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.
In his book Hate and the ‘Jewish Science’ Stephen Frosh attempts to cover a wide range of issues relating to psychoanalysis and several phenomena of anti-Semitism. The book consists of three parts which are presented as ‘case-studies’ of the intimate relationship between Jewish identity psychoanalysis and anti-Semitism: in the first part Frosh deals with Freud's Jewish identity and his response to Nazism and anti-Semitism; the second part is a historical account of the fate of psychoanalysis in the Third Reich, and of the postwar discussions on this matter; the third and last part of the book addresses the theoretical question regarding the ‘psychosocial’ sources of anti-Semitism and, more generally, the hatred of the Other. Frosh does not present new historical primary sources regarding psychoanalysis, anti-Semitism or the way in which the Nazis dealt with the ‘Jewish science’. He is relying on existing secondary sources in the first two historical parts, and gives an overview of existing materials in the third part, while mostly presenting his views in a very subtle way.
I find the first part unconvincing: although it contains a variety of evidence to support an apparently profound connection between psychoanalysis and Judaism - and specifically between Freud and his Jewish identity - I think much of it is forced and sometimes out of context. Of course, Freud was a Jew and was concerned about his Judaism, more so as he became older and as the historical circumstances made it essential. But Frosh's account continually interprets Freud quotes in support of his general argument, even when they are clearly not representative of Freud's main line of thinking and Freud's own, more explicit, accounts of his identity as a Jew. Marginal quotes that support Frosh's thesis are given central significance, and clear expressions of Freud's intent to distance himself from Judaism, both as a religion and as a national identity, are interpreted as denials or smokescreens. Thus, Fro