19 November 1922  81 Harley Street  London W1

Dear Professor:

I was glad to hear you are well, though unfortunately I cannot say the same of myself.  For a fortnight I have been in severe pain, night and day, from neuritis in both arms, which does not make it easy to keep up good spirits.

The Eitingons arrived on Thursday and I have seen them three times, including most of today.  Tomorrow evening we are to have a meeting with Rickman and Strachey to discuss the Press situation, about which I will then write at once to Rank.  It was a great pleasure to see Eitingon, for I am very fond of him; he is so fundamentally sincere and throughout well‑meaning.

So a real start is being made with the great business of the Sammlungen, which is a considerable undertaking.  I was chagrined to hear of the medical mistake I overlooked in the correction (I suppose I carelessly read mediale Anteil as mittlere Anteil, not recognising that mediale in this sense is a technical German expression for what we call mesial); though I corrected some dozens that is no excuse for overlooking one, especially one where neurological readers might find something to criticise, so I am very glad you found it and compliment you on your sharp sight.

I was sorry, and also disappointed, to learn that you still think there are disagreements between us.  My optimistic temperament had led me to hope, in spite of your changed attitude towards me in Berlin, that they belonged to the past.  Indeed I would still hope so but for your expression "at the moment", for your references to them are very general.  I refer to them unwillingly, but I cannot make my letters to you artificial, as they would be if I confined myself to external news, which besides is contained in the Rundbrief.

The first point you say you disapprove of is my attitude towards Mrs. Riviere. If this relates to anything in the past few months then I am entirely blind to it, for my only feelings towards her in this time have been those of friendliness and gratitude and I was under the impression ‑‑ which I trust is not an illusion ‑‑ that my behaviour was in correspondence.

Then you do not think I am right in blaming Rank, though I do not know what for.  I do not think I have ever blamed or criticised him in any matter in his own sphere, but I have sometimes had to defend myself against misstatements he has made about me.  If you refer to my remark that Hiller and he did not get on well together that is a mere observation, due to a difference in temperament, and there is no question of blaming either for it.  It is true that I do not consider Rank to be infallible.  For instance, at the present juncture when the Verlag is in a critical position I should have found it wiser of Rank if he had made more efforts for cooperation and a united front instead of doing things that were bound to repel us.  I say "us", for since writing my last Rundbrief,^[1] in which I say plainly what I think, I have received the Berlin letter in which Abraham takes up a still sharper position, and also Rickman, to whom I telephoned Rank's message, was not exactly pleased at the cool way in which he had been ignored.

Finally you say you cannot take my side in the Hiller case.  I cannot be sure what you conceive my side to be, but to me it appears like this.  While defending Hiller a little, so far as I thought it wise, before the Committee, I concentrated my efforts on inducing him to agree to Rank's proposals which I had myself honestly accepted.  In this direction I strained my influence with him, working hard over the ground in all my spare time (twice up till four in the morning).  The total result was a failure, for he did not or could not carry out the promises he made me.  And in the end I have earned your displeasure (I suppose for my failure) and lost his friendship.  That is certainly depressing, like all failures, but in the circumstances I knew of no better path to take, nor do I yet know of one that offered a better prospect of leading to success.

As to your own repeated disapproval of me I need not tell you how grievous I find that, for you must know what part you play in my life and feelings.  If it lay in my power to alter your attitude through any conduct of mine I would gladly do so; if it is not in my power I must somehow accept the fact.  So far I have honestly tried to be true to myself and to act in the best way I could according to the light that is in me, but it may well be that there are dark places which that light does not illuminate.  In the latter case I can only wait till I receive some criticism which is concrete enough for me to put to the test and which also corresponds to the facts as they are known to me, but such criticism is rare.

Please forgive me if this letter is not written in too happy a vein; you will not find that surprising if you reflect for a moment on the complexities of my position as it appears to me: health, friends, the future of the «MDUL»Journal«MDNM», work, even practice (my solitary consultation since July has remained solitary and I have several vacant hours).  But I will end on two brighter notes: my domestic happiness is all that man could wish it to be, and my spirit has always proved indomitable in the long run.  So I cannot doubt that everything will change for the better ‑‑ you see once more my optimism.

always your loyal friend,  Ernest Jones

^[1]           In his Rundbrief of 16 November 1922 Jones provides an outline of how Rank with Hiller recently issued orders "behind our backs" to the group secretaries of the branch Societies of the International Psychoanalytic Association (Sigmund Freud Copyrights Ltd, Wivenhoe; and Rank Collection, Butler Library, Columbia University, N. Y. C.).