You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The title, the brilliance of its author, and the fact that this is the first interpretation based on any psycho-analytical knowledge of a large body of law, excite the liveliest interest in this book. Unfortunately the author's psycho-analytical knowledge is not sufficient to solve many of the problems encountered, and this review must discuss the misadventures of an author who picks and chooses among the theories, neglecting obvious facts and the deductions from them. The reviewer none the less wishes to express gratitude for much stimulating reading and many valuable suggestions.
In the first place, the book attempts to explain law, the signal position of the judge in the courts, the relation of primitive law to totemism, the significance of the oath and ordeal, without referring to the place of the father in the nuclear complex, which lies at the root of our individual and social life. According to him the Oedipus complex is a desire to return to the mother and nothing more, as though we were all orphans from birth. (Totem and Taboo and Sonderstellung des Vatermordes are omitted from a bibliography which includes twenty-seven psycho-analytical references.)
Secondly, he tries to dispense with sexuality: 'care must be taken not to translate it [the word Libido] surreptitiously in thought by its Latin grammar rendering and identify it with sexuality' (p. 105). He qualifies libido further by saying that when the surpassing function of sexuality is attained the process does not stop there, but constant transformations by desexualization turn it into other channels till finally it is of something more than merely individual reference. This shows that he lacks understanding of the pregenital anal-sadistic tendencies, and without the employment of this concept the development of law is, it seems to us, unintelligible.
Thirdly, he accepts the word 'unconscious' and uses it frequently, but considers 'it would be a mistake to try and set up two orders of mental function