Coincidences in analysis: Sigmund Freud and the strange case of Dr Forsyth and Herr von Vorsicht

Abstract

Freud’s interest in thought transference opens the possibility for psychoanalytic research on the primary preverbal language and the maternal function, which the emphasis on verbal and paternal communication had hidden in the background of the setting. The author advances a new interpretation of coincidences in analysis and of the psychopathology of everyday life of the setting. Starting from a strange coincidence, new hypotheses are submitted following additional readings of the unpublished manuscript of the ‘Forsyth case’, recovered by the author, in regard to a significant moment of transformation, both in Freud and in psychoanalysis, at the end of the war. This phase corresponds first to a change of language, from German to English, as well as to the foundation of the International Journal of Psychoanalysis by Ernest Jones. In particular, the roots of the metapsychological turn of the 1920s are explored, together with the opening of private and productive thoughts in the area of ‘telepathy’ that joined Freud, Ferenczi, and Anna Freud in a true ‘dialogue of unconsciouses’. The free association between A Child Is Being Beaten, Beyond the Pleasure Principle, and the clinical experience with ‘Herr B.’ is outlined in order to understand Freud’s heroic self‐analysis at the time when he was treating his daughter Anna and grieving the death of his beloved Sophie.

Key words:

• Anna Freud analysis
• coincidences
• death instincts
• Forsyth‐case
• incest
• occult
• setting
• story of psychoanalysis
• telepathy
• thought‐transference

1. Translation by Gina Atkinson.

1. Translation by Gina Atkinson.

Notes

1. Translation by Gina Atkinson.

2. The dynamics of the coincidence recall the episode of the house call to the very old lady as well as the scene of the missed meeting between Freud and Jung at Kreuzlingen – when, in 1912, Freud had gone to Switzerland at short notice to Jung, to visit his other friend Binswanger, then gravely ill (from the same illness, incidentally, that von Freund did not survive). This misunderstanding had been the first sign of a lack of agreement between the two, and the ‘Kreuzlingen gesture’, which had aroused Jung’s jealousy, had been many times flung in Freud’s face by Jung.

3. Paul Roazen, whom I interviewed in March 2005, was not familiar with the manuscript. When I found it in 2006 in the Sigmund Freud Archives, I initially made contact with Grubrich‐Simitis, who informed me that it had already been reported on in 1992; she directed me to Ernest Falzeder for transcription.

4. Freud’s grandson Ernst, who was analysed by Anna and changed his surname to Freud, will psychically survive the death of his mother as well, in contrast to his little brother Heinz, who with his death in 1923 – in what is almost a re‐presentation of trauma across generations – will give Freud, preoccupied in coping with his first encounter with cancer of the jaw, his greatest pain.

5. Sigmund Freud Archives, The Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. :

OVERSIZE, 1859‐1985, n.d. OV 10 (cont.) 5 (cont.) Writings (Container 50),

“Nachtrag” [1932?], holograph manuscript

[Unidentified quotation (for “Neue Vorlesungen XXXI”?)]

Transcription and translation by Ernst Falzeder for Maria Pierri

6. This word inserted later.

7. According to American usage. In British English: first floor [trans.].

8. ‘People’s University’– adult education center [trans.].

9. Freund is the German word for ‘friend’ [trans.].

10. One word crossed out.