Significant Moments: A Pattern in the Omissions

And so . . .
Joel Glenn Brenner, The Emperors of Chocolate: Inside the Secret World of Hershey and Mars.
. . . the inner circle of psychoanalysis . . .
J. Moussaieff Masson, Final Analysis: The Making and Unmaking of a Psychoanalyst.
. . . lifted its veil of secrecy ever so slightly, in a rare attempt to justify its actions to the public.
Joel Glenn Brenner, The Emperors of Chocolate: Inside the Secret World of Hershey and Mars.
As I was reading through the correspondence and preparing the annotations for the first volume of the series, the Freud-Fliess letters, I began to notice what appeared to be a pattern in the omissions made by Anna Freud in the original, abridged edition. In the letters written after September 1897 (when Freud was supposed to have given up his "seduction" theory), all the case histories dealing with the sexual seduction of children had been excised. Moreover, every mention of Emma Eckstein, an early patient of Freud's and Fliess's, who seemed connected in some way with the seduction theory, had been deleted. I was particularly struck by a section of a letter written in December 1897 that brought to light two facts previously unknown: Emma Eckstein was herself seeing patients in analysis (presumably under Freud's supervision); and Freud was inclined to give credence, once again, to the seduction theory.
J. Moussaieff Masson, Freud and the Seduction Theory.
All that had been suppressed and edited out reappeared . . .
Dan Levin, Spinoza.
. . . as clear, as transparent as . . .
Alexandre Dumas, Ten Years Later.
. . . objective.
Paul Wienpahl, On Translating Spinoza in Speculum Spinozanum 1677-1977.
I asked Anna Freud why she had deleted this section from the letter. She said that she no longer knew why.
J. Moussaieff Masson, Freud and the Seduction Theory.
A masterpiece of evasion.
Don DeLillo, The Names.
It was while she held a photograph . . .
Virginia Woolf, Night and Day.
. . . of Emma Eckstein . . .
J. Moussaieff Masson, Freud and the Seduction Theory.
. . . in her hands that she exclaimed, impulsively, if incongruously:
Virginia Woolf, Night and Day.
It never occurred to me to know more.
William Shakespeare, The Tempest (Modern English Version).
When I showed her an unpublished letter from Freud to Emma Eckstein, she said that she could well understand my interest, since Emma Eckstein had indeed been important to the early history of psychoanalysis, but the letter should nevertheless not be published In subsequent conversations, Miss Freud indicated that since her father had eventually abandoned the seduction theory, it would only prove confusing to readers to be exposed to his early hesitations and doubts. I, on the other hand, felt that these passages not only were of great historical importance but might well represent the truth. Nobody, it seemed to me, had the right to decide for others, by altering the record, what was truth and what was error. Moreover, whatever Freud's ultimate decision, it is my belief that he was haunted by the seduction theory all his life.
J. Moussaieff Masson, Freud and the Seduction Theory.
The question . . .
Emile Zola, Germinal.
. . . of child sexual abuse, . . .
Robert A. Phillips, Jr., Introduction to Truddi Chase, When Rabbit Howls.
. . . I was sure . . .
Bertolt Brecht, Galileo.
. . . continued to trouble him, though he had supposedly, with scientific smugness, settled it.
Emile Zola, Germinal.
______________________________________

From a letter I sent in 1995 to U.S. Attorney Eric H. Holder, Jr. of the Justice Department, months before I filed a court case in D.C. Superior Court in my lawsuit against my former employer, Akin Gump:

http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2010/06/what-did-attorney-general-eric-holder.html

CONCORDANCE OF INCIDENTS REPORTED BY EMPLOYER TO DOHR VS. INCIDENTS REPORTED BY FREEDMAN

The following is a verbatim report made by Akin Gump to DOHR of the incidents that I stated to Dennis M. Race and Malcolm Lassman on October 24, 1991.  See Akin Gump Response to Particulars (Attachment A), at p. 2.  NOTE THAT AKIN GUMP’S LIST CORRESPONDS EXACTLY WITH DOHR’S FINDINGS OF FACT, EXCEPT THAT THE FOUR INCIDENTS INVOLVING ROBERTSON AND SCHAAR--THE TWO PERSONS KNOWN TO HAVE ENGAGED IN SERIOUS MISCONDUCT--ARE UNACCOUNTABLY OMITTED IN AKIN GUMP’S RECITAL.

1.  An attorney once used the word "sweet” while pouring a cup of coffee from a coffee machine (apparently corresponds to Finding of Fact 4(c));

2.  While with a group of co-workers one female employee stated “I bet you have a sexy chest” (apparently corresponds to Finding of Fact 4(a));

3.  One evening after business hours, an attorney got on the elevator with him and paced back and forth, looking at Claimant but saying nothing (apparently corresponds to Finding of Fact 4(j));

4,  Co-workers in the litigation support group were trying to "make him nervous" (apparently corresponds to Finding of Fact 4(h));

5.  A female co-worker stood by him swinging her hips so as to provoke him (apparently corresponds to Finding of Fact 4(I)); and

6.  A male co-worker had his eyes fixed to Claimant’s genital area (apparently corresponds to Finding of Fact 4(b));

The following is a list of the incidents that I reported to DOHR as constituting my report of harassment to Lassman and Race on October 24, 1991.  DOHR incorporated my report in its findings of fact, but designated my report evidence of paranoia rather than evidence of unlawful harassment.

1.  Finding of Fact 4(a) involving unidentified male co-worker "with sexy chest” [see (2.) above];

2.  Finding of Fact 4(b) involving Paul Wageman staring at genitals [see (6,) above];

3.  Finding of Fact 4(c) involving David Hardee at coffee machine [see (1.) above];

4.  Finding of Fact 4(D) involving Stacey Schaar; OMITTED BY EMPLOYER

5.  Finding of Fact 4(e) involving Robertson; OMITTED BY EMPLOYER

6.  Finding of Fact 4(f) involving Robertson; OMITTED BY EMPLOYER

7.  Finding of Fact 4(g) involving Robertson; OMITTED BY EMPLOYER

8.  Finding of Fact 4(h) involving co-workers in litigation support group [see (4.) above]

9. Finding of Fact 4(I) involving Katherine Harkness swinging her hips [see (5.) above]

10.  Finding of Fact 4(j) involving David Eisenstat on elevator [see (3.) above]


http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2010/01/significant-moments-defamation-vs.html


http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2009/12/significant-moments-pattern-in.html