388

laxis of instinctual conflicts the only methods which we need really
consider are the other two: the artificial production of new conflicts in
the transference (conflicts which lack the character of reality) and the
rousing of such conflicts in the imagination of the analysand by speaking
to him about them and telling him that they may possibly arise.

I do not know if we can assert that the first of these two less drastic
procedures is out of the question in analysis. No experiments have
been made in this particular direction. But some difficulties at once
suggest themselves which make the success of such an undertaking
very problematic. In the first place the choice of such situations for
the transference is very limited. The analysand himself cannot
embody all his conflicts in the transference, nor can the transference-
situation be so employed by the analyst as to rouse all the instinctual
conflicts in which the patient may possibly become engaged. We may
incite him to jealousy or inflict upon him the pain of disappointed
love, but no special intention is necessary for this purpose. These
things happen spontaneously in most analyses. But in the second
place we must not overlook the fact that any such deliberate procedure
would necessitate unkind behaviour on the part of the analyst towards
the patient and this would have an injurious effect upon his affectionate
attitude towards the analyst, i.e. upon the positive transference
which is the strongest motive of the analysand for co-operating in the
work of analysis. So we shall not form any high expectation of the
results of such a technique.

This leaves only the other method, which is probably the only one
originally contemplated. The analyst will tell the patient about
possible instinctual conflicts which may occur and will lead him to
expect that they will occur in himself. This is done in the hope that
the information and warning will have the effect of activating in the
patient one of these conflicts in a moderate degree and yet sufficiently
for it to be dealt with. But here experience speaks with no uncertain
voice. The result hoped for is not achieved. The patient hears what
you say but it rouses no response in his mind. He probably thinks to
himself, ‘That is very interesting but I see no sign of it in myself’.
We have increased his knowledge but effected no other change in his
mind. We have much the same situation when people read psycho-
analytical writings. The reader is ‘stimulated’ only by those passages
which he feels apply to himself, i.e. which refer to conflicts that are
active in him. Everything else leaves him cold. I think we have a
similar experience when we enlighten children on matters of sex.

389

I am far from maintaining that this is a harmful or unnecessary thing
to do, but it is clear that the prophylactic effect of this liberal measure
has been vastly over-estimated. After such enlightenment the children
know something that they did not know before but they make no use
of the new knowledge imparted to them. We come to the conclusion
that they are by no means ready to sacrifice those sexual theories
which may be said to be a natural growth and which they have con-
structed in harmony with and in dependence on their undeveloped
libidinal organization–theories about the part played by the stork,
about the nature of sexual intercourse and about the way in which
children are born. For a long time after they have been enlightened
on these subjects they behave like primitive peoples who have had
Christianity thrust upon them and continue in secret to worship their
old idols.

V

Our starting-point was the question how to shorten the tediously
long duration of an analysis and, still pursuing the question of time,
we went on to consider whether we can achieve permanent cure or
prevent illness in the future by prophylactic treatment. We saw
that the success of our therapeutic work depended on the influence of
traumatic factors in the ætiology of the neurosis, on the relative
strength of the instincts which have to be mastered and on something
which we called modification of the ego. Only the second of these
factors has been discussed in any detail and we have had occasion
in so doing to recognize the paramount importance of the quantitative
factor and to stress the claim of the metapsychological standpoint to
be taken into account in any attempt at explanation.

Of the third factor, the modification of the ego, we have as yet
said nothing. The first impression received when we turn our attention
to it is that there is much to ask and to answer, and that what we can
say on the subject will prove very inadequate. This impression is
confirmed when we go into the problem further. We know that the
essence of the analytic situation is that the analyst enters into an
alliance with the ego of the analysand to subdue certain parts of his
id which he has failed to master, i.e. to include them in the synthesis
of the ego. The fact that in the case of psychotics this co-operation
is never successful brings us to our first definite conclusion. If we
want to make a compact with the patient’s ego, that ego must be
normal. But such a normal ego is, like normality in general, an ideal
fiction. The abnormal ego which is of no use for our purpose is un-