On Sun, 10 Dec 2000, Harry Avis wrote:
>
> Like others, in the past, I admired much of Fuller Torrey's work. Starting a
> few years ago, however, his work has bothered me. His book on Freud was, in
> my opinion, particularly biased. Obviously, many legitimate criticisms of
> Freud have been made and still others could be made, but in his book (I know
> I have it, but I can't find the title right now) he seems most concerned
> that Freud was a "leftist" a "socialist" or even (gasp) a small c
> communuist. He spent a lot of time linking Freud with known "fellow
> travelers". Since my political leanings are quite far to the left I couldn't
> fully empathise with his outrage. He has come up a few other howlers
> recently. I wonder what happened?
>
I was rather dismayed to read this, and it certainly seems out of
character for Torrey to base his attack on specious political
grounds. I haven't read the book (shame on me!) so I did the next
best thing: I checked the reviews at Amazon.com. Some are rather
interesting (the book in question must be _Freudian Fraud_).
For example, here's one from some obscure reader named H.J.
Eysenck:
"This is an account, entertaining, well-researched, and
interestingly written, of the growth of the Freudian religion in
the United States, its social accompaniments and consequences,
and its baleful impact on American civilization. It is intriguing
to see how a doctrine completely lacking in factual support or
theoretical rigour became all-powerful in the public mind, while
refuted, discredited, and rejected by scientifically minded
psychologists, psychiatrists, and anthropologists. Torrey shows
clearly how, once a myth has taken over, common sense vanishes.
This is a unique book in the eschatology of Freudianism."
And Torrey himself says:
"I didn't make many new friends writing Freudian Fraud, and in
fact, I lost a few old ones. There seemed to be no middle ground
in feelings about the book; reviewers either loved it or they
hated it. Some of the negative reviews came from reviewers who
themselves had been in psychoanalysis for years. In such cases,
psychoanalysis often becomes a religion and the book therefore
attacked their god. Other reviewers seemed profoundly upset that
I had focused on Freud's cocaine addiction, including the period
when he formulated his most important theories. Other Freud
biographers have minimized the magnitude and length of Freud's
addiction to cocaine, but I believe it is seminal (so to speak)
for understanding Freud's rather strange sexual theories."
"The book, nevertheless, provided me with great pleasure in its
creation. The underlying question that I was addressing-why did
Freud's ideas become so much more popular in the United States
than in Europe-had bothered me for years. Finding an answer was
most satisfying."
Unlike Harry, none of the reviewers mention the problem of
commie-bashing in the book. I wonder if anyone else who's read
the book has an opinion on this. Failing that, I just may have to
read the book myself. Thanks, Harry, for bringing it to our
attention.
-Stephen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Black, Ph.D. tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470
Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661
Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lennoxville, QC
J1M 1Z7
Canada Department web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
Check out TIPS listserv for teachers of psychology at:
http://www.frostburg.edu/dept/psyc/southerly/tips/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
