INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHO‑ANALYSIS

                                   6 June 1921  London W1

Dear Professor:

I will write and make the matter quite plain to Stern, but I must first ask you to make clearer one passage in your letter, where I am to tell Stern that it is proposed "to replace Farnell by Blumgart or Oberndorf as he (the President) may choose".  In the Rundbrief it says "ihm vorschlagen" (i.e. Stern).  Whom do you wish to have the choice, Stern, Oberndorf, or the president, who is at present a certain Ames?Adolph Stern (b. 1878), M. D. 1903 Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, N. Y., specialist in neurology and psychiatry, first of the American analysts to go to Vienna (summer 1919) to be analyzed by Freud.  Thaddeus H. Ames (b. 1885), M. D. 1907 University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, was a neurologist, deeply interested in religion and pastoral psychiatry, and an early supporter of Jung in America (1912).  In 1921 he was President of the New York Psychoanalytic Society, but resigned from the Society entirely in March 1922«MDNM».»  Or again the Society?  I am very sorry to trouble you again in this way, but it is important to avoid misunderstandings with such touchy people and I want to do exactly what you wish.

May I at the same time ask for help on a few points in the «MDUL»Jenseits«MDNM» which I am not sure on?  I quote of course from the first edition, for the second has not yet come.  (1) S. 49. Z.11 v.u.. "von Sexualtrieben".«FN1.××Freud (1920g, p. 52), «MDUL»G.W.«MDNM» 13:56.»  I suppose this is not a misprint for "ichtrieben"?  (2) S.52. Last line but one of the footnote.  Is "zeigen" a misprint for "zeugen"?«FN1.××Freud (1920g, p. 56), «MDUL»G.W.«MDNM» 13:61.

»  (3) S.57 Last line but two in the footnote.  "treten, der".  What exactly does "der" relate to?«FN1.××Freud (1920g, pp. 60‑61 n. 1), «MDUL»G.W.«MDNM» 13:66 n. 1.»  (4) S.58. Z.7.  Is "all dies" general or does it refer to the preceding sentence?«FN1.××Freud (1920g, p. 62), «MDUL»G.W.«MDNM» 13:67.»  I have a copy of this letter, so that your answers can be short, simply numbered.

The proofs of «MDUL»Massenpsychologie«MDNM» that have reached me begin only at Spalte 24 and some are missing even after that, so that it would be foolish of me to comment on it until I can see a complete copy.  I will only say that your exposition of suggestion as a Teilerscheinung des hypnotischen Zustandes "«MDUL»schlägt ein«MDNM»".«FN1«MDSU».××See Freud (1921c, p. 128 n. 1), «MDUL»G.W.«MDNM» 13:143 n. 1, where he states that "suggestion is a partial manifestation of the state of hypnosis...".  For Jones, this "hits the nail on the head.«MDNM»"»

Brill's lack of insight into himself and also into his relation with the outer world is astounding, almost psychotic.  His initial remark about his translations shews that your diagnosis of the aetiology was the right one.  About the editorship: you will remember that you and the congress accepted Stern's proposal to ascertain the views of the N. Y. group before you came to a definite decision.  Then you wrote and invited Brill to be one of the editors.  To reconcile the two things I wrote an official letter about the Congress to Brill, explained what had happened, expressed the hope that he would accept and that he would use his influence to choose the two others according to his own wishes, and made the practical suggestion that he should do as I did in London, first choose and then use one's influence to get the Society to ratify the names put forward.  This is what in Brill's mind became "Jones taking an entirely different view"!  In any case it is an extraordinary reason for not answering your letters that he had to wait till the society had discussed the matter (and then three months more).

His remark "From all that I gathered I did not feel that I would be missed" is a curious comment on my extravagent flattery of his importance to us, and shews again the impossibility of dealing with narcissism.  By the way, no doubt you noticed the Verschreiben of the word "conscious", which I have underlined.

Well, even if he does little for us, which seems probable, I am glad that you decided to accept his name for the Journal, in consideration of all he has done in the past, and also that you refuse Farnell after his exhibition in our present number.^[1]

I know how you feel in the last month of the year's work and am sure you must be looking forward to a holiday.  About the invitation to Edinburgh in September, I am torn between two considerations.  On the personal side it would be very delightful to see you in England, and you would be warmly welcomed, not only by our own circle.  But at the same time I honestly think that the occasion is not honourable enough to warrant an interference with a much‑needed holiday.  You would be one speaker amongst others at a congress, whereas you ought to be invited to deliver one or more special lectures at a University and do not doubt that that invitation will come before long.

I am very well and working like a nigger.

With affectionate regards,  yours always  Ernest Jones

P.S. On Spalte 31, in the middle, Boris Sidis has his name misprinted.^[2]

^[1]           See note 3 to letter 308.

^[2]           Boris Sidis's name, spelled correctly in the published version, is mentioned in Freud (1921c, p. 119), G.W. 13:131.