Psychoanalysis in the Netherlands PDF

Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History Psychoanalysis in the Netherlands Author(s): Ilse N. Bulhof Source: Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 24, No. 4 (Oct., 1982), pp. 572-588 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/178428. Ac...

Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History Psychoanalysis in the Netherlands Author(s): Ilse N. Bulhof Source: Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 24, No. 4 (Oct., 1982), pp. 572-588 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/178428. Accessed: 09/05/2014 19:46 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at. http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].. Cambridge University Press and Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Comparative Studies in Society and History. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Psychoanalysis in the Netherlands ILSE N. BULHOF Katholieke Theologische Hogeschool Utrecht and RijksuniversiteitUtrecht In this article I will first investigate the response Freudianpsychoanalysis received in the Netherlandsfrom 1905, when the first Dutch analystbegan to practice psychoanalysis, until the beginning of World War II. Then I will briefly describe the development of psychoanalysis after the war. In the Netherlandsas elsewhere Freudianpsychoanalysiswas transmitted first to the medical profession, that is to say, to a segment of the Dutch social elite. From there, Freud's ideas spreadto other parts of the elite, especially the intellectuals and the religious leaders, after which psychoanalysis was filtereddown to the public at large in a form the elite thoughtappropriateto it. In the 1930s, a few leftist intellectuals not belonging to the social elite dis- covered Freud's relevance for emancipatorypolitics. In order to understand the process by which the freudianraw materialwas assimilatedby the medical profession;the intellectuals;the guardiansof public morality,the theologians; and the moreradicalreaders,and from thence passed on to the largerpublic, it will be helpful to begin by looking at Dutch society duringthe period under investigation. Fromthe last quarterof the nineteenthcenturyuntilthe onset of the Depres- sion in 1929, the Netherlands experienced steady economic growth. The period witnessed an increasing democratizationof the political process, culminatingin 1917, when all men received the franchise,and in 1922, when women did also. The period furthermorewitnessed the entrance upon the political scene, which had long been occupied almost exclusively by the liberals, of three additionalsocial groups: the orthodoxProtestants,the Ro- man Catholics, and the working class-groups which so far had kept them- selves outside the political process. In their emancipatorystruggle, each of these groups developed a strongsense of identity. As a result, Dutch political and cultural life became curiously compartmentalizedinto orthodox Protes- tant, Roman Catholic, Socialist, and "neutral" segments. Each grouphad its own political party, labor union, school system, university, student union, insurancecompany, broadcastingsystem, professionalsocieties, sportclubs, and libraries. In spite of a growing spirit of democracy, Dutch society was until the 1960s still very much a class society with little upwardmobility. The dividing line between the classes not only ran between the social democrats 0010-4175/82/4260-1307 $2.50 ? 1982 Society for ComparativeStudy of Society and History 572 This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions  PSYCHOANALYSIS IN THE NETHERLANDS 573 and the liberals, but also throughthe religious parties, each of which had an upper- and a lower-class wing. In sketching the history of psychoanalysisin the Netherlands, I will begin with a descriptionof the responses it received before the beginning of World War I. The earliest date in the history of psychoanalysis in the Netherlandsis 1905, the year in which the psychiatristAugust Starckebegan to use psycho- analysis in private practice.1 The Dutch medical profession as a whole be- came exposed to psychoanalysis at the First InternationalCongress for Psy- chiatry, Neurology, Psychology, and the Care of the Insane, organized at Amsterdamin September 1907. At this congress, Pierre Janet of Paris, G. Aschaffenburgof K6ln, Carl Gustav Jung of Zurich, and the Dutch president of the congress, GerbrandusJelgersmaof Leiden, readpaperson the causes of hysteria.2Albert Willem van Renterghem,who had introducedhypnoticther- apy into the Netherlands and who later became the first president of the Dutch Society for Psychoanalysis, read a paper on psychotherapyin which Freudwas not mentioned. The papersof Aschaffenburgand Jungattractedthe most attention, as they respectively attackedand defended Freud's ideas. It was at this time that Jelgersma first heard about Freud.3 However, in the subsequent discussion, Freud's ideas received little support, and the Dutch physicians did not participatein the debate. In 1907 and 1908, two medical dissertationson Dutch experimentswith Jung's association test were published;both authorsbriefly rejected Freud's theories.4 Freud received somewhat more attentionfrom a Dutch Reformed physician, A. Deenik, who in the Orgaan van ChristelijkeNatuurkundigenen Geneeskundigen(Organ of Christian Physicists and Physicians) explained Pierre Dubois's rationaltherapyand Freud's psychoanalysis. In his opinion, the success claimed for their treatmentsby these "neurologists" was simply the result of their practitioners'suggestive personalities.5 Freud stayed in the Netherlandsin 1910 on a family vacationat the beach, 1 E. Jones, TheLife and Workof SigmundFreud, 3 vols. (New York:Basic Books, 1957), III, 28. J. Spanjaard,"August Starcke, 1880-1954: The Sourcesof CastrationAnxiety," in Analytic Pioneers, F. Alexander, S. Eisenstein, and M. Grotjahn,eds. (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966), 321-32. 2 Premier Congres international de Psychiatrie, de Neurologie, de Psychologie et de l'as- sistance des alienes, Amsterdam,2-7 September1907 (Amsterdam:J. H. de Bussy, 1908). The congress was reported in Psychiatrische en Neurologische Bladen (henceforwardPNB), 12 (1908), 51-55. I am very gratefulto J. H. van den Berg and his Instituutvoor Conflict Psychol- ogy at Leiden for help in locating materialsfor this study. 3 E. A. D. E. Carp, Jelgersma. Leven en Werken van een verdienstelijkNederlander (Lochum: De Tijdstroom, 1942), 59. 4 J. G. Schnitzler, "Onderzoekingenover Diagnostiek van Voorstellingscomplexenmet Be- hulp van het Associatie-Experiment"(doctoraldissertation,Utrecht, 1907); H. van der Haeven, "De Invloed der Meerwaardevan Voorstellingenin het Woordreactie-Experiment" (dissertation, medicine, Leiden, 1908). 5 A. Deenik, "Iets over modere Behandelingvan Zenuwlijders," Orgaan van de Christelij- ke Vereniging van Natuur- en Geneeskundigenin Nederland (1907-08), 168. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 574 ILSE N. BULHOF during which time he received a visit from the physician Jan EgbertGustaaf van Emden.6 (Van Emden went to Vienna for furtherstudy, and upon his returnpracticedpsychoanalysis at Leiden and later at The Hague.) The fol- lowing year, van Renterghemattendedthe InternationalCongressfor Psycho- therapyat Miinchen.He had previouslyvisited (with van Emden, who was his cousin) the ThirdInternationalCongress for Psychoanalysis,held at Weimar, where he was much impressedby Jung. As a resultof the papershe heardand of the discussions with the psychoanalysts he met there, van Renterghem decided to study psychoanalyticliteratureand became a memberof the Inter- national PsychoanalyticSociety.7 From 1911 on, positive reactionsto psychoanalysisbegan to be published. Physician and hypnotist Dirk Stigter, for instance, writing in the Nederlands Tijdschriftvoor Geneeskunde(Dutch Journal of Medicine), admonishedhis colleagues to read Freud, statingthat Freud's theories would have met with a more ready acceptance had their authorput them in the context of previous psychotherapeuticresearch instead of that of his own sexual aetiology of neuroses.8In the same year, the pedagogical correspondentof the influential daily newspaper, Nieuwe Rotterdamse Courant, informed his readers of Freud's discovery of the lasting effect of early childhoodimpressions,but he did not mention Freud's sexual theories.9 A turningpoint came in the year 1912. Fromthen on, psychoanalystsbegan an active campaignto win converts among colleagues and the generalpublic. In that year, the Dutch Society for Psychiatry and Neurology devoted a session to psychoanalysis. Paperssympatheticto psychoanalysiswere readby Starcke, since 1910 connected with the institution for the insane at Den Dolder, and by LeendertBouman, professorof psychiatryat the newly found- ed orthodoxProtestantFree Universityat Amsterdam. 0 JohannStarcke,who was a generalpractitionerand brotherof August, wrote an enthusiasticarticle in the populardaily, The Telegraph, praisingpsychoanalysisas "one of the most importantachievements of human thought," one which heralded "a new epoch in human culture.""1 Van Emden published the first Dutch translationof a work by Freud, the 6 Jones, Life and Work, III, 28. 7 A. W. van Renterghem,Autobiographie, 2 vols. (Rotterdam:privatelyprinted, 1924-27), II, 450-81. OtherDutch membersat the time were Starcke;J. H. W. van Ophuysen,a physician who lived at Zurich, where he worked at the Bircherclinic; and B. D. J. van der Linde. 8 D. Stigter, Announcementof the founding of the ZentralblattfurPsychoanalyse, in Neder- lands Tijdschriftvoor Geneeskunde(henceforwardNTG) (1911), 1174-75. 9 F. van Raalte, "Uit de duistereDiepten van de Ziel," Nieuwe RotterdamseCourant, 13, 17, and 29 November 1911. 10 A. Starcke, "Psycho-Analyse van theoretisch Standpunt," PNB, 16 (1912), 365-468; LeendertBouman, "De Psycho-Analyse van Freud," PNB, 16 (1912), 346-64. 11 J. Starcke, "De Psychologie van her Onbewuste; een nieuwe Wetenschap," De Tele- graaph, Morning Ed., 12 January1912. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions  PSYCHOANALYSIS IN THE NETHERLANDS 575 Clark University lectures.12 Van Renterghem-the first Dutch analyst to go abroadfor a traininganalysis-went to Zurichto be analyzedby Jung. Upon his return, he began to practice psychoanalysis in his Institute for Psycho- therapyat Amsterdam.He publishedthe first popularizingDutch introduction to psychoanalysis, Freud and His School (1914).13 His associate, A. van der Chijs, also analyzed by Jung, continued the effort with Introductionto the FundamentalPrinciples and Techniqueof Psychoanalysis (1914).14 Anotherimportantchannel throughwhich psychoanalysisreachedthe gen- eral public was August Starcke's translationof Freud's iconoclastic essays, "Sexual Morality as Cause of Modern Nervousness" and "Religion as Ob- sessional Neurosis." Stircke introducedthe essays with a short preface in which he concurredwith Freud's opinion as to the negative effects of sexual repressionupon modernlife. 5 His brotherJohanntranslatedin 1913 Freud's On Dreams, and in 1914 Karl Abraham'sDream and Myth.16 One of the most significant events in the diffusion process was Jelgersma's 1914 address, "Unconscious Life of the Mind." Serving that year as presi- dent of Leiden University, Jelgersmaspoke at the opening of the new school term-a festive occasion at which faculty, regents, students and prominent citizens were present. He enthusiasticallyoutlined Freud's theory of dreams, and discreetly but unmistakablyhinted at their sexual meanings.17 From that year on, until Jelgersma's retirementin 1931, the University of Leiden func- tioned as the training ground for a new generationof analysts. Starcke, van Renterghem,Jelgersma,and Boumanexemplify four different patternsof reception, all originating, however, in a shared rejection of the somatic style of medicine. Relatively little is known about August Stircke's background. He specialized in psychiatry and neurology, studying with 12 J. E. G. van Emden, OverPsychoanalyse. VijfVoordrachtengehoudenter gelegenheid van het 20-jarig Bestaan der Clark University in Worchester,Massachusettsdoor Prof. Dr. Sigm. Freud LL.D, Met Toestemmingvan de Schrijververtaalddoor J. E. G. van Emden(Leiden:S. C. van Doesburgh, 1912). 13 A. W. van Renterghem,Freud en zijn School (Baam: Hollandia Drukkerij, 1913; French trans. 1914, English trans. 1914). 14 A. van der Chijs, Inleiding tot de Grondbegrippenen Techniekder Psychoanalyse (Baarn: Hollandia Drukkerij, 1914). 15 A. Starcke, authorizedtranslationof Sigm. Freud, I. De Sexueele Beschavingsmoraalals Oorzaak der moderne Zenuwzwakte. II. Dwanghandeling en Godstdienstoefening,met eene inleiding (Baar: Hollandia Drukkerij, 1914). 16 J. Starcke, translationof Sigm. Freud, De Droom als Uiting van het onbewusteZieleleven (Leiden: van Doesburgh, 1913); idem, translationof KarlAbraham,Droom en Mythe(Leiden:S. C. van Doesburgh, 1914). 17 G. Jelgersma, OngewetenGeestesleven (Leiden:S. C. van Doesburgh, 1914). In his history of the psychoanalyticmovement, Freudmentionedthis addressas the first official recognitionof dream interpretationand psychoanalysis in Europe (Sigmund Freud, The History of the Psycho- analytic Movement, edited and with an introductionby Philip Reiff (New York: Collier Books, 1972), 66). This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 576 ILSE N. BULHOF JohannesWerthem-Salomonsonand CornelisWinklerin Amsterdam.A read- ing of Otto Weiniger's Sex and Character and, strangelyenough, of some Indian literaturepredisposedhis interest in psychoanalysis.18 When in 1905 as a young psychiatrist he came across Freud's booklet, On Dreams, his interestin psychoanalysis was immediatelyaroused. In particular,its tenden- cy to unmask hypocriticalattitudesappealed to him. Subsequentanalysis of his own dreamsbroughtabout a conversionexperience and convinced him of the correctness of Freud's insights.19 A psychiatrist at a mental hospital, StarckeappreciatedFreudfor having restoredthe understandingof, and com- munication with, the insane. He expected furtherprogress in the field of psychiatry to come from deeper self-knowledge on the part of the physi- cians-not from a better understandingof the patients' diseases. Needless to say, his unconverted colleagues interpretedStarcke's position as psycho- analytic imperialism ratherthan as an honest attemptto furtherpsychiatry. Van Renterghemwas a psychotherapistinterestedin the occult. In 1886, while still a physician in general practice in the countrytown of Goes, he by chance happened to read about the phenomenon of hypnosis. Profoundly intrigued,he began to study all the availableliteratureon the topic. He joined the London Society for Psychical Research, signed up for the journalSphinx, and developed an interestin spiritualism.20He began to apply hypnosis him- self, and visited Liebault at Nancy, France. Liebaultmade a lasting impres- sion upon him. Returning to Goes, van Renterghempracticed Liebault's suggestive therapy with great success, acquiringquite a name as a miracle doctor. A year later, he moved to Amsterdam, where, with a colleague, Frederikvan Eeden, he founded an Institutefor Psychotherapy,the first of its kind in Europe.21Independentlyfrom van Renterghem,van Eeden had dis- covered hypnosis during a visit to Paris, where he met Jean MartinCharcot. Charcot's demonstrationsof hysterical patients confirmed van Eeden's al- ready markedaversion to materialismand positivism, and startedhim on a lifelong course which, by way of studies of psychotherapy,hallucinations, clairvoyance, and telepathy, eventually led him towardspiritualismand Ro- man Catholicism.22During his association with van Renterghem,he wrote articles on psychotherapyfor literaryjournals, attemptingto acquaintDutch 18 Spanjaard, "August Starcke," 323. 19 A. Starckementions the profoundeffect of his self-analysis in his paper, "Psycho-Analyse van Theoretisch Standpunt," 167-68. 20 Van Renterghem,Autobiographie, I, 548-50. 21 Ibid., II, 87-93. On van Renterghem'sand van Eeden's institute, see also J. H. van den Berg, Dieptepsychologie (Nijkerk: G. F. Callenbach N. V., 1970), 131-33; and H. F. Ellen- berger, The Discovery of the Unconscious. The History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1970), 757, 759, 777-78. 22 F. van Eeden describes his interest in psychotherapy,hypnotism, mysticism, occultism, and spiritualismin his Dagbook [Diary], 1878-1923, 5 vols. (Culemborg:TjeenkWillink Noor- duijn B. V., 1972). This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions  PSYCHOANALYSIS IN THE NETHERLANDS 577 intellectuals with the mysterious workings of the unconscious. He left the institute in 1893 to devote himself to literatureand social change. Later, he would react violently against psychoanalysis because of its downgradingof the spirituallife. He became more sympathetic,however, afterhavingrevised his own Victorian attitudeconcerning sex. Van Renterghem,by contrast,readily acceptedpsychoanalysisbecause the psychotherapyhe had developed anticipatedseveral features of the psycho- analytic therapy. The transferof his practice from ruralGoes to the nation's capital in 1887 changed its character in significant ways. In Goes, van Renterghemhad been consulted by simple country folk whom he treatedby means of quick miracle cures, using Liebault's suggestive therapyfor a wide variety of physical and mental complaints-cramps, pain, sleeplessness, hys- terical attacks, ulcers, abscesses. He treatedhis patients as did Liebault-the patient seated in a chair, while those awaiting their turn watched. At Amsterdam, however, his patients came from the upper classes and suffered from neurastheniaand hysteria. These patients had to be treated separately.They also requireda much more prolongedtreatment.First it took time to get to know them, and it was also necessary to provide continuing moral support and guidance. Van Renterghem's therapy involved privacy, daily suggestion sessions of a half to several hoursat fixed times duringwhich the patients were comfortably resting on couches, and a treatmentperiod lasting from weeks to months. An importantmoment in his therapywas the discovery of the psychic trauma.23Following Liebault'smodel of the fatherly physician, van Renterghemhad much appeal as a charismatichealer. He also had a genuine gift for empathy. His tolerance for other people's ways was supportedby his psychomonism, which made it possible for him to make liberals, orthodox Protestants,Jews, and spiritualistsall feel at ease. In all these creeds, he thought, the same force was revered. His therapywas at the same time a typical upper-classtreatment,practicedin a sumptuousbuilding especially constructedfor the purpose, and requiringlarge amountsof money. Van Renterghemclearly cateredto the fin de siecle spiritof the uppermiddle class-in the Netherlands, the upper class tout court-with its then fashion- able interest in the mystical and occult. During his 1911 visit to Weimar and his 1912 visit to Jung in Ziirich, van Renterghemfound to his surprisethat his psychotherapeuticmethodwas very similar to psychoanalysis. Easily assimilating the elements of dream in- terpretationand free association, he considered psychoanalysis as one of several forms of psychotherapy-"a highly valuable enrichmentof the psy- chotherapist'sweaponry."24He pointedout thatpsychoanalysiswas the most 23 A. W. van Renterghemdescribed his therapyin Liebault en zijne School (Amsterdam:F. van Rossen, 1898), 182-231. 24 Van Renterghem, Freud en zijn School, 37. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 578 ILSE N. BULHOF effective of the existing psychotherapiesbecause it was the most radical, digging out the unconscious roots of the patient's problems.25 The case of Jelgersmawas quite different. His careeroffers an interesting example of a natural scientist's shift from a materialisticto a mentalistic conception of man caused by the discovery of the unconscious-a discovery made several times independentlyfrom Freud.26Jelgersmawas trainedas a physician and had specialized in the anatomyof the brain.He had developed a special interestin criminalanthropology.27Early in his careerit became clear to him that the anatomyof the brainitself cannot throw light on the causes of insanity or criminality:a person with a perfectly normalbrain can neverthe- less be insane or criminal. Thus Jelgersma maintainedthat criminals suffer from "a morally defective, abnormalpsychic constellation," from an abnor- mal characterand underdevelopedmoral potential. In order to understand crime, the scientist had to understandthe criminal's whole person, not just dissect his brains.28After his appointmentas directorof a clinic for neurotic patients, he began to experimentwith hypnosis. He was, however, carefulto separatehimself from the mystics of the likes of van Eeden and van Renter- ghem. A fervent practitionerof the objective naturalsciences, Jelgersmafelt con- tempt for "subjective" philosophy and religion. He maintainedthathis clini- cal study of criminals based on observation was every inch as scientific as brain anatomy.29Appointed in 1898 to the first Dutch chair in psychiatry (University of Leiden), he clarified in his inauguraladdressthe relevance of his new field by pointing out the importance of psychopathology for the understandingof man. He explained that psychopathology magnifies, and thus explains, processes that take place in normal psychology. Jelgersma's acceptance of psychoanalysis during the years 1912-14 came as a natural continuationof his own studies of hysteria. In 1926 he extensively covered psychoanalysis in the third edition of his Textbook of Psychiatry.30 Jelgersma's early views on the causes and natureof hysteria met with stiff opposition from representatives of the anatomical-physiological school, 25 Ibid., 38. 26 Ellenberger,Discovery of the Unconscious, 245-321. 27 Jelgersmabecame in 1885 privaatdocent-one privileged to teach at a universitywithout having an official function-in criminal anthropologyat the City University of Amsterdam.He had specialized in brain anatomy. 28 G. Jelgersma, "De geboren Misdadiger," Tijdschriftvoor Strafrecht,6 (1892), 97-117 at 117. 29 Ibid. In his 1899 inauguraladdress, he called psychology and psychiatrynaturalsciences, and expressed contempt for the nonexperimentalproceduresof philosophersand theologians(G. Jelgersma, Psychologie en pathologische Psvchologie (Leiden: van Doesburgh, 1899), 4, 31-34). He elaboratedon this theme in his Open Brief aan Prof. G. J. P. J. Bolland (Leiden: Gebroedersvan der Hoek, 1906). 30 G. Jelgersma, Leerboek der Psychiatrie, 1st ed. (Amsterdam:Scheltema en Holkema's Boekhandel, 1911). This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions  PSYCHOANALYSIS IN THE NETHERLANDS 579 among whom was the brain anatomistComelis Winklerof the University of Amsterdam, later of Utrecht.31Naturally, Winkler later was also adamantly opposed to psychoanalysis.32 Bouman exemplifies the third pattern of receptivity: that of a religious scientist. He belonged to the orthodox Protestantmovement of active par- ticipation in the modem world led by AbrahamKuyper, founderof the Free Universityof Amsterdam.33Like his coreligionists, Boumanwas predisposed to investigate with an open mind what Protestantscould learn from non- Christianscientists, in this case aboutpsychic life. He hoped thathis research would contribute to the development of a "Christian" science-a science based on orthodox Protestantprinciples-and lead ultimatelyto a general re- Christianizationof society. Pointing to the researchof Kiilpe, Klein, Busse, and others, Bouman happily stated that the views of these scientists corre- spond with the views of those who are committed to God's word, for their research proves that the soul is not a property,or a product, of matter, but something totally new, organized with regardto the physical world but not explainableby it.34 In his view, the latest scientific researchthus bridgedthe gap that in the nineteenth century had separatedpsychology and psychiatry from theology, and science from faith. Bouman could contributeto this pro- cess of reconciliationbetween science and faith because personallyhe had no affinity with mystic religious experiences. As a rationalistsuspicious of ex- cessive religiosity, he wholeheartedly agreed with modem psychiatry that some forms of religious behavior are abnormal.He preferredcontemplation over ecstasy.35 Accepting the existence of the soul, Bouman favored psychotherapy.He stated that because neurotic complaints usually are caused by psychic causes-disillusionment broughtby life and the "aftereffects of sin"-they could be treated most effectively by directly working on the soul through psychotherapy.36While rejecting treatmentof patients under hypnosis be- cause the practice was at variance with Biblical principles, he did accept the proprietyof suggestive therapy in the waking state.37We have seen that in 1912 Bouman had a positive attitudetoward psychoanalysis. Freudianpsy- choanalysis was in his eyes anotherstep towardthe recognitionof the soul. In a 1918 brochure, he was even more positive, although he had reservations 31 "G. Jelgersma," NTG, 38 (1901), 1068-74. 32 On Winkler, see his autobiography, Herinneringen. (Amhem: van Loghum Slaterus, 1947). 33 On AbrahamKuyperand his attemptsto modernizeorthodoxProtestantismwhile retaining its fundamentalistprinciples, see Jan Romein and Annie Romein, Erflatersvan onze Beschaving: Nederlandse Gestalten uit zes Feuwen, 4 vols. (Amsterdam:Querido, 1946), IV, 145-78. 34 L. Bouman, "Het Verbandtussen Lichaamen Ziel," Orgaan van de ChristelijkeVerenig- ing van Natuur-en Geneeskundigenin Nederland (henceforwardOCVNG)(1908-9), 154. 35 L. Bouman, "De Opwekking in Wales," OCVNG(1909-10), 53. 36 L. Bouman, "Psychische Therapie," OCVNG(1910-11), 6. 37 Ibid., 4-6. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 580 ILSE N. BULHOF concerningFreud'sdeterminism.At thatpoint, he had become much attracted by the work of Karl Jaspers.38Although Bouman never became a Freudian, he helped to pave the way for depth psychology. We may conclude thatpsychoanalysisappealedto these physiciansbecause it representeda departurefrom the materialismof the previous age, offering explanationsof phenomenathat reductionisticmedicine ignored. For diver- gent reasons, all four had been attentiveto "anomalies" such as phenomena pointing to unconscious mental processes that did not squarewith the domi- nant paradigmof somatic style medicine. Thus, they were ready for a para- digm switch. Actually, they alreadyhad made the switch before they became acquaintedwith psychoanalysis. But psychoanalysis presentedthem with a convincing combinationof theory and practicewhich unified theirown ideas. It also connected them with other researchersand therapistsin supportive national and internationalorganizations. With Jelgersma's 1914 address at Leiden, psychoanalysis caught the public eye, and from then on the debate surroundingit intensified among both the elite and the general public. T. J. de Boer, orthodox Protestantprofessor in the history of philosophy, logic, metaphysics, and psychology at the Free University at Amsterdam; GerritJan Heering, the futureprofessorof theology at the liberal seminaryat Leiden; and JohannesDominicus Joseph Aengenent, RomanCatholicBishop of Haarlem, all reacted negatively. De Boer welcomed the contemporary trend to restore the soul and to accept psychological explanationsof normal and abnormalbehavior, but he did not believe thatFreudcontributedmuch to this noble goal, because, he said, the latterdiscernedin it only sexual desires of the most perverse kind.39 Heering did not react to Freud, the scientist, but ratherto Freud, the social theorist as presentedto the Dutch public by August Starcke. Unlike Starcke, however, Heering did not see any necessity for sexual and social liberation. He also rejectedOskarPfister's attemptto combine religion and psychiatryas representinga denaturalizationof the ChristianFaith.40 In the same vein, Aengenent expressed concern about Freud's immoral advocacy of sexual license. He was especially worriedabout the kind of treatmentthat could be expected from the young psychiatriststrainedby Jelgersma.41Thus, the the- ologians unanimously tried to protect their flocks against this dangerous novelty. The psychoanalystsin the meantimecontinuedtheiroffensive. In 1915, the 38 L. Bouman, De BegrijpelijkeRelaties in de Psychologie (Amsterdam:Kirchner, 1918), 26-27. 39 T.J. de Boer, "Psychanalyse," De Beweging. Algemeen Maandschrift voor Letteren, Kunst, Wetenschapen Staatkunde, 10:1(1914), 113-29; 10:3(1914), 16-22. 40 G.J. Heering, "Om de menschelijke Ziel. De Psychanalyseen het Geestesleven," Onze Eeuw. Maandschriftvoor Staatkunde,LetterenWetenschapen Kunst, 15(1915), 42-77, 249-84. 41 J.D.J. Aengenent, "De Psycho-analytischeMethode van Freud," De Katholiek.Gods- dienstig en LetterkundigMaandschrift, 153(1918), 289-99. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions  PSYCHOANALYSIS IN THE NETHERLANDS 581 psychiatristAdolph F. Meyer published an Introductioninto Psychoanalysis for students and physicians,42 and a year later a survey of psychoanalytic interpretationof dreams.43 Johann Starcke translatedFreud's The Psycho- pathology of Everyday Life,44 and Jelgersmapublished a case history of an hysterical patient in which he successfully used psychoanalysis.45 In 1916, Jung was praisedin the Dutch Journal of Medicine,46and the next year he would find a powerful ally in a student of Jelgersma, Johannes Hermannusvan der Hoop. After a period of study with Jung, van der Hoop opened psychoanalytic practice at Amsterdam and became a prolific pro- pagandistfor psychoanalysis in general, and for Jung's "synthetic" psycho- analysis in particular.47In Jung's theory of the patient's new emerging syn- theses, and his advocacy of a more active role of the therapistin helping patients to realize their syntheses, the wildly irrationalFreudianlibido was tamed. It gave the therapist a chance to perform his healing task in the frameworkof existing civilization. Van der Hoop illustratedJung's softening effect on Freudiananalysis and demonstratedits attractivenessfor the thera- pist in an authoritariansocial structure.He explained in his books that the sexual instincts are powerful and important, and had thus far been sadly neglected by educators, but he added that these instincts can be guided by conscious insight, and contributeto the person's over-all harmoniousdevel- opment. Sexual education and the institution of marriage were the most importantmeans for such guided personal development. Thus, sex had been brought back under man's control. It now could be discussed, and-in its prescribedarea, marriage-even enjoyed. Van der Hoop's patientscould be "with it" without being subversive. For several reasons, 1917 was a second turningpoint in the psychoanalytic movement in the Netherlands. First of all, that year saw the founding of the Dutch Society for Psychoanalysis. Its first president was van Renterghem. The society had twelve members, of whom eight were practitionersof psychoanalysis. 42 A.F. Meyer, De Behandeling van Zenuwziekendoor Psycho-analyse. Een Overzichtvan Freud's Theorie en Therapie voor Artsen en Studenten(Amsterdam:Scheltema en Holkema's Boekhandel, 1915). 43 A. F. Meyer, De Droom (Baarn:HollandiaDrukkerij,1916). 44 J. Starcke,translationof Sigm. Freud,De Invloed van ons Onbewuste.Over: vergeten,zich verspreken,zich vergissen (Amsterdam:Maatschappijvoor goede en goedkope Lectuur, 1916). 45 G. Jelgersma, Een Geval van Hysterie Psychoanalytisch behandeld (Leiden: van Doesburgh, 1915). 46 R. J. Katz, "Over de heuristische Waarde van Droomen bij de Behandeling van Neu- rosen," NTG, 60 (1916), 1470-75. 47 Major articles and books by J. H. van der Hoop are: "De psycho-analytischeMethode," NTG, 61 (1917), 458-79; "Psycho-analytischeOpvattingenvan de Zielsziekte," Geneeskundige Bladen, R, 21 (1920), 117-44; Nieuwe Richtingenin de Zielkunde(Arnhem:N. V. Uitgeversvan Lochum en Slaterus, 1921; authorizedEnglish trans., as Characterand Unconscious, by Eliz- abeth Trevelyan, 1923); Sexualiteit en Zieleleven (Arnhem:N. V. van Lochum Slaterus, 1926); Homosexualiteit (Amsterdam:Kosmos, 1934). This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 582 ILSE N. BULHOF The year 1917 also witnessed a lengthy debate on psychoanalysis in the Dutch Journal of Medicine in consequence of an article by van der Hoop.48 The debate was carriedon mostly by generalpractitionersopposed to psycho- analysis. Furthermore,Winkler, the brain anatomistand psychiatristat the Universityof Utrecht, was invited at a meeting of The HagueMedical Society to destroy psychoanalysis once and for all. The general opinion of the au- dience was that he had very well succeeded: at the end of the evening the presidentthankedthe speakerfor rehabilitatingthe society's members,having shown they were after all not as bad as the psychoanalysts had depicted them.49 Last but not least, Nico van Suchtelen, a well-known writerand directorof the Wereldbibliotheek,a publishing house "for good and cheap literature," published an enormously popular introduction to psychoanalysis entitled From the Depths of the Soul. It consisted of an introductionproper,followed by a series of illustrativedialogues;50the book went throughseveraleditions. As a psychomonist, van Suchtelen believed thatby delving deep enough into one's individual consciousness, one could reach the world-soul, or "God in us." He depicted sexual intercourseas a participationby the individualin the cosmic mystery of procreation.This publicationis indicativeof the mystical focus of the early interest in psychoanalysis in the Netherlands. What ap- pealed most at this stage were its discoveries of the mysteriousunconscious that produceddreams and myths-not the call for sexual liberation. Thus, by 1917, psychoanalysis was clearly flourishingin the Netherlands, but it provoked strong positive and negative responses, both from profes- sionals and from laymen. From 1917 until around1930, the cause of psycho- analysis slowly progressed. Jelgersma traineda new generationof psychia- trists and analysts. He had startedthe Leiden Society for Psychoanalysisand Psychology for students, former students, and other interestedpersons. Be- cause Jelgersmadid not have a dogmatic attitude,the society countedFreudi- an, as well as Jungian, members.51 The Dutch Society for Psychoanalysis also grew, although less harmo- niously than did the Leiden Society. On one occasion, the secretary, who 48 Van der Hoop, "De psycho-analytischeMethode," 458-79. 49 The meeting is described by J. E. G. van Emden in InternationaleZeitschriftfur Psycho- analyse, 4 (1916-1917), 332-40. The paper was subsequently published:C. Winkler, "Het Stelsel van Prof. Sigm. Freud," GeneeskundigeBladen (1917), 269-99. See also Winkler, Herinneringen, 145-46. It was often quoted, and promptedreactionsby A. F. Meyer, "Winkler contra Freud," Medisch Weekblad,24 (1917), 264-70, and J. H. W. van Ophuysen, "Prof. Winkler en de Psychoanalyse," NTG, 61 (1917), 504-7. 50 N. van Suchtelen, Uit de Diepten der Ziel. Samensprakenover Droom en Geweten.Met een algemene inleiding over het psychoanalytisch onderzoek van den droom (Amsterdam: Maatschappijvoor Goede en Goedkope Lectuur, 1917). 51 For a description of Jelgersma's circle, see A. J. Westerman Holstijn, "Professor G. Jelgersma und die Leidener Psychiatrische Schule," Internationale Zeitschriftfur Psycho- analyse, 10 (1924), 253-57. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions  PSYCHOANALYSIS IN THE NETHERLANDS 583 happenedto be a Freudian,left blank the pages on which he had to recorda paper favorable to Jung. Lay analysis caused anotherserious problem in the society-a problemthatlasted until 1937, causing splits and factions.52Major centers of psychoanalytic practice were the cities of Amsterdam and The Hague. A few more positions were conqueredat the universities:in 1922 a student of Jelgersmabegan teaching psychopathologyfrom a Freudianpoint of view at the University of Leiden.53 And in 1934, Anthonie Johan Westerman Holstijn began teaching psychoanalysisat the City Universityof Amsterdam; he did not become a full professor until after World War II, and died soon after.54 Duringthe late 1920s, psychoanalysisfound in the Netherlandsa new type of opponent in J. Olten and E. van Dieren. These authorspracticedname- calling of the most primitivekind. Their anger was indicativeof the growing interest among the general public in psychoanalysis. Olten was indignant about Freud's attributionof perverse ideas to such a noble soul as eighteen- year-old Dora's, whose case was publishedby Freudin 1905 ("Fragmentof the Analysis of an Hysteria");55 van Dieren saw in Freudan advocateof all kinds of perversions, of which communism was not the least.56 But the medical world, abiding by the professional code of polite discourse, did not pay much attention:van Dieren's articles were refused by the Dutch Journal of Medicine. In order to correct van Dieren's distorted picture of psycho- analysis, the psychiatristArie Querido in 1932 gave a radio talk in which he explained to the general public what Freud was really about.57 During the 1930s, the psychoanalytic advance in the medical world slackened. Jelgersma retired in 1931, and his successor did not care for psychoanalysis. Thus, psychoanalysis lost its most important intellectual stronghold.Bouman still taught(after 1925 at Utrecht)until his deathin 1936 but, although sympathetic, he did not actually teach psychoanalysis. His successor at the AmsterdamFree University, Leendertvan der Horst, adhered 52 J. Spanjaardand R. U. Mekking, "Psychoanalyse in den Niederlanden,"Die Psychologie des 20. Jahrhunderts,GerhardStrube, ed., 15 vols. (Zurich:KinderVerlag, 1976-), III, 55-72. 53 F. P. Muller, OpenbareLes, gehouden bij den Aanvang zijner Werkzaamheidals Privaat- Docent aan de Rijks-Universiteitte Leiden op 1 November 1922 (Leiden: N. V. Boekhandelen Drukkerijvoorheen E. J. Brill, 1922). 54 A. J. Westerman fHolstijn,De Invloed van het bewuste denkenop het onbewuste. Van het "ik" op het "Es." OpenbareLes gehouden bij den Aanvang zijner Werkzaamheidals Privaat- Docent in de Psycho-analyse van Psychosen en Primitivismenaan de Universiteitte Amsterdam op 27 September 1934 (Amsterdam:H. J. de Bussy, 1923). 55 J. Olten, Ideeen van Freud (Baar: Hollandia Drukkerij, 1925). 56 E. van Dieren, "Futuristische Behandeling van Zenuwzieken.Wetenschapof Waanzin? Weldaad of Misdaad?" 1927; idem, Het Verband tussen de "FuturistischeBehandeling van zielsziektenvolgens Freud en de Bolsjewistische Geestesgegestelheid" (Utrecht:J. van Drutten, 1930). 57 E. van Dieren, Verbreidingvan Freudiaansche Wetenschap(?)door den Radio-Omroep! (Utrecht: J. van Drutten, 1932). This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 584 ILSE N. BULHOF to the phenomenological school. So did Bouman's successor at Utrecht, Henricus Cornelis Rumke. Moreover, many of the first generationanalysts had died, retired, or emigrated. As a result, fewer papers were read at the psychoanalyticsociety's meetings, fewer articles and books published. On the other hand, psychoanalysis was penetratingincreasingly into the general culture. This was partlythe result of the shift in Freud's approachto psychoanalysis. Where at first Freudhad studiedthe repressedmaterialof the unconscious, he had begun in the 1920s to focus his attentionon the repress- ing agency. Freud's new conception of the superegoseemed to give morality a chance in the frameworkof psychoanalyticthoughtafterall. Thus, psycho- analysis became less scandalous. Many of Freud's principlescould now find their way into psychology and pedagogy.58 Even the attitudeof the theologians became more positive. An example is the 1933 theological dissertationof CoenraadLiebknechtTuinstra, entitled "The Symbol in Psychoanalysis."59In the new field of pastoralpsychology, Freud's profound understandingof the complexities of the human soul was much appreciated.60A furtherexample is offered by the orthodoxpsychiatrist Willem Jacobus de Haan. De Haan studied medicine at Leiden with Jelger- sma, but specialized in psychiatryat Utrechtwith Bouman.61In his Modern Psychology and the Bible, published in 1937, de Haan presentedhis psychi- atricviews to the generalpublic.62De Haanfollowed Jung, whom he consid- ered the synthesis of Freud and Adler. As far as the Roman Catholics were concerned, the rejection of psycho- analysis as a danger for morality had been reaffirmedin 1923 by the pres- tigious Society for the Advancementof Science among Roman Catholics in the Netherlands.Its members even decided to starta campaign against psy- choanalysisin the newspapers.63But in 1935, the Society for ThomistPhilos- ophy devoted a session to psychoanalysisin which H. de Vries, a psychiatrist analyzed by Stekel, althoughnot himself a practicinganalyst, and W. Duyn- stee, professor of philosophy at the Catholic University of Nijmegen, read papersthat were by and large favorableto psychoanalysis;they depictedit as 58 See, for instance, Ph. Kohnstamm, Modern-PsychologischeOpvattingenomtrent Gods- dienst en Religie. Een kritisch Overzicht(Amsterdam:N. V. BoekhandelW. ten Have, 1931), 19, 59-64; idem, "De Herontdekkingvan het Geweten bij Freud" [The rediscovery of con- science by Freud], Nederlands Tijdschriftvoor Psychologie en hare Grensgebieden,9 (1941), 1-18. 59 C. L. Tuinstra, Het Symbool in de Psychoanalyse (dissertation, theology, Groningen) (Amsterdam:H. J. Paris, 1933). 60 J. C. A. Fetter, Menschbeschouwingen Zielszorg (Zeist: J. Ploegsma, 1933). 61 W. J. de Haan, Psycho-analyse. Ontwikkeling van Freud's Leer en Critische Be- schouwingen (dissertation, Utrecht, 1935) (Amsterdam:H. J. Paris, 1935). 62 W. J. de Haan, Moderne Zielkundeen het Evangelie. Zielsbeschouwingen Zielsvorming (Amsterdam:H. J. Paris, 1937). 63 Annalen 1923 (Leiden: G. F. Thionville, 1923). This yearbook is a publicationof the Vereeniging tot het Bevorderenvan Wetenschaponder de Kathokiekenin Nederland. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions  PSYCHOANALYSIS IN THE NETHERLANDS 585 a fruitfuldeparturein psychiatryand psychology, and as perfectlycompatible with Roman Catholic doctrine.64 Two further aspects of the reception of Freudianpsychoanalysis require comment:first, the attitudeof the FreudianstowardFreud'sviews on civiliza- tion and, in conjunction with it, their attitudetoward the perceptionof the sexual problem. Around 1900, a consensus existed among the members of the medical profession-in the Netherlandsas well as in otherEuropeancountriesand the United States-that among the upperclasses neuroses were increasing. This phenomenongenerally was explained as being the resultof the hectic pace of modem life, which especially affected the upper classes, upon whom the burdenof civilization weighed most heavily. Regardlessof whetherthis per- ception was corrector not, we can state thatit made the treatmentof neuroses by psychotherapyand psychoanalysis typical class therapies. Van Renterghem,with his lucrativepsychotherapypracticeat Amsterdam, experiencedno difficulty in acceptingthe existing social orderof civilization. He believed that it just so happenedthat the poor, who could not afford his expensive treatment, had no use for psychotherapy anyway. First of all, neuroses were an affliction of the rich, and second, the poor with their untrainedminds were best served by quick and cheap miracle cures founded upon the patient's blind faith in the physician-cures of the kind he had performedat Goes.65 Van Renterghemadheredstrictlyto his role of therapist, showing no interest in social problems. While van Renterghemdid not commenton the presentstateof civilization, Jelgersma and Bouman repeatedly expressed happiness about modem pro- gress. Content with society as they found it, they also accepted its class stratification.Bouman did dissent, however, from the stereotypeof specifi- cally upper-class susceptibility to neuroses. This is not surprisingwhen we keep in mind that he had close ties to the social group of "small people"- shopkeepers, craftsmen, and the like-that composed the majority of his church, his party, and his students. Bouman acknowledged that neuroses occurred among the lower middle class and labor class.66 But he was very much aware of the difficulty for a physician-always a memberof the social elite-in gaining the trust of those having a different social background. The only analystin the Netherlandsreceptiveto Freud'sculturalpessimism and inclined at least to contemplate fundamentalsocial change was August Starcke. He underlinedand even magnified the pathogenicnatureof modem 64 Report of meeting of the Society for Thomistic Philosophy. H. F. de Vries, "De huidige Stand der Psychoanalyse," and W. Duynstee, C.s.s.R., "De Verdringingstheoriebeoordeeld van een Thomistisch Standpoint," in Studia Catholica (Nijmegen: N. V. Centrale Drukkerij, 1935). 65 Van Renterghem,Liebeault en zijne School, 171. 66 Bouman, "Psychische Therapie," 13. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 586 ILSE N. BULHOF civilization and, after World War I, cast the analyst in the role of social reformer.It is indicative of the natureof Starcke'sinterestin psychoanalysis that, as noted above, in 1914 he chose to translatetwo civilizationalessays of Freud. In his Introduction, Starcke explained society's need for psycho- analysis. He pointed out that the love life of modem man is as thinnedas the milk sold in the cities.67 Because of its sexual morality, modem civilization subscribesto the ideal of "the greatestunhappinessfor the greatestnumber." Starcke, a romanticby nature,describedhis age as the "evening" of Western civilization-an age in which the great psychic syntheses of humanbehavior that had dominated in the past, "Passionate Love" and "Sovereign Ego- ism," were disintegrating.He declaredhimself unqualifiedto judge whether the new vogue for modem comradeshipcould make man happy,68but he clearly doubted it. He certainly did not share the enthusiasmof some of the intellectuals and artists of the time for socialism. He rejected socialism and capitalismas equally repressiveof individualwell-being. "Only a lazy opti- mism in its enthusiasmcan ignore that the state of happy comradeswill also be the irreconcilable enemy of individual happiness..."69 He thus re- mained committed to the prime value of the bourgeoisie-individualism. As a result of World War I, however, Starckebecame more militant. The war convinced him that the analyst had a task in reforminghis sick civiliza- tion. He therefore proclaimed that from now on the characterof psycho- analysis should be different. Thus far, it had been left to society to prescribe its goals to man;in this new era, psychoanalysishad to prescribecivilization's goals. Raising itself above society's censorship, it had to "reconcile society with the libido, with death, in short, with the unconscious."70 But despitethis more activist conception of the psychoanalyst's role, Starcke doubted the chance for success of a fundamentalchange of society. That Starcke's ideas were far removed from his complacent compatriotsis clear from a remark following his delivery of a paper:it was said that the views he had expressed had "the charm of the alien."71 In the 1930s, anotherwriter, HendrikGiltay, connectedpsychoanalysisand social reform. But preaching a "new socialism," that would be free from complexes and "socially, economically and psychologically reinforcedand deepened,"72 Giltay used psychoanalytic theories to formulatea harmless, 67 A. Starcke, De sexueele Beschavingsmoral, 5. 68 Ibid., 6. 69 Ibid. 70 A Starcke, Psychoanalyse und Psychiatrie. Beiheft der InternationalenZeitschriftfur Psy- choanalyse (Leipzig, Wien, Zurich: InkernationalerPsychoanalytischerVerlag, G.M.B.H., 1921), 17. 71 A Starcke, Psycho-analytische en andere Beschouwingen over Schuld en Straf. Verslag bijeenkomst van het PsychiatrischJuridischGezelschap op 12 November 1932 te Ansterdam. (Amsterdam:N. V. Uitgevers en Drukkers Maatschappijvan F. van Rossen, 1932), 9, 35. 72 H. Giltay, Sociaal-Culturele Vernieuwing en Psychoanalyse (Arhem: van Lochum Slaterus' Uitgeversmaatschappij,1933). This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions  PSYCHOANALYSIS IN THE NETHERLANDS 587 non-Marxist conception of social reform. Starcke came up with practical suggestions for changing society's repressive structure,such as reeducating physicians, authorities,and parents;Giltay, on the otherhand, offered only a vague idealism of altruisticreform. And while Starckecourageouslyfaced the painful realities of a sick civilization, Giltay relished the vision of a religious revival as the crowning achievement of society's cure. In a way, the dif- ference between these two analysts illustratesthe declining level of the psy- choanalyticdebate in the 1930s. This, in turn, reflectedthe generalanemiaof Dutch political life during the period. Concerning the attitude of Freud's adherentstoward the sexual issue, it strikes the observer that in the early phase of the diffusion process only enemies of psychoanalysismade a point of it, accusingFreudof pansexualism and moral laxity. With the exception of Starcke, Freud's followers in their public statementsdid not emphasize the importanceof psychoanalysisin the field of sexual problems. Analysts treated them as a matter of the couch, while laymen who had a positive disposition towardpsychoanalysistendedto interpretits approachto sexual matters as expressions of a mystical uncon- sciousness. In the 1930s, however, a few individualswith leftist, anarchist,or pacifist sympathies73began to realize that the notion of sexual repression was of utmost importancein the frameworkof a reorganizationof society that they felt was much needed. Disillusioned by the failureof socialism to bringabout the revolution, and disgustedby the massive defection of laborersand middle- class people to fascism, they realized, thanks to Freud, that this had come about because the socialists had neglected to pay attentionto the "spiritual" or psychological aspects of social developments. They thereforeadmonished the working class to read Freud in order to become aware of their mental captivity to bourgeois society. In these circles Wilhelm Reich and his SexPol movement made a great impression. With his buoyant optimism about the innate goodness of man-a goodness that could be liberatedby means of a more natural, less sexually repressive morality-Reich inspiredthese leftists with the courage they had lost as a result of the rise of revisionism and fascism. The war cut short their efforts for sexual and social revolution, but they proved to be significant points of departurefor the successful movement for sexual reform which followed World War II. In conclusion, we may state that by the outbreakof WorldWar II, psycho- analysis had gained its place alongside the other disciplines in the medical 73 For example, the sexologist C. van Emde Boas, "Eros en Agressie," Fundament. OnafhankelijkTijdschriftvoor Politiek, Economie, Cultuuren Literatuur,4 (1937), 9-26; A. L. Constandse, Sexueele nood en fascisme (Den Haag: uitg. "De Albatros," 1935); idem, Sexu- aliteit en levensleer. De sexuele en politieke psychologie van Dr. W. Reich (Antwerpen-Amster- dam: uitg. Het Lichtschip, 1938); G6 Nabrink [B. Vermeers], Levensvreugde. Wegen en Mogelijkhedentot Vrijheiden Geluk (Amersfoort:BrochurendepotI.A.M.V., 1940). This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 588 ILSE N. BULHOF profession. The familiarity with which many people commented on such subjects as libido, Oedipuscomplex, repression,and resistanceshows, more- over, that Freud's influence was much more pervasivethanthe actualnumber of Freudians would suggest. As far as the general culture was concerned, given the importanceof religion in Dutch social and cultural life and the stability of its class structure, it is not surprisingthat psychoanalysis in a softened Jungianform was more acceptableto the Dutch people than in the original Freudianform with its debunkingattitudetowardman and religion, and that Freud's implied encouragementof sexual freedom, atheism, and civilizational and social criticism was largely ignored till the onset of World War II.74 Few persons would have predicted the immense expansion of psycho- analysis in the Netherlands in our own time.75 A combination of factors contributedto this development: the founding of a PsychoanalyticInstitute (1947) at Amsterdam, which regulated the teaching and training of new analysts;the movement for sexual reformpreviously noted which expressed and createda favorableclimate;the prestigeof the United States afterthe war, which enhanced the influence of American medical thought at the univer- sities; and the institutionof a socialized medicine whose financingenabledthe less affluent to undergoanalysis. From 1955 on, the universitiesincreasingly appointedpsychiatristswith a psychoanalyticbackground.And the psycho- analysts, for theirpart, have more and more given up theirattitudeof splendid isolation, which to a certainextent had been forced upon them by the prewar situation:and by Freud's own ideas about his science's organization. 74 The exception was August Starcke. 75 Spanjaardand Mekking, "Psychoanalyse in den Niederlanden," 62-72. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.40 on Fri, 9 May 2014 19:46:04 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions