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.
57F
Vienna IX, Berggasse 19
26 December 1908
Dear Colleague,
I reply without delay to your interesting letter, which contains pleasing and unpleasing news side by side, as happens indeed in life itself.
In the first place, many thanks for the woman of Pompeii. It would be really interesting to know whether the sculptor knew Gradiva or worked independently. Unfortunately I have not even a trace of foot worship, and that is why I am so completely at a loss about the whole problem. Now for the painful part. I am very sorry that you are again at loggerheads with Jung. In Zurich I pressed him hard, found him accessible, and he wrote to me only recently, saying he was glad to have come to an easy relationship with you. Now, this time I cannot agree that you are in the right. Jung made a decision that plainly falls within his powers as editor, and in my opinion someone who assumes responsibility and labour should be allowed a certain amount of elbow-room for this. His act has certainly nothing hostile to you in it; you are, as far as I know, represented in the first half-volume with your paper on the intermarriage of relatives, and the postponement of your review to the second can really not be regarded as a snub to you. I fear you have rather too much mistrust of him, a trace of a persecution complex. I should be very sorry were you to give grounds now for justifying his earlier behaviour towards you. I have deliberately refrained from exercising any influence on the contents of the Jahrbuch, and think you could well do the same without compromising your dignity. I also remind you that your prognosis about Jung's future behaviour with regard to our cause did not turn out to be correct. You see from this how important it is to me that in these affairs, in which each of you judges the other, both of you should turn out to be wrong and I to be right; I really cannot tolerate that “two such fellows”1 both of whom are so close to me, should not get on with each other.
The hostilitie