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.
Biographies of early analysts continue to multiply. When one considers that a quarter of a century ago the only available documents on the history of analysis were Freud's own polemics and Ernest Jones's three-volume authorized biography of Freud, then it becomes clear just how recent is the genuine historiography in this area. The early pioneers in analysis were a remarkable group of people; they chose their profession as a spiritual calling, and pursued their occupation with a rare degree of devotion. Compared with those of our own time, the early analysts were also an admirably cosmopolitan group of people; they came from a wide variety of walks of life and often brought an unusual cultural range to this new “movement.”
It is still unfortunately true, however, that despite all that has recently been published, we still know less than one might expect about the early days of analysis. And part of the problem stems from the effects of lingering sectarianism on our understanding of history. The many so-called heretics in the history of analysis have by and large still not gotten a fair shake from historians. A successful movement does attract publicists in its own behalf; and those who broke with the so-called mainstream of Freud's “cause” have still not received the full attention they deserve. For example, Sandor Ferenczi, whose clinical contributions are now being widely acknowledged, still has not had a full-scale biography. We do have, however, an excellent book by E. James Lieberman (1985) on Otto Rank's life and a fine biography of Wilhelm Reich by Myron Sharaf (1983). (See also Roazen, 1989.)
The literature on Carl Jung is large and growing, and it appears that the Jung family in Switzerland is at long last searching for a biographer to entrust Jung's papers to. Those