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.
220A
Berlin
16 June 1914
Dear Professor,
A chance free hour enables me to answer you at once. It is wonderful that you yourself now write so contentedly and confidently about your well-being. I hope you will already be completely recovered when I meet you in Seis in August. Naturally it will still be somewhat uncertain up to the last moment whether my wife can leave the children for long enough to make a journey to the Tyrol worth while. We are hoping to find a good substitute for her, but it is still uncertain. I myself could of course make the journey, and am coming in any case.
I am certainly glad to hear that you are satisfied with the Jahrbuch, only you do not have to thank me for it, dear Professor. I really believe that all the reasons for gratitude are on my side. True, it was a great deal of work, especially in the last few weeks again, as the proofs were so bad (in my general review two pages of manuscript were simply left out). But we have got over that now, and I believe we shall all be happy with the finished volume. I did notice the shortcomings of some single reviews, but we could not expect any more in so short a time. I am glad none of our collaborators failed us.
I am sending with this the passage relating to the withdrawal of the libido, in an altered form. If you approve of it like this, simply send it back to me in an envelope. If necessary, make any changes. I shall use them for the 2nd proofs.
I am still going to write to Ferenczi; I observed the same deficiency as you (ambivalence).
I am not as satisfied as you with my contribution to the Jahrbuch (scoptophilia). I could really have shaped some things better, but I did not have the time.
I have given the answers to the political questions in your last letter directly to Rank. I have had an afterthought about my planned letter to Maeder and Seif. I deliberately wrote as calmly as possible; that now contrasts much with the “bombshell”. It could thus look like duplicity, if I ask both groups, quite charm