8/10/2019 Ferenczi_My Friendship With Miksa Schachter

1/4

My Friendship with Miksa Schachter

Sandor Ferenczi

I first met Miksa Schachter in 1898 under unusual circumstances. I was a junior

physician at the Rokus Hospital. While I wanted to become a neurologist, Kalman Muller's

malice chained me to the VD ('prostitutes') department for more than a year. I had

requested many times to be liberated from duties that were so alien to me. All in vain - the

hospital director, who was so strict with his subordinates, turned down all my requests. As

I had no chance to perform psychological experiments, I had begun to experiment on

myself. I had tried to explore the so-called `occult' phenomena, amongst others. It

happened once that, following a dinner with friends, I walked through the permanently

locked gates of the `Little Rokus' 1 well after midnight. I went to the junior physicians'

room and engaged in `automatic writing', frequently discussed by the spiritualists of the

time; Janet had already published interesting observations on this phenomenon. It occurredto me that it was already very late; I was tired and somewhat aroused emotionally. All

these circumstances favoured the exploration. So I picked up a pencil and, holding it

loosely in my hand, I pressed it against a piece of blank paper. I decided to let the pencil

move `on its own', letting it write whatever it wished. Senseless scribbles came first, then

letters, words (some of them strange to me), and finally whole sentences. Soon I was

having a real dialogue with my pencil - I asked questions and got quite unexpected

answers. Being young, first of all I demanded answers to big theoretical problems, but later

more practical questions occurred to me. Finally the pencil suggested the following: `Write

an article on spiritualism for Gyogyaszat, the editor will be interested'.

I had arrived from Vienna not long before and knew hardly anything about Hungarian

medical journals. I did not know that, while Orvosi Hetilap(Medical Weekly)2 was the

journal of the influential university circles, Gyogyaszat (Therapy)3 was the forum of a

single powerful man - Miksa Schachter. His voluntarily undertaken crusade was to protect

medical justice and ethics from threatening attacks by any antagonists.

The next day I wrote my first medical paper entitled `On spiritualism'.4 I started off

from the phenomenon of automatism which I had observed in myself. My conclusion (

which has been generally accepted since then but is now based on more sound evidence)

was that the so-called occult phenomena do not contain anything supernatural and should

be viewed as manifestations of the functioning of the unconscious. I sent the article toGyogyaszat.

Soon my colleague Lajos Levy5 brought me a message from Schachter: he was willing

to publish my paper and also invited me to visit him. Thus the results of the automatism

experiment led to a turning-point in my life and became the beginning of a long-lasting

friendship.

Translated from Hungarian by Professor Borisz Szegal, Academy of Sciences, Budapest.

British Journal of Psychotherapy, Vol 9(4), 1993

The author

8/10/2019 Ferenczi_My Friendship With Miksa Schachter

2/4

Sandor Ferenczi 431

I have no doubt that my ignorance of the dynamic relationships in Hungarian medical

life was superficial. Clearly, remarks that I had overheard had informed my unconscious to

know where a young, truth-seeking physician should look for moral support.

I found, however, much more than that in Miksa Schachter: friendliness, warmth, a

hospitable family which became my second home, and - above all - an example. While I

was fully aware that his example was unmatchable, for years my main inspiration was to

emulate him.I remember that talking to my friends outside the medical profession I would speak

enthusiastically for hours describing Schachter's impressive talents, especially his austere

character. In his judgment of others he applied the same strict standards as he applied to

himself. I felt that his personality could be compared to a single piece of perfect marble

free of fractures or faults.

His encouragement stimulated me to write not only scientific articles, but also papers

dealing with social medical issues, which were published in his journal. These papers

lacked independence as I had followed his doctrines to such an extent that some of

colleagues started to call me `the Schachter-boy'.6

Today I think differently, concentrating primarily on my own subject. However, the

experience of working with him, thinking together and supporting each other is

unforgettable. It was truly a period which shaped my character.

I do not intend to present a picture of the Miksa Schachter's character; others will do

that. I would rather present a few observations from that period when we spent so much

time together.

I still hear him talking. His speech was perfect, both in content and form. He never

made any mistakes, even during an intimate friendly conversation or emotional dispute. He

was born a speaker having a pleasant voice, using rich expressions and quiet intonation,

although he always emphasised (usually referring to the `English example') that all hispublic performances were carefully prepared.

Debating with Schachter was always an interesting and exciting experience. He could

suddenly and unexpectedly challenge my assumptions even on those topics about which I

felt myself confident. In order to cope with his arguments I had to concentrate very hard.

His logic might drive me into a corner even when my standpoint was correct. In such cases,

however, he smiled and confessed that, in challenging my position, he was merely sparring

with me.

There were two issues, however, about which he never joked: religion and morals. And

on both issues I held views opposed to his.He was a devout religious man, who retained a strict adherence to ancient Jewish

traditions and rituals. In contrast, neither my family influence nor my natural convictions

stimulated my interest in religion. I viewed (as I still view) religion as an atavistic remnant

of ancient times, whose origin is similar to that of art. We discussed this issue only once;

seeing him deeply upset by the sheer mention of this topic, I always tried hard to avoid it. I

was not disturbed by the many Friday supper prayers, but rather felt aesthetic satisfaction

listening to them. On his side Schachter forgave me my pagan views and never tried to

proselytise me.

I have already mentioned that, at the beginning of our relationship, we worked together

on moral issues. Later, influenced by Freud's pioneering work in psychology, I moved far

away from those issues; the mechanisms of mental functioning became the focus of my

interests. It was natural that through these interests

8/10/2019 Ferenczi_My Friendship With Miksa Schachter

3/4

432 British Journal of Psychotherapy

independence developed. Thus I had to realise that lies related to sexual problems are

damaging to mental health, as well as disturbing the understanding of its mechanisms.

Schachter was not keen to see such adventurous interpretations of sexual topics and tried

to avoid them. However, seeing my insistence on these principles, he did not prevent me

from publishing them in Gyogyaszat. This again demonstrates Schachter's character:

though conservative himself, he never obstructed liberal progress.

I discovered the kindest, most loving features of Schachter's personality whileaccompanying him once to Corfu7. It is well known that, while travelling, even friends

quarrel; but on the contrary, our friendship became even stronger after spending long

hours in each other's company.

One could really admire his gentleman's style and tact, which characterised his behaviour

with foreigners and bearers of high rank. Schachter was a truly honourable representative

of the Hungarian medical profession abroad. On his arrival in Corfu - he had visited the

island so many times - members of the city's aristocracy wasted no time visiting him.

Local painters and merchants and members of the synagogue also greeted him with

pleasure because he was such a generous customer and benevolent supporter. Schachternever missed a chance to visit the synagogue and extended considerable charity there. I

witnessed his generosity which greatly exceeded his modest resources. He always returned

from Corfu sun-tanned, carrying baskets of freshly picked oranges. He seemed as full of

vitality as those fruits ripened by the sun of the Ionian Sea. For several months Schachter

drew energy from this reserve which he accumulated in his body and his soul at Corfu.

Together with his loving family, Corfu was Schachter's main source of vitality.

Fate brought us together for the last time under quite different circumstances. I was

resting in the Sanatorium in Semmering when my poor, already very sick friend arrived,

sent by his physicians. For the first few days, the weather was nice and sunny, and

Schachter became somewhat more optimistic. However, the weather changed, snow

storms raged for days. Schachter became more and more depressed and, knowing his fate,

insisted on returning back home. Finally he departed.

The Institute's head physician affectionately called him `that antique character'. He spent

many hours with Schachter every day enjoying and admiring his wise, original thoughts

and conversation, his loftiness which was undamaged by the disease.

I was still in Semmering when the news of his death arrived.8 But that I, that we, have

really lost him forever - this I am still wholely unable to believe.

NOTES

1An annexe to the main building of the Rokus Hospital, Budapest.2 Orvosi Hetilap,founded by Dr Lajos Markusovszky in 1857,was the first journal of Hungarian

medicine. Later it became the organ of ruling medical community and was famous for its

conservative attitude greeting psychoanalysis with harsh criticism. For years, it published no writings

on psychoanalysis at all. It published a few short papers and neurological case studies by Ferenczi.3 In 1861 Gyogyaszat wasset up by Dr Imre Poor, who left the editorial board ofOrvosi Hetilap.

Miksa Schachter became the owner and editor-in-chief ofGyogyaszatin 1886,and deeply influenced

medical thinking and public life for more than 30 years.4Published under the title 'Spiritualism' in Gyogyaszat on 23 June 1899 (pp. 477-479).5 Lajos Levy, internist and later a psychoanalyst, was a founding member of' the Hungarian

Psychoanalytical Association established by Ferenczi in 1913. He was later Ferenczi's

8/10/2019 Ferenczi_My Friendship With Miksa Schachter

4/4

Sandor Ferenczi 433

attending physician. At the turn of the century, he worked as assistant physician at the Internal

Department of the Rokus Hospital, where Ferenczi also started his medical career. Later Levy became

one of the editors at Gyogyaszat,where he wrote articles to provide introductions to the main topics

of the thematical issues of the journal. He undersigned his writings with lambda (.l).According to

Schachter's last wish, the editorial work of Gyogyaszatwas continued by Sandor Szenasi, Mihaly

Mohr and Lajos Levy.6 As well as papers on neurology, psychiatry and psychology, Ferenczi's writings and reviews

characteristic of his preanalytical period were articles that also reflected Schachter's interests: medical

ethics and severe anomalies in the functioning of the hospital medical system.7 Schachter loved Corfu. His old disease and bad wintertime physical condition were `cured' by

the climate of Corfu (he suffered a kind of lung damage when falling from horseback during military

service). From 1900 on, he and his family went to Corfu thirteen times until the outbreak of World

War One. It was an honour for friends to be taken there. Ferenczi accompanied him to Corfu once, in

1913.8 Schachter's death was caused by recurrence of his old disease due to the strain of work during

the war; according to Lajos Levy, the diagnosis was the rapid onset of diabetes and parenchymal

nephritis on the base of a deteriorating physical condition. (In Gyogyaszat, Vol. 57(18), 6 May 1917).