3 January 1911  4O7 Brunswick Avenue  Toronto

Dear Professor Freud,

«IP4,0»Your second letter has just come, re the Hamlet paper.  I apologise for giving you so much trouble; it is very good of you to take it.«FN1.××See Jones (1910a, pp. 75, 77) for quoted passages which follow.

»  The first passage (P. 75) "without reference to the past or future evolution of motive" is certainly very condensed, and attains a quite Nietzchean obscurity, though it has its meaning all the same.  It refers to your demonstration (e.g. in the «MDUL»Gradiva«MDNM») that a given piece of conduct, poetic creation etc. etc. relates to (a) «MDUL»past«MDNM» experiences and (b) «MDUL»future«MDNM» ones (Wunsch), in other words is past ‑‑ one stage ‑‑ of an evolution.  I think that Shakespeare describes conduct intuitively without consciously tracing it to either its past roots or its future connections.  The idea in the next sentence is taken from Shaw, who points out that Shakespeare was a blind artist rather [than] a conscious philosopher.  (This is stupidly put, I know, but you will gather what I am driving at).

P. 77. "the argument, then, must remain unconvincing except to those who already accept it."  I am not sure that I understand the difficulty here, but I will try to put my meaning in another way.  The reasons given by critics for H's general aboulia are not adequate psychologically (H's scepticism etc.).  This will be obvious to some readers.  I mention shortly an argument why the reasons of the critics are inadequate, but do not fully discuss it as it is irrelevant, for I go on to show that H. had no «MDUL»general«MDNM» aboulia.  Therefore the readers who appreciate the argument briefly hinted at are already convinced; others will not be convinced without a longer discussion which it is not worth while to enter on as it is irrelevant; they must therefore remain unconvinced ‑‑ the point makes no difference.

Have you an obsolescent word in German corresponding to the last word of the paper, "eld"?«FN1××Jones (1910a, p. 113).

»  It sounds very appropriate in English.

With my best thanks,  Yours ever  Ernest Jones.

«MDUL»P.S«MDNM». This morning I got an invitation to read a paper at the American Medical Association meeting in Los Angeles, Southern California, end of June.  I wish you would tell me it was my duty to refuse such invitations, for I weakly accept as a rule.  Do you think they do any good?

                                                E.×J.