18 September 1933  81 Harley Street  London W1

Dear Professor,

I have just come back from an enjoyable holiday.  The rheumatism cure, like most of these cures for organic troubles, was not very successful.  It gave considerable temporary relief, but the trouble soon came back afterward.  However, there are much more important things to talk about.

First of all, please let me say that it is perhaps possible to exaggerate the blow to our work caused by recent events in Germany.  It is easy in Germany, or perhaps even in Austria also, to forget the rest of the world.  Deplorable as the whole affair has been, particularly in its personal reverberations among our friends, I am confident that we shall survive it as we have other blows.  Nothing can lastingly set back the progress of our work.  Its effect on our organization is another matter, which needs careful consideration.  We shall certainly miss Eitingon very much.  I see this much advantage in von Hattingberg's appointment by Hitler, namely, that his calling himself a psycho‑analyst will have the result that psycho‑analysis will not be forbidden in Germany.«FN1.××Psychoanalysis did suffer severely under the Nazis, see Cocks (1985) and Brecht et al. (1985).»  There will of course be a tendency to dilute it with other material, and it is there that we shall have to fight.  Boehm has sent me a letter of which I enclose a copy and you will of course perceive the significance of the passage I have marked.  We have good reason to be suspicious of him, but I want to explore the situation and so am accepting his invitation to meet him in Holland (next week).  I am making the condition that van Ophuijsen, as Beirat,«FN1.××The meeting with Felix Boehm of the German Psychoanalytic Society regarding a recent order prohibiting Jews from sitting on scientific councils is discussed in Jones (1957a, pp. 183, 185; 1957b, pp. 195, 198).

» should also be present at the discussion.

Coming now to your proposal about the Princess, my opinion of her is that she has the highest technical ability, admirable energy, and self‑less devotion to our cause.  The fact of her being non‑medical would also, as you say, be an advantage to an official position.  I think, however, that her judgements are apt to be impulsive and to need a steadying influence.  We are good friends and it will be a pleasure to cooperate with her more fully.  You have, however, forgotten one technical point in the rules of the Association.  A Beirat can only be an ex‑President.  At the last Congress an exception to this rule was specially made by resolving that the President of the Pan‑American Association should also be a Beirat.«FN1.××The President (Brill) of the newly formed Federation of American Psychoanalytic Societies of 1932 (the reorganized American Psychoanalytic Association) was given a seat as Vice‑President (Beirat«MDUL»«MDNM») on the Central Excecutive of the International Psychoanalytic Association, see «MDUL»Journal«MDNM», 14(1933):177.

»  If it were a question simply of nominating an official I should certainly take the responsibility of doing so and would ask the Congress to ratify it subsequently.  It would be exceeding my powers, however, to abrogate an official rule without first asking the permission of the Congress.  I shall come to see you before the next Congress and we can arrange this as well as other matters.

I am very distressed at the suffering caused to our colleagues in Germany, but not despairing at the blow dealt to our movement, which I am sure we shall survive.  Ever since Abraham's death the «MDUL»niveau«MDNM» of the German Society had steadily deteriorated, both from emigration and from internal dissensions.  Two other matters give me almost as great concern.  One is that several Societies, notably the Dutch and French, contain a majority of members who are evidently opposed to international cooperation.  The other matter, and perhaps the gravest of all, is the tendency towards quarrelling and internal dissension in so many Societies.  I think in the first place here of the New York Society where the little «MDUL»Quarterly«MDNM» group, flushed by their early and unexpected triumphs, have now grown so troublesome as to paralyse the good working of the Society and to force the retirement of the steadier influences.  I have a great deal of influence with Brill, but on this occasion seem to have failed in moving him from his decision to resign.  I feel sure this would be a fatal blow to the Society, and would therefore suggest that you make a personal appeal to him to continue his efforts to steer it until at least the paranoiac Zilboorg be eliminated.«FN1.××Brill did not resign his post as President of the New York Psychoanalytic Society and was re‑elected in 1934; Zilboorg, who was Secretary in 1933, was not re‑elected in 1934.  See «MDUL»Journal«MDNM», 14(1933):523 and 15(1934):379.

»  I am afraid that nothing other than an appeal from you would be successful.  Rado is in a position where he could do much.  Unfortunately, I have the best of reasons for deeply doubting his trustworthiness.  He has of late been behaving with tact and skill, but I am afraid that his future aims will prove to be of an intriguing nature.

The British Society continues to be one of the bright spots on the horizon, and I do not think Brill exaggerates when he says in a recent letter that it is "the real bulwark of the psycho‑analytic movement".  We have checked any slight tendency to the formation of cliques, and work together very harmoniously.  The intellectual level of the work and discussions is very gratifying and we are slowly consolidating some prestige in the profession, etc., outside.

You must have wondered often why psycho‑analysis has not been more successful among analysts themselves.  I find three reasons for this.  First, that so many were originally neurotic and have chosen the career as a method of holding their neurosis at bay.  Secondly, that continued work all day in the realm of the unconscious imposes a strain which only the most balanced natures can sustain.  Many analysts are sufficiently well analysed for other activities in life, but not for doing analytic work.  Thirdly, and last not least, is the fact that so very few of them are adequately analysed.  One sees, and I have experienced it myself personally, how difficult it is to secure enough analysis when one has attained a senior position, with intimate contact with many colleagues.  Yet we must find some method for securing what may be called post‑graduate analysis.  I think this can be done only by insisting on a still higher standard of analysis among the beginners and introducing them to the idea that they must continue their analysis from time to time later on.

Brill tells me that the American woman who was the evil genius in Ferenczi's later days was Clara Thompson.«FN1.××Clara Thompson (1893‑1958), M. D., American psychoanalyst, member of the Washington‑Baltimore Psychoanalytic Society, Ferenczi's patient between 1928 and 1933, later helped to found the William Alanson White Institute, N. Y..  She was an "evil genius" through her participation in Ferenczi's researches into active therapy.

»  I am sure you must miss him very much, though there again we have actually lost less than it might appear.

I am glad to say that my family is very well and happy.  The latest arrival promises to be a lusty fellow.  I have left them at the seaside now, but they return to London in another week.

With my kindest personal regards to you and your family,

Yours always affectionately  Ernest Jones