S.
«IP9,0»26 November 1911 407 Brunswick Avenue Toronto
«IP0,0»Dear Professor Freud:
«IP4,0»Many thanks indeed for your kind letter, including the complimentary remarks on my work; you no doubt suspect how important such encouragement is to me. At the same time I am sorry you did not put in some criticism; my request for such was seriously meant, for a hint from you goes a long way in correcting the errors I must make.
«IP4,0»The news of my wife is not so good as when I wrote last. She does not want to go to Europe until next May, for she says she cannot stand being so long with the whole Atlantic between us in case of any urgent need. It looks therefore as if we shall cross together in May; I shall stay somewhere in Europe until the following Christmas. She has also had a bad recrudescence of her hostility towards analysis, and I am afraid her attitude will be one of submission to the treatment with a bad will, and with no hope. It will depend on you or Maeder if this attitude can be altered. She has been feeling very sickly, tired, and weak, and has an obsession that she will die this winter. The latter is no doubt a sign of resistance against the treatment, but I am hoping it also has an unconscious meaning of the desire for a new birth, for I know for certain that the ideas of birth («MDUL»Mutterleib«MDNM») [womb, uterus] and death are intimately associated in her mind. On the other side I am glad to say that our personal relations have greatly improved, and we have not been so happy together for a very long while. This is chiefly due to my own greater freedom on account of better self‑analysis.
My copy of the «MDUL»Jahrbuch«MDNM» has just arrived, and I have been charmed with your Zwei Prinzipien article. «FN1.××Freud (1911b).
» It is a perfect little cameo, just as you give us sometimes, full of condensed thought artistically polished and finished. It is the kind of article from which we shall go on drawing new ideas and fresh inspiration for many years, always finding new things in it. How well it harmonises with Jung's great production in the same number, of which I am most eager to see the continuation; I think it is the best thing he has ever done.«FN1.××Part I of Jung (1911‑12), in «MDUL»Jahrbuch«MDNM» (1913), 3:120‑227.
» Jung sweeps over the canvas like a Rubens, you draw with the accuracy and close feeling of a Del Sarto.
May I ask one question that applies to both articles? It is easier for me to couch it in the form of a comment, though it is prompted only by the desire for enlightenment. Namely I was surprised that so much stress was laid on the differences between the two modes of mental functioning, and not more on their ontogenetic relationship; this especially applies to Jung's article, it is true, for you say a little on the matter on page 2. In the sentence "es wurde nicht mehr vorgestellt was angenehm, sondern was real war, auch wenn es unangenehm sein sollte"«FN1.××Strachey translates this as "what was presented in the mind was no longer what was agreeable but what was real, even if it happened to be disagreeable." See Freud (1911b, p. 219), «MDUL»G.W.«MDNM» 8:232.
» I was puzzled by the sharp opposition of the two. I had conceived of the desire for reality as being essentially merely a more effective method of obtaining gratification than the hallucinatory method. Do I understand you to mean that it was so originally, having come into existence for this purpose, but that later on it acquires a meaning of its own ‑‑ the search for reality being an aim or principle in itself, quite apart from the greater power thus won of procuring gratification? Or does it continue to serve the latter function in a more roundabout way? In other words isn't the reality principle constantly a form of sublimation, or do the two principles become secondarily entirely divorced from each other? I wonder if I have made my difficulty clear. If it is possible to give me a short answer that would not take up too much of your time I would be much obliged.
I was enormously impressed by your choice of the quotation from Bernard Shaw.«FN1.××See note 3 to letter 59. The passage from Shaw quoted in Freud (1911b, p. 223, n. 1) reads: "To be able to choose the line of greatest advantage instead of yielding in the direction of the least resistance."
» I know all his work and life very well, and think you could not possibly have selected a better passage for expressing the central and most fundamental point of his philosophy. In spite of his unconventionality he is at heart essentially an English Puritan of an ascetic type. I was always struck by the truth of his position that the strivings of a great man are not primarily towards happiness as such, but towards reality, and I think that in the Hell Scene there are passages that bring out the grandeur of this simple conception more forcibly than do even Ibsen or Nietzsche. When I got to know your work I had some difficulty in reconciling the two, and came to the conclusion that you must be right and Shaw wrong because of the more fundamental and biological significance of the Lustprinzip. Now you show that after all Shaw had got hold of something truly important and great. That is a permanent appeal of psycho‑analysis that it does not deny the conclusions of others; it does more, it explains them. There lies one of its greatest sources of strength (take, for example, the relatively trite matter of suggestion in therapeutics).
I have done a certain amount of work in the past six weeks, but not much. I sent Stekel a couple of short things,«FN1.××Any of the following: Jones (1912d, 1912e, 1912f, 1912g, 1912i).» and to the «MDSU»«MDUL»Journal of Abnormal Psychology«MDNM» the analysis of a beautiful Oedipus saving dream ‑‑ the heterosexual and homosexual solutions coming in two distinct halves, with very neat determination. «FN1.××Jones (1912c) is actually a distiguised autobiographical account based on his self‑analysis.» This week I finish my casuistic article for the «MDUL»Jahrbuch«MDNM»,«FN1«MDNM».××Jones (1912‑13).
» and next week I read a paper at Detroit on the mode of action in psycho‑analysis in therapeutics.«FN1«MDNM».××Jones (1912a).
» I have just been very flatteringly asked to contribute a section of 4OOOO words on the treatment of the neuroses for a large two‑volume work on the treatment of nervous and mental diseases,«FN1«MDNM».××Jones (1913a).
» the most ambitious of the kind yet attempted. Although it will interfere with my other plans for work I am accepting it, for it is an unusual opportunity for the propagandism of our views and otherwise it might fall into bad hands; it has to be finished by April. I hear from Rank that Sachs is translating my salt article, for which I am much obliged. The other, nightmare, one is safe in your hands; I suppose you have not had time to look them through, but will wait till they are translated.«FN1.××Jones (1912h, 1912j).» I am eager to hear about the troubles with the publishers, and sincerely hope that they will be satisfactorily settled. Have you definitely decided on the title of the new journal? Are you not afraid that «MDUL»Eros‑Psyche«MDNM» may provoke too great prejudice and ribald jests?
I have often smiled at the thought of a remark you once made to me about the French: "They are an arrogant people". Here is an excellent example. In a review in Janet's journal of a paper of mine on psycho‑analytic treatment the reviewer concludes with the words: "Il est à peine besoin de noter que ces idées sont courantes en France depuis les travaux de Pierre Janet".«FN1«MDNM».××See Pierre Mendousse, [Review of Jones (1910c)], «MDUL»Journal de Psychologie«MDNM», 8(1911):477.
» As I laid stress on the sexual aspects I am gratified, though surprised, to hear this news. It is plain that when, in the dim future, your works do reach France the authorities there will move heaven and earth to prove that the French knew and discovered them years ago, just as they amusingly did lately in the case of Ehrlich's salvarsan. «FN1«MDNM».××Salvarsan (arsphenamine), an arsenic compound used hypodermically or intramuscularly in syphilis, yaws, and other protozoan infections. Paul Ehrlich (1854‑1915), German bacteriologist, discoverer of salvarsan; received Nobel Prize for medicine (with Metchnikoff) in 1908.
»
Now in conclusion I am going to ask you another theoretical question. A friend, and former patient of mine, who is a pretty good observer, brought me recently the following experience. He dreamt that an Oriental woman was trying to get him to do something for her, no doubt something erotic. He put her off with the words "Now, I've done this three times". He woke up (it was in the morning) and positively heard himself saying these words aloud. His wife also heard them distinctly, but is equally positive that they were "Oh, all right, I'll do it in the morning". There are I suppose three possible explanations: (1) faulty observation on one or the other side, which their certainty seems to exclude. (2) Both sentences may have occurred in the dream and been spoken aloud, but he remembers only the one, while his wife heard the other, which may have been the only one spoken aloud. This is hardly likely, as they both refer to the same utterance, «MDUL»heard«MDNM» by both. (3) It is possible that an unusually great distortion took place in the secondary elaboration. This would be a remarkable occurrence. Have you any experience of such a thing? It must be a rather rare opportunity to check the point. I should be greatly interested to hear what you think of it.
You ask me about my impressions as to the rate of progress. You will see that they are bound to be different from those of one in Vienna, for I stand outside the daily work, so to speak, and note only the results arrived at. These seem to me to be very considerable every year, both in detail and in gross. Examples of the former are various symbolisms and strikingly your work on the saving phantasy, of the latter especially the extension of your principles to the broad problems of mental evolution and cultural development, which are of the highest importance for the race in general and for civilisation in particular. I am inclined to think that not the «MDUL»Traumdeutung«MDNM» but your forthcoming work on religion will be your masterpiece.«FN1«MDNM».××Freud (1912‑13).
» Is this going on well at present, or are you feeling weighed down by the immensity of the material and subject to be dealt with? By the way, you will be sure to ask me if you have difficulty in getting any of the books we spoke of at Weimar. Of course your remark is very true as to the lack of coordination in the different articles of the creed, but how can that be otherwise in a rapidly growing subject? The synthesis can only come later, and it is a good thing for the progress that it has not been too prominent up to the present. I notice the lack of coordination in quite little things: To take quite a simple instance, I have read at least four different interpretations for Platzangst. Perhaps they are all true, but the relative significance of each has not been pointed out.
I have no impersonal news to give from this side. Brill is more in the thick of the fight at present than I am, and he seems to be training some very good men to help him in New York. All the members of my group have paid their subscriptions and I have forwarded them with the addresses to Riklin as secretary. I have heard several times from Jung since returning, and hope to spend some time with him next summer. I am also in correspondance with Abraham, Ferenczi, Seif, and others. In London things seem to be making a start. When I get there I shall certainly push things hard, and ought to be able to found a branch in a short time.
Yours always Ernest Jones.
