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.
Budapest, September 21, 19301
Dear Professor—
The signs of increased resistance since the Goethe Prize are undeniable; but the fact can't be removed from the world and signifies progress.
I was pleased to hear that you find my new views “very ingenious”; I would have been much more pleased if you had declared them to be correct, probable, or even only plausible. The comparison with the “theory of genitality” is perhaps only a superficial one. The “theory of genitality” was the product of pure speculation at a time when, far removed from any practice, I totally gave way to contemplation (military service). The newer views, only fleetingly alluded to, originate from the practice itself, were brought to the surface by it, extended and modified daily; they proved to be not only theoretically but also practically valuable, that is to say, usable.
It goes without saying that you are completely right when you place the never resting tendency to unification in mental life alongside the trauma. I can not only confirm that in principle, but also plaster with examples the various modes of the tendency to heal. Only I find that the expression “scar formation,” as far as my experience goes, does not characterize mastery of trauma by means of pathological reaction quite accurately, inasmuch as the mental pathological products are not so rigid and incapable of regeneration as are the scars of bodily tissues.
At the beginning of October we are going to Baden-Baden, then to Paris, so that my wife also has something of a vacation. A severe case has to go along.2 You see, relaxation therapy is not always very comfortable for the doctor.
Could you tell me if our Madrid friend with the long name3 has a special reason for not answering my letters?
Many kind regards.
Yours,
Ferenczi