15 November 1914  69 Portland Court  London W

Dear Professor:

«IP4,0»Martin is, I think, leaving for Russia on Nov. 28.  He has sent me a postcard from you, as has V. Emden, and I have received the letter from your archaeological friend.«FN1.××A fuller discussion of this early war period is contained in Jones (1955a, p. 173‑174; 1955b, p. 194‑195).»  Today came from Jekels, via V. Emden, his article on Napoleon, «FN1.××Jekels (1914).» which will interest me very much; will you please thank him for it, as I haven't his address.  I should be greatly obliged if you would get the journals, including the «MDUL»Jahrbuch«MDNM», sent for me to V. Emden, and then Dr. Bisschop«FN1.××Possibly Francis R. B. Bisshopp, M. D. 1892 London.» will call on him and fetch them when he is next in the Haag.  Loe and I also exchange all the letters, etc., we receive, so as to get the latest news of you and your family.  We shall be especially eager to hear about your sons' welfare, and to know what happens about Rank and Sachs.

I would give a great deal to have an hour's talk with you, which I am afraid must be postponed until perhaps the summer of 1916, and do not know which topic to begin with in a letter.  I keenly hope that you will be able to spare some attention from the war, and give it to more productive aims, so that the writings that will result from your increased leisure will to some extent compensate for other things (what Ferenczi calls «MDUL»nachkriechende Lust«MDNM»).  What about the «MDUL»Handbuch«MDNM» article on Hysteria?«FN1.××The article for Kraus and Brugsch (1919‑1928) was not written.»  Also what are you writing for «MDUL»Imago«MDNM»?  I have written to Payne offering to help him with the translation of the historical essay, if it is arranged with Brill.  You say this is appearing in Prince's Journal«MDUL»«MDNM», but I thought it was in Jelliffe's «MDUL»Review«MDNM».«FN1.××The episode regarding Brill (1916b) is discussed fully in Jones's next letter.»  Janet has republished his paper from the Congress Transactions in both his own «MDUL»Journal de Psychologie«MDNM» and in Prince's Journal«MDUL»«MDNM». «FN1.××Janet (1914).»  He made not the sligtest modification of his mis‑statements, and so I have written a rejoinder which should appear in the December number of the «MDUL»Journal of Abnormal Psychology«MDNM».«FN1.××Jones (1915b), but see also Freud (1916e).»  As you may imagine, it is quite unsparing, and calculated to affect his reputation in America.

We have had only one meeting of our society since July, a fortnight ago.  It was a stormy one.  Constance Long read a stupid Jung paper, announcing such discoveries as that a motor‑car in a dream symbolised enthusiasm, and when I criticised the paper Eder and his wife behaved very obstinately.  I wanted then to postpone further meetings until after the war, or at least for a year (in the hope that the theologians would gradually increase their distance and withdraw), but after an animated discussion it was decided to hold the next meeting at the end of January, when I shall read a paper on Jung's views.  The opinion they defend is that Jung's method constitutes a variety, and legitimate evolution, of Ps‑A, and that the difference between his views and ours is not great enough to prohibit the possibility of cooperation in work, my opinion to the contrary being regarded as mere obstinacy and dogmatism.  Unfortunately there is no one on my side except Bryan, who does not know very much, most of the members being rather passive spectators.  However, you may be sure I shall do my best to keep the flag flying.

I get German papers now and then, and so knew that what our papers say about the distress in Vienna and cholera in Galicia was greatly exaggerated.  In return I ask you to believe that the Bank of England has not been destroyed by bombs, that Egypt and India have not revolted, and that our coasts have not been bombarded by the German Fleet!  There is no feeling here against Austria, the view being that she has been exploited by Germany.  An intelligent distinction is made between Prussia and the rest, and there is much resen[t]ment against her bullying arrogance and annihilation of the Hague laws.  There is a considerable "sekundäre Bearbeitung" going on, and the worthlessness of German science has been discovered by the war in much the same way a certain people we could mention have renounced their belief in infantile sexuality on equally irrelevant grounds.  To me it is very painful to see the lack of objectivity that even scientific men have shewn on both sides on questions relating to the causes, motives, and conduct of the war.  Wundt and Eucken one could imagine, but fancy Ostwald!«FN1.××Wilhelm Wundt (1832‑1920), Professor of Physiology at Leipzig, founder of experimental psychology; Rudolf Christoph Eucken (1846‑1926), Professor of Philosophy at Jena, Idealist, winner of Nobel Prize for Literature (1908); Wilhelm Ostwald (1853‑1932), Professor of Chemistry at Leipzig, winner of Nobel Prize for Chemistry (1909).»  It seems to me that here, as elsewhere, the only people who have a real opportunity to display their superiority in this respect are psycho‑analysts.  I hope we shall be able to learn something about the psychology of nationalism and patriotism as the result of such a good chance to study this important matter, and am sure that much of your attention is going in this direction.  As it seems to me I think I could hold the balance pretty well between the arguments brought on either side, and the only real reason that I can give for wanting our side to win is that on the whole the average Englishman is nearer and more sympathetic to me than the average German, especially the average Prussian.  It is difficult to see what vital principle is involved in the conflict, which is rather a boyish one of wanting to see which side is the stronger, and not being able to agree on the point without testing it by force.  Beyond a tremendous abreaction of pugnacity I don't suppose much will result from the whole war, for obviously Germany cannot win nor can she be really crushed, and even if Bosnia, Galicia, and Alsace are changed over it is not a very important matter.  It looks, however, as though Germany will be left with an abiding hatred of England, which is regrettable but apparently unavoidable.

I should very greatly like to hear something of your own attitude towards the war, and to know how deeply your feelings are engaged.  The fact that your sons are involved is of course bound to make a big difference.

Of personal news I have not much.  Practice is still increasing, but I find time to do some other work.  I have finished my book on treatment and am now going on with the translation of Ferenczi's papers.«FN1.××Jones (1920b, 1916b). »  After that comes perhaps Napoleon, the atmosphere being favourable to such topics, and then the big lay book on Ps‑A.«FN1.××These were not completed.»  I see Loe pretty often.  She has some physical troubles at present, but is happy and on the whole well; her new house will be ready in January or so.  My own health has not been good (toxic arthritis and neuritis) but I hope to remedy that next month by an operation for removal of nasal septum, turbinates, and exploration of antrum; it will mean two weeks in hospital.  I am pleased to hear that our circle has decided not to regard me as an enemy, and to see that they have thus been able to correct the irrational tendency to unconscious Verdichtung that might otherwise have made it possible to do so.  As for my side, I also have no diffficulty in separating personal friendship from national rivalry.

As this letter contains no military secrets I hope it will arrive safely, and shall look forward with eagerness to your next letter.  Will you please distribute messages of warm greeting to the Committee and to your family, reserving the warmest for yourself.

Yours always  Jones.

«PG»

«DF»