|
114. See Krüll (1978). For example, the Fluss family stayed in Freiberg and prospered.
115. See S. Bernfeld & S. C. Bernfeld (1944); Sajner (1968); Krüll (1979). 116. Bowlby (1969, Ch. 2; 1973, p. 253; 1980, pp. 28-29). 117. Burnham, cited by Bowlby (1973, p. 251). 118. S. C. Bernfeld (1951, p. 113). 119. This conclusion that Freud would spend a lifetime trying to undo his childhood loss was proposed by Zilboorg (1962, p. 138). 120. Gedo (1968/1976). 121. Spector (1972, p. 61); see also Swan (1974). 122. Sophocles (1939, pp. 21, 22). 123. For example, see Jones (1955, p. 363-367). 124. Exodus 2:10. 125. S. Freud (1910a, S. E., 11, pp. 112 -113). 126. Spector (1972, p. 54). 127. Jones (1955, p. 346); Lichtenberg (1978) further enriches our understanding of the projective, autobiographical character of Freud’s Leonardo essay. 128. Schapiro (1956). 129. Spector (1972, p. 58). 130. Spector (1972, p. 58). 131. Spector (1972, p. 57). 132. It should also be noted that Freud’s future relationship with his wife and her sister Minna (who lived in the Freud house beginning in 1896) represented a re-creation of the “two mothers” situation, a situation powerfully explicated by Swales (1982a). Roazen (personal communication, 1985) also sees Martha and Minna as an example of two mothers. 133. For example, see Origins (p. 245). In this letter Freud used “Amme” for his nurse; at other times he used “Kinderfrau.” See Grigg (1973, p. 112). 134. Machek (1971, p. 389). It was Professor Zezula (personal communication, 1981) who first informed me of this common Czech expression for a nanny. 135. Machek (1971, p. 389) notes that the term “Nana” is used mainly by children and that it is most prevalent in Moravian dialects. 136. Zezula (personal communication, 1981). 137. Freud’s proposal of a psychoanalytic aesthetic—that is, a psychological interpretation of the artist—was so contaminated by his own psychology that, in spite of his claim of analyzing the artist, much of what he discussed is now understood as a projection of his own psychology. That is, what he gave us was a psychoanalytic interpretation of the critic. This “aesthetic of the critic” is interesting, of course, but it tells us little or nothing about Leonardo or his work. The richness of the autobiographical element in Freud’s writing is constantly stressed throughout this book. The pervasive tendency of Freud to project his own psychology has led Swales to comment that “taken as a whole, Freud’s work represents the longest and strangest autobiography in Western literature” (personal communication, 1982). This overstates the case, but the remark nevertheless contains much truth. 138. This well-known earlier version, the Burlington House Cartoon, is in the |