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.
Nagelshausen, 20 October 19121
75aB
Dear Professor,
I have come out again for Sunday, bringing my work with me, this time to relations nearby.2 I am letting that work wait for now, so that I can reply to your last letter at leisure. I was extremely delighted by the news about Kraus-Berlin, partly because of the satisfaction for you personally and for our whole thing, but equally because I anticipate an extraordinary pleasure in finding the field of hysteria and obsessional neurosis summarised in handbook or textbook form edited for once by your pen.3 How much time have you got for it? May I take this opportunity to wish you luck! — I am glad that things are going well for you at home and that you are still feeling the benefit of your holiday, both of which I can say for myself too. I do not know whether my work4 will be finished this year; it would not be impossible if it continues to be as relatively quiet at the clinic as it has been since I came back. Your encouragement is very supportive anyway. By the way, on looking more closely, I had to change quite a lot of what I read aloud to you,5 purely with regard to content. The psychiatric part, which I have dealt with on its own, is ready; now I am on the description of psychoanalysis and its relationship to Part 1. I am really enjoying it. — I have read your work on taboos6 with great interest and was delighted by the broadening of our horizon which you have thus made possible for us. I was also highly delighted once again with your paper on impotence.7 Nos. I and II of your ‘Conditions’8 etc. are so interesting and so important for practitioners, that I am looking forward to No. III. I have read Jung's remarks on the libido theory9 as well. It is certainly commendable that he goes further into the problem that you brought up in the ‘Schreber’10 and tries to find a solution to it. But it is a bit laborious and in my opinion goes too far into the biological on the one hand and the philosophical on the other. I admit th