americans, thereby empowering people of all racial and religious backgrounds, and promoting equality in the American nation.
This is a psychobiographical research study which aimed to explore and describe the life of
Martin Luther King junior’s psychological development according to Erik Erikson’s
Psychosocial Developmental Theory. King was selected through purposive sampling on the basis of interest, value, and uniqueness to the researcher. Alexander’s model of identifying salient themes was used to analyse the data which were then compared to Erikson’s theory through a process of analytical generalisation. Limitations of the current study were identified and certain recommendations for future research in this field are offered.
Key Concepts: Erik Erikson, Martin Luther King Junior, psychobiography, psychosocial development.
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
Chapter Preview
This chapter contains an introduction to the research study and provides a general orientation thereof. It provides a brief outline of the psychobiographical approach, a short account of the life of Martin Luther King Junior, and an overview of Erikson‟s (1950)
Psychosocial Development Theory. The aim of the research is presented, and the chapter then concludes with an overview of all the chapters in the research study.
Orientation to the Research Study
Through the research method of psychobiography the researcher explores and describes the personality development of Martin Luther King Junior throughout his entire lifespan, utilizing Erik Erikson‟s (1950) Psychosocial Development Theory. The research is categorised as a psychobiographical case study which uses Erikson‟s psychosocial stages to restructure and highlight King‟s life, providing a comprehensive account of his psychological development.
The Psychobiographical Approach
The purpose of a psychobiography is to utilise psychological theory in a systematic way, so as to discover aspects of the subject‟s lived life (McAdams, 1994; Stroud, 2004). Roberts
(2002) ascribed interest in the psychobiographical method in recent years to four different factors: a developing cynicism with static approaches to data collection; a growing interest in the life stages; an increased concern with lived experience and how best to express and reveal it, as well as the growth in popularity of qualitative research in general.
Pillay (2009) suggests that various definitions and descriptions of psychobiography exist.
Schultz (2005) describes psychobiography as the process of utilizing psychological theory and research to analyse the inner life of the subject. It looks at the entire life birth to death, to 2 determine and differentiate the main story of the subject‟s life (McAdams, 1994).
Psychobiography is a method of practicing psychology (Elms, 1994), which could contribute insights into the process of the development of one‟s life and the societal context of a subject being studied (Uys, 2007).
Anderson (1981) and Runyan (1984) assert that the biographical approaches have received much criticism regarding ambiguity and controversy. Despite the criticism, there has been growing interest in biographical approaches, especially among personality psychologists
(Elms, 1994; McAdams; Runyan).
The Life of Martin Luther King Junior
Martin Luther King Junior was born on January 15, 1929 to the Reverend Martin Luther
King, Sr. and his wife, Alberta Christine Williams King (Togni, 1994). He was the Kings‟ second child, the first born was daughter, Willie Christine, and the youngest was a brother,
Alfred Daniel (Nazel, 1991; Togni). According to Nazel, the King family was close, and despite the racial conditions of the time, the King children lived a model life in a home filled with love.
Schloredt and Brown (1994) describe young King as an intelligent boy. At age five he was memorising passages from the Bible and at age six he sang Gospel songs for the congregation
(Schloredt & Brown). To make up for being called a “shrimp” for being short, he competed extra hard in everything (Milton, 1995). He did so well at his schoolwork that he skipped several grades completely (Schloredt & Brown; Togni, 1994). King began college when he was fifteen, three years earlier than most students (Nazel, 1991). Schloredt and Brown mention that King‟s father had set his heart on King becoming a preacher like him, but King thought he might like to become a doctor or a lawyer, professions he thought might be of more use to his people (Schloredt & Brown). However the combination of learning and inspiration in King‟s mentor, Dr Benjamin Mays sermons, impressed King and made him 3 change his mind (Fairclough, 1990). At the age of 17 King preached his first sermon and after a year he was ordained and made assistant minister to his father (Milton; Schloredt &
Brown).
According to Nazel (1991), the man whose beliefs most excited King was Mahatma
Gandhi. Gandhi‟s philosophy of non-violence, or soul-force, reinforced the spiritual strength of India‟s people against the political and military strength of imperialist Britain (Milton,
1995). King led a vast civil rights movement – a campaign for justice for Black people in the
United States of America – with non-violence as its great guiding principle (Schloredt &
Brown, 1994). King graduated at the top of his class from Crozer Theological Seminary and went on to continue his studies at Boston University (Fairclough, 1990). He was introduced to a young singer named Coretta Scott (Milton). King was overwhelmed by her beauty and intelligence, her vivid personality, and her strength of character. On June 18, 1953, they were married by King‟s father at Coretta‟s home in Marion (Milton; Nazel; Schloredt & Brown).
October 31, 1954, King and Coretta relocated to the parsonage of the Dexter Avenue church in Montgomery, Alabama (Milton; Nazel; Schloredt & Brown).
On December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks, a Black woman, boarded a bus in Montgomery,
Alabama, and refused to give up her seat to a White person, changing the course of the struggle for racial equality in the South (Fairclough, 1990; Hodgson, 2010; Milton; 1995;
Nazel, 1991; Schloredt & Brown, 1994: Togni, 1994). Subsequently a community of 40
Black leaders elected King as head of the Montgomery Improvement Association when he was just 26 years old (Fairclough). After Parks‟ conviction, on December 5 1955, the
Montgomery bus boycott began (Fairclough; Hodgson). In February 1957, King was elected the first president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (Milton; Nazel; Schloredt
& Brown). This organisation proved to be the most influential in the organisation of the
Southern Civil Rights Movement. Under the leadership of King it became the example for 4 non-violent action for the next decade (Nazel). Somehow, despite all the travel and stress, the
King family remained close and loving. It was a bewildering life: one week he might be imprisoned in a jail on a civil rights issue and the next he would be a distinguished celebrity in New York appearing on the Today show, signing copies of his book, Strides Toward
Freedom (Schloredt & Brown).
King‟s inspiration and passion for non-violent protests against segregation and injustice was supported by many, including college students and children (Nazel, 1991). He was imprisoned on many occasions, one of which was in Birmingham. On April 16, 1963, while in jail, he wrote his famous “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” The letter was addressed to those in the clergy who criticised his presence in Birmingham (Nazel). King was 34, still a young man, when he and other civil rights leaders planned the biggest march to date on the nation‟s capital, Washington (Milton, 1995) for the one hundredth anniversary of the ending of slavery in America (Schloredt & Brown, 1994). It was a day-long rally in front of the Lincoln
Memorial, about 250 000 people of every race and creed joined in support of the Civil Rights
Bill (Fairclough, 1990; Milton; Schloredt & Brown; Togni, 1994). On that day King made his famous “I have a dream” speech, the greatest speech of the civil rights movement and the speech that has become a part of history (Fairclough; Hodgson, 2010; Milton; Nazel;
Schloredt & Brown; Togni).
In October 1964, King, at age 35, was the youngest man to be awarded the Nobel Peace
Prize (Fairclough, 1990; Hodgson, 2010; Milton, 1995; Nazel, 1991; Schloredt & Brown,
1994; Togni, 1994). On the evening of April 3 1968, King addressed a strike rally in
Memphis, delivering one of the most powerful speeches of his career (Fairclough). The following evening, on the April 4, while standing on the balcony outside his motel room, he was shot. An hour later, he was dead (Fairclough; Milton). King was 39 years old.
5
Overview of the Theoretical Framework
To conceptualise King‟s personality development the researcher used Erik Erikson‟s
(1950) Theory of Psychosocial Development. According to Levinson (1996), Erikson‟s book
Childhood and Society might as well have been called “Life Cycle and Society” as its distinctive creativity started with placing children within an articulated framework of the life cycle, and subsequently led to the study of adult development. Erikson‟s theory (1950) provides an intuitively appealing description of some key universal concerns of each period of life. It is a psychosocial theory which views humans as biological, psychological and social beings that are shaped by an interactive mix of forces (Corey, 2005). Erikson‟s developmental concepts deal primarily with the individual life course. Corey stated that
Erikson emphasised the process of living, the idea of history rather than case history, and the use of biography rather than therapy or psychological testing as the chief research method. In studying life, his first step was to examine its course over the years.
Erikson‟s „epigenetic principle’ (Boeree, 2006) explains that humans develop through a predetermined unfolding of their personalities in eight stages. Progress through each stage is in part determined by personal success, or lack of success, in all the previous stages. Social factors or influences refer to the demands placed on individuals by society in accordance with their current stage of development (Meyer, Moore & Viljoen, 2003). Erikson‟s eight stages of development unfold as individuals go through life (Santrock, 2006). At each stage, a unique developmental task confronts individuals, with a crisis that must be resolved (Santrock).
These stages are interrelated; the success or failure in one stage therefore determines the outcome in another (Morris, 1996). If successful resolution does not occur, all consequent stages reflect the failure in the form of physical, cognitive, social or emotional maladjustment
(Sadock & Sadock, 2003). The various stages are Trust versus Mistrust (first 18 months),
Autonomy versus Shame and Doubt (18 months to 3 years), Initiative versus Guilt (3 years to 6
5 years), Industry versus Inferiority (5 years to 13 years), Identity versus Role-Confusion (13 to 21 years), Intimacy versus Isolation (21 years to 41 years), Generativity versus Stagnation
(40years to 60 years) and Integrity versus Despair (60 years and onwards) (Coles, 1970;
Welchman, 2000). Erikson‟s (1950) theory covers the psychosocial development of an individuals‟ entire lifespan and therefore serves as an adequate lens through which King‟s life can be described. As King died at the age of 39, only the first six stages of Erikson‟s theory are discussed in this psychobiography.
Aim of the research
The primary aim of the current research study was to explore and describe King‟s life from the theoretical perspective of Erikson‟s theory of psychosocial development. The study did not aim to generalise findings to a larger population, but to generalise the results to
Erikson‟s developmental stages, which according to Yin (2003) is known as „analytical generalisation‟.
Overview of the Treatise
This treatise consists of seven chapters with chapter one containing the introduction and the aim of the research. Chapter two provides an overview of Erikson‟s (1950) Psychosocial
Development Theory while Chapter three provides a brief historical overview of King‟s life.
Chapter four contains both a discussion on the preliminary methodological considerations as well as the research design and the methodology of the research study. Chapter five focuses on the findings of the study, while Chapter six includes the conclusions, limitations and recommendations flowing from the current study.
7
Chapter 2
Erikson’s Psychosocial Development Theory
Chapter Preview
The focus of this chapter is on Erik Erikson‟s (1950) Theory of Psychosocial
Development across the human lifespan. In order to contextualise Erikson‟s theory, a brief retelling of his life and a historical description of the development of his theory is provided.
This is followed by a discussion of Erikson‟s psychosocial theory as well as its criticism.
Significant Life Events which Contributed to the Development of Erikson’s Theory
The manner in which Erikson‟s life story interrelates with his historical context is an important factor to understanding the meaning and the significance of his work (Welchman,
2000). Erikson was born on the June 15 1902 in Frankfurt, Germany (Welchman). His parents were both Danish and reared in Copenhagen, however they separated before Erikson was born (Coles, 1970; Welchman). According to Welchman and Coles, Erikson never really shared how he felt about his father‟s abandonment and he never discovered the identity of his biological father which his mother kept a secret. Friedman (1999) asserted that Karla
Abrahamsen, Erikson‟s mother, was married to a Jewish stockbroker, Waldermar Isidor
Salomonsen at the time of his birth. Therefore, at birth, Erikson‟s name was registered as Erik
Salomonsen. Friedman further suggested that Erikson‟s biological father was also married at the time when he was conceived.
Erikson‟s mother, pregnant with Erik went to Germany to be with friends (Welchman,
2002). It is not clear whether his parents were later separated or divorced as Karla, a single parent in her mid-twenties, travelled to Karlsuhe where she knew a few people (Coles, 1970;
Maier, 1988; Welchman). Coles wrote that at the age of three, Erikson fell ill and was seen by a local paediatrician, Dr Homburger. The doctor cured him, fell in love with his mother, and a 8 short while later they were married (Coles; Welchman). So according to Welchman, at age three Erikson became Erik Homburger.
According to Maier (1988), Erikson‟s childhood years were spent in Karlsruhe, Germany, in a household enlivened by his mother‟s friends from the arts and distinguished by his adoptive father‟s role as a physician. Welchman (2000) explained that Erikson‟s relationship with his stepfather was strained by fear and resentment at his intrusion into Erikson‟s relationship with his mother. The relationship with his stepfather also resulted in guilt and the fear of punishment over his energetic intrusiveness and growing initiative (Welchman). These themes were integral to Erikson‟s proposed third stage of development, Initiative versus
Shame and Doubt, which begin around the third year of life.
Coles (1970) asserts that young Erikson attended Vorschule (primary school) from the age of six to 10 years and the Gymnasium (secondary school) until the age of 18. Erikson found it very difficult to integrate into the social environment at primary and secondary school, specifically to integrate with other children his own age (Alexander, 2005). Erikson was
Jewish, but was born in Germany, and had Danish features; this seemed to make him unacceptable to his peers and made finding his identity challenging (Boeree, 2006). Erikson experienced isolation and rejection, and to cope with this he enjoyed doing artwork.
According to Coles (1970) the eight years in the Gymnasium formed an extremely important part of Erikson‟s formal education. He studied Latin, Greek and the German languages, however Erikson enjoyed ancient history and art more (Coles). This may have been because his mother entertained many artists in the region (Welchman, 2000). So instead of going to college after graduating from high school, he went travelling through Europe, while writing down his thoughts, reading and taking in the scenery (Coles).
Crain (2000) asserted that contrary to Erikson‟s stepfather‟s hopes for him to pursue medicine, Erikson chose to become an artist. Crain further stated that Erikson wandered 9 through Europe for a year, returned home to study art for a while, and then set out on his travels once again. Coles (1970) explains that while in Munich Erikson studied at another art school, the Kunst-Akademie. According to McAdams (1994), until his twenties Erikson studied art briefly, painted children‟s portraits, did sketches and made wood carvings, while travelling through different parts of Europe. Erikson expressed his gratitude toward his parents for the time that they allowed him to find his way, at his own pace (Erikson, 1975).
This period was not only sanctioned by his parents, but by society as well, and could be defined as a „moratorium‟ (Welchman, 2000) - a period during which young people take time out to try and find themselves (Crain).
Erikson had a friend from school, Peter Blos who, according to Welchman (2000) was also from Karlsruhe. Both had fathers who were doctors and had beards. Peter Blos sent a letter to Erikson in 1927, to invite him, to join him in running a small American experimental founded by Anna Frued and Dorothy Burlingham school in Vienna, (Crain, 2000; Maier,
1988; Welchman). Erikson was 25 years old at the time (Welchman). Here Erikson taught art to the children (Maier; Crain). According to Coles (1970) Erikson and Peter Blos were given full freedom to organise a curriculum and teach it to about twenty children.
When Erikson was not teaching, he studied child psychoanalysis with Anna Freud and others. He was also analysed by Anna Freud. Erikson also studied the work of Maria
Montessori which focused on children learning by doing (Welchman, 2000). According to
Crain (2000), Erikson became very successful in his work with children as he used art to supplement science in his methodology. McAdams (1994) asserted that Erikson found acceptance amongst the intellectuals despite his lack of formal training. Crain (2000) explained that while in Vienna, from 1927 to 1933, Erikson completed his professional training in psychoanalysis. He obtained his only formal academic certificate as a Montessori teacher and at that time he was probably one of the very few men with such a certificate 10
(Crain). While in analysis with Anna Freud, Erikson made the personal acquaintance of
Sigmund Freud
During this time, at the age of 27, Erikson met, and a few months later married Joan
Mowat Serson who was a young dancer and also a teacher at the Dorothy Burlingham School
(Welchman, 2000). The two started a family. Kai was born and later, in 1933, their second son, Jon, was born (Coles, 1970; Welchman). Erikson became accustomed to his role as father and husband, established into adulthood and the sixth developmental stage (Alexander,
2005; Coles; Friedman, 1999; Welchman). The Eriksons left Europe with their 2 boys in
1933, on invitation to Boston in the United States (Crain, 2000; McAdams, 1994). They eventually had three children, one of whom became a sociologist (Coles, 1970; Welchman).
Over the years Erikson worked in both clinical and academic settings and frequently wrote and published many books (McAdams, 1994). He befriended the psychologists Henry
Murray and Kurt Lewin, and the anthropologists Ruth Benedict, Margaret Mead, and
Gregory Bateson (Boeree, 2006). It can be argued that these friendships had nearly as great an effect on Erikson as Sigmund and Anna Freud. McAdams suggests that Erikson‟s interaction with these personalities may have laid some of the foundation to his seventh life stage, Generativity versus Stagnation. Erikson held teaching positions at the University of
California at Berkley, Yale, San Francisco, the Psychoanalytic Institute, the Austen Riggs
Centre, and the Centre for Advanced Studies of the Behavioural Sciences (Alexander, 2005;
Boeree; Friedman, 1999). Erikson enjoyed and preferred the solace and privacy of his study, where he could work. According to Bloland (1999) Erikson did this even while they had guests. To the public he presented a different side (Bloland, 1999).
In 1949 Erikson was awarded a professorship at the University of California at Berkley.
He resigned a year later due to a controversy which arose from the signing of a loyalty oath, which he refused to do (Alexander, 2005). According to Douvan (1997) even though Erikson 11 was new that he was part of society and the social norms, he stayed true to his own principles.
Erikson‟s journey to becoming a recognised developmental theorist began with the publishing of his book Childhood and Society. Later they moved to Stockbridge where he worked at the institute of Austen Riggs as a psychoanalyst. He developed research outputs related to the field of psychobiography, specifically psychobiographies of Martin Luther
(1958) and Mahatma Gandhi (1969). In 1960 Erikson became a professor at Harvard
University.
Erikson‟s wife Joan provided him with great support and inspired him to produce great work, specifically the development of his lifespan theory (Alexander, 2005). He took sought for opportunity to reflect, develop and challenged himself and in so doing produced a legacy
(Slater, 2003). Erik Homburger Erikson passed away at the age of 78 in 1980.
The next section deals with the formation of Erikson‟s ideas from which his theory evolved.
The Development of Personality: Erikson’s Perspective
Barlow and Durand (2005) asserted that personality refers to the observable and explicit features of the individuals‟ adult years. Personality is the distinguishing factor in an individual, in the manner in which that individual behaves and thinks (Millon & Davis,
2004). The fundamental understanding is that personality is formed in the early years of an individuals‟ lifespan, and becomes entrenched in the adult years (Barlow & Durand).
Erikson (1965) described the development of an individual in terms of the entire lifespan.
Erikson‟s theory is cast in eight relatively separate “epigenetic” stages (Erikson, 1959, 1963,
1968), each of which has its own distinctive goals. Each of these stages is marked by specific crises that need to be resolved. Erikson saw these crises as a crossroads in the individuals‟ life. These crossroads can either allow the individual to find resolution to their conflicts or fail to master the developmental task (Corey, 2005), with the consequence being either 12 progression or regression. Resolution of the crises thus leads to progression and “healthy personality” development (Rosenthal, Gurney & Moore, 1981, p. 526). Erikson (1968) explained that the individual who has a healthy personality is able to master his environment, has a certain unity of personality, and his perceptions of the world and himself are accurate and correct.
Erikson also realised that the psychological mind, cultural influences and the genetic biological programming all interact to contribute towards the course of human development and ultimately personality development (Erikson, 1965). Erikson was careful not to use the word 'achieve' in the context of successful outcomes, because it implied gaining something specific and permanent (Boeree, 2006). According to Erikson, there is constant motion; a person is always a personality in the making, developing and redeveloping (Maier, 1988).
Personality changes over time, yet it retains stable physical, psychological and spiritual characteristics which has an impact on behaviour (Meyer, Moore & Viljoen, 2003).
The Fundamentals of Erikson’s Psychosocial Approach
Erikson believed in harmony which he considered to be the experience of both sides of the psychosocial continuum. Erikson (1963) proposed that focus should be on homeostatic qualities of the individual rather than the pathological context, when studying an individual‟s development. He highlighted the following areas of influence within an individual‟s development.
The epigenetic principle.
Development occurs through the epigenetic principle (Boeree, 2006). Erikson (1968) and
Hook (2002) asserted that every living creature has a set time and season in which they mature and grow. This happens according to format or structure. The epigenetic principle proposed by Erikson explains that individual development occurs through the “predetermined unfolding of our personalities” (Boeree, p. 6). Flowers bloom at certain times, in a certain 13 format related to nature and genetics. Opening it before the time can damage the whole flower (Boeree, 2006). There is an optimal time for each stage, which cannot be rushed or slowed down (Boeree, 2006).
Each individual according to Erikson (1968) develops through the eight stages. Each of the stages has a psychosocial developmental task which is called a crisis. Erikson (1963) explained that if the individual is able to successfully resolve the crisis, a virtue is added to their development and a psychosocial gain is made. An individual‟s progress is influenced in part by the environment in which they find themselves; and in part by their success or failure in all the previous stages (Welchman, 2000).
Lifespan development.
Erikson explored and developed lifespan development and suggested that a person grows through eight psychosocial stages (Erikson, 1963, 1964, 1968). At each of the eight developmental stages societal demands are placed on the individual, which interact with the ground plan and result in a developmental crisis. Rosenthal, Gurney and Moore (1981) asserted that each stage represents a critical stage of conflict and a possible crisis to be resolved, in order to gain an ego quality. Hook (2002) further explained that the way in which each crisis is resolved, results in the individual making progress toward integration or regression as a social being. Through the positive resolution of each stage, a person acquires a psychosocial strength (or virtue) which ultimately contributes to identity formation (Hook;
Massey, 1986). Erikson stated that a virtue can be understood as “certain qualities which begin to animate man pervasively during successive stages of his life” (Erikson, 1963, p. 3).
If an individual postpones or hinders the fulfilment of a virtue, developmental deficits, disorders or dysfunctions manifest (Erikson, 1968). A closer inspection of ego development in terms of the virtues follows.
14
Ego development and identity.
Erikson was very interested in how identity is formed (Muuss, 1996), which according to
Cherry (2013) is one of the main elements of Erikson's psychosocial stage theory. According to Welchman (2000) Erikson was concerned with concept of the ego expanding beyond
Freud‟s psychosocial trio (id, ego, superego), to the concept of identity. Erickson understood that this would not be an easy concept to define, but that it was integral to the “individual‟s development as a member of society” (Welchman, p. 38).
Erikson believed that a strong ego is an individual‟s core; “firm and flexible enough to reconcile the necessary contradictions in any human organization” (Welchman, 2000, p. 49).
The ego is the inner guide of the individual‟s development, which guides the individual in relation to society. The ego not only produces a sense of identity but is itself dependent on the formation of the developing identity. Ego identity is the conscious sense of self that individuals develop through social interaction (Cherry, 2013). The work of the ego creates the identity, and according to Van Wagner (2005) individual‟s ego identity is constantly changing because of the new knowledge and understanding individuals get from the daily interactions they have with others. Markstrom and Kalmanir (2001) suggested that identity is formed as the individual gradually analyses and incorporates different experiences and earlier identifications. The individual becomes a defined self within a social reality (Erikson, 1980).
Favourable conditions will allow the child to develop a separate sense of identity early in life (Boere, 2006; Erikson, 1963). The crisis of identity is most prominent during the adolescent years, however identity issues remain a lifelong concern (Muuss, 1996).
15
The Eight Psychosocial Stages
Erikson‟s eight stages were originally called the “eight ages of man” (Erikson, 1950) and are probably the most influential part of his theory (Welchman, 2000, p. 52). This framework proposed by Erikson is one that he continued to work on for the rest of his life (Welchman).
The theory states that through their life course, each individual experiences eight psychosocial crises that need to be resolved and which assist in defining the individual‟s growth and personality (Boeree, 2006; Corey, 2001). The following section aims to explain each of the stages and the crises related to each stage. Erikson explained that these crises are not threats, but rather to be viewed as “turning points” and an important period in which the individual has both increased “vulnerability and potential” (Erikson, 1968, p. 96). Following the discussion of a crisis, a description of the virtue or psychosocial strength will be presented. According to Boeree, these virtues aid us through the next stages of life. However if the resolution of the crises are not positive, then there might be a tendency to develop either a malignancy or a maladaptation. According to Boeree the malignancy is “too little of the positive task and too much of the negative” (p. 6). The maladaptation involves too much of the positive and too little of the negative (Boeree, p. 6). These are both discussed for each of the following stages.
Trust versus mistrust (birth to about 18 months).
According to Corey (2001) infants develop a sense of trust when their caregivers, (mother and significant others), fulfil their basic physical and emotional needs. Obtaining physical nourishment through nursing requires an interpersonal situation in which the infant develops an understanding of what quality of life to expect, and learning that the world is a good and safe place. In addition to the basic trust that babies develop, the necessary self-confidence to explore their environment is achieved (Louw & Louw, 2007). However, if these needs are not 16 adequately met, an attitude of mistrust may develop in the infant. The mistrust may be directed towards the world and especially towards interpersonal relationships later in life.
Meyer, Moore and Viljoen (2003) suggested that the quality of the mother-child relationship is thus very valuable as the infant‟s development of trust in the environment depends on it. Welchman (2000) too suggested that it is not the extent of the deprivation, but the quality of the relationship with the caregiver, which is important. According to Boeree
(2006) if mother and father can provide care which is consistent, familiar and continuous, then the infant will develop a sense that the world can be a safe place. Trust can be seen as a
“state of being and responding” (Welchman, p.52). In order to trust oneself and the capacity of one‟s own organs to cope with urges, we need to trust in the stability of our “outer providers” (Erikson, 1965, p. 239). Conversely, abuse, neglect or cruelty will destroy trust and promote mistrust and increase individuals‟ resistance to risk and exploration
(Welchman).
Infants who grow up to trust are more able to attain the virtues of hope and faith (Boeree,
2006).
Hope is the strong belief that, even when things are not going well, they
tend to work out in the end. One of the signs that a child is doing well in
the first stages, is when the child is not overly upset by the need to wait a
moment for the satisfaction of his or her needs (Boeree, 2006, p. 8).
According to Boeree (2006) if parents are over-responsive to and overprotective of the infant‟s needs, this might lead to the infant developing a maladaptive tendency, which
Erikson calls „sensory malajustment’. This means being too trusting, to the point of being gullible (Boeree). To avoid this Corey (2005) suggested that the infant should not be over- indulged. On the other hand, if there is a deficiency of trust within the infancy stage, the malignant tendency of this stage is „withdrawal‟ which manifests as neurotic, depressive and 17 fearful cognitions/behaviour (Boeree). According to Erikson (1968) the social institution which protects the trust and hope, is the institution of religion. Healthy development is a function of the balance between trust and mistrust, as infants may experience both in the first year of life (Hook, 2002; McAdams, 1994).
Autonomy versus shame and doubt (18 months to about three years).
Santrock (2006) stated that after trust has been achieved in their interaction with their caregivers, infants become toddlers and begin to discover that their behaviour is their own.
During early childhood between the ages of 18 months and three years, autonomy is developed. As toddlers, children grow physically which allows them increased autonomy and contact with their environments (Morris, 1996). Toddlers at this stage also have an increased awareness of their bodies and how to control it, particularly as they progress through activities such as eating, dressing, toileting and moving around (Hook, 2002). Erikson (1965), in Welchman (2000, p. 53) stated that: “Autonomy is the growing ability to control oneself, to hold on and to let go with discretion, to stand on his own feet”.
Infancy also develops mastery of movement as infants start reaching, walking and climbing (Maier, 1988).Corey (2001) asserted that the central struggle that toddlers experience is between a sense of self-reliance (autonomy) and a sense of self-doubt. Self- reliance, independence of thought, and a basic confidence to think as an individual are all constructs which comprise autonomy (Corey).
Shame and doubt inhibits individuals‟ ability for self-expression and the development of their own ideas and opinions (Boeree, 2006). Welchman (2000) described shame as related to
“being completely exposed and conscious of being looked at and doubt as related to the realisation and awareness of having an area behind that one cannot see” (p. 53). Children learn to feel shame and self-doubt when they continually fail and are criticised as being untidy, inadequate, or bad (Craig & Baucum, 2002). 18
According to Boeree (2006), if parents permit exploration and manipulation of the environment, the toddler is likely to develop a sense of independence. However, parents are advised to be firm but tolerant in order to develop self-control and self-esteem. Furthermore,
Boeree asserted that parents should be mindful of the fact that finding a toddler‟s efforts amusing, could lead to him or her feeling deeply ashamed. This could cause them to doubt their own abilities and not try things on their own. Therefore a balance must be found for the child to explore and experiment and to make mistakes (Corey, 2001).
Children who successfully resolve the crisis of this stage attain the virtue of willpower and self-control or determination (Boeree, 2006). Boeree (2006) described this age range as the most “admirable and frustrating” because of the child‟s determination. (p. 9). Erikson
(1963) states: “From a sense of self-control without loss of self-esteem comes a lasting sense of goodwill and pride” (p. 254).
Without the shame and doubt, the development of the maladaptive tendency of impulsiveness can develop (Boeree, 2006). This impulsiveness could be seen later in life in the individual attempting activities without considering his or her ability (Boeree). Too much shame and doubt results in the malignancy of compulsiveness, which manifests as striving for perfection in everything (Boeree). When children express a lack of confidence, which stems from intolerance and irrational fear, they may at the extreme also develop suicidal tendencies, or antisocial personality disorders (Hook, 2002).
Initiative versus guilt (three years to five years).
In this stage, the basic task to achieve is a sense of initiative versus too much guilt
(Boeree, 2006). According to Corey (2001) if children are given the freedom to select meaningful activities to engage with, they develop a positive view of self and follow through on their projects. Boeree suggested that initiative develops when adventure is encouraged.
Children also develop physically and verbally as they acquire more responsibilities for their 19 bodies, behaviour, toys, pets, etc. (Santrock, 2006). This responsibility increases their initiative (Santrock; Sadock & Sadock, 2007). Boeree describes this stage as a time for fantasy, curiosity, imagination and play to be encouraged. The initiative is the child‟s
“attempt to make the non-reality a reality” (Boeree, p.9).
According to Erikson (1965) “the alternative is a sense of guilt over the goals contemplated and the acts initiated in one‟s exuberant enjoyment of new locomotor and mental power…” (p. 247). If children are deterred from attempting to make decisions, they tend to develop guilt over taking initiative (Corey, 2001). Santrock (2006) explained that this feeling of guilt arises when children are negligent and made to feel anxious. Boeree (2006) asserted that when children are able to „imagine a future‟ they are able to plan, be responsible and guilty. Therefore Boeree stated that during this stage “moral judgement has arrived” (p.
9)
Maier (1988) noted that an important factor in this stage is that a sense of sociability develops as children start to become social in their relationships with others. Gender identity is understood and there is a distinction between the different activities which boys and girls occupy themselves with. According to Hook (2002), children also decide if they will abide by or explore beyond the restrictions placed by their parents.
Boeree (2006) explained that when there has been an imbalance toward initiative as opposed to guilt, the individual may develop the maladaptive tendency of ruthlessness. This ruthlessness manifests as the individual is driven by the goal and does not care who gets hurt in the process (Boeree). The malignancy from this stage is „inhibition‟ which results from too much guilt and manifests in those who do not want to risk, because they do not want to lose and feel guilty (Boeree,). However, the successful resolution of this stage results in the psychosocial strength (virtue) of purpose or courage to act regardless of previous failings
(Boeree). 20
Industry versus inferiority (five years to 13 years).
Here children need to consolidate that which they have learnt in the previous three stages.
Erikson (1965) described this stage as a kind of entrance to life. At this stage children learn to read, write, do basic sums and produce things of their own making (Cherry, 2013). Teachers become important individuals in the child‟s life as they spend time with and teach children new skills (Cherry). With all the newly acquired skills, children develop a sense of industry and success as they are proud of themselves and what they have set out and accomplished, with the encouragement of parents and teachers (Morris, 1996; Sadock & Sadock, 2003).
When a child is able to set and attain personal goals, then he or she has achieved the basic task of this stage and a sense of industry (Corey, 2001).
A sense of self grows when the child‟s competencies develop and the comparisons with peers become important. Erikson (1965) asserted that children develop a need to share their social skills, not only with parents, significant others and teachers, but with a wider social network, and friendships are formed. Corey (2001) noted that children may also develop a sense of their gender-role identity during this stage. The ability to communicate and receive affirmation from others at the same level becomes important at this stage and becomes a major source of a child‟s self-esteem (Hook, 2002).
Boeree (2006) and Craig and Baucum (2002), stated that if children experience failures with school tasks and outside of the classroom, their accomplishments are inhibited, and if they receive harsh criticism from parents and teachers, a feeling of inferiority may result.
McLeod (2006) explained that some failure might be necessary in order for children to develop a sense of modesty, but a balance between modesty and competence should be maintained.
Children successful in this stage will be able to gain the virtue of competence, which is the belief in their own abilities to handle tasks set before them (Erikson, 1978; Cherry, 2013). 21
Children who are overly industrious, usually the child actor, athlete or musician, are often examples of what Boeree (2006) describes as the maladaptive tendency of “narrow virtuosity” (p. 10). These children may be pushed by their parents and teachers to achieve in their area of competence and are not free to develop other areas of interest (Boeree).
However, if the majority sense is inferiority then the malignancy of “inertia”(Boeree, 2006, p. 10), which results in never wanting to try because we failed or were humiliated the first time we tried, can arise.
Identity versus role-confusion (13 years to 21 years).
The fifth stage takes place during adolescence (Corey, 2005; Santrock, 2006). In this stage, adolescence begins and childhood ends. Erikson (1980) described it as the psychosocial stage where an individual is between childhood and adulthood. Furthermore,
Corey (2001) states that this stage of development is a time for testing limits, breaking dependent ties and for establishing a new identity. Identity may be understood as the way in which an individual perceives themselves in relation to their world (Boeree, 2006). Failure to attain a sense of identity results in role-confusion (Corey). Role-confusion refers to the individual‟s inability to have confidence in the knowledge of who they are and how they can positively contribute to the environment (Boeree).
There are major conflicts which arise around the clarification of self-identity, life goals and life‟s meaning. Corey (2001) suggested the following regarding adolescents:
Adolescents struggle to define who they are, where they are going and how to get
there
Adolescents have the task of integrating a system of values that will give their life
direction
Adolescents must make key decisions regarding religious beliefs, sexual ethics,
values, etc. 22
Boeree (2006) also asserted that during adolescence the individual may have to reach certain accomplishments or go through certain rituals in order to pass from childhood into adulthood, referred to as „rites of passage‟. In doing so, adolescents may find themselves in conflict with the norms and rules of society in their quest to establish their identity. However, society may be seen as tolerant of adolescent behaviour which could be unacceptable in the other psychosocial stages (Erikson, 1982; Meyer et al, 2003).
Models are important to adolescents in the search for identity and Erikson (1963; 1982) stated that adolescents place idols and ideals as the guardians of their identity. Erikson (1968) mentioned that the main concern of the adolescent is how he or she is perceived by others as opposed to how he or she perceives him or herself. Furthermore, Erikson asserted, that adolescents seek affirmation from their peers. According to Erikson in adolescence crowds and cliques tend to exclude those who are different. Mooney (2010) stated that for identity formation to be established, the individual would need to establish and maintain interpersonal relationships. At the resolution of this stage, the virtue gained is fidelity (Welchman, 2000).
Fidelity means to find your place in society, contributing to it and maintaining loyalties regardless of the flaws you may be aware of (Erikson)
The extreme end of this stage is fanaticism which is characterised by self-important cognitions and behaviours which lead to only seeing things in black and white (Boeree,
2006). Repudiation is the malignancy of this stage, where individuals allow themselves to join a group that will give them an identity (Boeree). The individual would have to be socially disconnected in cognition and behaviour and thus have the need for an identity and a group such as a religious cult which will give them an identity.
Intimacy versus isolation (21 years to 40 years).
According to Corey (2001), after individuals master the conflicts in adolescence of identity versus role confusion, they approach adulthood. The task to achieve in this stage is 23 that of intimacy rather than being isolated (Boeree, 2006). Before an individual can experience intimacy with another person, that individual needs to have confidence in their own identity. Intimacy is achieved when young adults are able to develop and maintain healthy friendships (Santrock, 2006). Thus, Corey (2005) and Erikson (1978) stated that this is the stage in which the identity that was achieved in the previous stage is shared with another individual. The young adult is now ready to commit to partnerships, form affiliations and engage in intimacy (Erikson, 1963).
Boeree (2006) described intimacy in terms of sexual mutuality which refers to the giving and receiving of physical and emotional connections and other elements that would usually be associated with healthy relationships. If an individual is able to find and lose him/ herself in another, he/she has achieved intimacy (Erikson, 1950). The ability to form intimate relationships is a “key characteristic of the psychologically mature person” (Corey, 2001, p.
80). Mooney (2010) also suggested that the individual in this stage is now aware of their relationships with others. Boeree explained that relationships during adolescence, however, are just an attempt at establishing an identity in being a couple, for example: “I am his girlfriend” (p. 12).
Thus, during adulthood, the developmental task is to form intimate relationships and failure to do so can lead to alienation and isolation (Corey, 2001).Isolation means being and feeling excluded from that which is the norm, such as dating, mating and mutually loving relationships. This is characterised by feelings of loneliness, alienation, social withdrawal or non-participation (Boeree, 2006).
The virtues of love and affiliation stem from the successful resolution of this stage
(Erikson, 1978; Welchman, 2000). The love gained in this stage is the transformation of the love received in childhood and adolescence (Erikson, 1964). Markstrom and Kalmanir (2001) made an important assertion in that the virtue of fidelity, which was attained in the previous 24 stage, is required to uphold the commitments made to others. Markstrom and Kalmanir further suggested that the virtues of love and fidelity contain the trait of commitment.
The term distantiation is used to refer to the individual‟s readiness to isolate him/ herself
(Erikson, 1965). Conversely, if an individual becomes self-absorbed instead of “losing” himself to another, the malignancy of narcissism develops. If maladaptive tendencies have been developed from this stage, the individual may become promiscuous. Malignant tendencies result in being very exclusive in the interactions with others (Boeree, 2006).
Generativity versus stagnation (40 years to 60 years)
Corey (2001) asserted that in the seventh stage of psychosocial development, a possible challenge arises in the analysis of oneself. This stage could be the most productive stage of an individuals‟ life or there could be a discrepancy between the dreams held as a young adult that have not been accomplished. The „middle age‟ stage as Erikson delineated and labelled it, is a time for learning how to live with ourselves and others (Corey).
Corey (2001) stated that within this stage there is a need to go beyond self and family and be involved in helping the next generation. Erikson (1965) saw the stimulus for growth as a continued crisis between Generativity and Stagnation. Generativity in the broad sense of the word would include career, family, leisure time activities etc. The main quality of a productive adult is their ability to love well, work well and to play well. Generativity is also known as the interaction and guidance of the next generation (Sadock & Sadock, 2003) and extends to other activities such as work (Erikson, 1965). The word generativity is derived from the word generation which refers to the limitless giving that represents the love of a parent to a child and the care of those children (Boeree, 2006). This stage of Generativity is also directed to creative activities, such as art work, that according to Meyer et al (2003) may develop knowledge, values and skills to the next generation. This stage is characterised and concerned with the assistance of the younger generation and developing them to leading 25 useful lives (Santrock, 2006). To achieve this, the mentoring does not need to be directed towards family, as this does not necessarily guarantee that generativity will be realised
(Boeree; Meyer et al).
In the event that productivity is not achieved, adults may stagnate and die psychologically.
Stagnation is described as the feeling of not having done anything for the next generation and it is the extension of intimacy directed inward in the form of vanity (Erikson, 1965; Sadock &
Sadock, 2003). Meddling and being a “busy-body” is the „over extension‟ and the manifestation of the maladaptation of this stage (Boeree, 2006). According to Boeree these individuals usually take on more than they can do and in turn have no time for themselves.
Boeree described the experience of individuals questioning their accomplishments and attempting to regain their youth, also known as a mid-life crisis, as common in this stage.
Care or caring is the virtue attained in this stage of middle adulthood (Erikson, 1978;
Welchmann, 2000). Successful resolution results in the individual with a developed capacity to take care and not to care for (Erikson, 1982). The adult individual would therefore be able to convey meaning to the next generation by virtues of hope, will, purpose and competence.
Erikson (1964) made valuable contributions in the explanation of care as a virtue derived from this stage:
Care is essential for psychosocial evolution
Care is the concern for that which has been granted by love, necessity or accident
Care overcomes the feeling of ambivalence towards irreversible obligation.
Integrity versus despair (from 60 years and onwards).
The final stage of Erikson‟s psychological theory begins when an individual is approximately sixty or seventy years of age. According to Erikson (1968) the central crisis in this stage of the elderly is integrity versus despair. Erikson (1963; 1965; 1978) asserted that integrity is the result of the successful accomplishment of the seven previous stages. 26
Integrity is described as having no regrets or blame but having peace about self and the world (Boeree, 2006). Corey (2001) said: “If one looks back on life with few regrets and feels personally worthwhile, ego integrity results” (p.76). Ego integrity is a product for those with few regrets; they have lived a productive life and have coped with the disappointments as well as the victories of life (Corey). Individuals who find themselves in this stage are not preoccupied with that which might have been and they can feel satisfied with that which they have achieved in life. Death to those successful in this stage is just part of the life process and they can still derive meaning from their current way of life.
Meyer et al. (2003) suggested that a reflection on the lived life occurs as individuals feel a sense of being close to the end of their lives. An important challenge at this stage of development is dealing with the fear of death and according to Erikson (1963) despair may come as the individual understands that there are no more second chances. Craig (1996) too suggested that despair results from the reflection on life with the realisation of misdirected energies and lost chances.
The virtue resulting from the resolution of this stage is wisdom and renunciation (Boeree,
2006). The maladaptation of this stage is „presumption‟ and is characterised by arrogant cognitions and behaviours (Boeree). Individuals who find themselves feeling miserable, unfulfilled and blaming are displaying the malignancy of this stage. Erikson describes this as disdain, which can be understood as contempt for life.
Critique of Erikson’s (1950) Psychosocial Theory
In order to have a comprehensive view of Erikson‟s work, a critical look is required
(Welchman, 2000) There are many criticisms and concerns regarding Erikson‟s work, however in this section three of those concerns are highlighted. These criticisms relate to
Erikson and his theory being too idealistic, the gender assumptions in Erikson‟s work, as well as concern regarding the developmental stages. 27
Erikson the idealist and theory too idealistic.
Roazen (1976) stated that Erikson‟s idealism may have distorted his work. He suggested that Erikson‟s theory focuses only on that which is positive in nature and negates that which is negative (Roazen). Maier (1988) asserted that Erikson‟s theory consists of idealised descriptions of typical development and that it may be too optimistic. Maier questioned whether Erikson‟s theory can account for tragedy and its effects on human development
(Maier). Welchman (2000) defended Erikson by explaining that the theory used a dialectical approach which involved a crisis of conflict and struggle. Furthermore Welchman pointed out that Erikson expressed in his theory that there are conflicts which need to be resolved and the dangers of those conflicts not being resolved.
Other critiques include Lacan (1977) in Müller (2010) who suggested that Erikson may have “overvalued the adaptive and integrative function of the ego” (p. 38). Roazen (1976) who criticised the ethics of Erikson‟s work as being ideal, impractical and not including differing and opposing arguments.
Gender assumptions in Erikson’s work.
Hook (2002) pointed out that similar to Freud, Erikson chose to focus on males, with females only featuring as a variation of the usual psychosocial development. Maier (1988) makes a bold statement and criticised Erikson, by stating that the proposed development of humankind should actually be the development of malekind, if Erikson‟s theory should be taken into account. Hook and Welchman (2000) further stated that Erikson only used males, as subjects for his psychobiographical studies and used the male pronoun in his writing.
Roazen (1976) criticised Erikson as not going against the traditional male-female stereotypes, but receiving them willingly.
Douvan (1997) defended Erikson by saying that Erikson‟s emphasis on male development reflected the era in which he found himself and therefore it may be 28 understandable why he used male subjects. Furthermore, Erikson‟s emphasis on the constructs of trust, intimacy, generativity and the significance of feeling and being aware of feelings in healthy development is also very relevant for females and would easily resonate with female development. Furthermore, Evans (1964) stated that his suggestion to Erikson was to include females as they contribute femininity to a field which was already very masculine.
Sorell and Montgomery (2001) expressed their criticism with regards to Erikson‟s theory placing an emphasis on biology as an important component of psychosocial development.
Their concern is that Erikson did not display as an explanatory construct how men and woman are separate and distinctive, biologically. They stated that the emphasis of Erikson‟s theory is on the experiences of White, middle class, European and American men, and their definitions of psychosocial normality. Sorell and Montgomery highlighted some questions around the theory‟s usefulness as a framework for understanding contemporary human development. However, they also point out that their criticism is constructed from their feminist standpoint.
The developmental stages.
According to Boeree (2006) personality theorists are not fond of „stages‟ and would prefer a measured, continuous approach to development. Welchman (2000) highlighted three main areas in which criticism for Erikson‟s developmental stages can be categorised. The first category relates to those who accept the outline of the stages, but question the details. Some of the questions relate to the order of the stages as well as to how the crisis of each stage was designated. The second category of criticism relates to those who recommend fundamentally different developmental concepts. Welchman (2000) described how Jung also focused on adult development; however his earlier and later life was very differently constructed to
Erikson‟s (Welchman). The third category is a criticism toward the “validity of any 29 developmental scheme” as the best way of “making sense of human behaviour” (p. 123).
Welchman explained that in relation to the criticisms above, it might be difficult for parents to find meaning in life with the loss of a child, as according to the sequence of the stages, they could only find accomplishment once the stage is resolved.
Cherry (2013) noted that there are limitations to Erikson‟s psychosocial theory of development which leaves some questions unanswered, such as:
What kinds of experiences are necessary to successfully complete each stage?
How does a person move from one stage to the next?
What are the exact mechanisms for resolving conflicts?
Cherry described these as the major criticisms of the psychosocial theory and that it is not well defined or developed.
Conclusion
Erik Erikson and the development of his psychosocial theory of development is one of the major contributions to the field of human development. Despite the criticism he received, he remains the first to have constructed a developmental model which spans an entire life cycle.
Erikson contributes to understanding of difficulties that individuals experience in adulthood as being related to the unresolved crises in the early phases of their development. His work regarding the ego and identity formation has also been very valuable. Erikson‟s theory was chosen for this study owing due to it being used in similar psychobiographical studies before.
It also has the ability to explain growth and change throughout the life cycle. The following chapter provides a detailed account of the life of Martin Luther King Junior, from his early years to middle age.
30
Chapter 3
The Life of Martin Luther King Junior
Chapter Preview
Black children growing up in the South during the 1930s and 1940s hated the name “Jim
Crow”. Jim Crow was not a person. According to Fairclough (1990), Hodgson (2010),
Milton (1995) and Nazel (1991), the name stood for a system of racial segregation and discrimination. Martin Luther King Junior lived during this period and was personally affected by the “Jim Crow” system. He was pivotal in challenging this system to change. This chapter provides a historical overview of the life of Martin Luther King Junior. His life history is presented over a 39 year historical period, from his birth in 1929 to his assassination in 1968.
The Life of Martin Luther King Junior
A chronology of King's life was compiled based on a literature review of his development and experiences. The chronology depicts the interrelationship between significant events and the pertinent systematic influences over his lifespan. The chronology is divided into significant periods which include (a) the childhood years (1929 - 1947), (b) becoming a man
(1947 - 1950), (c) emergence of King (1950 - 1953), (d) leader in preacher‟s cloak (1953 -
1957), (e) freedom with responsibility leaves a legacy (1957 - 1968) and (f) the legacy lives on.
This chapter also describes the systemic influences that include significant socio-historical and cultural events of the time that impacted King‟s childhood and early adult years.
The Childhood Years (1929-1947).
Family of origin.
Martin Luther King Junior (King) was born on Saturday 15 January 1929 in the American city of Atlanta, Georgia (Togni, 1994). Togni stated that on that night few might have 31 suspected that the almost stillborn child would one day stand as a pillar for liberation.
Reverend Martin (Mike) Luther King Senior and his wife Alberta Christine Williams King had three children: Willie Christine was their eldest daughter, Martin Luther was the middle child, and their youngest son was Alfred Daniel (Nazel, 1991; Togni). King was named after his father, and the family called him ML for short – a nickname that stuck throughout his childhood (Schloredt & Brown, 1994)
According to Nazel (1991), the King family lived in a two-story Victorian style wood frame house at 501 Auburn Avenue, North East Atlanta, Georgia. Looking back on his childhood, King recalled a loving family, a close-knit community, and a church that functioned as a second home (Fairclough, 1990; Nazel). Hodgson (2010) states that King was born into a happy, prosperous household.
Fatherly influence.
King senior, during a trip to the World Baptist Alliance meeting in Germany, visited
Wittenberg, where Martin Luther, the German priest and theologian, had nailed his
Reformation thesis to the church door. When back from Germany, he decided to change his name from Michael King to Martin Luther King. King‟s name on his birth certificate was first given as Michael, which was later crossed out, and „Martin Luther‟ was inserted
(Hodgson, 2010). Hodgson further stated that biographers and historians have argued about exactly when and why his five-year-old son‟s name was changed. The simplest explanation is that Martin Luther King Senior, proud of his new name, had his son‟s changed to echo his own. Hodgson (p. 21) quotes King senior as saying: “It was a name after all, fitting for a leader who would give his life to bringing reformation to his people”.
Nazel (1991) says that the King children called the Reverend King senior, “Daddy,” and mother Alberta, “Mother Dear”. Furthermore, Fairclough (1990) explains that King senior was a towering figure in the young King‟s life, a strong role model and a major influence in 32 shaping his personality. King senior is further described as a strict disciplinarian with a temper, who imposed his authority with the aid of regularly administered corporal punishment (Fairclough; Togni, 1991). Although Christine, the King daughter, escaped physical punishment, the two sons, Martin and Alfred, endured hidings until their mid-teens
(Fairclough). Yet throughout his life King showed respect and affection for his father.
According to Nazel (1991) the year 1929 was a tragic one in American history. In
February there was the “St. Valentine‟s day massacre”; and in October the stock market crashed and began the worst financial depression in American history. For black Americans the depression pushed those few who were gainfully employed over the edge and into the ranks of the poverty-stricken unemployed (Nazel).
Schloredt and Brown (1994) explained that the church, during that era, played a vital role in the life of Black people in the American South. King‟s father was a minister of such a church and held an important position within the Black community (Schloredt & Brown).
King senior earned a doctoral degree in Divinity, became a bank director, and a business man, served on the board of a civil rights organisation called the National Association of
Coloured People (NAACP), and was the Reverend of the Atlanta Ebenezer Baptist Church
(Schloredt & Brown; Togni, 1994). Fairclough (1990) described King as proud of his father, as he was the direct contradiction of everything that was expected of black people. King offered the following statement about his father: “My admiration for him was the great moving factor; he set forth a noble example I didn‟t mind following” (Fairclough, p. 7).
King as a boy.
Schloredt and Brown (1994) referred to King as a bright boy. At five, he regularly memorised passages from the Bible. At six, he sang Gospel songs for the congregation.
Throughout these developments, the process of learning was taking place (Schloredt & 33
Brown). After hearing a guest minister give an impressive sermon, King told his parents
“Someday, I‟m going to get me some big words like that!” (Schloredt & Brown, p.10).
When King was a boy of six, his grandmother, of whom he was deeply fond, died of a heart attack (Hodgson, 2010). Hodgson asserts that King jumped out of a first floor window when he was told of her death. He fortunately did not sustain any serious injury. King later shared that his grandmother‟s death was the first time he discussed death and immortality with his parents (Hodgson). Hodgson reported that neither King nor his father referred to this as a suicide attempt. In later years King described in an essay how the death of his grandmother had deeply affected him, even though he was only six years old.
King‟s first experience of the racial prejudices of the society he grew up in, was on the first day of school. King was told that he could no longer play with his White friend, whom he had been playing with since he was very young (Hodgson, 2010; Milton, 1995; Nazel,
1991 and Schloredt & Brown, 1994). According to Schloredt and Brown, the White boy‟s mother sent King home, saying that her son was getting too old to play with a Black child.
When this was relayed to King he was deeply hurt (Hodgson; Nazel; and Schloredt &
Brown). King‟s parents explained that he should never think that he was less than a White person because of this incident, but rather understand that it was simply a lack of understanding and prejudice that made people behave in this way (Hodgson; Nazel; and
Schloredt & Brown).
King at school.
At school King experienced problems with his peers; he was teased about his height as he was very short, and about being a minister‟s son (Milton, 1995). According to Milton, King received the nickname “shrimp”. King made up for these perceived deficiencies by competing extra hard on every playing field. On the basketball court and the football field, he was the kind of player that was not keen to pass the ball and wanted to take every shot 34 himself (Milton). In high school, King was popular; he was a good fast dancer and dressed in the latest trends (Schloredt & Brown, 1994). According to Schloredt and Brown, King was given the nickname “Tweed” after a tweed sports jacket that he often wore.
Togni (1994) and Schloredt and Brown (1994) described King as very advanced academically, a keen student, who consequently skipped his senior year of high school.
During this time King‟s parents taught him to take pride in himself. “No one can make you a slave if you don‟t think like a slave,” his father liked to say. “Don‟t forget” his mother used to add, “you are somebody” (Milton, 1995, p. 15).
Questioning.
King thought he might like to become a lawyer, a profession that he felt would be more useful to his people, rather than a preacher (Schloredt & Brown, 1994). King senior automatically assumed that both his sons would enter the ministry, and that King would eventually succeed to pastorate at Ebenezer (Milton, 1995; Schloredt & Brown). King already expressed his doubts about religion at the age of 12. According to Fairclough (1990), King experienced ideological growth that caused him to question the church. He had already spent enough time in church to last a lifetime and wondered whether he was a true Christian, and whether he was in the church only because of his family (Fairclough; Milton). King continued to rebel in subtle and indirect ways against his father (Fairclough; Togni, 1994).
King senior was very disappointed at his choice of career (Milton).
Tough experiences.
When King left his neighbourhood, he experienced the opposite of the equality which his parents promoted (Milton, 1995). He was exposed to segregation, with the two ethnic groups living completely separated lives on many fronts, seen in access to public drinking fountains and toilets, movie theatres, schools, public libraries, parks and suburbs (Schloredt & Brown,
1994). Milton asserted that these experiences caused King to have a strong dislike for White 35 people which lead King to become angry and use vulgar words in front of his father, which got him into trouble. “Love your enemies,” Reverend King would tell him. “That‟s what the
Bible says” (Milton p. 16). King disagreed with this, and often wondered how it was possible to love your enemy, and why you would want to (Milton).
At 15 years old, during his last year of high school, King took part in the schools debating competition held in a different town (Milton, 1995; Schloredt & Brown, 1994). He won first prize for his speech entitled: “The Negro and the Constitution”. King was very proud of his achievement (Schloredt & Brown). On the bus back with his teacher that night, the bus driver demanded that he give up his seat to White patrons. According to Schloredt and Brown, King refused and the driver called him derogatory names until he angrily gave up his seat. Milton and Schloredt and Brown commented on the irony of the situation, in that King had just been awarded a prize for his speech on black people‟s rights, yet it was the very same constitutional rights he had spoken about that were pushed aside and forgotten during this incident. “That night will never leave my memory,” he said years later. “It was the angriest I have ever been in my life” (Milton, p. 11).
During the school holidays King worked at a tobacco farm (Togni, 1994). Another prejudicial incident happened on the train from Connecticut on his way home. King was approached by a waiter while in the dining car. He asked King to move to the back of the dining car, where he drew the curtain to separate him from the White patrons (Togni).
According to Togni (p. 91), “this indignity was the foundation stone of his commitment to the civil rights struggle.”
College years.
King began college when he was 15, three years earlier than most students. It was the autumn of 1944 and World War II raged in Europe and the South Pacific (Nazel, 1991). King went to Morehouse College in Atlanta, one of the best Black colleges in the country, where 36 open discussion of racial matters was encouraged. He knew that he was lucky compared with many Black youngsters, and he wanted to make the most of his chances (Schloredt & Brown,
1994). King registered for a Bachelor‟s degree in Sociology (Togni, 1994). According to
Milton (1995) King struggled to understand his homework for the first few weeks at
Morehouse. One of his teachers arranged for him to take an achievement test, where the results showed that he was four years behind his peers in his reading (Milton). Thus, from the start of his college studies King found that he was ill-equipped to deal with the study material and understood this is be the as a result of the deficient high school educational system for
Blacks in the Southern United States (Milton; Togni). King felt cheated; he was so bitter that he thought about giving up (Milton). However, his parents encouraged him to continue and
King began to do extra work to raise his reading level. Through determination and hard work he earned distinctions in a number of courses, including Philosophy, History, English and his major, Sociology (Togni). By his second year at college he had caught up with his class and was a member of the football team too (Milton).
Influences during college.
While at Morehouse College, King was influenced by several professors and lecturers who helped to build his natural abilities (Togni 1994). One such man was the president of
Morehouse, Dr Benjamin Mays, who influenced generations of Black students (Fairclough).
Fairclough further stated that in an important sociological study of the Black church, Dr
Mays argued the fact that even in the depths of the depression, few clergymen referred to social and economic issues, relying instead on rambling and illogical „shouting‟ sermons that dealt almost exclusively with the life hereafter . According to Mays (Fairclough), if the church were to retain its status as the cornerstone of negro life, it needed educated ministers who would adapt the Christian message to modern realities, addressing the worldly concerns of ordinary Blacks. Thus Mays was a minister who thought the church should play a greater 37 role in American society. The combination of learning and inspiration in Mays‟ sermons impressed King and made him change his mind about entry into the ministry (Schloredt &
Brown, 1994). King believed that a minister like Mays could help people in all sorts of ways, dealing with real modern problems. Milton (1995) stated that King told his father that he would become a minister after all. King‟s father organised a trial sermon for him, at his own church, the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta. Although very nervous, at the age of seventeen, King preached his first sermon and did very well (Milton; Schloredt & Brown).
Becoming a Man (1947 - 1950)
Minister after all.
After his first sermon, King acted as an assistant pastor alongside his father for a year
(Milton, 1995). King was ordained on 25 February 1948 and became known officially as
Reverend Martin Luther King Junior (Nazel, 1991). He graduated from Morehouse College a few months later, convinced that he was on the right path (Hodgson, 2010; Milton). King told an educator in later years about his career choice: “It came neither by some miraculous vision nor some blinding light experience on the road of life…it was a response to an urge [which] expressed itself in a desire to serve God and humanity” (Hodgson, p. 27).
Continued studies.
While still under the age of 20, King graduated from Morehouse College with a
Bachelor‟s degree in Sociology, however his education was not yet over (Milton, 1995). He continued his studies at Crozer Theological Seminary in Chester, Pennsylvania, towards a
Bachelor‟s Degree in Divinity (Fairclough, 1990; Nazel, 1991; Togni, 1994). Nazel described the years studying at Crozer as crucial in developing King‟s views on non-violence.
King arrived at Crozer during the autumn of 1948; there were only 106 students of which only 6 were Black (Milton, 1995). Nazel (1991) asserted that these statistics made King so aware of the perceptions of his White fellow students that many times he overcompensated. 38
King worried about being late, and would arrive half an hour early; he wore a suit and a tie every day; his room was spotless and he hardly ever smiled (Nazel).
King quickly settled into his new world and committed himself to research and study. His goal was to find a system, a method that would bring about a peaceful change in the racial conditions that oppressed black Americans, particularly in the South (Nazel).
Influences and beliefs while at seminary
A strong influence on King‟s development was his reading of famous theologians and philosophers in his spare time. Togni (1994) stated that King undertook special studies of
Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, Hobbes, Bentham, Mill and Locke. King was particularly impressed with the work of the philosopher Henry Thoreau. Thoreau was an abolitionist, who believed that slavery must end. He served a jail sentence because he refused to pay taxes to a government that allowed slavery to continue. He believed slavery to be a shocking, unacceptable, social injustice (Schloredt & Brown, 1994).
The thinker who influenced King the most was the theologian Walter Rausenbusch, who had lectured at the Rochester Theological Seminary during the turbulent social period of the
1890s (Togni, 1994). King became immersed in the study of Rausenbusch‟s teachings, which in particular influenced him to disagree with the tradition that churches deal with matters of the soul only. The church, he felt, must deal with the total man (Togni).
According to Fairclough (1990) King condemned Marxism for substituting materialism in place of religious and spiritual values, and for utilising ruthless methods that led to
”strangulating totalitarianism” (Fairclough, p. 10), which is a regime that constricts all autonomy. However he applauded Marx for exposing the injustices of capitalism, promoting class consciousness among the workers, and challenging the complacency of the Christian churches (Fairclough). Furthermore, King strongly believed that capitalism no longer met the need of the masses and that it had outlived its usefulness (Fairclough). 39
Another such influence was the work of Reinhold Niebuhr, a theological and a political liberal (Hodgson, 2010). Niebuhr challenged assumptions of the social gospel: Christian faith practiced as a call not just to personal conversion but to social reform, to which King was accustomed to in his book Moral Man and Immoral Society (Hodgson). According to
Fairclough (1990) and Hodgson, Neibuhr‟s philosophy and methods enabled King to find his own defining “personalist theology” that could lead him through “the theological disputes of mid-twentieth century Protestantism” (Hodgson, p. 30).
Philosophy of non-violence.
King‟s philosophy of non-violence was greatly influenced by the writings and actions of
Mahatma Gandhi (Nazel, 1991). Milton (1995) explained that Gandhi had believed that love and truth were the most powerful forces in the world, so strong that they could defeat any army equipped with guns. During a lecture King attended, he learnt that Gandhi used a phenomenon known as “Satyagraha” or “soul-force” (Milton) which is a “means of striving for truth and social justice through love, suffering and conversion of the oppressor. The method used is active non-violent resistance" (McKay, et al., 2009, p. 859). Fairclough
(1990) stated that King realised that the Blacks in the United States at the time were so heavily outnumbered that violence was suicidal. He was persuaded by the relevance of
Gandhian non-violence and the fact that Niebuhr himself had argued that non-violence is a particularly strategic instrument for an oppressed group which is hopelessly in the minority
(Fairclough). Nazel stated that it was through the Gandhian emphasis on love and non- violence that King discovered the method for social reform that he had been seeking.
Through the study of Gandhi‟s life, King began to understand that Gandhi had undergone a personal change and had abandoned all violence and hatred, even for his “enemies” (Togni,
1994). Nazel (1991, p. 99) quotes King as saying: “Non-violence is a powerful and just 40 weapon. It is a weapon unique in history, which cuts without wounding and enables the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals”.
The Emergence of King (1950 – 1953)
King as the diligent student.
The Crozer Divinity students were often invited to deliver sermons at local churches and this helped them to polish their speaking skills. King established himself as an excellent speaker (Nazel, 1991). His deep, melodic voice and poetic delivery made an impression on the local church. As a training minister of religion, King felt that the church had a broader function than just the spiritual focus, and was there to minister to all the needs of man, and therefore had to serve both God and humanity (Togni, 1994).
Although King was an average student at Morehouse, he blossomed at Crozer, graduating in 1951 at the top of his class (Fairclough, 1990). King was so respected by his fellow classmates at Crozer that he was elected president of the graduating class as well as class valedictorian (Nazel, 1991). At graduation he received the Pearle M Plafker Citation, honouring him as the most outstanding student (Nazel). Nazel described this as a triumphant moment for King, whose parents also showed their pride in him by giving him a new car as a graduation present – a green Chevrolet (Milton, 1995).
The J. Lewis Crozer grant of $1300 assisted King to enter Boston University in 1951.
There he pursued a Doctorate in Theology, and in addition registered for an advanced course in Philosophy of religion with Harvard, with particular focus on Hinduism, Shintoism, Islam and Christianity. Fairclough (1990) asserted that while studying for his doctorate, King delved more deeply into modern philosophy and theology. He continued to ponder Niebuhr‟s emphasis on the enduring reality of sin, society‟s endless capacity to rationalise sinful acts, and the impossibility of moral certainty. 41
Initially, as a young student at Crozer, King attributed his optimistic outlook to a happy childhood. “It is quite easy for me to think of a God of love mainly because I grew up in a family where love was central and where a loving relationship was ever present” (Fairclough,
1990, p. 12). According to Fairclough, King believed that “through religious faith, man could become God‟s co-worker, subordinating his innate evil and reinforcing what was best in human personality” (Fairclough, p. 12). King left university convinced that Christian love and non-violence had the potential to transform society. This was contrary to what he had previously believed regarding Neibuhr‟s teachings which had made him sceptical of pacifism, convincing him of the absolute necessity for coercion to restrain evil and combat oppression
(Hodgson, 2010). At this time (1953), King also rejected all forms of war, changing his original belief that some wars were justified. The Christian teaching that individuals must love their enemies was paramount in his philosophy. King felt that by opening the self to the fatherhood of the Almighty God, individuals could deal with their own sinfulness (Togni,
1994).
King on a social level.
As serious as King was about his studies, he still found time to enjoy himself (Schloredt &
Brown, 1994). He was intent on displaying an elegance that would refute the stereotype of the “impoverished southern Black American” (Hodgson, 2010, p. 30). According to
Fairclough (1990), King had expensive taste; good clothes, shiny shoes, a suite in an expensive hotel, dinner at a restaurant, plane trips, long distance telephone conversations, money in the bank and, to his father‟s horror, he smoked cigars. He even cultivated an elaborate signature, practised playing pool until he was a skilful opponent, and used a private language with his friends, for expressing their appreciation for young women (Hodgson).
According to Schloredt and Brown (1994), King was a typical charming young man and dated many young women (Hodgson, 2010). King was described as a “prince” by a friend as 42 he was not running after the girls, but the girls were running after him (Hodgson, p.35).
However, consideration of his father‟s potential anger and his mother‟s pain changed King‟s mind from marrying the White girl. (Hodgson).
King meets Coretta Scott.
Nazel (1991) asserted that King and his friend and classmate, Walter McCall, often met at social functions and enjoyed dining out. Nazel goes on to say that King dated several young ladies but the relationships were never serious. On the other hand, Hodsgon (2010) noted that a relationship with the daughter of a German immigrant cook named Betty was serious and
King meant to marry her, however his friends at the time persuaded him otherwise.
Furthermore, Hodsgon stated that sometime later King was serious about Juanita Sellers, the daughter of the wealthiest funeral director in Atlanta, but that their relationship did not last.
Togni (1994) asserted that King grew tired of his bachelor existence. In 1952 he met Coretta
Scott, who was a young singer and voice student. King acquired her number from a friend,
Mary Powell, called her, and made a date (Hodgson; Milton, 1995).
King was bowled over by Scott‟s beauty and intelligence, her vivid personality, and her strength of character, the four things he was looking for in a woman (Hodgson, 2010).
Schloredt and Brown (1994) stated that he expressed this to her on the first date, saying:
“You have everything I‟ve been looking for in a wife” (Milton, 1995, p. 33). Milton noted that King thought Scott had lovely eyes and a quiet manner. When he started to talk about his studies, Scott joined right in. Furthermore Milton stated that most of the girls that King had dated did not share his interest in philosophy and politics, and he was very impressed to finally find one who did.
Scott came from the South, having grown up in a Black farming family in Alabama, similar to King. Born in 1927, she was two years older than King (Nazel, 1991). Scott‟s family owned a trucking company, but most importantly, the Scott family, like the Kings, had 43 a tradition of speaking out against segregation. Scott had made up her mind while she was still in college that she could never love any man who was not ready to fight for justice for
Black people (Milton, 1995). She was a determined young woman who aspired to a career in music.
As a child Scott excelled at school, especially in voice and musical instruments. Upon graduation in 1945 she entered Antioch College in Antioch, Ohio. She graduated with a
Bachelor of Music Degree in 1951 (Nazel, 1991) A scholarship allowed her to study music at the New England Conservatory, and she worked part-time to pay her living expenses.
Schloredt and Brown (1994) indicated that the last thing Scott wanted was to be swept off her feet and give up her career. Marriage and children were things she had hoped to have once she had established herself in music (Schloredt & Brown). However, her sensible plans did not last. The more time she spent with King, the more she liked him. She saw in him a quality she strongly admired; he was a fighter (Milton, 1995).
Fairclough (1990) described King‟s attitude towards women as sexist by today‟s standards; even at the time his attitudes would have been considered conservative. King made it clear to Scott that he was looking for a pastor‟s wife and that she must abandon her plans for a singing career. In King‟s eyes, her primary role was that of wife and mother
(Fairclough).
Hodgson (2010) explained that Scott and King went to meet his parents in Boston, and that this meeting was almost disastrous. Apparently, King senior questioned his son in front of Scott about his other girlfriends, and suggested that their relationship was just a college romance. He also indicated that her interest in secular music would be inappropriate in a
Baptist minister‟s wife. Finally he asked her directly whether she took King seriously, and she replied “Why no, not really” (Hodgson, p. 36). At this point King senior said he was glad because he knew for a fact that his son had already proposed marriage to several other girls, 44 and he named them, who came from families the Kings knew and respected, and who had much to offer him. However Scott was adamant that she had something to offer too.
Fairclough (1990) noted that King sat through his father‟s appalling display of bad manners without saying a word. As Scott put it many years later, “He was amazingly respectful and considerate of Daddy King‟s feelings” (Fairclough, p. 14). Hodgson (2010) explained that after some more bullying, King replied that he was going to get his doctorate and marry Scott and at that, his father finally gave his blessing.
On 18 June 1953 they were married by King‟s father on the lawn of Scott‟s family home in Marion (Milton 1995; Nazel, 1991 and Schloredt & Brown, 1994). A year later, back in
Boston, King and Scott finished their last year of studies and King began looking for a job
(Milton).
Leader in Reverend’s Cloak (1953 - 1957).
Where to go and what to do.
Having graduated from Boston University with a Doctorate in Theology, King wanted to teach theology, but a number of churches expressed an interest in him (Togni, 1994). He also had several offers to become a college teacher, and was tempted to accept one of them as he enjoyed studying and writing. King knew that he and Scott would like living on a college campus (Milton, 1995).
The best offer that King received for the position of minister was at the congregation of
Dexter Avenue Church in Montgomery, Alabama (Milton, 1995; Nazel, 1991 and Schloredt
& Brown, 1994). There were many advantages and disadvantages to this move. Nazel and
Schloredt and Brown describe the membership then as small and well-educated, saying that some of the congregation were teachers at the college. Furthermore, the south was home to both King and Scott, they had family there and they had the opportunity to invest the education they had received back into the community (Nazel). Some of the reservations they 45 had to the offer were that they were uncomfortable about raising children under the oppressive racial conditions in the south (Nazel). Nazel asserted that the young couple could not ignore the fact that their parents, even after their lives were threatened, had held their ground and remained in the South and continued to struggle for dignity in the face of racism.
The King‟s went to Montgomery to meet the congregation and King preached a trial sermon. The congregation liked what they heard and decided to invite him to become their full-time reverend (Milton, 1995). Thereafter both King and Scott talked it over and after reviewing both the advantages and disadvantages agreed that he would take up the post as
Reverend of the Montgomery, Alabama, church (Nazel, 1991), which he did in March 1954.
King‟s studies would not allow him to relocate from Boston to Montgomery for some months, so he agreed to commute to Montgomery and preach once a month (Nazel, 1991).
Nazel stated that the Kings formally relocated to Montgomery on 31 October 1954. They moved in to the parsonage of the Dexter Avenue church. Nazel described it as a move that would quickly catapult King into the national spotlight and draw much attention from those who wanted to maintain the traditions of racial separation and oppression.
Life as a reverend.
As reverend of Dexter Avenue Church, King immersed himself in the work before him.
He attended to the needs of his congregation and the larger community, while completing work for his doctorate from Boston University (Nazel, 1991). The Kings had a busy life together in Montgomery. According to Schloredt and Brown (1994), King woke at 5:30 each morning to work on his doctoral thesis for three hours before breakfast. He then drove downtown to the Dexter Avenue Church, where his duties as a reverend began. He settled in well into his vocation, ministering to his congregation on societal and spiritual matters
(Togni, 1994). His duties included giving advice to members of his congregation on family 46 problems, performing marriage ceremonies and funeral services, and serving as a character witness in matters of business and law (Milton, 1995; Schloredt & Brown).
Having a predominantly Black congregation, King often had to calm down tempers and hatred towards White people, often cautioning individuals against violent impulses (Togni,
1994). According to Schloredt and Brown (1994) King was a very good preacher, and already showed signs of becoming a great orator. Togni (p. 94) described “King as speaking with determination during his sermons and that he often resorted to oratory of “the fire-and- brimstone kind”, mixing deep emotions with keen intellectual insight”. Togni stated that the church became an instrument for King to fight for both the edification of the soul of the individual and the satisfaction of needs that are common to the human condition. The following quotation clearly indicates his commitment to ministering to man as a totality:
And I tell you that any religion that professes to be concerned with the
souls of men and is not concerned with the slums that damn them and the
social conditions that cripple them is a dry as dust religion. Religion
deals with heaven and earth, time and eternity, seeking not only to
integrate man with god, but man with man (Oates, 1982 from Togni, p.
95).
King began to see that he could combine both learning and emotion in his sermons. He began to use dramatic phrases and timing to make his point, sometimes speaking softly and quietly and sometimes with a thunderous voice that vibrated through the church (Schloredt &
Brown, 1994). People came to church to be uplifted and inspired, and this is what King tried to do every Sunday. According to Schloredt and Brown, King soon became immensely popular with his congregation.
On 5 June 1955, King went north to Boston to receive his doctoral degree (Fairclough,
1990; Milton, 1995; Nazel, 1991; Schloredt & Brown, 1994). From then on he was known as 47 either “Dr” or “Reverend” King. At the time there was another cause for celebration, with the birth of the King‟s first child Yolanda Denise King, “Yoki”, born 17 November 1955.
Thought and word into action.
King was not merely satisfied with talking his philosophy. He began a social action programme which looked after the sick, the ailing and the aged and administered funds for promising students for both school and university study (Togni, 1994). He also established social and political action committees, which strongly supported the local chapter of the
National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) (Togni).
Furthermore, Togni asserted that King‟s activism led to his election to the Executive
Committee of the NAACP‟s regional Montgomery chapter. During the same period, King was also elected to the Alabama Council of Human Relations, an interracial group in
Montgomery (Togni). King saw the need for unity in the various committees, as each had their various agendas and he doubted that this divergent approach would be successful in winning justice and equality of opportunity for all (Togni). It was during these dark days that
King befriended a fellow pastor, the Reverend Ralf Abernathy of the first Baptist Church, who was also gaining prominence as an activist. As friends King and Abernathy complemented each other‟s needs; Abernathy had come from a poor background and lacked
King‟s forceful personality and powerful intellect (Togni).
King recognised the importance of arguing the plight of Black Americans before the
United States Supreme Court. He was convinced that change to state legislation was vital to making change in the land (Nazel, 1991). However, King also believed that “justice [for]
Black people will not flow into society merely from court decisions nor from fountains of political oratory…” (Nazel, p. 73). He asserted that massive direct action and legal action complemented each other and believed that “when skilfully employed, each [of these actions] becomes more effective” (Nazel, p. 73). 48
On 1 December 1955, a Black woman named Rosa Parks boarded a bus in Montgomery,
Alabama, changing the course of the struggle for equality in the South. On that day Mrs Parks refused to give her seat to a White man, as was the custom in both written and unwritten law
(Fairclough, 1990; Hodgson, 2010; Milton; 1995; Nazel, 1991; Schloredt and Brown, 1994 and Togni, 1994). The Alabama Segregation laws of the day required Black people to pay their fares at the front of the bus, get off the bus and then enter the bus at the rear entrance.
The last few rows of seats on the bus were reserved for Black riders unless there were no seats available for White riders in the front portion of the bus. When seats were not available for Whites, bus drivers had the right to order Black riders to relinquish their seats to Whites.
If the Black bus riders resisted, they were arrested and fined. Mrs Parks resisted and was arrested (Nazel).
According to Schloredt and Brown (1994), Mrs Parks was a good, quiet, hardworking, upstanding member of the Black community. On this particular day, Mrs Parks left the department store where she worked and boarded the second bus as the first was too full
(Milton, 1995). According to the story reported in Milton, Nazel (1991) and Schloredt and
Brown, the back seats on this bus were already taken and she found an empty seat in the middle section and sat down. Further on their way White passengers boarded the bus and one man remained standing. The bus driver ordered the Blacks to move to the back and three got up but Mrs Parks remained seated. Although Mrs Parks was threatened and ordered to also move to the back, she remained seated (Fairclough, 1990). Schloredt and Brown quoted Mrs
Parks as saying: “I was just plain tired and my feet hurt” (p. 20). Hodgson (2010) asserted that Rosa Parks was something more than the naïve woman with tired feet that she has often been portrayed as. She was a well-known and politically committed member of the tiny
Negro leadership in Montgomery, who were looking for an opportunity to mount an effective legal challenge (Hodgson; Nazel,). She settled herself firmly in that seat and told the driver to 49 go ahead and have her arrested. She was convicted on the morning of 5 December 1955
(Nazel).
At this time the community of 40 Black leaders elected King as head of the Montgomery
Improvement Association (MIA). He was just 26 years old (Fairclough, 1990). The MIA arranged a boycott of the public transport system. Officials of the Montgomery Bus Company were convinced that the boycott would fail. It was December and they believed that the cold weather would force Black customers back to using buses, segregated or not. This did not happen. Boycotters were encouraged to continue their “long walk to dignity” (Hodgson,
2010, p. 45) by E.D. Nixon‟s organisational skills, Reverend King‟s eloquence, and the commitment of other leaders like Revered Ralph Abernathy (Fairclough). After much struggle the United States Supreme Court ruled the Alabama transportation laws unconstitutional on 12 November 1956. Milton (1995) stated that after 381 days “The Long
Walk” was over and they had won (Nazel, 1991). On the morning of 21 December 1956, four men, King, Reverend Abernathy, E.D. Nixon and a White minister, Reverend Glenn Smiley, boarded a bus on the street in front of Dr King‟s house. They took seats in the front of the bus without incident (Milton; Nazel: Scloredt & Brown).
On 11 January 1957 a gathering of 60 representatives from 10 southern States met because, according to Nazel (1991), a strong organisation was needed to take the struggle against racism to States throughout the south. In February 1957, King was elected the first president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (Milton, 1995; Nazel: Schloredt &
Brown, 1994). This organisation proved to be the most influential of the organisations in the
Southern Civil Rights Movement, and under the leadership of King became the example for non-violent action for the next decade (Nazel).
Freedom with Responsibility Leaves a Legacy (1957 - 1968)
Fame and its challenges. 50
According to Schloredt and Brown (1994), King‟s leadership in the bus boycott made him a famous man, and his picture appeared on the cover of Time magazine with the caption:
“One of the nation‟s remarkable leaders of men” (Nazel, 1991, p. 93). Several job offers were made to King from all over the country. Some of the job offers were for lecturing positions and although this was King‟s dream job, he turned them down (Schloredt & Brown). King was in tremendous demand as a speaker, and he felt it was his duty to do everything in his power to help spread the message of the civil rights campaign (Milton, 1995). At times his schedule seemed impossible and Schloredt and Brown asserted that in 1957 and 1958 he journeyed thousands of miles, giving 208 speeches all over the country. Somehow he had to fit in his work as a minister and also as president of SCLC. On top of that he had promised a
New York publisher to write a book on the Montgomery bus boycott, which he did, called
Strides Toward Freedom (Milton).
Schloredt and Brown (1994) indicated that King longed sometimes to be at home with his wife and two children and found it hard to miss so much of the children‟s growing up.
Somehow, despite all the travel and stress, the family remained close and loving (Schloredt &
Brown). Hogdson (2010) stated the contrary; he asserted that as a young man, as well as a married man, King was reported to have had repeated sexual infidelities. He reported two serious relationships during King‟s marriage to Coretta (Hodgson). Hodgson stated that throughout 1964 the Federal Bureau of Investigation had wire-tapped most of the establishments King stayed in during his travels. They transcribed the recordings of what the
Federal Bureau of Investigation deemed as immorality and profanity and offered it to most newspapers and magazines, but according to Hodgson, none of the publications used the material. Hodgson further stated that King did not deny these allegations and many of King‟s friends confirmed the allegations. In the film, Betty and Coretta, Coretta relays to Betty
Shabazz that she overlooked these infidelities because there was a bigger mission at stake and 51 she loved King. After his death, Coretta asked their lawyer to arrange for the tapes to be suppressed and never to be heard by the public (Anthony, Blige, Isaacs, Johnson & Sanitsky,
2003).
At times King was imprisoned on a civil rights issue and yet he was also a distinguished celebrity in New York appearing on the Today show, and signing copies of his book
(Schloredt & Brown, 1994). On 3 September 1958 King went to Harlem, New York, for a book signing, and while at a table signing books a well-dressed Black woman pushed her way through the crowd that surrounded him (Hodgson, 2010; Schloredt & Brown, 1994). She asked him if he was Martin Luther King, and when he responded that he was, she plunged a sharpened letter opener into his chest. Later at the hospital, a doctor told him: “You‟re lucky that you didn‟t have to sneeze, if you had, you probably would have bled to death” (Milton,
1995, p. 58). The public had been shocked that King was stabbed. The woman could not explain why she did it, yet King asked the police to see that she was sent to a hospital instead of to jail (Milton). This action may be understood by King‟s belief in the Gandhian notion of love and non-violence (Nazel, 1991), which came through strongly in his book, Strides
Toward Freedom. This influence can also be seen in King‟s visit to India in 1959. On his return, King continued to lead Black Americans along the path of non-violent protests:
We will match your capacity to inflict suffering with our capacity to
endure suffering...Do to us what you will and we will still love you. Bomb
our homes and threaten our children: send your hooded perpetrators of
violence...and drag us out on some wayside road, beating us and leaving us
half dead, and we will still love you (Nazel, 1991, p. 100).
King felt strongly that “the Christian doctrine of love operating through the Gandhian method of non-violence was one of the most potent weapons available to the Black American in his struggle for freedom” (Nazel, 1991, p. 101). According to Nazel, a different voice, 52 other than that of King, gained national attention in the North. Malcolm X was against non- violent direct action. He believed in self-defence and encouraged Black Americans to defend themselves against racism “by any means necessary” (Nazel, p. 105).
The movement.
The King family moved to Atlanta in January 1960, as King found it necessary to move back to the city he was born in (Nazel, 1991; Togni, 1994). Between 1960 and 1965, King became even more involved in leading the civil rights movements in several States (Togni).
On 1 February 1960, four Black college students in Greensboro, North Carolina, walked up to a Woolworth‟s lunch counter and sat down (Fairclough, 1990). They told the waitress that they meant to “sit in” until someone served them (Fairclough; Milton, 1995). Day after day, they went back to sit at the counter, and more and more students joined them (Fairclough).
News spread and other sit-ins started throughout the South (Schloredt & Brown, 1994). The students looked up to King as a hero, and asked him for help and advice (Schloredt &
Brown). When the sit-ins in Atlanta started, King decided to take part. King joined 75 students who were sitting in at a snack bar in Rich‟s department store in Atlanta (Milton).
The police arrested everyone for trespassing; however the students were all released on bail within three days (Milton). According to Milton,the police kept King in jail and after three days his case came to trial. Scott, pregnant with their third child, attended the hearing with
King senior and according to Fairclough, King was sentenced to four months hard labour at a state penitentiary.
The next morning Scott received a telephone call from Senator John F. Kennedy, the
Democratic candidate in the presidential election at the time (Schloredt & Brown, 1994).
Schloredt and Brown relayed that Kennedy was shocked to hear of her husband‟s sentence and offered his help. Scott accepted the offer and within a few days she was overjoyed to hear that the judge had reversed his decision and King could go home (Schloredt & Brown). It 53 may be that Kennedy‟s support of King was pivotal in his winning the American presidency
(Schloredt & Brown).
Violence in Alabama turned the national spotlight on Montgomery and Birmingham
(Nazel, 1991). In April 1963 King was arrested for leading a protest march in Birmingham.
Nazel asserted that on 16 April 1963, while King was in jail, he wrote his famous “Letter from Birmingham Jail”. The letter was addressed to those in the clergy who criticised his presence in Birmingham. He explained that he was there because injustice was there (Nazel).
He explained there were certain things, important in non-violent direct action, which he described as: “a collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self- purification, and direct action” (Nazel, p. 108). In his letter King expressed that: “Left to themselves, people would never change” (Schloredt & Brown, p. 44). He quoted an unknown lawyer: “Justice too long delayed is justice too long denied” (Schloredt & Brown, p. 44).
Milton (1995) asserted that when King was released from prison, he found a new challenge of having to appeal to students to support the cause, as adults faced challenges of losing their jobs and homes for taking part in the marches. When an appeal was sent out to the students of Birmingham, thousands responded, even young children (Milton). Children eight and over were allowed to march. The children‟s crusade began on 2 May 1963, and as a result, 959 children were arrested for marching in the demonstration, and school buses had to be used to take them to jail (Milton; Nazel, 1990; Schloredt & Brown, 1994). The next day young people gathered again, this time in their thousands, to march to downtown
Birmingham (Milton). According to Schloredt and Brown, they were met by the police who ordered them to turn back, but the students ignored them. As per the command of Bull
Conner, the Birmingham Commissioner of Public Safety, the firemen turned their powerful water hoses on the young people; the police went in with clubs, and aggressive German shepherd dogs were let loose on the crowd (Schloredt & Brown). As the scene of chaos 54 unfolded, it was recorded by television cameras and aired to the world the next day
(Fairclough, 1990; Schloredt & Brown). Milton reported that newspapers and TV reporters called what had happened that day the “Battle of Birmingham”. It was stated that King was horrified by the incident, as he had not really believed that violence would be used against children (Milton, Schloredt & Brown).
However, two days later, on 5 May 1963 the marchers continued to march and were again met by the police, dogs and the high-pressure hoses, all the while singing their songs of freedom (Schloredt & Brown, 1994). According to Schloredt and Brown and Milton (1995), as the marchers approached the police lines they refused to turn back, instead, they dropped to their knees in prayer. Once more a command came to open the hoses and release the dogs, however nothing happened and the police and fire-fighters refused to obey the command
(Milton; Schloredt & Brown). According to Schloredt and Brown and Milton, the police stood back and allowed the marchers through.
This incident confirmed King‟s belief that fundamental goodness can be found in most humans. Non-violence triumphed, but at a high cost in suffering (Schloredt & Brown, 1994).
However, Milton (1995) indicated that many of the marchers‟ demands were met and agreed to by the city of Birmingham, such as: that there would be no more segregation in
Birmingham‟s stores and restaurants and that these businesses would start to hire Black workers. The demonstration caused a ripple effect in other regions as many marches took place after it; 20 000 protesters were arrested by the end of the summer of 1963 and in more than 250 southern cities and towns, the „ Jim Crow‟ laws were abolished (Fairclough, 1990;
Milton).
I have a dream.
King and other civil rights leaders planned the biggest march of the time on the nation‟s capital, Washington (Milton, 1995), for the one-hundredth anniversary of the ending of 55 slavery in America (Schloredt & Brown, 1994). It took place on 28 August 1963. It was a day-long rally before the Lincoln Memorial. About 250 000 people of every race and creed joined in support of the Civil Rights Bill (Fairclough, 1990; Milton; Schloredt & Brown;
Togni, 1994). Fairclough (1990) stated that the march on Washington exemplified King‟s ability to unify and project the civil rights movement.
Many political leaders, church leaders, singers, actors, sportsmen and women addressed the crowds and according to Milton (1995), King had eight minutes on the program to make a speech. King delivered his famous “I have a dream” speech, in which he revealed his dream of all men being united in brotherhood throughout the world (Togni, 1994). Fairclough
(1990) explained that King based his vision on well-known symbols of Americanism: the
Bible, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Emancipation Proclamation and the American dream. He also included the refrain of the patriotic song “My country T‟is of
Thee” (Fairclough). Togni indicated that one of the major results of this event was the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by Congress. Newspapers reported that King had become the unofficial “president of Black America” (Schloredt & Brown, 1994).
A few weeks later, on 15 September 1963, King‟s philosophy of non-violence in the face of violence was tested (Fairclough, 1990). Fairclough, Milton (1995) and Schloredt and
Brown (1994) reported that four young Black girls were killed in the bombing of 16th Street
Baptist church, in Alabama. Only four months before the bombing, King‟s fourth child,
Bernice Albertine, was born. Nazel (1991, p. 109) stated that King wrote in his book, Why
We can’t Wait, that “The ultimate tragedy of Birmingham was not the brutality of the bad people, but the silence of the good people” referring to this incident. A month later, on 22
November 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated. Schloredt and Brown quoted
King as stating that too often one assassination triggers another; King said that he knew that this was going to happen to him (Schloredt & Brown; Nazel). 56
King had reached the height of his fame in 1963 when Time magazine chose him as its man of the year (Milton, 1995). The article by Time magazine on 3 January 1964 read:
Few can explain the extraordinary King mystique. Yet he has an
indescribable capacity for empathy that is the touchstone of leadership. By
deed and by preachment, he has stirred in his people a Christian forbearance
that nourishes hope and smothers injustice (Schloredt & Brown, 1994, p.
51).
In October 1964, King, at age 35, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for obtaining justice for all, non-violently, and was the youngest man ever to be awarded it (Milton, 1995; Nazel,
1991; Schloredt & Brown, 1994; Togni, 1994). Hodgson (2010) stated that King was not free from fear and during his Nobel trip was depressed. Coretta, his wife stated that: “it was a time he ought to have been happy, but he was concerned about what Black people would think”
(Hodgson, p. 129). That same year King visited Pope Paul VI at the Vatican. The civil rights movement had gained international support (Nazel). On 21 February 1965 Malcolm X was assassinated (Nazel).
President Johnson‟s advised King not to expect further legislation change, and not to participate in more marches. However, King started a new campaign in 1965 aimed at getting
Black people in Selma, Alabama the vote (Fairclough, 1990; Schloredt & Brown, 1994).
Schloredt and Brown explained that Black people were allowed to vote, but they needed to register to do so. By February, 280 Black people were arrested while trying to register; 57 registration forms were completed but none were registered (Schloredt & Brown). As King led the march in Selma on 7 March 1965, to demand voting rights, the demonstrators were met by the police with clubs, whips and tear gas (Fairclough; Togni, 1994). Again, the cameras and media caught the incident on camera. The events of that confrontation shocked 57 viewers. President Johnson was moved to supporting the National Voting Rights Bill and it was passed (Fairclough).
Less than a year later in 1966 this mood of hope had vanished. America was at war with
Vietnam, and riots broke out that lasted for six days (Fairclough, 1990). According to
Fairclough, by 1967 The Civil Rights movement had disintegrated and King found himself confused, depressed and isolated. Togni (1994) asserted that for the first time in six years
King felt as if he had failed to effectively lead a campaign of non-violent direct action. Togni stated that King called for an end to the Vietnam War and this led to strong opposition from the United States government and a number of Black groups.
On the evening of 3 April 1968 King addressed a strike rally in Memphis, delivering one of the most powerful speeches of his career:
Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place.
But I‟m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God‟s will. And
He‟s allowed me to go up to the mountaintop. And I‟ve looked over.
And I‟ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I
want you to know tonight that we as a people will get to the Promised
Land. So I‟m happy tonight. I‟m not worried about anything. I‟m not
fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the
Lord (Fairclough, 1990, p. 117).
Schloredt and Brown (1994) described King‟s speech as prophetic, as if he was preparing himself to die. He spent most of the following day in his hotel and told his friends: “Avoid violence at all costs. Non-violence must be the rule, whatever the provocation” (Schloredt &
Brown, p. 56).
58
Peace at a price.
On the evening of 4 April 1968, while King was standing on the balcony outside his hotel room, he was shot (Milton, 1995). According to Fairclough (1990), the bullet pierced his face and he died moments later. King was 39 years old at the time of his death. The news of
King‟s assassination caused chaos and riots in more than a 100 cities (Milton, 1995). Milton stated that a White man named James Earl Ray, a drifter who had been in trouble with the law for most of his life, was arrested and eventually convicted of the murder. On 9 April
1968 the funeral ceremony took place at the Ebenezer Baptist Church, where King had begun his life of service to the community (Togni, 1994). The streets of Atlanta were filled with
50 000 - 100,000 mourners, including King‟s wife and four children, Yoki, Martin Junior,
Dexter and Bernice (Fairclough, 1994; Milton, 1995). Milton relayed that they marched behind the hearse that took King‟s body to the cemetery. The inscription on King‟s gravestone was a quotation from an old spiritual song that he had referred to in his speech in
Washington: “Free at last, free at last. Thank God Almighty, I‟m free at last” (Schloredt &
Brown, 1994, p. 58).
The Legacy Lives On
Fairclough (1990) asserted that on 5 April 1968, President Johnson ordered the Stars and
Stripes to be flown at half-mast and proclaimed the following Sunday a day of national mourning. A few dignitaries attended the Memorial service: mayors, governors, senators,
Supreme Court Judges, Vice-president Hubert Humphrey, and Jacqueline Kennedy. They all paid tribute to King in Ebenezer Baptist Church (Fairclough; Milton, 1995).
Nazel (1991) said that in the two decades following King‟s „I have a dream‟ speech and culminating in the historic march on Washington, there were many changes, of which the
Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965 were important milestones. However, the “dream” King had shared so eloquently was not yet realised. Twenty years later, in 1983, 300,000 people 59 marched under a similar banner as before: “March for jobs, Peace and Freedom”, with the theme: “We Still have a Dream” (Nazel, p.180). There were many differing agendas but two common issues were agreed on, including the “declaration of a holiday in honour of the late
King, and the condemnation of President Ronald Reagan” (Nazel, p. 182). In 1985 Congress voted to establish a federal holiday in King‟s honour (Milton, 1995). Only three other individuals have been honoured in this way: Christopher Columbus, George Bush and
Abraham Lincoln. The holiday was celebrated for the first time in 1986.
Almost 25 years after King was assassinated, on July 4, 1992 the Lorraine Motel in
Memphis was renovated and named the National Civil Rights Museum (Nazel, 1991). The 10 million dollar project features a history of the Civil Rights Movement and now stands as a shrine to the life and ultimately the death of Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Junior
(Nazel).
Conclusion
This chapter provided a chronological review of the life and work of Reverend Dr Martin
Luther King. Significant elaboration was made on King‟s development, experiences, beliefs, and influences throughout his life. The following chapter will describe the psychobiographical approach which was used to facilitate a deeper understanding of the personality development of Reverend Dr Martin Luther King Junior. Erik Erikson‟s (1950)
Psychosocial Developmental Theory will be used as a lens through which to create this understanding.
60
Chapter 4
Psychobiographical Research Design and Methodology
Chapter Preview
In this chapter, the psychobiographical research design is discussed. The various definitions and discussions regarding the psychobiographical approach are explored.
Furthermore, elements such as the methodological and the ethical considerations, the research design, the research subject, and the data collection and analysis are discussed.
Overview of the Psychobiographical Research Design
Müller (2010) noted that learning about the experiences of other human beings as they make their way through life, can be very interesting. Stroud (2004) explained that through the use of psychological principles, a researcher may be able to explain certain aspects of a subject‟s lived life. The purpose of a psychobiography is to utilise psychological theory in a systematic way so as to discover aspects of the subject‟s lived life (McAdams, 1994; Stroud).
Through this type of research, the psychobiographer is able to “discern, discover, and formulate the story of that person‟s life” (Pieterse, 2012, p.6). Psychobiographical research tend to analyse the individual in a holistic manner and may focus on areas such as their: personality, motives, their ideas, relationships, how they formed them¸ as well as their cultural and economic status (Schultz, 2005; Uys, 2007)
Roberts (2002) ascribed interest in the psychobiographical method in recent years to four different factors: a developing cynicism with static approaches to data collection; a growing interest in the life course; an increased concern with lived experience and how best to express and reveal it, as well as; a growth in popularity of qualitative research in general.
Prior to this, psychobiography as an approach to research was neglected. Runyan
(1988) in Pillay (2009) suggests that this may, in part, be attributed to factors such as the lack of exposure to psychobiographical research methods at both graduate and undergraduate 61 levels; also the criticisms with regards to the presumed lack of generalisability and subjective methodology employed in the approach (Anderson, 1981; Roberts, 2002). As a result of this, psychologists may have neglected it as an important research area where psychological theories could be evaluated and scrutinised and improved (Pillay, 2009). Consequently, in the past, a proven and effective approach to the study of personalities who have made extraordinary and often, controversial contributions to society was underutilised by researchers. However, the study of unique individual lives has become more accepted and utilized in recent years (Carlson, 1988; Runyan, 1982; Yin, 1994).
A psychobiographical approach to studying King‟s life has special value to the study of human, as well as personality development. It enables the researcher to obtain a complex picture of his life structure in a given time period and to describe its evolution over a span of years (Levinson, 1996). The psychobiographical design is well suited for gaining a concrete sense of the individual‟s life course, for generating new concepts, and for developing new hypotheses that are rooted in theory and relevant to the lived life (Levinson).
Pillay (2009) suggests that various definitions and descriptions of psychobiography exist.
Schultz (2005) describes psychobiography as the process of utilizing psychological theory and research to analyse the inner life of the subject. It looks at the entire life, birth to death, to determine and differentiate the main story of the subject‟s life (McAdams, 1994).
Psychobiography is not just a biography, but a way of doing psychology (Elms, 1994), which could contribute insights into process of personality development and the societal context of a subject being studied (Uys, 2007).
Anderson (1981) and Runyan (1984) asserts that the biographical approaches have received much criticism regarding ambiguity and controversy. Runyan explained that the psychological biographical method is criticised for its subjective methodology which makes a thorough, reliable, scientific study impossible. The counter argument from McAdams (1994) 62 is that psychologists would be neglecting their responsibility if they did not view the biographical information as important, and disregarding it would be a narrow view of science. Despite the criticism, there has been growing interest in biographical approaches, especially among personality psychologists (Elms, 1994; McAdams; Runyan).
A number of theorists have suggested that the best way of analysing a life in a particular context of time, is by utilising a psychologically informed biography (McAdams, 1994).
However, personality psychologists do not perceive themselves as biographers (Elms, 1994).
Howe (1997) and McAdams (1988) pointed out that the fields of biography and scientific psychology researched the lives of famous individuals with the aim of determining what made them famous and how differences in development occurred. Furthermore, both fields sought to find a method of observing and analysing the development of life over time. The field of life history research has also made great contributions to the field of psychobiography by developing and testing theories of human development (Yin, 2003).
Methodological Considerations of Psychobiographical Research
Stroud (2004) proposed that when conducting a psychobiography, certain considerations need to be made for the quality assurance of the research process. Booysen (2012) elaborates that these considerations are important as they aid the researcher in adhering to “scientific quality and trustworthiness of the study” (p.2). In undertaking the study of Martin Luther
King Junior the following considerations were made by the researcher, and they are discussed below: analysing the absent subject; researcher bias; reductionism; elitism and easy genre and inflated expectations.
Analysing an absent subject.
Cheze (2009) points out that analysing the absent subject could be seen as a disadvantage for psychobiographers due to the limited access on information of the subject being studied. 63
Barzun (1974) explains that the information that may have been left by the absent subject may now be a “product of chance,” and the “trickle from written remains” (e.g., diaries, letters, and literary works) is almost negligible (p. 46). In addition, Pieterse (2012) states that the researcher may only use information which is already in the public domain and further commented that these may be hard to come by.
Although researchers need to be aware of the possible limitations regarding the absent subject in psychobiographical research, Anderson (1981) states that psychobiographers may consider the advantages as well. Anderson suggests that psychobiographers may employ various sources of information in order to develop a holistic perspective of the individual‟s lived life. According to Anderson, Booysen (2012); Müller (2010) and Runyan (1982) these sources may include family, friends, colleagues, diaries, public speeches, written books, drawings, photographs, etc. (p. 41) and may include primary sources (information produced by King) and secondary sources (information produced on King).
Anderson (1981) stated that a common criticism of psychobiography is that less personal data relating to the subject under study is available to the psychobiographer than that which is available to psychotherapists. However psychobiographers and psychotherapists have different goals and therefore may require different methods of gathering and analysing data that are appropriate to achieving their goals. The researcher does not have contact with the subject to corroborate information. However, with regards to this limitation, the present researcher consulted the sources that were available to her. Various biographies regarding
King‟s life, such as that of Fairclough (1990), Hodgson (2010), Milton (1995), Nazel (1991),
Scloredt and Brown (1994), and Togni (1994) were consulted. The motion picture entitled:
Betty and Coretta, was another source used. From these sources the researcher was able to extract relevant data such as: King‟s childhood; his theology; his political philosophy; the 64 struggle for human rights; his physical and moral courage; his insistence on equality; his marital infidelity, as well his death and legacy.
Researcher bias.
Due to the nature of psychobiographical research psychobiographers often experience countertransference (Müller, 2010; Stroud, 2004). According to Anderson (1981) countertransference results when the researcher projects his/her view of people on the subject and in so doing, alters his/her impression of the subject. This could either result in the researcher idealising or degrading the subject. Elms (1994) described this slanted view of the subject, resulting from the researcher‟s feelings towards the subject, as researcher bias.
However, according to Müller (2010), this does not need to pose a problem as most biographers will have these biases. Anderson, Pieterse (2012) and Schultz (2005) suggest that biographers need to make every effort to be aware of their biases and to utilise some of the strategies to overcome them.
Pieterse (2012) suggests that researchers should reflect on their own feelings and their relationship to the subject, as well as the reasons behind the study, throughout the research process. These reflection sessions, could be in the form of “peer debriefing” where the researcher would engage with others knowledgeable regarding the research (Pieterse, p. 115).
This would allow the researcher to think critically and evaluate the process of research.
In order to minimise the bias of idealising and/or demeaning King, the present researcher purposefully employed the following strategies:
During the beginning stages the researcher kept a research journal, diarising
feelings and attitudes that arose during the literature study.
The researcher also had the opportunity to discuss the progress of the research,
including feelings and attitudes, with her continuous professional development 65
group. The researcher made use of this opportunity to discuss possible issues of
countertransference.
Lastly, the researcher also discussed new discoveries with her research
supervisors.
These strategies enabled the researcher to focus on maintaining an objective view of
King‟s life and to reduce potential researcher bias within the study.
Reductionism.
The incidence of reductionism within psychobiographical research decreases the scientific integrity of psychobiography (Booysen, 2012; Schultz, 2005). According to Schultz
(2005) reductionism can be identified within a psychobiography in a number of ways.
Pieterse (2012) explains these reductionism factors as “pathography”(excessive focus on pathology); “single cues”(only focusing on one part of the data) and “reductionism of development”(not focusing on the different stages of development) (p. 158). Authors such as
Anderson (1981), Booysen (2012); Elm (1994) Howe (1997) and Pieterse (2012) all suggest that the research subject should be viewed as a complete individual; across their lifespan; with their abilities and their shortcomings. However Muller (2009) states that because individuals are so “complex” it is not always possible to understand him or her completely (p.
43). In the past psychobiographies had a predominant focus on child development (Runyan,
1988), however Müller (2010, p. 43) adds that “while childhood is a key to personality, it not the only key”.
Data collected and analysed from multiple sources decreases the prevalence of reductionism
(Runyan, 1988). Elms (1994) suggested that the researcher should use more health-orientated theoretical approaches when analysing the subject, in order not to pathologise the subject.
In order to minimise reductionism in the psychobiography of King, the study was approached in the following way: 66
The researcher made use of a developmental theory, namely, Erikson‟s (1950)
Psychosocial Theory, which not only gave attention to childhood personality
development but rather to personality development across the lifespan. Müller (2010)
mentioned that Erikson‟s psychosocial approach (1950) is a health-orientated
approach and therefore aids the researcher in not pathologising the subject.
The researcher‟s literature review included data from a variety of contexts or areas of
King‟s life - family, political affiliation, socio-economic, etc.
Elitism and easy genre.
Researchers, such as Müller (2010) and Pieterse (2012) mentioned that psychobiography as a form of research has been criticised for being only directed at the social elite, for being susceptible to elitism, with a focus on famous individuals (Müller, 2010). According to Elm
(1994) this is not the case. Elm stated that the researcher is allowed to study anyone and that there are many different people that can be studied. Schultz (2005) stated that the individuals who are studied are often those who set the boundaries of the human mind. Runyan (1988) countered this criticism, regarding elitism of psychobiography. He argued that although psychobiographers tend to study subjects who are well-known, as a research method it is well suited for any individual from any social and cultural context (Runyan, 1988).
Some might argue that a study of King‟s life adds evidence to the elitist criticism.
However, the researcher selected King as a subject for the research based on the interest value of his life to the researcher. In a preliminary literature review, King was thought to be suitable for a psychobiographical study as a variety of sources of biographical data regarding his life was available.
Runyan (1988) argued against the fact that psychobiography has been criticised as being an easy form of research. He explained that in order for a researcher to produce a research of worth, and explore the complete individual, extensive research is required, thorough data 67 collection and good writing ability (Runyan).The present researcher aimed to produce a
“good psychobiography” (Schultz, 2005), and would have to agree with Runyan , that psychobiography is not an easy genre.
Inflated expectations.
Anderson (1981) suggested that the researcher should be mindful of the limitations to the findings of the research when conducting the research. The researcher should acknowledge that the explanations in the course of the research do not replace, but rather supplement existing explanations (Anderson). The findings should be seen as speculative, and the research cannot claim to have interpreted the entire complexity of another„s life (Anderson).
According to Pieterse (2012), the researcher should acknowledge that psychobiography is a form of explorative-descriptive research and thus be tentative in drawing conclusions and making generalisations (Elms, 1994; Schultz, 2005).
The focus of this study was aimed at describing the psychosocial development of King and was achieved by integrating his life with Erikson‟s (1950) theory of psychosocial development. An extended literature review assisted in becoming more familiar with the psychobiographical approach.
Psychobiographical Ethical Considerations
When engaging in psychobiographical research, there are a number of ethical considerations. In the selection of the individual to be studied, the question arises whether research should be conducted on a deceased or living individual (Elms, 1994). Pillay (2009) also mentions that it is important to consider which material to use as data sources, how the researcher would like to present it and to always be mindful of treating the information with respect. Runyan (1984) noted that the researcher should ethically respect the privacy of the subject and protect them, as well as any family or friends, from harm. These issues will have 68 an effect on how the research is conducted, the data collected and how the findings of the study are disseminated to the research community and public at large (Runyan, 1988).
The researcher therefore undertook this study with data regarding King which is already in the public domain. He has been deceased for over 10 years and the study does not pose any potential embarrassment to any living relative. This was done in accordance with the 1976 ethical guidelines set out by the American Psychiatric Association (Elms, 1994).
Research Design
The study of King‟s life can be described as psychobiographical research or life history research (Runyan, 1984) which spans across the entire life span of the subject and that utilised a qualitative single-case research design (Yin, 1994). According to McAdams (1988) this design explores an individual‟s life using psychological theory in a systematic manner. It further utilises the theory to make meaning from this life and to test the theory and its constructs (Yin, 1984). Therefore Elms (1994) states that the psychobiographical method also assists researchers in practising psychology.
The Psychobiographical Research Subject
The research subject was selected via a purposive sampling technique, as part of a single- subject qualitative psychobiograpy (De Vos, Strydom, Fouché and Delport, 2005). Purposive sampling can be described as occurring when a particular case is selected because it demonstrates some features and processes that are of interest for the study (De Vos et al.).
Elms (1994) noted that the main focus of most psychobiographical research is to provide a clear understanding of the psychology regarding the subject selected.
Howe (1997) claimed that to understand how certain children develop into unusually competent or creative individuals, one should utilise the psychological study of greatness with a scientific approach. According to Huysaman (1994), the purpose for undertaking a psychobiography is to gain a better understanding of the subject selected and one of the main 69 reasons for selecting a subject to study is because of the interest value and their prominence
(Stroud, 2004).
King serves as the single individual selected for study in this qualitative case study, based on the interest value to the researcher and significance of his life achievements. There is extensive literature and material on the life of King, however little if any of these have a psychological theme. There is one other psychobiography regarding King, however that study utilised a different theoretical framework.
Data Collection
Data for this study was obtained from several sources. The biographical information came from two types of source, primary and secondary documents (Pillay, 2009). The primary sources included documents produced by Martin Luther King Junior and the secondary sources were documents produced by other authors about his life history (Berg, 1995). The use of multiple sources allows for data triangulation or cross referencing, which according to
Yin (2003) is a means by which author bias can be overcome. In addition, multiple sources serve to enhance the internal validity of the data collected. Yin furthermore advocated the use of published material in psychobiographical studies as a stable source of data that can be continually reviewed.
The researcher constructed a data collection and analysis grid to map and collate all data collected on the life of King (see Appendix A). The grid includes Erikson‟s psychosocial stages of development as the primary theoretical framework. Alexander (1988) mentioned that a data collection and analysis grid enhances the dependability and consistency of auditing the data collection process. According to Alexander in Booysen (2012) the data collection of a study consists of three components: data which is collected should be relevant and published; data should contribute information regarding the subject‟s growth over the 70 years and the subject‟s psychosocial development. Alexander also adds that the data collected should provide information regarding the subject‟s life.
Alexander‟s (1988) “nine identifiers of salience” were used in collecting relevant data on
King‟s life in a transparent and replicable manner. Alexander reported that the primary concern in psychobiography is to extract the most meaningful units of personality structure and development from the productions of an individual.
Data Analysis
Analysing case study data can be done in various ways, however Yin (2003) described the process as examining of data sources, extracting the salient data, categorising the data in a systematic framework and combining the evidence to draw conclusions. He proposed two general strategies of data analysis which involve a) relying on the theoretical propositions and b) developing a case description. Objectives and propositions exist within each case study.
These propositions reveal a set of research questions that provide insight into the objectives of the study and the content of the theoretical approach. With the original purpose of the study in mind, this strategy involves developing a descriptive framework for the organisation and integration of the case study.
Irving Alexander (1988) proposed a different set of units of analysis according to the psychobiographical model. In this model, the personal data is approached according to two major methods of drawing out and highlighting the “core identifying units”: (a) letting the data reveal themselves, and (b) asking the data a question, based on the research problem.
Alexander identified the “nine principal identifiers of salience” which serve as guidelines to extract salient data (Pillay, 2009).
71
Alexander’s guidelines for the extraction of salient data.
Alexander (1988) proposed these guidelines in order to source essential information from data sources, so as to provide the researcher a clear idea of what information and descriptions are to be deemed important in the study. These nine guidelines are discussed below:
Primacy.
This refers to a moment, an incident which is the first in someone‟s life and which formed the basis of their beliefs. This relates to the link established between the concepts of first and that of importance; the information presented first is commonly perceived as being most important (Alexander, 1988). According to Alexander, in psychology, the concept of first relates to early experiences in the development of personality. These “firsts” could be related to memories from when the subject was young or the first paragraph of a journal entry or opening lines of an autobiography which set the tone and are worth exploring (Elms, 1994).
Alexander also describes how therapists display the importance of primacy by taking into account the first hour of communication with a client as salient information which may bear the “key to unravelling what ensues” (Alexander, p. 270).
Frequency.
This refers to that which occurs frequently. Frequency is derived from the relation to the importance and certainty surrounding a particular occurrence (Alexander, 1988). The assumption is that the more something is experienced; it may relate that it is important to the subject. Frequency refers to the assumption of a direct positive relationship between repetition and importance or certainty (Elms, 1994).
Emphasis.
There are three different forms of emphasis according to Alexander (1988). This refers to overemphasis when the researcher places a lot of attention or that which is ordinary.
Underemphasis when little or no attention is given to that which is important. Then lastly, 72
Alexander also refers to misplaced emphasis, when that which is not necessary is, unintentionally highlighted.
Uniqueness.
This refers to that which is singular or odd to that particular person. Uniqueness can be pointed out in the subject‟s verbal communication. However uniqueness does not only refer to verbal expression, but also to the content of what is being expressed by the subject, not to mention the subtle cues as well (Alexander, 1988).
Negation.
The subject‟s unconscious information which has been denied (Elms, 1994). There may be a particular belief or understanding of an individual which is in fact the opposite in reality.
Omission.
This refers to that which is missing from all the events and accounts of the subject.
Alexander noted that it is usually the attention to affect, which is omitted.
Error or distortion.
According to Alexander researchers have no way of checking if the information by the subject is correct. This refers to mistakes which can exist in the form of time, place and people.
Isolation.
The researcher is able to sense that something is out of place when information which does not make sense, stands alone. Elms (1994) described it as something which does not fit.
Incompletion.
This refers to an incomplete story (Fouché & Van Niekerk, 2005). Alexander (1988) explains that the incompletion may be due to avoidance of outcome or its implications. The researcher was guided by these nine principles of salience, to methodically and regularly 73 reflect during the data collection, and in “asking the data questions” related to the Erikson‟s theory and the research objectives.
Questioning the Data
In the process of extracting and analysing the data in this study, the researcher questioned the data based on Erikson‟s (1950) Psychosocial Theory of Development (Alexander, 1988).
The purpose of these questions was to gain information regarding the research subject and achieve the objectives of the study by highlighting main themes. The following questions were asked: “What body or section of the data will allow for the exploration and description of personality development as reflected in King‟s life?”
The conceptualisation and operationalization of the constructs of personality would need to be completed in order for this question to have been answered. Chapter 2 mainly focused on a comprehensive review of Erikson‟s theory, which contained clear definitions and descriptions of the concepts relevant to the study.
The second question posed was “To what extent do the data obtained regarding human development; as reflected in the life of Martin Luther King Junior, compare with Erikson‟s conceptualisation of the psychosocial stages of development?”
In order to answer this question, the relationship between the theoretical perspective suggested and the data collected, must be further discussed. Firstly, the extents to which the constructs of Erikson‟s psychosocial stages of development are evidenced in King‟s life were determined through a careful analysis of the organised data gathered through the grid.
Secondly, the process entails comparing the biographical data to the theory through a process of analytical generalization (Yin, 1994). This process is of crucial importance as it may generate hypotheses about the theory which could lead to further development of the theoretical framework.
74
Developing a Case Description
Yin (2003) explained that it is essential for researchers to construct a framework to organise data and integrate information as per the aim of the research study. The process of data management requires a clear working framework (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The researcher developed a conceptual matrix to categorise the stages of Erikson‟s (1950)
Psychosocial Development Theory over the lifespan of Martin Luther King Junior, so that the data could be revealed (Miles & Huberman).
Appendix A is the matrix of the Personality Development across the life span of Martin
Luther King Junior according to Erikson‟s (1950) Psychosocial Stages of Development. The vertical columns represent the process of psychosocial development and the horizontal columns represent the periods of historical development over King‟s life span.
The vertical column representing Erikson‟s (1950) psychosocial personality theory, only focuses on the six of the eight Psychosocial Stages. King lived to the age of 39, which fits within the first six stages of Erikson‟s Psychosocial stages. These were discussed in Chapter
2.
The horizontal rows represent his historical lifespan on the matrix. The first period of
King‟s life spans over 18 years and falls within the first five stages of Erikson‟s theory. The second period fits into the fifth and sixth stage. The remaining three periods of Kings life, all fit within the sixth stage of Erikson‟s theory. The life of Martin Luther King Junior is discussed in Chapter 3.
The reliability of the data analysis was enhanced by the consistency of the chronological timeline (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The findings and discussion derived from this conceptual framework follow in Chapter 5.
75
Reflexivity
According to Finlay (2002) reflexivity is described as the researcher‟s analysis of the role that he or she has played within the research. In qualitative research, reflexivity would increase the integrity and trustworthiness of the research. However, researchers should take into account, explore and evaluate how their perceptions and influence may have impacted the process of the research (Finlay). Reichertz (2010) suggests that the data be viewed as important and that the validity of the researcher‟s acquired knowledge has to be questioned.
Reichertz describes this process as „abductive inferencing’. Ashworth (2003) further highlights that research should be seen as collaborations between the researchers and researched (what may be termed „reflexivity‟). Meaning is therefore the result of the interdependent research, the subject, the observer and the collaboration between them
(Stroud, 2004). Therefore the knowledge created by the research does not have universal meaning and the analysis of the data by the researcher is not final.
Conclusion
In this chapter the research design and methodology of this study were discussed. In addition to this, the processes of allowing the data to reveal itself and the questioning of the data were highlighted. The findings and discussion of King‟s life are presented in Chapter 5.
76
Chapter 5
Findings and Discussion
Chapter Preview
This chapter presents the personality development of Martin Luther King Junior utilising
Erikson‟s Psychosocial Theory of Development. A discussion follows to further contextualise the findings that emerged.
Findings
Martin Luther King Junior was born on 15 January 1929 and was assassinated on 4 April
1968. During his 39 years of life he was very influential in the civil rights movement and his leadership left an indelible mark on society and ultimately the world. He was known as a powerful orator of non-violent action against the racial injustices of the time and was still
„fighting‟ these issues at the time of his death. Much has been said about who he was and what he did; details regarding his life are elaborated on in Chapter 3.
Erikson (1965) described the development of an individual in terms of the entire lifespan.
Stroud (2004) explained that while a lived life is studied, a researcher may be able to derive an explanation of certain aspects of a person‟s lived life, which may not be as obvious, through the use of psychological principles. In this regard, Erikson‟s theory was used to achieve this purpose. The data of King‟s life are presented according to the stages of
Erikson‟s theory, i.e. basic trust versus mistrust, autonomy versus shame and doubt, initiative versus guilt, industry versus inferiority, identity versus role confusion and intimacy versus isolation. In each section a brief explanation of the relevant psychosocial stage will be provided. This will be followed by a brief account of King‟s life during this stage and a discussion regarding the researcher‟s findings.
77
Basic trust versus mistrust (birth to 18 months).
The crisis to be resolved in this stage is between trust and mistrust. According to Corey
(2001), infants start to develop a sense of trust within their relationships with their mother, parent or caregiver. Meyer, Moore and Viljoen (2003) add that once this sense of trust is achieved, the infant develops trust in its surroundings. Louw and Louw (2007) went further to say that when trust develops, infants feel safe to “explore” their environment with a sense of self -confidence.
King was born on 15 January 1929. Unfortunately there is little information regarding
King as an infant. Togni (1994) mentioned that he was almost a „still born‟ baby, which could mean that there were complications during his birth. He was the middle child and the first son. King was given his father‟s name Michael, which was later changed to Martin (details explained in chapter 3). King, according to Fairclough (1990), recalled growing up in a loving family. Hodgson (2010) described King as being born into a happy prosperous household.
Discussion of the first stage.
Based on the descriptions of King‟s family of origin, the researcher inferred that King‟s relationships with his caregivers was such that he could develop trust and could develop the self-confidence to explore his environment. Infants who are able to trust are able to gain the virtues of hope and faith that there will be a resolution(Boeree, 2006).
The epigenetic principle proposed by Erikson explains that individual development occurs through a “predetermined unfolding of our personalities” (Boeree, 2006, p. 6). Furthermore, an individual‟s progress is influenced in part by the environment in which they find themselves, and in part by their success or failure in all the previous stages (Welchman,
2000). Therefore, in the exploration of his later life, King clearly demonstrated that he had resolved the conflicts of earlier years. He mistrusted the regime of his time, but showed great 78 trust in the potential of individuals to behave righteously. Welchman (2000) stated that trust is a state of being and responding.
The work that King did as a leader of non-violent protest action against the racial segregation of his time, demonstrated this state of responding, and testified to the attainment of the virtues of hope and faith in his early developmental stages. Given that King showed these qualities, the researcher deduces that both his physiological and social needs were adequately met during this stage (Fairclough, 1990; Nazel).
Autonomy versus shame and doubt (18 months to three years).
The second stage of Erikson‟s psychosocial developmental theory occurs between the ages of 18 months to three years, i.e. the toddler years. The toddler years are when children want to explore, experiment, and test their limits (Corey, 2001). They start walking as a result of the trust that they have acquired in the safety of their environment in the previous stage of development (Maier, 1988; Morris, 1996). The central struggle (crisis) in this stage is between a sense of self-reliance (autonomy) and a sense of self-doubt and shame (Corey). If children are discouraged from attempting to pursue their own ideas and activities, it hinders their capacity to deal with the world. Shame and doubt may be the result (Corey).
Again the literature review did not present information about King‟s life between the ages of 18 months to three years. The literature illustrated that although loving, King‟s father was a strict disciplinarian with a temper, who imposed his authority with the aid of regular corporal punishment (Fairclough, 1990; Togni, 1991).
Discussion of the second stage.
The researcher speculated that even though it is likely that King had opportunities to explore his environment and to experiment, his father might have set the limits to that
„exploration‟. The researcher hypothesises that the stern authority of King‟s father might have deterred his exploration to some extent. This could have resulted in shame or doubt. 79
However Boeree (2006) stated that some shame and doubt is “not only inevitable, but beneficial” (p. 9). The researcher notes that King did not develop the impulsiveness which is the „maladaptive tendency‟ nor the „malignancy‟ of compulsiveness. Both of these characteristics are not evident in the life of King, and thus the researcher deduces that shame or guilt experienced in this stage were not excessive.
The successful resolution of this stage results in individuals having a sense of their own
„will‟ and the ability to control themselves (Hook, 2002). Erikson (1963, p. 254) stated that
“From a sense of self-control without loss of self-esteem comes a lasting sense of goodwill and pride”. Once again the use of examples from King‟s later life confirms the resolution of the crisis in this stage. Such examples are: King‟s parents taught him to think differently to that of many other individuals at the time. When King expressed anger about racial segregation, his father taught him to “Love your enemies…that‟s what the bible says”
(Milton, 1995, p.16). Despite dissatisfaction with this teaching, King was able to control his behaviour according to what was taught to him at home, and with the help of his parents, his self-esteem was buffered. In his adult life he developed more insight into this teaching.
Initiative versus guilt (three to five years).
The basic task to achieve in this stage is a sense of competence and initiative. This is derived from children having the opportunity to choose which activity they would like to engage in (Corey, 2001). Corey further stated that the freedom to choose assists in developing a “positive view of self” and motivates individuals to complete projects. Between the ages of three and five years children develop physically and verbally and acquire more responsibility for their bodies, behaviours, toys and pets etc. and so their initiative increases (Santrock,
2006). However if choices are made for them, guilt develops from attempting things on their own (Corey). Guilt also emanates from the belief that something is wrong and will result in disappointment (Boeree, 2009). 80
King was described as a bright boy (Schloredt & Brown, 1994). At the age of 5 he memorised scriptures from the bible, and would present these in church. As King‟s mother was a teacher, she taught him to read and write before he went to school (Nazel, 1991;
Schloredt & Brown).
Discussion of the third stage.
There is little literature that demonstrates his use of initiative and whether these actions, i.e. memorising scripture and presenting them in church, were motivated by his need to be involved in the church service, or his parent‟s need to involve him. There is insufficient information regarding how he utilised the knowledge of scriptures he memorised and how he was able to demonstrate his initiative. Furthermore, the literature does not show that King expressed excessive guilt during this stage. Guilt is sometimes identified through the display of inhibition. Inhibition is used to avoid tasks, and thereby avoid guilt. There is evidence from King‟s life that even at the young age of 5, he was very active, i.e. reading, writing, memorising scripture and presenting it in church and little evidence for inhibition. There is thus evidence of his engagement in activities. This then proves that there was no inhibition.
Therefore, successfully resolving the crisis of this stage resulted in King acquiring the virtues of purpose and courage (Erikson, 1978).
Industry versus inferiority (five to 13 years).
Erikson (1965) described this stage as a “kind of entrance into life”, where children need to consolidate that which they have learnt in the previous three stages. Children learn to read, write, do basic sums and produce their own creations (Cherry, 2013). As a result of their newly acquired skills, children develop a sense of industry and success, as they are proud of themselves and what they have set out to do and achieve (Morris, 1996, Sadock & Sadock,
2003). When children fail or are unable to attain the goals they have set, a sense of inadequacy and inferiority results (Corey, 2001). 81
During the fourth stage, King went to school and was questioned about what he should do with his life. At the age of 6, King sang songs for the congregation (Schloredt & Brown,
1994). It can be assumed that singing a solo for the congregation in the presence of his father and mother made King very proud and added to his sense of industry. Schloredt and Brown described an occasion where King, after hearing a sermon from a guest minister, was impressed and said: “Someday, I‟m going to get me some big words like that!”(p.10). In other words, when he grew up he would like to use words and be impressive like the speaker was. King‟s first experience of racial prejudice occurred in this stage. When he was about to start school, he was told by the boy‟s mother that he could no longer play with his White childhood friend (Schloredt & Brown, 1994). King had two nicknames as he progressed through this stage, the first was “shrimp” because he was short and “Tweed” for the popular tweed jacket he wore.
Discussion of the fourth stage.
Although King was very industrious, he experienced real threats during this stage. The incident with his friend, and later the fact that he was “teased” for being short and a minister‟s son, could have caused him to develop a sense of inferiority. However, this “crisis” could have been resolved through his parent‟s encouragement. As his parents attempted to assist young King to make sense of his “hurt” feelings, they explained to him that he should never believe that he was inferior, saying that it was simply ignorance and prejudice that made people behave in the way that they did (Hodgson, 2010; Nazel,1991; Schloredt &
Brown). Sadock and Sadock (2003) asserted that the encouragement of both parents and teachers are valuable in developing the sense of industry and success; thus the support of his parents may have buffered King from the feelings of inferiority.
Erikson (1965) asserted that children develop the need to share their social skills, not with family and teachers, but with a wider social network, and consequently friendships are 82 formed (Corey, 2001). At school King was teased for his short stature and for being a minister‟s son (Milton, 1995). Milton further explained that King competed extra hard on every playing field to compensate for these perceptions. On the basketball court, King wanted to make every shot himself and did not like to pass the ball. McLeod (2006) stated that a bit of failure might be necessary in order for children to develop a sense of modesty. The researcher would hypothesise that King perhaps wanted to prove himself industrious, and capable. Hook (2002) suggested that the ability to communicate and receive affirmation from peers, as well as making comparisons, is important at this stage. Over time, King went from the nickname “Shrimp” (for being short) to “Tweed” (for a tweed jacket he often wore) as he became popular at high school (Milton; Schloredt & Brown, 1994), communicating the affirmation that he received from his peers.
According to Erikson (1978) and Cherry (2013), children successful in this stage will be able to gain the virtue of competence, which is the belief in their own abilities to handle tasks set before them. If children struggle to achieve industry they may conclude that they are inadequate, for which there is little clear evidence in King‟s behaviour.
Identity versus role-confusion: (13 to 21 years).
This is the stage when adolescence starts and childhood ends. Corey (2001) stated that this stage of development is a time for testing limits, breaking dependant ties and for establishing a new identity. Identity may also be understood as the way in which an individual perceives themselves in relation to their world (Boeree, 2006).
From the age of 12 and throughout this stage, King displayed the tendency of questioning.
He questioned his religious beliefs, the racial segregation of the time and was concerned about which profession to follow.
83
Discussion of the fifth stage.
Corey (2005) asserted that there are major conflicts which arise around the clarification of self-identity, life goals, and life‟s meaning. King experienced conflict with the norms and rules of society in his quest for establishing his identity (Erikson 1982; Meyer et al, 2003).
Milton (1995) relayed a situation where King felt so strongly about his dislike toward White people that he used angry words in the presence of his father. On another occasion at the age of 15, while travelling on a bus with his teacher, he again displayed a “defiant spirit” (Milton;
Schloredt & Brown, 1994) when asked to give up his seat to White patrons. King initially refused before consenting. Milton quoted King as saying, “It was the angriest I have ever been in my life” (p. 11). King was most certainly angry, however, he was also testing his limits (Corey, 2001). These incidents may be seen as King testing his boundaries, and exploring who he was in relation to the society he found himself in. Boeree (2006) confirmed this by asserting that identity can be defined as the way in which an individual perceives themselves in relation to their world.
King was often exposed to segregation of the two ethnic groups every time he left his neighbourhood (Milton; Schloredt & Brown 1994). These experiences, according to
Schloredt and Brown, contributed to King‟s developing a dislike towards White people.
Speculatively, King might have identified that there was a difference as to who he was in his own neighbourhood and who he was outside of it. The realisation of this discrepancy must have created conflict for him when defining himself in relation to others. The pivotal influence to his identity is seen in King saying of the train incident: “this indignity was the foundation stone of my commitment to the civil rights struggle” (Togni, 1994, p. 91). Corey suggested that during this stage of adolescence individuals have the task of integrating a system of values that will give their life direction and they would need to make key decisions regarding their values, among other things. 84
Models are important to adolescents in their search for identity. Erikson (1963, 1982) stated that adolescents place idols and ideals as the guardians of their identity. King senior was a bank director, a business man, served on the board of a civil rights organisation, had a
Doctors degree in divinity and was the reverend of a church (Schloredt & Brown 1994; Togni
1994). He was a strong role model for King, who is quoted as saying “My admiration for him was a great moving factor, he set forth a noble example I didn‟t mind following” (Fairclough,
1990, p. 75). King preached his first sermon at the age of 17 and became an officially ordained reverend on the 25 February 1948 (Nazel, 1991). The researcher made the inference that King had developed the ability to have confidence in the knowledge of who he was and had figured out how he could meaningfully contribute to his environment.
King graduated from college at the age of 19 and continued to pursue his studies at
Crozer Theological Seminary towards a Bachelor‟s Degree in Divinity (Fairclough, 1990;
Milton,1995; Nazel; Togni, 1994). According to Corey (2001), King had made a few key decisions during his adolescence regarding his religious beliefs and direction as well as his value system. Hodgson, (2010, p. 19) quoted King as saying: “I am fundamentally a clergyman, a Baptist preacher. This is my being and my heritage, for I am also the son of a
Baptist preacher, the grandson of a Baptist preacher, and the great-grandson of a Baptist preacher”.
At seminary school, King still experienced what Erikson (1963; 1982) described as adolescents seeking acceptance and affirmation from their peers. Milton (1995) explained that from the 106 students at the seminary, only six were Black. King was very aware of the perceptions White people had of Black people, therefore he overcompensated (Nazel, 1991).
Nazel stated that King would arrive early, he wore suit and tie every day, his room was spotless and he was serious most of the time. The researcher postulates that King might have found himself in a new environment and therefore continued the “fight for identity”. 85
An inspirational person, who King regarded as a role-model at the time, was Dr. Benjamin
Mays (Fairclough 1990), who inspired him to believe that the church could play a greater role in the society. He explained to King that if the church were to retain its status as the cornerstone of Black African American life, it needed educated ministers who would adapt the Christian message to modern realities, addressing the worldly concerns of ordinary
Blacks (Fairclough). Based on these words the researcher believes that King was set on a path to become a minister, be educated and address the concerns that Black people faced. His self- identity and life goals were summarised in these ideals. Through Dr May‟s sermons King changed his mind about wanting to be a lawyer and decided to become a minister after all
(Schloredt & Brown, 1994). According to Corey (2001) adolescents struggle to define who they are, where they are going and how to get there. King‟s resolution of this task can be seen in the decision that he made here.
King‟s identity became established in these beliefs and the virtue of fidelity, which was a sense of loyalty and responsibility towards the cause. This was what he was known for.
According to Nazel (1991) King‟s goal was to find a system or method that would bring about a peaceful change in the racial conditions that oppressed Black Americans, particularly in the South of America. In searching for this system, King read the work of many philosophers and theologians that challenged his beliefs. The ones who made the biggest impression on him were Walter Ransenbush for his belief that the church must deal with the total man (Togni, 1994) and Reinhold Nejbuhr who enabled King to find his own “personalist theology” (Hodgson, 2010, p.30). However, the greatest influence of his life was the writings and actions of Mahatma Gandhi (Nazel). King adopted and continued to live the philosophy of Gandhi and the method of “active non-violent resistance” until the day he died (Togni, p.
93). 86
The virtue of fidelity and devotion is gained at the resolution of this stage (Erikson, 1978).
Fidelity means to find your place in society, contributing to it and maintaining loyalties regardless of the flaws you may be aware of (Erikson, 1968). If this is not achieved, the result could be ego-diffusion (not being able to settle on a stable sense of self). King was able to resolve the conflict he experienced with the church, its ideologies, and questions around
Christianity. He worked through his question of how being a church minister could be meaningful to the community. This journey ultimately led to gaining the virtue of fidelity.
Intimacy versus isolation (21 to 40 years)
According to Corey (2005) this is the stage in which the identity that was achieved in the previous stage is shared with another individual. It is the sixth stage of Erikson‟s psychosocial theory and it occurs between the ages of 21 to 40. The young adult, according to
Erikson (1963) is now ready to foster partnerships, form affiliations and develop their sense in intimacy. Failure to develop intimate relationships can lead to alienation and isolation
(Corey, 2001). The virtue of love and affiliation results from this stage.
King was greatly influenced by Gandhi who believed that love and truth were the most powerful forces in the world, so strong that they could defeat any army equipped with guns
(Milton, 1995). Nazel (1991) asserted that it was through the Gandhian emphasis on love and non-violence that King discovered the method of social reform that he had been seeking. The discovery of this philosophy impacted King‟s life throughout the events of this stage, specifically King‟s quest for love.
Discussion of the sixth stage.
During the stage of Identity versus Role-confusion, it was mentioned that King‟s experiences of the segregation and discrimination had caused him to become angry. However during this stage of his life he was able to conceptualise and integrate the constructs of love and intimacy, more than before. King realised that responding to the struggle with violence 87 would be futile as Black people were outnumbered (Fairclough, 1990). King is quoted as saying: “Non-violence is a powerful and just weapon. It is a weapon unique in history, which cuts without wounding and enables the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals” (Nazel,
1991, p.99).
Erikson believed that when an individual is able to master the conflicts of Identity versus role confusion, he approaches adulthood (Corey, 2001). In the previous stage, King was elected class president, class valedictorian, and received a prestigious citation, honouring him as the most outstanding student. He also received a financial grant for university studies and his parents bought him a new car as a graduation present. The researcher believes that in the process of learning and reaching these milestones King crystallised his identity and this gave him the ability and confidence to achieve intimacy with another.
According to Mooney (2010) individuals in this stage are now aware of their relationships with others, especially family. King was quoted as saying: “It is quite easy for me to think of a God of love mainly because I grew up in a family where love was central and where loving relationships were ever present” (Fairclough, 1990, p. 12). Erikson (1964) stated that the love gained in this stage is the love received in childhood and adolescence. King could reflect on his relationship with his family and gained a new affinity towards them (Fairclough). As stated before, the Christian teaching which he previously did not understand, that one must love one‟s enemies, was now paramount to his philosophy (Milton, 1991). King left university convinced that Christian love and non-violence had the potential to transform society (Fairclough).
The developmental task of this stage is to form intimate relationships and failure to do so may result in isolation, being excluded from the norm, such as dating, mating and mutually loving relationships (Boeree, 2006). King had an active social life as a student at Boston
University as well as after he graduated. He did many things elaborately, even to the point of 88 having a private language between him and his friends to express their appreciation for young women (Hodgson, 2010). Boeree asserted that intimacy in terms of sexual mutuality refers to giving and receiving of physical and emotional connections and other elements that are usually associated with healthy relationships. As part of his social interactions, King dated several woman, most likely a part of striving towards the intimacy referred to by Boeree. But according to Nazel (1991), his relationships were not serious, although two relationships are identified as significant, namely with a White girl, Betty, (Hodgson), and with Juanita Sellers.
These relationships did not last. King was described as a “charming man who dated many women in his life” (Hodgson, 2010, p. 35).
King had matured to the point of capability for intimacy and sought to share his love with someone. Corey (2001) stated that the ability to form intimate relationships is a “key characteristic of the psychologically mature person” (p. 80), and he showed progress in this regard as King grew tired of the bachelor life (Togni, 1994). He subsequently met his wife
Coretta in 1952. Erikson (1950) asserted that if an individual is able to find and lose him/ herself s in another, then the individual has achieved intimacy. Coretta had the four characteristics that King was looking for: beauty, intelligence, a vivid personality and strength of character. King told her that she was everything he was looking for in a wife on the first date (Hodgson; Milton, 1995: Schloredt & Brown, 1994). Makstrom and Kalmanir
(2001) further suggested that the virtue of love and fidelity contain the trait of commitment.
King and Coretta were married in 1953.
King had four children with Coretta, Yoki, their daughter, being the first born during this time in their lives. This added a new dimension to King‟s love, as Boeree (2006) puts it, the intimacy which relates to the giving and receiving of physical, but also emotional connections. 89
Young people are able to develop and maintain healthy friendships, where intimacy is also achieved (Santrock, 2006). This includes an awareness of the capacity for kinship and like- mindedness. King befriended a fellow pastor, Ralph Abernathy, who became an activist like
King, he travelled with King wherever he went and was with him at the time of his death
(Hodgson, 2010). Ralph Abernathy even wrote a book about his friendship with King, after
King had died, revealing some of their experiences.
Erikson explained that intimacy can also mean an individual‟s “capacity to commit despite the sacrifices and compromises” (1965, p.255). King became very popular and his popularity caused him to be away from home for long periods of time (Schloredt &
Brown, 1994). Between 1957 and 1958 he gave about 208 speeches all over the country, managed to do his work as a minister, acted as president of the SCLC and wrote a book
(Schloredt & Brown). King missed home and his wife, and found it difficult to miss so much of the children growing up (Schloredt & Brown). Both King and Coretta had to endure the time apart as they were both committed to the cause.
During King‟s time at Crozer, he developed an interest in women and “a habit of sexual adventure that continued after his generally happy marriage” (Hodgson, 2010, p. 26).
Hodgson asserted that as a young man, as well as a married man, King was reported to have had repeated sexual infidelities. Hodgson reported on two serious relationships King had during his marriage to Coretta. Hodgson stated that throughout 1964 the Federal Bureau of
Investigation had wire-tapped most of the establishments King stayed in during his travels.
They transcribed the recordings of what the Federal Bureau of Investigation deemed as immorality and profanity and offered it to most newspapers and magazines, none of which would use the material. Hodgson further stated that King did not deny these allegations and many of King‟s friends confirmed them. Although the marriage was strained, Coretta made no mention of it and publically continued to support King (Hodgson). Boeree (2006) stated 90 that Erikson called the maladaptive form of intimacy, promiscuity, referring particularly to the tendency to become intimate too freely, too easily and without depth to the experience of intimacy.
The researcher would refer back to Markstrom and Kalmanir (2001) who stated that the virtue of fidelity obtained in the previous section is required to uphold the commitment made to others. King had obtained the virtue of fidelity; however, based on the findings above;
King might have committed to his wife and children, but not exclusively. This does not negate the fact that King had sufficiently obtained fidelity and love as the virtues of this stage. Welchman (2000) confirmed Erikson‟s belief that in order for there to be a „healthy‟ resolution of each stage, there should be a balance between the developmental tasks of that stage; a balance, the researcher believes King managed to maintain.
Time magazine published the following on 3 January 1964:
Few can explain the extraordinary King mystique. Yet he has an
indescribable capacity for empathy that is the touchstone of leadership. By
deed and by preachment, he has stirred in his people a Christian
forbearance that nourishes hope and smothers injustice. (Schloredt &
Brown, 1994, p. 51)
Conclusion
King‟s goal was to find a system, a method that would bring about peaceful change in racial conditions that oppressed Black Americans, particularly in the South. The researcher has highlighted Martin Luther King Junior‟s life, by using Erikson‟s (1950) Psychosocial
Developmental Theory. The researcher hoped to provide the reader with a new view of who
Martin Luther King Junior was and what contributed to his development. In the following chapter the conclusions and limitations of this study and recommendations for future research are discussed. 91
Chapter 6
Conclusion, Limitations, And Recommendations
Chapter Preview
This is the final chapter of this treatise. The aim of this study was to explore and describe the development of King‟s life, utilising Erik Erikson‟s Psychosocial Development Theory.
The following section highlights the conclusions drawn, describes the limitations of the current psychobiographical case study and offers a number of recommendations for future research in this area. This is followed by the final conclusion.
Conclusions of The Study
In the previous chapter, the researcher concluded that King‟s life demonstrated the virtues outlined by Erikson‟s (1950) Psychosocial Theory of Development, within the age ranges stipulated. The crises from the different stages were resolved and the virtues of hope, will, purpose, competence, fidelity and love were obtained. The researcher concludes that King resolved the various developmental crises within the age ranges proposed by Erikson‟s theory. Furthermore the researcher concludes, through the patterns which emerged from the analysis and discussions that King worked hard to establish his identity with the central theme of love and non-violence.
Limitations of The Current Research Study.
The criticisms related to Erikson‟s theory are discussed in detail in Chapter 2. In Chapter 4 a discussion ensued regarding the methodological issues and difficulties that would require careful consideration when conducting a qualitative psychobiographical research study. The researcher discussed the following considerations: analysing the absent subject, researcher bias, reductionism, elitism and easy genre and inflated expectations. In this section criticisms of the current study are discussed: 92
The researcher notes that summarising a life is a challenging task, in that there are various levels of data to consider and also to incorporate and explore them within the framework of a theory. The framework discussed in Chapter 4 assisted the researcher to ask the data specific questions. However, what was limiting to the researcher, was reporting on the wealth of information. Therefore the focus was on King‟s personality development and not on his
Christian faith development which was found to be a big driving force in King‟s life. Details of this are discussed in Chapter 3 and further elaborated on in Chapter 5. The researcher discovered that there were more primary sources of King‟s speeches and written works which exist. The researcher believes that this information would have added much depth and value to the study. Not having explored these was a limitation to the current study.
As per Erikson‟s epigenetic principle, each stage has an optimal time, and Generativity versus Stagnation occurs during 40 to 60 years. The literature review revealed that King started to develop the sense of care which is the virtue derived from them seventh stage.
King died at the age of 39, approaching middle adulthood and before his death became depressed when he looked at the disintegration of what he had fought for during his life. Not being able to reflect on this stage due to the age range restriction, posed a limitation to the researcher in that the researcher could not reflect on this stage in the findings. The researcher speculates that reflecting on this stage, might have yielded valuable information.
Interviews of living relatives were not conducted, due to this study being a master‟s thesis, produced in South Africa, without the availability or access to living relatives. Although there was an abundance of biographical data available regarding his political involvement and life events, there were still gaps or little to no information regarding certain areas in King‟s life. These gaps in information were particularly related to information regarding his family life, his experience in his role of father and regarding his psychological state. The information regarding his childhood lacked depth and could have contributed to the exploration of King‟s 93 personality and character traits which became evident in later years. The researcher believes that the availability of such information would have added more depth to the study.
While conducting the study, the researcher was aware of and kept the consideration for researcher bias in mind, however it must be declared that the researcher might have been biased initially in the selection of King as the researcher subject. King was a familiar figure in the home of the researcher, as his picture and “I have a dream” speech was displayed in her home. During the literature review, the researcher became aware of the subject‟s character flaws and limitations. The processes explained in Chapter 4 aided the researcher in maintaining objectivity and hopefully reduced the experience of researcher bias.
As previously mentioned, the researcher became aware of the complexity of King as the research subject and therefore acknowledged that his development cannot be interpreted easily nor completely. As the research study is explorative-descriptive in nature, the conclusions drawn are purely speculative and cannot be generalised. The researcher noted that although the study provided a scientific contribution towards the psychological understanding, Martin Luther King Junior, his life transcends that which can be explained by theory.
Value of The Study
The researcher has produced the second known psychobiographical research study on the life of Martin Luther King Junior as it unfolded through the developmental stages proposed by Erikson. The researcher utilised Erikson‟s (1950) theory as it views humans as biological, psychological and social beings, who are shaped by an interactive mix of forces (Corey,
2005). The aim of the study was to explore King‟s life and to demonstrate the importance of the developmental tasks and the resolution of the crises, throughout his life span. Erikson‟s theory provided the framework for the exploration and description of King‟s lifespan development. The theory was of great value as the researcher could use the theory as a base 94 from which to construct the data analysis grid as displayed in Appendix A. By applying
Erikson‟s theory to the life of King, which only stretched into young adulthood, the researcher could note patterns and make inferences regarding the causes of the results. The researcher was also aware of the limitations and criticisms of Erikson‟s theory (as discussed in section 2.6), however the researcher still found great value in it.
The researcher selected King for the study through a purposive sampling technique, based on the individual‟s significance and interest value (Stroud, 2004). King, as discussed in
Chapter 3, was a dynamic man and prominent leader during the black American civil rights movement. Due to King‟s significance as a public figure, multiple sources were available from which to extract data. These sources were discussed in Chapter 4 in more detail. This was valuable as the multiple sources of information aided the researcher in enhancing the internal validity of the data collected (Yin, 1994).
During the process of conducting the research, and the development of the findings and discussion, the researchers personally developed new insights into the life of Martin Luther
King Junior. The value of engaging the material sources and extracting the salient information discussed in section 6.3.1 regarding analysing the absent subject allowed the researcher to have a more objective view of the subject, once revered. According to
Huysaman (1994), the purpose for undertaking a psychobiography is to gain a better understanding of the subject selected.
Recommendations for Future Research
The research findings are speculative and by no means conclusive. The research findings can therefore be seen as a foundation from which to build future research and to produce a more in-depth, comprehensive view of the research subject, King. The researcher recommends utilising an additional theoretical approach, which may add value to the body of knowledge available. The following are suggested: 95
A research focus on King‟s faith development, utilising Fowler‟s (1981) theory of
faith development (Fowler, 1995).
Utilising systems theory to explore and describe King‟s development and the systemic
contexts within which he was embedded.
If more information on his childhood could be obtained from King‟s close relatives,
then object relations theory could explore the impact of the “mother –child”
relationship on his life.
Final Conclusion
This chapter outlined and discussed the conclusions, limitations, as well as the recommendation for possible future research, with regards to King‟s life. The primary aim of the current research study was to explore and describe King‟s life from the theoretical perspective of Erikson‟s Theory of Psychosocial Development. It is the researcher‟s opinion that based on the conclusion and limitations discussed; the primary aim of the study has been largely achieved. The study contributes towards a deeper understanding of King‟s life and the development of the psychiographical research locally and internationally if the findings of the study are published.
96
References
Alexander, I.E. (1988). Personality, psychological assessment, and psychobiography.
Journal of Personality, 56(1), 265-294.
Alexander, I.E. (2005). Erikson and psychobiography, psychobiography and Erikson. In W.T.
Schultz (Ed.), Handbook of psychobiography (pp. 265-284). London, England: Oxford
University Press.
Anderson, J.W. (1981). The methodology of psychological biography. Journal of
Interdisciplinary History, xi(3), 455-475.
Anthony, P., Blige, M., Isaacs, K., Johnson, J. & Sanitsky, L. (Producers), & Simoneau, Y.
(Director), (2013). Betty and Coretta [Motion picture]. Toronto, Canada: Lifetime.
Ashworth, P. (2003). The origins of qualitative psychology. In J.A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative
psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 4-24). London, England: Sage.
Barlow, V. M., & Durand, D. H. (2005). Abnormal psychology: An integrative approach (3rd
ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group.
Barzun, J. (1974). Clio and the doctors: Psycho-history, quanto-history, and history.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Berg, B.L. (1995). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bloland, S. E. (1999). Fame: the Power and cost of a fantasy. Atlantic Monthly, 284, 51 -62.
Boeree, G.D. (2006). General psychology. Erik Erikson. Retrieved August 12, 2013 from
http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/genpsyerikson.html
Booysen, D. D. (2012). A psychobiography of Friedrich Nietzsche. Unpublished
Masters dissertation, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South
Africa.
Carlson, R. (1988). Exemplary lives: The use of psychobiography for theory development. 97
Journal of Personality, 56(1), 265-294.
Cherry, K. (n.d). Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development. Psychosocial
development in infancy and early childhood. Retrieved August 12, 2013 from
http://psychology.about.com/od/psychosocialtheories/a/psychosocial.htm
Cheze, E. (2009) Jefferey Lionel Dahmer: A psychobiographical study. Unpublished
Masters dissertation, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South
Africa.
Coles, R. (1970). Erik. H. Erikson: The growth of this work. Toronto, Canada: Little, Brown
& Company.
Corey, G. (2001). Theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy. (6th ed.).
Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole-Thomson Learning.
Corey, G. (2005). Theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy (7th ed.). Belmont,
CA: Brooks/Cole-Thomson Learning.
Craig, G.J. (1996). Human development (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Crain, W.C. (2000). Theories of development: Concepts and applications (4th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Craig, G. J., & Baucum, D. (2002). Human development (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
De Vos, A.S., Strydom, H., Fouché, C.B., & Delport, C.S. (2005). Research at grassroots.
For the social sciences and human service professions (3rd ed.). Pretoria, South Africa:
Van Schaik.
Douvan, E. (1997). Erik Erikson: critical times, critical theory. Child Psychiatry and Human
Development, 28(1), 15-21.
Elms, A. (1994). Uncovering lives: The uneasy alliance of biography and psychology. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press. 98
Erikson, E.H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York, NY: Norton.
Erikson, E.H. (1959). Young man Luther. New York, NY: Norton.
Erikson, E.H. (1963). Youth: Fidelity and diversity. In E.H. Erikson (Ed.), Youth: change and
challenge. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Erikson, E. H. (1965). Childhood and society. London, England: Penguin.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and Crisis. London, England: Faber & Faber.
Erikson, E. H. (1969). Gandhi's Truth: On the origins of militant non-violence. New York:
Norton.
Erikson, E.H. (1971). On the nature of psycho-historical evidence: In search of Gandhi, In
Greenstein & M. Lerner (Eds.), A source book for the study of personality and
politics. Chicago, IL: Markham.
Erikson, E.H. (1975). Life history and the historical moment. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
Erikson, E.H. (1978). Adulthood. New York: W. W. Norton.
Erikson, E.H. (1980). Identity and the life cycle. New York: W. W. Norton.
Erikson, E. H. (1982). The life cycle completed. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
Fairclough, A. (1990). Makers of the twentieth century: Martin Luther King. London,
England: Sphere Books.
Finlay, L. (2002). Outing the researcher: The provenance, process and practice of
reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 12(4), 531–545.
doi:10.1177/104973202129120052
Fouché, J.P. & Van Niekerk, R. (2005). Psychobiography: Methodological criticisms,
constraints and strategic considerations. Paper presented at the International Society of
Theoretical Psychology Congress, Cape Town, South Africa.
Fowler, J. W. (1995). Stages of faith: The psychology of human development and the quest
for meaning. New York, NY: HarperCollins 99
Friedman, L. J. (1999). Identity’s architect: A biography of Erik Erikson. London, England
: Free Association Books.
Hodgson, G. (2010). Martin Luther King. London, England: Quercus.
Hook, D. (2002). Erikson‟s psychosocial stages of development. In D. Hook, J. Watts, & K.
Cockcroft (Eds.), Developmental psychology. Cape Town, South Africa: University of
Cape Town Press.
Howe, M. (1997). Beyond Psychobiography: Towards more effective syntheses of
psychology and biography. British Journal of Psychology, 88, 235–248.
Huysamen, G. (1994). Methodology for the social and behavioural sciences. Pretoria, South
Africa: Sigma Press.
Lacan, J. (1977). Ecrits. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
Levinson, D. J. (1996). The seasons of a woman’s life. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.
Louw, D., & Louw, A. (2007). Child and adolescent development. University of the Free
State, Bloemfontein: Psychology Publications.
Maier, H.W. (1988). Three theories of child development (3rd ed.). New York, NY:
University Press of America.
Markstrom, C.A., & Kalmanir, H.M. (2001). Linkages between the psychosocial stages of
Identity and Intimacy and the ego strengths of Fidelity and Love. Identity: An
International Journal of Theory and Research, 1(2), 179-196.
Massey, R.F. (1986). Erik Erikson: Neo-Adlerian. Individual Psychology: Journal of
Adlerian Theory, Research & Practice, 42(1), 65 -91.
McAdams, D.P. (1988). Biography, narrative and lives: An introduction. Journal of
Personality, 56(1), 1-18.
McAdams, D.P. (1994). The person: An introduction to personality psychology (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Harcourt Brace College. 100
McKay, J. P., Hill, B. D., Buckler, J., Ebrey, P. B., Beck, R. B., Crowston, C. H., & Wiesner-
Hanks, M. E. (2009). A history of world societies. From 1775 to present. (Vol. C., 8th
ed.). New York, NY: Bedford/St. Martin's.
McLeod, S. (2008). Erik Erikson. Retrieved December 19, 2013 from
http://www.simplypsychology.org/Erik-Erikson.html
Meyer, W. Moore, C & Viljoen, H. (2003). Personology from individual to ecosystem
(3rd ed.). Cape Town, South Africa: Heineman.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Millon, T., & Davis, R. D. (2004). Personality disorders in modern life (2nd ed.). Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Milton, J. (1995). Marching to freedom: The story of Martin Luther King, Jr. Milwaukee,
WI: Gareth Stevens.
Mooney, E. F. (2010). Erik Erikson: Artist of moral-religious development. In J. Stewart
(Ed.), Kiekegaard’s influence on the Social Sciences. (Vol. 13. Aldershot, England:
Ashgate
Morris, C. G. (1996). Psychology: An introduction (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Muller, H. R. (2009). Vincent Van Gogh: A psychobiographical study. Unpublished
Masters Treatise, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South
Africa.
Müller, T. (2010). A psychobiography of Paul Jackson Pollock. Unpublished
Masters Treatise, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South
Africa.
Muuss, R. (1996). Theories of adolescence (6th ed.). Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill. 101
Nazel, J. (1991). Martin Luther King, Jr. Civil rights leader. Los Angeles, CA:
Melrose Square.
Pillay, K. (2009). Mahatma Gandhi: A psychobiographical study. Unpublished
Masters Treatise, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth.
Pieterse, J. (2012) John Wayne Gacy: A psychobiographical study. Unpublished
Masters Treatise, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth.
Reichertz, J. (2010). Abduction: The logic of discovery of grounded theory. Forum:
Qualitative Social Research, 2(1) Art. 13. Retrieved from
http://nbn- resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1001135.
Roazen, P. (1976). Erik H. Erikson. The power and limits of a vision. London, England:
Collier Macmillan.
Roberts, B. (2002). Biographical research. London, England: Open University Press.
Rosenthal, D. A., Gurney, R.M., & Moore, S.M. (1981). From trust to intimacy: A new
inventory for examining Erikson's stages of psychosocial development. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence, 10(6), 525-537.
Runyan, W. M. (1982). In defence of the case study method. American Journal of
Othopsychiatry, 52(3), 440-446.
Runyan, W. M. (1984). Life histories and psychobiography: Explorations in theory and
method. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Runyan, W. M. (1988). Progress in psychobiography. Journal of Personality, 56(1), 295-326.
Sadock, B. J., & Sadock, V. A. (2003). Synopsis of psychiatry (9th ed.). New York, NY:
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Santrock, J. W. (2006). Life-span development. (10th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Schloredt, V., & Brown, P. (1994). Martin Luther King. America’s great non-violent leader,
who was murdered in the struggle for black rights. Watford, England: Exley. 102
Schultz, W.T. (2005). Handbook of psychobiography (pp. 3-18). New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Slater, C.L. (2003). Generativity versus stagnation: An elaboration of Erikson‟s adult stage
of human development. Journal of Adult Development, 10(1), 53-65.
Smith, J.A. (2003). Introduction. In J.A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical
guide to research methods (pp. 1-3). London, England: Sage.
Sorell, G. T., & Montgomery, M. J. (2001). Feminist perspectives on the relevance of
Erikson‟s theory for contemporary identity development research. Identity: An
International Journal of Theory and Research, 2, 97-128.
Stroud, L. (2004). The life of Mother Teresa: A psychobiographical study. Unpublished
Doctoral Thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth.
Togni, L. (1994). The struggle for human rights. An international and South African
perspective. Kenwyn, South Africa: Juta.
Uys, H.M.G. (2007). Ralph John Rabie: A psychobiographical study. Unpublished
Masters Treatise, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth.
Van Wagner, K. (2005). Erik Erikson biography (1902-1994). Retrieved February, 12,
2012, from http://www.about.com
Welchman, K. (2000). Erik Erikson: His life, work and significance. Philadelphia, PA:
Open University Press.
Yin, R.K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
103
40 yrs)
vs.
-
Isolation
Intimacy
(21
Young Adulthood Young
21 yrs)
vs.
-
Identity
Confusion
(13
Adolescence
13 yrs) 13
vs.
-
Industry
Inferiority
(5
Primary school Primary
5 yrs) 5
school
vs.
-
-
Guilt
Stages
Initiative
(3
Pre
Appendix A Appendix
3 yrs)
vs.
-
Psychosocial Psychosocial
Autonomy
(18
Toddlerhood
Shame/Doubt
vs.
Trust Trust
18 months) 18
Infancy
Mistrust
-
(0
A Matrix of Martin Luther King Junior‟s Life and Erikson‟s Theory of Theory and Erikson‟s Life King Junior‟s Luther MatrixA of Martin
1947) 1950) 1953) 1957) 1968)
- - - - -
The
Periods
Historical
Development
(1929 (1947 (1950 (1953 (1957
leaves a legacy a leaves
Childhood years Childhood
Becoming a man Becoming
The legacy lives on lives The legacy
The emergence of King The emergence
Leader in Reverends Cloak in Reverends Leader
Freedom with responsibility with Freedom