Many who attended last fall's meeting of the American in New York had a rare opportunity to learn about the early history of psychoanalysis in New York City when Sanford Gifford, David Krasner, and Liselotte Bendix Stern presented “Psychoanalysis in New York, Part I: The Pioneers, 1911-1931” at the Oral History Workshop on December 14, 1989.
Both the American Psychoanalytic Association and the New York Psychoanalytic Society were founded in 1911, but by different men and for different purposes. The two organizations often were at odds until the reorganization of the American Psychoanalytic Association in 1931.
In his presentation about the early history of psychoanalysis in New York, Dr. Gifford noted that the New York Society had been founded by Abraham A. Brill, at whose apartment at 97 Central Park West its first meeting was held on February 12, 1911. Sixteen members attended, five of whom lived at Manhattan State Hospital, where Brill, Clarence Oberndorf, and other young psychiatrists were influenced by the teaching of Adolph Meyer. The first officers of the New York Society were Brill, Bronislaw Onuf, and Horace Frink Significantly, the first motion passed was that membership be “restricted to physicians actively engaged in analytic work.”
Three months later, on May 9, the first meeting of the American Psychoanalytic Association was held at the Bellevue Stratford Hotel in Baltimore in conjunction with the meeting of the American Psychopathological Association, which had been formed by Ernest Jones three years earlier. The American Psychoanalytic Association's goal was to bring together analysts from throughout the country. Like the American Psychopathological Association, the American Psychoanalytic had no restriction against nonphysicians. James Jackson Putnam of Boston was president, and Jones became secretary. Brill was conspicuous by his absence. Later that summer, at the Weimar Congress, both the American Psychoanalytic Association and the New York Psychoanalytic Society were accepted as independent members of the International Psychoanalytical Association.
Dr. Gifford used the sketchy minutes of the New York Society, which were written mainly by Brill, as the focus of his presentation. Detailed notes of the enthusiastic and active scientific sessions, which were held monthly, were not kept The records contain items related primarily to the business and political aspects of analysis in New York City. Many minor items appear in the minutes: a proposal to make the Cafe Boulevard a permanent meeting place, dues increases, attendance, and reelection of members who failed to pay dues or attend meetings. The most substantial issues involved who would be considered an analyst and eligible for membership. This issue encompassed the problems of schisms, such as those created by Jung and his followers, and the question of nonmedical training.
In 1912, Smith Ely Jelliffe became a member of the New York Society. The recurrent and serious issues of membership centered on the personalities and practices of Brill and Jelliffe, who with Putnam were the first three psychoanalysts in the United States.
“The whole Freud business is done to death. The lamp posts of Vienna will cast forth sexual rays pretty soon
Dr. Krasner discussed Jelliffe's life. Jelliffe began his medical career as a neurologist in New York City. In 1896, while on a summer job at Binghamton State Hospital, he met William Alanson White, with whom he shared an interest in psychiatry and a life-long friendship. Jelliffe had worked with his wife translating French and German neurological and psychiatric articles, and in 1902 he purchased the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, the official publication of the American Neurological Association. In his capacity as translator and publisher, he made several trips to Europe and in 1907 became acquainted with Carl G. Jung.
Initially, Jelliffe was not enthusiastic about psychoanalysis. In 1909, he wrote White, “The whole Freud business is done to death. The lamp posts of Vienna will cast forth sexual rays pretty soon.” Nonetheless, Jelliffe became a psychoanalyst through the influence of Brill, who was Jelliffe's assistant at the Vanderbilt Clinic of Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons. Walking home from work, they would discuss Freud's theories, and by 1911 Jelliffe had become an advocate of analysis. Like most pioneer analysts, Jelliffe never had formal analysis, but on summer vacations he and White would analyze each other.
Because of his interest in psychiatry and then psychoanalysis, Jelliffe allowed articles on these topics to be published
in JNMD, a practice that antagonized some older neurologists. In 1913 he and White founded the Psychoanalytic Review, which became the official publication of the New York Psychoanalytic Society. Jelliffe had hoped that Freud would write the lead article, but because of internal feuding in the Viennese camp, Freud refused. Jung accepted, much to Freud's displeasure, this being the time of the Freud-Jung separation. During the preceding year, at Jelliffe's request Jung had visited New York to speak at Fordham College and stayed at Jelliffe's home. Jelliffe's relationship with Jung and Jelliffe's employment of lay analysts created problems for him in the psychoanalytic community.
In 1913, Jelliffe and White's two-volume work, The Modern Treatment of Mental and Nervous Diseases, was published. It posited the clinical interrelatedness of neurology and psychiatry. He and White then wrote Diseases of the Nervous System, which was published in 1915 and ran six editions, the last published in 1935. It was the first major text in the United States to give credence to psychoanalytic theories.
Jelliffe's only original contribution to psychoanalysis was the idea of “paleopsychology,” the study of the evolution of ideas and symbols in a manner similar to the study of paleontology. His interest in symbols was another reason some classified him as a Jungian. Dr. Krasner felt that he was not; he considered Jeliffe an eclectic Freudian. Jelliffe's overall significance lies in his introducing to American physicians various aspects of psychoanalysis and providing a pool of information. In addition, he had a major impact on psychosomatic medicine, examining a range of medical conditions from an analytic viewpoint. He is little known today, Dr. Krasner believes, because he never developed a cadre of followers to hold and transmit his ideas. He seemed more concerned with knowledge than with people. He could expose and dissect, but neither explain nor inspire.
Abraham A Brill's name, on the other hand, continues to be known to contemporary analysts, although when it is mentioned, Mrs. Stern commented, it is often with a condescending smile and a comment about the poor quality of his translation of Freud. His contribution as a pioneer leader in organized psychoanalysis is less well known, and his role as an ardent teacher who inspired many to study and practice psychoanalysis is almost forgotten.
Early in his career, Brill, dissatisfied with the level of psychiatric treatment in the United states, traveled to Europe for further education. He studied with Eugen Bleuler at Zurich, where he became fascinated with psychoanalysis. Brill became part of the group of physicians under Adolph Meyer at Manhattan State Hospital, which had the country's largest training program in psychoanalytic psychiatry. It was that group of Brill's colleagues, who met in his apartment and “the back of Rudolph's beer saloon,” who became the New York Psychoanalytic Society.
Through his professional involvement in New York, Brill helped spread psychoanalytic knowledge. He was appointed chief psychiatrist at Columbia
University's College of Physicians and Surgeons in 1910-1911 and lecturer in Abnormal Psychology and Psychoanalysis in the School of Pedagogy at New York University in 1913. Manhattan State and Cornell University, once active teaching centers of psychoanalytic concepts, declined in importance; and Vanderbilt Clinic and Mount Sinai Hospital, where Brill was actively involved, became the places where young physicians were exposed to psychoanalytic thought.
Brill himself said, “From 1911 to about 1936 I was conspicuously active in the affairs of this Society … the prime mover in its organization.” Under Brill's leadership, the New York Society was the most numerous and most powerful analytic group. The Society and its Institute moved into permanent offices at 321 West 86th Street on September 15, 1931. In the early and mid-30s, Brill was con-currently president of the New York Society, of the New York Institute and of the American Psychoanalytic Association.
Brill, an immigrant to the United States, had taught himself English, then French, German, Italian, and Spanish. When he first met Freud in 1908, he asked for translation rights to Freud's work. The major complaints about his translation of Freud are that he distorted Freud's style, used colloquialisms, and substituted and omitted Freud's case illustrations and interpretations. Brill said he was more interested in making Freud's works accessible to the public than in producing a literary masterpiece. Mrs. Stern concluded that Brill's devotion to Freud and to psychoanalysis was sincere and heartfelt and that he expressed it with courage.
Dr. Gifford discussed tensions within the New York Society involving Brill and Jelliffe. Notwithstanding that in May 1912 a dinner had been held by the New York Society in honor of Carl Jung, Jelliffe's friendship with Jung became an issue by 1914, when Jung resigned from the International Psychoanalytical Association.
In 1916 Beatrice Hinkle, who had been a member in 1912, was rejected for reelection to membership, because, Dr. Gifford suspects, she was identified with Jung. [See article by Nellie Thompson, this issue.] Beginning in 1919 the question of lay analysis was repeatedly addressed in the Minutes. The Society attempted to enlist the support of the Medical Society in regard to “those quacks who practice psychoanalysis.” Two of the “quacks” were lay assistants of Jelliffe, whom he had trained and who were associated with Jung. Both Jelliffe's Jungian sympathies and his defense of lay analysts continued to be problems for Brill, who attempted to win over Jelliffe. In 1925 the Society reaffirmed its opposition to lay practitioners of psychoanalysis; however, when Jelliffe applied for renewal of membership it was Brill who proposed his name. Also in that year the society established its first education committee to consider all applicants for membership. This move was in part a response to the recommendations of the International Commission on Training at the Bad Homburg IPA Congress and a dispute with Karl Abraham about guest membership privileges for lay analysts.
Mrs. Stern amplified aspects of this history. After World War I, interested persons were able to travel to Europe for training and training analyses. In 1921-1922, Federn organized lecture courses for Americans studying in Vienna; later, in 1922, the New York Society began a series of lectures. A training analysis became a requirement for admission in 1929.
Oberndorf chaired the first Education Committee; and until newer societies were formed and recognized, the New York Society was regularly asked to sanction the training of Americans in Europe. The New York Society's training requirements had an effect on analytic education that extended far beyond New York.
In response to Freud's “The Question of Lay Analysis,” discussions were printed in the International Journal of Psycho-Analysis in 1927. Three Americans responded. As expected, Brill and Oberndorf were opposed to lay analysis. But now even Jelliffe wrote in opposition, stating that his former position had been a mistake. The indefatigable eloquence of Brill had finally won over Jelliffe to his position. Dr. Gifford described Freud's disappointment with the effect his paper had had on American psychoanalysis. In 1929 Freud hinted at a “friendly separation' between European and American analysts. Brill responded with some concessions, and a few non-physicians were admitted to the Society, apparently all of them women child-therapists.
The 1920s brought the American Psychoanalytic Association a new group of analysts, now better remembered: Bernard Glueck, Monroe Meyer, Leonard Blumgart, Phillip Lehrman, and Marion Kenworthy. There was a shift in locale from Central Park West to the Upper East Side.
The minutes of the Society end in 1925. In 1932 the American Psychoanalytic Association was reorganized, and the New York Society became one of its four Institutes, with a three-year training program modeled on that of the Berlin Psychoanalytic Institute.
This period saw the beginning of the great intellectual migration from Europe that changed the face of American psychoanalysis. In 1932 Hitler was elected chancellor of Germany, and the German analysts began to flee. In 1938 the Anschluss of Austria occurred. Freud escaped to England, and a wave of Viennese analysts entered America. These events, among others, were discussed at the workshop “Psychoanalysis in New York: Part II, The Age of Institutes.” [That era of psychoanalysis will be discussed in a future issue.]