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.
156A
Berlin
5 May 1913
Dear Professor,
If one only considers external events, then the outlook for psychoanalysis is very grim again. Just when I was about to write to you, the enclosed reached me. The last bit of desire to attend the Congress left me when I read Bleuler's contradictory stuff.1 It is best to stick to our old ways, and to keep ourselves to ourselves. As far as I know, only Wanke,2 who has also announced a paper, is going there. He is honest and will certainly stand up for the cause, but he will not make any impression. I shall ask him to write a report of the Congress.
I am now busy with preparation work for my Habilitation thesis; that is to say, I take down associations of patients suffering from senile dementia in the hospital for incurables. Otherwise, every day brings ten hours' work. I can reassure you, dear Professor, on the question of fees. Last autumn I had started putting up my fees from 10 to 15 M and recently made the jump to 20 for the first time. The income is about to rise correspondingly; i.e. to 18,000 M last year; this year I may count on about 25,000 M. As soon as I have carried through the increase in fees totally, the best time for which is after the holidays, I shall shorten my working day by one hour in order to have more time for scientific work. So much is ready to be written down; and in addition the thesis for the Habilitation is another hindrance at the moment.
You ask me to work on the ban on images; this shall be done too, but, I would prefer not to communicate this as such, but, rather, in a broader context. I should like to speak at the Congress3 on the transformation of scoptophilia.4 Surely, you will agree if I leave the triviality unpublished until then. I should very much like to know whether your work on totem will be published before Munich; I would have to refer to it in my paper. I would perhaps like to ask you to let me read the proofs, as you did in an earlier case too.
Unfortunately, I cannot but agree with what y