Psychopathology of Everyday Life by Sigmund Freud - Chapter 9 - Symptomatic and Chance Actions

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Section nine of Psychopathology of Everyday Life, translated by A. A.
Brill Symptomatic and chance actions. The actions described so far,
in which we recognize the execution of an unconscious intention,
appeared as disturbances of other unintended actions and hid themselves

(00:22):
under the pretext of awkwardness. Chance actions, which we shall
now discuss, differ from erroneously carried out actions only in
that they disdain the support of a conscious intention and
really need no pretext. They appear independently and are accepted
because one does not credit them with any aim or purpose.

(00:43):
We execute them without thinking anything of them, by mere chance,
just to keep the hands busy, and we feel confident
that such information will be quite sufficient should one inquire
as to their significance. In order to enjoy the advantage
of this exceptional position, these actions, which no longer claim

(01:04):
awkwardness as an excuse, must fulfill certain conditions. They must
not be striking, and their effects must be insignificant. I
have collected a large number of such chance actions from
myself and others, and after thoroughly investigating the individual examples,
I believe that the name symptomatic actions is more suitable.

(01:26):
They give expression to something which the actor himself does
not suspect in them, and which as a rule he
has no intention of imparting to others, but aims to
keep to himself. Like the other phenomena considered so far,
they thus play the part of symptoms. The richest output
of such chance or symptomatic actions is above all obtained

(01:49):
in the psychoanalytic treatment of neurotics. I cannot deny myself
the pleasure of showing by two examples of this nature,
how far and how delicately the determination of these plain
occurrences are swayed by unconscious thoughts. The line of demarcation
between the symptomatic actions and the erroneously carried out actions

(02:11):
is so indefinite that I could have disposed of these examples.
In the preceding chapter A, during the analysis, a young
woman reproduced this idea, which suddenly occurred to her yesterday
while cutting her nails. She had cut into the flesh
while engaged in trimming the cuticle. This is of so

(02:31):
little interest that we ask, in astonishment why it is
at all remembered and mentioned, and therefore come to the
conclusion that we deal with a symptomatic action. It was
really the finger upon which the wedding ring is worn,
which was injured through this slight awkwardness. It happened moreover
on her wedding day, which thus gives to the injury

(02:54):
of the delicate skin a very definite and easily guessed meaning.
At the same time, she all so related a dream
which alluded to the awkwardness of her husband and her
anesthesia as a woman. But why did she injure the
ring finger of her left hand when the wedding ring
is worn on the right. Her husband is a jurist,

(03:14):
a doctor of laws, doctor direct literally a doctor of rights,
and her secret affection as a girl belonged to a
physician who was jokingly called doctor der Link literally doctor
of left. Incidentally, a left handed marriage has a definite meaning. B.
A single young woman relates yesterday, quite unintentionally, I tore

(03:38):
a hundred dollar note in two pieces and gave half
to a woman who was visiting me. Is that too
a symptomatic action? After close investigation, the matter of one
hundred dollar note elicited the following associations. She dedicated a
part of her time and her fortune to charitable work.
Together with another woman, she will taking care of the

(04:01):
rearing of an orphan. The hundred dollars was the contribution
sent her by that woman, which she enclosed in an
envelope and provisionally deposited on her writing desk. The visitor
was a prominent woman with whom she was associated in
another act of charity. This woman wished to note the
names of a number of persons to whom she could

(04:23):
apply for charitable aid. There was no paper, so my
patient grasped the envelope from her desk, and, without thinking
of its contents, tore it in two pieces, one of
which she kept in order to have a duplicate list
of names, and gave the other to her visitor. Note
the harmlessness of this aimless occurrence. It is known that

(04:45):
a hundred dollar note suffers no loss in value when
it is torn, provided all the pieces are produced. That
the woman would not throw away the piece of paper
was assumed by the importance of the names on it,
and there was just as little doubt that she would
return the valuable content as soon as she noticed it.
But to what unconscious thought should this chance action, which

(05:09):
was made possible through forgetfulness, give expression. The visitor in
this case had a very definite relation to my patient
and myself. It was she who at one time had
recommended me as physician to the suffering girl, And if
I am not mistaken, my patient considered herself indebted for
this advice. Should this have one hundred dollar note perhaps

(05:33):
represent a fee for her mediation? That still remained enigmatic.
But other material was added to this beginning. Several days before,
a woman mediator of a different sort had inquired of
a relative whether the gracious young lady wished to make
the acquaintance of a certain gentleman. And that morning, some

(05:53):
hours before the woman's visit, the wooing letter of the
suitor arrived, giving occasion for much murder. When therefore the
visitor opened the conversation with inquiries regarding the health of
my patient, the latter could well have thought, you certainly
found me the right doctor, but if you could assist
me in obtaining the right husband and a child, I

(06:15):
should be still more grateful. Both mediators became fused into
one in this repressed thought, and she handed the visitor
the fee which her fantasy was ready to give the other.
This resolution became perfectly convincing when I add that I
had told her of such chance or symptomatic actions only
the previous evening. She then took advantage of the next

(06:39):
occasion to produce an analogous action. We can undertake a
grouping of these extremely frequent chants and symptomatic actions according
to their occurrence as habitual regular under certain circumstances, and
as isolated ones. The first group, such as playing with
the watch chain, fingering one's beard, and so on, which

(07:02):
can almost serve as a characteristic of the person concerned,
is related to the numerous tick movements and certainly deserves
to be dealt with in connection with the latter. In
the second group, I place the playing with one's cane,
the scribbling with one's pencil, the jingling of coins in
one's pocket, kneading dough and other plastic materials, all sorts

(07:24):
of handling of one's clothing, and many other actions of
the same order. These playful occupations during psychic treatment regularly
conceal sense and meaning to which other expression is denied. Generally,
the person in question knows nothing about it. He is
unaware whether he is doing the same thing or whether

(07:46):
he has imitated certain modifications in his customary playing, and
he also fails to see or hear the effects of
these actions. For example, he does not hear the noise
which is produced by the jingling of coins, and he
is astonished and incredulous when his attention is called to it.
Of equal significance to the physician, and worthy of his observation,

(08:10):
is everything that one does with his clothing, often without
noticing it. Every change in the customary attire, every little
negligence such as an unfastened button, every trace of exposure
means to express something that the wear of the apparel
does not wish to say directly. Usually he is entirely

(08:30):
unconscious of it. The interpretation of these trifling chance actions,
as well as the proof for their interpretation, can be
demonstrated every time with sufficient certainty, from the surrounding circumstances
during the treatment, from the themes under discussion, and from
the ideas that come to the surface when attention is

(08:51):
directed to the seeming accident. Because of this connection, I
will refrain from supporting my assertions by reporting examples with
their analyzes. But I mention these matters because I believe
that they have the same meaning in normal persons as
in my patients. I cannot, however, refrain from showing, by

(09:11):
at least one example, how closely an habitually accomplished symbolic
action may be connected with the most intimate and important
part of the life of a normal individual. As Professor
Freud has taught us, the symbolism in the infantile life
of the normal plays a greater role than was expected

(09:33):
from earlier psychoanalytic experiences. In view of this, the following
brief analysis may be of general interest, especially on account
of its medical aspects. A doctor, on rearranging his furniture
in a new house, came across a straight wooden stethoscope, and,
after pausing to decide where he should put it, was

(09:54):
impelled to place it on the side of his writing desk,
in such a position that it stood exactly between his
chair and the one reserved for his patience. The act
in itself was certainly odd, for in the first place,
the straight stethoscope served no purpose, as he invariably used
a binoral one, and in the second place, all his

(10:17):
medical apparatus and instruments were always kept in drawers, with
the sole exception of this one. However, he gave no
thought to the matter until one day it was brought
to his notice by a patient who had never seen
a wooden stethoscope, asking him what it was. On being told,
she asked why he kept it there. He answered, in

(10:38):
an offhand way, that that place was as good as
any other. This, however, started him thinking, and he wondered
whether there had been an unconscious motive in his action.
Being interested in the psychoanalytic method, he asked me to
investigate the matter. The first memory that occurred to him
was the fact that, when a medical still udent, he

(11:00):
had been struck by the habit his hospital intern had
of always carrying in his hand a wooden stethoscope on
his ward visits. Although he never used it, he greatly
admired this in turn, and was much attached to him.
Later on, when he himself became an intern, he contracted
the same habit, and would feel very uncomfortable if, by

(11:22):
mistake he left the room without having the instrument to
swing in his hand. The aimlessness of the habit was
shown not only by the fact that the only stethoscope
he ever used was a binormal one which he carried
in his pocket, but also in that it was continued
when he was a surgical intern and never needed any

(11:42):
stethoscope at all. From this, it is evident that the
idea of the instrument in question had, in some way
or other become invested with a greater psychic significance than
normally belongs to it. In other words, that to the
subject it stood for more than it does for other people.
The idea must have got unconsciously associated with some other

(12:06):
one which it symbolized and from which it derived its
additional fullness of meaning. I will forestall the rest of
the analysis by saying what this secondary idea was, namely
a phallic one. The way in which this curious association
had been formed will presently be related the discomfort he

(12:26):
experienced in hospital on missing the instrument, and the relief
and assurance the presence of it gave him. Was related
to what is known as a castration complex, namely, a
childhood fear often continued in a disguided form into adult
life lest a private part of his body should be
taken away from him, just as playthings so often were.

(12:50):
The fear was due to paternal threats that it would
be cut off if he were not a good boy,
particularly in a certain direction. This is a very common
complex and accounts for a great deal of general nervousness
and lack of confidence in later years. Then came a
number of childhood memories relating to his family doctor. He

(13:11):
had been strongly attached to this doctor as a child,
and during the analysis long buried memories were recovered of
a double fantasy he had in his fourth year concerning
the birth of a younger sister, namely that she was
the child one of himself and his mother, the father
being relegated to the background, and two of the doctor

(13:32):
and himself. In this he thus played both a masculine
and feminine part. At the time when his curiosity was
being aroused by the event, he could not help noticing
the prominent share taken by the doctor in the proceedings
and the subordinate position occupied by the father. The significance
of this for his later life will presently be pointed out.

(13:56):
The stethoscope association was formed through many connections. In the
first place, the physical appearance of the instrument, a straight, rigid,
hollow tube having a small bulbous summit at one extremity
and a broad base at the other, and the fact
of its being the essential part of the medical paraphernalia.
The instrument with which the doctor performed his magical and

(14:19):
interesting feats, were matters that attracted his boyish attention. He
had had his chest repeatedly examined by the doctor at
the age of six, and distinctly recollected the voluptuous sensation
of feeling the latter's head near him, pressing the wood's
tethoscope into his chest, and the rhythmic to and fro
respiratory movement. He had been struck by the doctor's habit

(14:43):
of carrying his stethoscope inside his hat. He found it
interesting that the doctor should carry this chief instrument concealed
about his person, always handy when he went to see patients,
and that he only had to take off his hat,
that is a part of his clothing, and to pull
it out. At the age of eight, he was impressed

(15:03):
by being told by an older boy that it was
the doctor's custom to get into bed with his women patients.
It is certain that the doctor, who was young and handsome,
was extremely popular among the women of the neighborhood, including
the subject's own mother. The doctor and his instrument were
therefore the objects of great interest throughout his boyhood. It

(15:25):
is probable that, as in many other cases, unconscious identification
with the family doctor had been a main motive in
determining the subject's choice of profession. It was here doubly
conditioned one by the superiority of the doctor on certain
interesting occasions to the father, of whom the subject was

(15:45):
very jealous, and two by the doctor's knowledge of forbidden
topics and his opportunity for illicit indulgence. The subject admitted
that he had, on several occasions experienced erotic temptations in
regardard to his women patients. He had twice fallen in
love with one, and finally married one. The next memory

(16:07):
was of a dream, plainly of a homosexual masochistic nature.
In it, a man who proved to be a replacement
figure of the family doctor attacked the subject with a sword.
The idea of a sword, as is so frequently the
case in dreams, represented the same idea that was mentioned
above to be associated with that of a wooden stethoscope.

(16:30):
The thought of a sword reminded the subject of the
passage in the Kneebling saga where Sigurd sleeps with his
naked sword Graham between him and Brunhilda, an incident that
had always greatly struck his imagination. The meaning of the
symptomatic act now at last became clear. The subject had

(16:50):
placed his wooden stethoscope between him and his patients, just
as Sigurd had placed his sword, an equivalent symbol between
him and the maie he was not to touch. The act
was a compromise formation. It served both to gratify in
his imagination the repressed wish to enter into nearer relations

(17:12):
with an attractive patient interposition of fallis, and at the
same time to remind him that this wish was not
to become a reality interposition of sword. It was, so
to speak, a charm against yielding to temptation. I might
add that the following passage from Lord Lytton's Richelieu made

(17:33):
a great impression on the boy beneath the rule of
men entirely great. The pen is mightier than the sword,
and that he became a prolific writer and uses an
unusually large fountain pen. When I asked him what need
he had of this pen, he replied, in a characteristic manner,
I have so much to express. This analysis again reminds

(17:57):
us of the profound views that are awarded us in
the psychic life. Through the harmless and senseless actions, and
how early in life the tendency to symbolization develops. I
can also relate an experience from my psychotherapeutic practice in
which the hand playing with a mass of breadcrumbs gave

(18:19):
evidence of an eloquent declaration. My patient was a boy
not yet thirteen years of age, who had been very
hysterical for two years. I finally took him for psychoanalytic
treatment after a lengthy stay at a hypertherapeutic institution had
proved futile. My supposition was that he must have had

(18:40):
sexual experiences, and that, corresponding to his age, he had
been troubled by sexual questions. But I was cautious about
helping him with explanations, as I wished to test further
my assumption. I was therefore curious as to the manner
in which the desired material would evince itself in him.

(19:01):
One day, it struck me that he was rolling something
between the fingers of his right hand. He would thrust
it into his pocket and there continue playing with it,
then would draw it out again, and so on. I
did not ask what he had in his hand, but
as he suddenly opened his hand, he showed it to me.
It was breadcrumbs kneaded into a mass. At the next session,

(19:23):
he again brought along a mass, and, in the course
of our conversation, although his eyes were closed, modeled a
figure with an incredible rapidity which excited my interest. Without doubt,
it was a Mannikin, like the crudest prehistoric idols, with
a head, two arms, two legs, and an appendage between

(19:44):
the legs which he drew out to a long point.
This was scarcely completed when he kneaded the Mannikin together again.
Later he allowed it to remain, but modeled an identical
appendage in the flat of the back and on other parts.
In order to veil the meaning of the first I
wished to show him that I had understood him, But

(20:06):
at the same time I wanted to deprive him of
the evasion that he had thought of nothing while actively
forming these figures. With this intention, I suddenly asked him
whether he remembered the story of a Roman king who
gave his son's envoy a pantomimic answer in his garden.
The boy did not wish to recall what he must

(20:28):
have learned so much more recently than I. He asked
if that was the story of the slave on whose
bald skull the answer was written. I told him no,
that belonged to Greek history and related the following King
Tarquinius Superbus, had induced his son Sextus to steal into
a Latin city. The son, who had later obtained a

(20:50):
foothold in the city, sent a messenger to the king,
asking what steps he should take next. The king gave
no answer, but when into his garden, had the question
repeated there and silently struck off the heads of the
largest and most beautiful poppies. All that the messenger could
do was to report this to Sextus, who understood his

(21:11):
father and caused the most distinguished citizens of the city
to be removed by assassination. While I was speaking, the
boy stopped needing, and as I was relating what the
king did in his garden, I noticed that at the
words silently struck, he tore off the head of the
mannikin with a movement as quick as lightning. He therefore

(21:34):
understood me and showed that he was also understood by me.
Now I could question him directly and gave him the
information that he desired, and in short time the neurosis
came to an end. The symptomatic actions which we observe
in inexhaustible abundance in healthy as well as in nervous people,

(21:55):
are worthy of our interest for more than one reason.
To the physician, that they often serve as valuable indications
for orienting himself in new or unfamiliar conditions. To the
keen observer, they often betray everything, occasionally even more than
he cares to know. He who is familiar with its

(22:15):
application sometimes feels like King Solomon, who, according to the
Oriental legend, understood the language of animals. One day, I
was to examine a strange young man at his mother's home.
As he came towards me, I was attracted by a
large stain on his trousers, which by its peculiar stiff

(22:36):
edges I recognized as one produced by albumen. After a
moment's embarrassment, the young man excused this stain by remarking
that he was horse and therefore drank a raw egg,
and that some of the slippery white of the egg
had probably fallen on his clothes. To confirm his statement,
he showed the egg shell, which could still be seen

(22:57):
on a small plate in the room. The suspicion spot
was thus explained in this harmless way. But as his
mother left us alone, I thanked him for having so
greatly facilitated the diagnosis for me, and without further procedure,
I took as the topic of our discussion his confession
that he was suffering from the effects of masturbation. Another time,

(23:20):
I called on a woman as rich as she was,
miserly and foolish, who was in the habit of giving
the physician the task of working his way through a
heap of her complaints before he could reach the simple
cause of her condition. As I entered, she was sitting
at a small table, engaged in arranging silver dollars in
little piles. As she rose, she tumbled some of the

(23:44):
pieces of money to the floor. I helped her pick
them up, but interrupted the recitation of her misery by remarking,
has your good son in law been spending so much
of your money? Again? She bitterly denied this, only to
relate a few moments later the mentable story of the
aggravation caused by her son in law's extravagances. And she

(24:05):
has not sent for me since I cannot maintain that
one always makes friends of those to whom he tells
the meaning of their symptomatic actions. He who observes his
fellow men while at table, will be able to verify
in them the nicest and most instructive symptomatic actions. Doctor
Hans Sachs relates the following. I happen to be present

(24:31):
when an elderly couple related to me partook of their supper.
The lady had stomach trouble and was forced to follow
a strict diet. A roast was put before the husband,
and he requested his wife, who was not allowed to
partake of this food, to give him the mustard. The
wife opened the closet and took out the small bottle

(24:51):
of stomach drops and placed it on the table before
her husband. Between the barrel shaped mustard glass and the
small drop bottle, there was naturally no similarity through which
the mishandling could be explained. Yet the wife only noticed
the mistake after her husband laughingly called her attention to it.

(25:11):
The sense of this syptomatic action needs no explanation. For
an excellent example of this kind, which was very skillfully
utilized by the observer, I am indebted to doctor Baron
Dattner of Vienna quote. I dined in a restaurant with
my colleague age, a doctor of philosophy. He spoke about

(25:33):
the injustice done to probationary students, and added that even
before he finished his studies, he was placed as secretary
to the Ambassador, or rather the extraordinary plenty potentiary Minister
to Chile. But he added, the minister was afterwards transferred,
and I did not make an effort to meet the
newly appointed. While uttering the last sentence, he was lifting

(25:56):
a piece of pie to his mouth, but he let
it drop, as if out of awkwardness. I immediately grasped
the hidden sense of this symptomatic action and remarked to
my colleague, who was unacquainted with psychoanalysis, you really allowed
a very choice morsel to slip from you. He did
not realize, however, that my words could equally refer to

(26:18):
his symptomatic action, and he repeated the same words. I
uttered with a peculiarly agreeable and surprising vividness, as if
I had actually taken the words from his mouth. It
was really a very choice morsel that I allowed to
get away from me. He then followed this remark with
a detailed description of his clumsiness, which has cost him

(26:41):
this very remunerative position. The sense of this symbolic action
becomes clearer if we remember that my colleague had scruples
about telling me, almost a perfect stranger, concerning his precarious
material situation, and his repressed thought took on the mask
of symptomatic acas, which expressed symbolically what was meant to

(27:03):
be concealed, and the speaker thus got relief from his
unconscious end. That the taking away or taking a long
things without any apparent intention may prove to be sensible.
May be shown by the following examples. One doctor B.
Dattner relates quote an acquaintance paid the first after marriage

(27:26):
visit to a highly regarded lady friend of his youth.
He told me of this visit and expressed his surprise
at the fact that he failed in his resolution to
visit with her only a short time, and then reported
to me a rather strange faulty act which happened to
him there. The husband of this friend, who took part
in the conversation, was looking for a box of matches,

(27:49):
which he was sure was on the table when he
came there. My acquaintance too, looked through his pockets to
ascertain whether he had not put it in his pocket,
but without avail. Some time later he actually found it
in his pocket and was struck by the fact that
there was only one match in the box. A dream
a few days later, showing the box symbolism in reference

(28:13):
to the friend of his youth, confirmed my explanation with
a symptomatic action. My acquaintance meant to announce his priority
right and the exclusiveness of his position. It contained only
one match. Doctor Hans Sachs relates the following. Our cook
is very fond of a certain kind of pie. There

(28:36):
is no possible doubt about this, as it is the
only kind of pastry which she always prepares well. One
Sunday she brought this pie to the table, took it
off the pie plate, and proceeded to remove the dishes
used in the former course. But on the top of
this pile she placed the pie and disappeared with it
into the kitchen. We first thought that she had something

(28:59):
to improve the pie, but as she failed to appear,
my wife rang the bell and asked Betty what happened
to the pie, to which the girl answered without comprehending
the question, how's that we had to call her attention
to the fact that she carried the pie back to
the kitchen. She had put it on a pile of dishes,
taken it out, and put it away without noticing it.

(29:22):
The next day, when we were about to consume the
rest of the pie, my wife noticed that there was
as much of it as we had left the day before.
That is, the girl had disdained to eat the portion
of her favorite dish, which was rightly hers. Questioned why
she did not eat the pie, she answered, somewhat embarrassed,
that she did not care for it. The infantile attitude

(29:44):
is distinctly noticeable on both occasions. First the childish insatiableness
in refusing to share with anybody the object of her wishes.
Then the reaction of spite, which is just as childish.
If you grudge it to me, keep it to yourself.
I want nothing of it. Chance or symptomatic actions occurring

(30:05):
in affairs of married life have often a most serious significance,
and could lead those who did not concern themselves with
the psychology of the unconscious to a belief in omens.
It is not an auspicious beginning if a young woman
loses her wedding ring on her wedding tour, even if
it were only mislaid and soon found. I know a

(30:28):
woman now divorced, who, in the management of her business affairs,
frequently signed her maiden name many years before she actually
resumed it. Once I was the guest of a newly
married couple and heard the young woman laughingly relate her
latest experience. How on the day succeeding her return from
the wedding tour, she had sought out her single sister

(30:51):
in order to go shopping with her, as in former times,
while her husband was attending business. Suddenly she noticed a
man on the opposite side of the street nudging her sister.
She said, why that is surely mister l She forgot
that for some weeks this man had been her husband.
I was chilled at this tale, but I did not

(31:11):
dare draw any inferences. The little story came back to
me only several years later, after this marriage had ended,
most unhappily. The following observation, which could as well have
found a place among the examples of forgetting, was taken
from a noteworthy work published in French by a mater.

(31:31):
Statement in French follows a friend who has learned to
observe signs related to me that the great actress Eleanora
Duse introduces a symptomatic action into one of her roles,
which shows very nicely from what depths she draws her acting.
It is a drama dealing with adultery. She has just

(31:52):
been discussing with her husband and now stands soliloquising before
the seducer makes his appearance. During this short interval, she
plays with her wedding ring. She pulls it off, replaces it,
and finally takes it off again. She is now ready
for the other. I know of an elderly man who
married a young girl, and instead of starting at once

(32:15):
on his wedding tour, he decided to spend the night
in a hotel. Scarcely had they reached the hotel when
he noticed with fright that he was without his wallet,
in which he had the entire sum of money for
the wedding tour. He must have mislaid or lost it.
He was still able to reach his servant by telephone.
The latter found the missing article in the coat discarded

(32:37):
for the traveling clothes, and brought it to the hotel
to the waiting bridegroom, who had thus entered upon his
marriage without means. It is consoling to think that the
losing of objects by people is merely an unsuspected extension
of a symptomatic action, and is thus welcome, at least
to the secret intention of the loser. Often it is

(33:01):
only an expression of slight appreciation of the lost article,
a secret dislike for the same or perhaps for the
person from whom it came, or the desire to lose
this object was transferred to it from other and more
important objects through symbolic association. The loss of valuable articles
serves as an expression of diverse feelings. It may either

(33:25):
symbolically represent a repressed thought, that is, it may bring
back a memory which one would rather not hear, or
it may represent a sacrifice to the obscure forces of fate,
the worship of which is not yet entirely extinct even
with us. The following examples will illustrate these statements concerning

(33:45):
the losing of objects. Doctor B. Dattner states a colleague
related to me that he lost his steel pencil, which
he had had for over two years, and which, on
account of its superior quality, was highly prized by him
analysis elicited the following facts. The day before, he had
received a very disagreeable letter from his brother in law,

(34:08):
the concluding sentence of which read, at present, I have
neither the desire nor the time to assist you in
your carelessness and laziness. The effect connected with this letter
was so powerful that the next day he promptly sacrificed
the pencil, which was at present from his brother in law,
in order not to be burdened with his favors. Brill

(34:31):
reports the following example. A doctor took exception to the
following statement in my book, we never lose what we
really want. His wife, who is very interested in psychologic subjects,
read with him the chapter on psychopathology of everyday Life.
They were both very much impressed with the novelty of

(34:52):
the ideas and so on, and were very willing to
accept most of the statements. He could not, however, agree
the above given statement, because, as he said to his wife,
I surely did not wish to lose my knife. He
referred to a valuable knife given to him by his wife,
which he highly prized, the loss of which caused him

(35:14):
much pain. It did not take his wife very long
to discover the solution for this loss in a manner
to convince them both of the accuracy of my statement.
When she presented him with this knife, he was a
bit loath to accept it. Although he considered himself quite emancipated,
he nevertheless entertained some superstition about giving or accepting a

(35:37):
knife as a gift, because it is said that a
knife cuts friendship. He even remarked this to his wife,
who only laughed at his superstition. He had the knife
for years before it disappeared. Analysis brought out the fact
that the disappearance of the knife was directly connected with
the period when there were violent quarrels between himself and

(35:58):
his wife, which threatened to end in separation. They lived
happily together until his stepdaughter, it was his second marriage,
came to live with them. His daughter was the cause
of many misunderstandings, and it was at the height of
these quarrels that he lost the knife. The unconscious activity
is very nicely shown in this symptomatic action. In spite

(36:20):
of his apparent freedom from superstition, he still unconsciously believed
that a donated knife may cut friendship between the persons concerned.
The losing of it was simply an unconscious defense against
losing his wife, and by sacrificing the knife, he made
the superstitious ban impotent. In a lengthy discussion with the

(36:43):
aid of dream analysis, Otto Rank made clear the sacrificial
tendency with its deep reaching motivation. It must be said
that just such symptomatic actions often give us access to
the understanding of the intimate psychic life of the person.
Of the many isolated chance actions, I will relate one

(37:04):
example which showed a deeper meaning even without analysis. This
example clearly explains the conditions under which such symptoms may
be produced most casually, and also shows that an observation
of practical importance may be attached to it. During a
summer tour, it happened that I had to wait several

(37:25):
days at a certain place for the arrival of my
traveling companions. In the meantime, I made the acquaintance of
a young man who also seemed lonely and was quite
willing to join me. As we lived at the same hotel,
it was quite natural that we should take all our
meals and our walks together. On the afternoon of the
third day, he suddenly informed me that he expected his

(37:48):
wife to arrive on that evening's express train. My psychologic
interest was now aroused, as it had struck me that
morning that my companion rejected my proposal to make a
law excursion, and in our short walk he objected to
a certain path as too steep and dangerous. During our
afternoon walk, he suddenly thought that I must be hungry

(38:10):
and insisted that I should not delay my evening meal
on his account that he would not sup before his
wife's arrival. I understood the hint and seated myself at
the table while he went to the station. The next morning,
we met in the foyer of the hotel. He presented
me to his wife and added, of course you will

(38:30):
breakfast with us. I had to attend first to a
small matter in the next street, but assured him that
I would return shortly. Just as I entered the breakfast room,
I noticed that the couple were at a small table
near the window, both seated on the same side of it.
On the opposite side, there was only one chair, which

(38:51):
was covered, however, by a man's large and heavy coat.
I understood well the meaning of this unintentional none the
less expressive disposition of the coat. It meant this, there
is no room for you here. You are superfluous. Now.
The man did not notice that I remained standing before
the table, being unable to take the seat, but his

(39:12):
wife noticed it and quickly nudged her husband and whispered,
you have covered the gentleman's place with your coat. These,
as well as other similar experiences, have caused me to
think that the actions executed unintentionally must inevitably become the
source of misunderstanding in human relations. The perpetrator of the act,

(39:34):
who is unaware of any associated intention, takes no account
of it and does not hold himself responsible for it.
On the other hand, the second party, having regularly utilized
even such acts as those of his partner, to draw
conclusions as to their purpose and meaning, recognizes more of
the stranger's psychic processes than the latter, is ready either

(39:58):
to admit or believe that he has imparted. He becomes
indignant when these conclusions drawn from his symptomatic actions are
held up to him. He declares them baseless because he
does not see any conscious intention in their execution, and
complains of being misunderstood by the other. Close examination shows

(40:19):
that such misunderstandings are based on the fact that the
person is too fine an observer and understands too much.
The more nervous to persons are, the more readily they
will give each other a cause for disputes, which are
based on the fact that one as definitely denies about
his own person what he is sure to accept about

(40:40):
the other. And this is indeed the punishment for the
inner dishonesty to which people grant expression under the guise
of forgetting of erroneous actions and accidental emotions, a feeling
which they would do better to confess to themselves and
others when they can no longer control it. As a
matter of fact, it can be generally affirmed that everyone

(41:03):
is continually practicing psychoanalysis on his neighbors, and consequently learns
to know them better than each individual knows himself. The
road following the admonition know thyself leads through the study
of one's own apparently casual commissions and omissions. The end

(41:24):
of chapter nine