Notes

Géza Róheim, author of THE ORIGIN AND FUNCTION OF CULTURE, reviewed in This QUARTERLY, Vol. XIV, No. 3, 1945, takes exception to some of the reviewer's statements. Quoting from the review: 'Róheim rejects Ruth Benedict's formulation that "Different cultures differ because they are oriented as wholes in different directions"' (p. 398). 'Actually', says Róheim, 'I quote the same passage from Ruth Benedict quoted by Alexander (p. 9 of my book) and then say, "In the preliminary report of my field work I tried to go beyond this and to show that these collective psychical system formations were organized as defense mechanisms against certain libidinal strivings and these again are dependent on the typical infantile situation of each area". In other words, what Ruth Benedict says I have also said, only a year earlier, and added something to it. There is not a trace in my book or elsewhere of my rejecting this idea. Alexander writes, "According to this view the genital attitude is not something new which appears with biological maturation … but only a veneer covering pregenital trends …" (p. 399), ignoring the explicit statement in my book: "Also I fully admit that we have an inborn trend of maturation and in discussing the problem of growing up I was envisaging only one, viz. the regressive aspect of the problem" (pp. V, VI). I cannot discuss all my objections to Alexander's review. I do wish to observe that in reviewing a book, the safest if not the quickest way is to read it as a whole (gestalt theory) not piecemeal.'1