We are looking deeper than Freud … On the departure from the primacy of the sexual in Berlin and London between 1920 and 1925

ABSTRACT

Between 1920 and 1925 a shift occurred in psychoanalytic theory that related primarily to the status of aggression. The author shows which authors in Berlin, Amsterdam and London participated in this change and to what extent they prepared the ground for the reception of Melanie Klein, who developed in her analyses of children a technique that applied pre-eminently to the perception and interpretation of aggression. The way in which Freud distanced himself from this departure from the primacy of the sexual is described, as well as the waning importance of his perspective following the establishment of the Institutes in Berlin and London.

Notre regard est plus approfondi que celui de Freud… L'écart d'avec la primauté du sexuel à Berlin et Londres entre 1920 et 1925

Entre 1920 et 1925, on devait assister à un changement dans la théorie psychanalytique, concernant principalement le statut de l'agressivité. L'auteure de cet article montre, d'une part,quels sont les auteurs, que ce soit à Berlin, Amsterdam ou Londres, qui ont pris part à ce changement, et d'autre part, dans quelle mesure ils ont préparé le terrain pour l'accueil des idées de Melanie Klein, celle-ci ayant développé dans ses analyses d'enfants une technique qui s'appliquait avant tout à la perception et l'interprétation de l'agressivité. Elle décrit la façon dont Freud s'est éloigné de cet écart d'avec la primauté du sexuel, ainsi que le déclin de l'importance de sa conception après la création des Instituts de Berlin et de Londres.

Wir blicken tiefer als Freud … um Abschied vom Primat des Sexuellen in Berlin und London zwischen 1920 und 1925

Zwischen 1920 und 1925 kam es zu einer Veränderung der psychoanalytischen Theorie, die sich vor allem auf die Stellung der Aggression bezog. Es wird dargestellt, welche Autoren in Berlin, Amsterdam und London an dieser Veränderung beteiligt waren und inwiefern sie den Boden für die Rezeption von Melanie Klein bereiteten, die zudem in der Analyse mit Kindern eine Technik entwickelte, die sich bevorzugt auf die Wahrnehmung und Deutung der Aggression bezog. Freuds Distanzierung vom Abschied vom Primat des Sexuellen wird beschrieben sowie das schwindende Gewicht seiner Sichtweise, nachdem sich die Institute in Berlin und London etabliert hatten.

Noi guardiamo più a fondo di Freud… L'abbandono del primato della sessualità a Berlino e a Londra tra il 1920 e il 1925

Tra il 1920 e il 1925, nella teoria psicoanalitica ha avuto luogo un cambiamento il cui fulcro principale era la concezione dell'aggressività. Si illustra in queste pagine quali autori a Berlino, ad Amsterdam e a Londra hanno preso parte a questa trasformazione, e si mostra parimenti in quale misura essi hanno preparato il terreno per la ricezione di Melanie Klein, che nelle sue analisi di bambini sviluppò una tecnica rivolta elettivamente alla percezione e all'interpretazione dell'aggressività. Viene qui descritto il modo in cui Freud prese le distanze da questo abbandono del primato della sessualità, e si tratteggia altresì la progressiva perdita di importanza della prospettiva da lui sostenuta man mano che gli Istituti di Berlino e Londra andavano affermandosi.

Vemos más allá que Freud… Sobre el apartamiento de la primacía de lo sexual en Berlín y Londres, entre 1920 y 1925

Entre 1920 y 1925 se produjo un cambio en la teoría psicoanalítica relacionado principalmente con el estatus de la agresión. Se muestra qué autores de Berlín, Amsterdam y Londres participaron en este cambio y en qué medida prepararon el terreno para la recepción de Melanie Klein, quien, en el análisis de niños y niñas, desarrolló una técnica aplicada de manera preeminente a la percepción e interpretación de la agresión. Se describe el modo en que se distancia Freud de este apartamiento de la primacía de lo sexual, así como la menguante importancia de su perspectiva tras la fundación de los institutos de Berlín y Londres.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

2 In his 2019 Karl Abraham lecture, Riccardo Steiner elaborated other aspects of the relationships between London and Berlin psychoanalysis and rightly refers to a “Berlin connection” (2019).

3 On the concept of oral aggression, see May (2017, 2018 [1997], 2018 [2010], 2018 [2011]), on anal aggression, see May (2011, 2018 [2012]); and on the relationship between aggression and the death drive, see May (2015 [2013]). Here and hereafter, the year refers to the source given in the references, and the year in square brackets to the year of first publication.

4 For the sake of completeness, Sadger, Federn and Andreas-Salomé should be added.

5 It is possible that Ophuijsen had already mentioned these considerations in a lecture of 1919 (Dutch Psycho-analytic Society 1920, 121).

6 The Rundbriefe or circular letters of the Committee (Wittenberger and Tögel 1999–2006) are abbreviated “RB”, followed by the volume number.

7 The following sources were used for the history of psychoanalysis in England between 1920 and 1925: Glover (1965), King (1991), King and Holder (1992), Aguayo (1997, 2000), Hinshelwood (1999), Robinson (2008, 2011) and Forrester and Cameron (2017).

8 The lecture forms the basis of the second part of her 1921 publication.

9 Abraham began to work on this paper in 1921 and completed the manuscript at the end of 1922 (Freud and Abraham 2002, 460). The paper was published in the Internationale Zeitschrift as well as in the International Journal in 1923. In the literature the publication year is repeatedly and wrongly given as 1921, which is presumably attributable to an inaccuracy in Jones’ Abraham bibliography (1927 [1926]). This has resulted in the above-mentioned connections being lost.

10 On the Committee”s dynamics, see Leitner (1998), Falzeder and Hermanns (2009), Zienert-Eilts (2013), and Liebermann and Kramer (2012).

11 Radó (1928 [1927]) later introduced the concepts of the “good” and the “bad” mother, which Klein took over from him. Another Hungarian colleague, Michael Balint, who settled between 1921/22 and 1924 with his wife in Berlin, would later in “Critical Notes on the Theory of the Pregenital Organizations of the Libido” (1965 [1935]) develop a strong counter-position to Abraham.

12 Jones, for example, adhered to Alexander’s (and Stärcke’s) theory at that time (1948 [1923], 324).

13 Freud’s theory of Nachträglichkeit (deferred action) originates from the 1890s. It concerned the way in which sexual trauma is only experienced as such subsequently. The above-mentioned Nachträglichkeit refers to something similar, namely that events are differently understood or experienced over the course of time from how they were when they occurred. In this sense, Freud confronted the students on several occasions between 1920 and 1925 with his view that the young boy at the oral or anal stage does not yet experience any castration anxiety in the stricter and true sense of the word, but only does this at the phallic stage. Freud mentioned this clarification in four publications during this period, namely in “The Infantile Genital Organization” (1923b, 144), in a postscript written in 1923 to “Little Hans” (1909, 8), in “The Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex” (1924, 175–176) and in “Inhibitions, Symptoms and Anxiety” (1926, 129–130), which was completed in December 1925. In the latter work he describes in detail how he understood Little Hans”s fear of being bitten and the Wolf Man”s fear of wolves not as a manifestation of oral-cannibalistic anxieties and wishes, but as products of resistance and regression. The “oral” images, in his opinion, were only disguised forms of the castration anxiety relating to the penis.

14 Freud formulated the relationship, undoubtedly deliberately, as a hierarchical one when he wrote that the death drive and/or aggression is “used” or “put in the service” of the ego or superego. He thereby made clear that the death drive or the aggressive drives do not use the ego, but are merely the medium, material or tool of the ego (or superego). From “Beyond the Pleasure Principle” (Freud 1920) he held that the death drive was diverted “by” narcissistic libido or “by” Eros from the ego and directed at objects that lie outside the ego. Seen in this way, the death instinct was “weaker” than Eros and “weaker” than narcissistic libido, just as “aggression” was seen as only a product of the activity of Eros: by turning outward, carried out by Eros and/or the narcissistic libido, the death drive “becomes” an aggressive drive.

Freud’s reflections may seem formalistic or conflictual, but they express his position. On the one hand, he was convinced from 1920 on that the death drive and the aggressive drive “must” be accepted for biological and psychological reasons. On the other hand, he wanted to emphasize their derived, secondary character. A certain solution to this problem was the presentation in the “Outline” (1940), according to which the sexual drives should play the most important role at least in the genesis of the neuroses. Here Freud left it open whether the primacy of the sexual should also apply to biological (life) and cultural phenomena.

15 The correct translation of the title would have been: The Developmental Goals of Psycho-Analysis.

16 “The Ego and the Id” was published only in April 1923, and could not therefore have been thoroughly considered by any student.

17 Ferenczi called it a “technical scientific-political” work (“technisch-wissenschaftspolitische Arbeit”; Ferenczi and Groddeck 2006, 102). What was meant by “technical” was that the work related to psychoanalytic treatment technique. What was meant exactly by “scientific-political” is not clear. From the context in which he used the term it seems that he wanted to express that their book was not only a scientific contribution, but that it took a stand against Berlin.

18 A characteristic that has gradually become apparent to me: May (2006, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2018 [1997]) and May-Tolzmann (1990).

19 Abraham referred to a lecture by James Glover on 3 May 1922, of which there is only a short summary, which mentions “aggressive ‘oral’ impulses” in the aetiology of depression (J. Glover 1922, 508).

20 What is meant, then, is an object that is not too similar to the ego.

21 See the abstracts in Report 1924, 392, 395, 398.

22 See the treatment notes in Frank (2009a, 289–345). The author gives a detailed account of Klein’s development of the concept of the negative transference (33–47).

23 An example: “At any rate, … it is certain that many of the initial slaps administered to the baby are associated with aggressive biting at the nipple. In other words, weaning ends in an atmosphere of punishment or at least loss following aggression” (E. Glover 1956 [1924], 8).

24 See, for example, RB 3, 139; RB 4, 59.

25 See Frank and Weiss (1996) for a reconstruction of the Würzburg lecture.

26 The lectures Klein gave in Berlin and Vienna were also unpublished. Klein’s move away from Ferenczi, her first analyst, and towards Abraham, her second analyst, was published in her paper on the aetiology of the tic (Klein 1975 [1925]), which referred to the so-called “Discussion of tic” that had taken place in 1921 between Abraham and Ferenczi (Dahl 2001; Discussion 1921; May-Tolzmann 1990). In this paper Klein made it clear that she preferred Abraham’s understanding of the tic to that of Ferenczi, because Abraham’s explanation referred to deeper layers than Ferenczi’s explanation (Klein 1975 [1925], 121–123); on Klein’s relationship to Abraham and Ferenczi, see in particular Aguayo (1997, 2000).

27 It was not until “Female Sexuality” (1931) and the “New Introductory Lectures” (1933) that Freud aligned himself with the colleagues who had posited a pre-Oedipal hatred of the mother in the girl. In his view the deepest source of this hatred was the narcissistic wound caused by not having a penis. Its reactive quality meant that the primacy of the sexual was unaffected by this change of emphasis.

28 Ophuijsen spoke before the Dutch Association on 20 December 1924, on the topic “Sadism” (Report 1925, 239). From his lecture only a short author’s note is preserved, from which one can gather that he repeated his thesis that sadism was a “derivative of oral erotism in its second phase, namely, that of biting” (239). Ophuijsen thus belonged to the group that held similar views to Abraham, who had referred to conversations with him, where he mentioned Ophuijsen’s thesis that the origin of oral sadism was to be sought in biting (1927 [1924], 450–451).

29 This shows how important it can be for the reconstruction of the history of theory not to limit oneself to publications, but to pay attention, if at all possible, to whether they were already presented before their publication and whether traces of these presentations exist.

30 The editors of the Abraham–Jones correspondence state that we can refer at the latest from summer 1923 to a close friendship (Hermanns 2018, 70); see also Bentinck (2016, 447–448).

31 Some members of the network remained connected with each other “through the couch”: after her analysis with Abraham Alix Strachey went into analysis with Edward Glover, and her husband James Strachey went to James Glover. In 1926 Klein took Jones’s two children and his wife into analysis (Grosskurth 1986, 159; Meisel and Kendrick 1986, 307–308).

32 See Bruns (2020). Forrester and Cameron (2017, 535–537) indicate that Freud was disappointed because he would have preferred an international editorship.

33 See Abraham (1927 [1925], 401, 403). This emerges from a search in the PEP archive in the International Journal. Already in 1924 Edward Glover had presented Abraham’s new oral stages in the British Journal of Medical Psychology (Glover 1956 [1924]). Abraham’s “A Short Study of the Development of the Libido” did not itself appear in English until 1927, translated by Alix Strachey.