Freud, Murder, and Fame: Lessons in Psychology’s Fascinating History

by Todd C. Riniolo

  Copyright Todd C. Riniolo, 2012. Cover by Todd C. Riniolo. Dr. Riniolo is a Professor of Social Sciences at Medaille College (Buffalo, NY, USA).

  This book is dedicated

  (in no particular order) to the following:

  To Katie Bear,

  to Tommy Tunes,

  to Angela Hogwarts,

  and to Dobby.

  Table of Contents

  Introduction

  Chapter 1: BELIEVE IT OR NOT: HISTORY DOES NOT HAVE TO BE BORING

  Chapter 2: RECONSTRUCTING THE PAST: AN INTRODUCTION TO HISTORICAL RESEARCH

  Chapter 3: HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION: PITFALLS THAT CAN MISLEAD

  Chapter 4: SEPARATING HISTORICAL FACTS FROM HISTORICAL FICTION (PART 1): THE CASE OF ANNA O.

  Chapter 5: SEPARATING HISTORICAL FACTS FROM HISTORICAL FICTION (PART 2): FREUD’S “MAGICAL SUBSTANCE”

  Chapter 6: FREUD COMES TO AMERICA!

  Chapter 7: THE POPULARIZATION OF FREUD IN AMERICA: HOW POPULAR WAS HE?

  Chapter 8: BECOMING A HOUSEHOLD NAME IN EARLY 20TH CENTURY AMERICA: SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT FREUD

  Chapter 9: THE CRIME OF THE CENTURY: THE SENSELESS MURDER OF ROBERT FRANKS

  Chapter 10: THE LEOPOLD AND LOEB TRIAL

  Chapter 11: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE LEOPOLD AND LOEB TRIAL FOR THE HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY

  Conclusions

  Appendix A

  Appendix B

  References

  Acknowledgements

  Footnotes

  Introduction

  For those of us living in the 21st century, Sigmund Freud has always been a cultural icon. And his fame shows no signs of diminishing anytime soon, as Freudian allusions have appeared in a variety of popular television programs (e.g., Frasier, Gilligan’s Island), movies (e.g., Analyze This, Psycho), and books (e.g., Lord of the Flies, The Prince of Tides). The Freudian couch even appears in an episode of the popular children’s cartoon SpongeBob SquarePants. This has not always been the case though, and in the early 20th century the American public did not recognize Freud’s name and was not especially interested in psychoanalysis. The interesting question of exactly how Freud achieved his iconic status is rarely, if ever, asked today. Like others who first achieved widespread fame early in the 20th century (e.g., Babe Ruth, Harry Houdini, Al Capone, the Titanic), Freud’s presence in our cultural experience is taken for granted, perhaps because it now seems that Freud has always been with us. In this book, I will bring the issue to the forefront, asking the intriguing but often overlooked question: exactly how did Freud first become a household name in America?

  Unfortunately, giving the precise date when most Americans first began to recognize Freud’s name is not possible. Other writers have provided evidence indicating that Freud initially achieved widespread fame in America sometime around his first appearance on the cover of Time magazine, which was October 27, 1924. I believe this assessment is accurate, and I know of no compelling evidence demonstrating that Freud was widely known prior to this time frame. In the first half of 1924, interest in psychoanalysis and Freud was largely limited to specialized groups. Some academics and other intellectuals knew of Freud, for example. So did individuals undergoing their own personal analysis. There were even some popular magazines, including Good Housekeeping, Harpers, Everybody’s Magazine, McClure’s, and Ladies’ Home Journal, that published articles about psychoanalysis for their readers. But again, even given this limited exposure, we cannot say that Freud’s work was widely known at this time.

  So how did interest in psychoanalysis spread from specialized groups to the general public, and how did Freud become truly famous? The answer to this question may surprise some readers. It is my conclusion that Freud’s rise to fame with the American public began with events that occurred during the summer of 1924. Specifically, two very bright young men from extremely wealthy Chicago families committed a premeditated murder, apparently just for fun. Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb, 18 and 19 years old respectively, brutally attacked and murdered 14-year-old Robert Franks in America’s first thrill killing, which has been labeled “the Crime of the Century.” During the murder trial, testimony from Freudian psychoanalysts became front-page news across the country, as the expert witnesses attempted to explain why the senseless murder occurred. Just as the more recent O. J. Simpson murder trial provoked massive media coverage and widespread public interest, the Leopold and Loeb trial dominated American news coverage during the summer of 1924. And just as the Simpson trial introduced the science of DNA evidence to a wider audience, the Leopold and Loeb trial introduced Freud’s ideas to the general public.

  Ultimately, the Crime of the Century changed the context for remembering Freud’s name. The American public quickly became immersed in the importance of early childhood events, abnormally developed egos, unconscious motivations and fantasies, and so forth. Now it was not just academics and intellectuals who were interested in the concepts and principles of psychoanalysis, but the nurse from Seattle, the housewife from Kansas City, and the mechanic from Buffalo. Everyone became engrossed in this New Psychology of Freud during the summer of 1924. And once psychoanalysis captured the universal attention of Americans, it would not be long before the father of psychoanalysis would earn his iconic status.

  For Whom Was This Book Written, and Why Was it Written?

  I have just provided a brief historical interpretation that the Leopold and Loeb case played a central role in first capturing widespread public interest in psychoanalysis; as a consequence, Freud became a household name in America. At the time of this writing, this interpretation cannot be found in any textbook or academic journal related to the history of psychology. Thus, this book was written in part for scholars, because it provides additional historical information about the popularization of psychoanalysis in America and a new interpretation of how Freud first became universally famous.

  Because of the subject areas covered, this book was also written for readers who are passionate about history, psychology, psychoanalysis, and true crime. And yet there is still one more audience I hope to reach. Specifically, this book was also written for the reader who needs to learn more about critically evaluating my (or any other) interpretation of historical events. As a college professor, I have found that many students passively accept historical interpretations without demanding supporting evidence and without critically evaluating the quality of the evidence before them. Many of my students seem stunned to learn that history books sometimes contain interpretations that are not fully accurate, or even just plain false. This may be because most historical accounts are solely focused on providing historical information (i.e., facts and interpretations). This focus assumes that readers already understand both the process of recreating the past and the need to critically evaluate such historical recreations.

  My book does not make this assumption, but instead tries to teach readers about the critical evaluation of historical interpretation. Thus, another primary focus of this book is to teach the process of history and provide the reader with the tools to critically evaluate historical interpretations. Students should leave a history course with a clear understanding that historical interpretations should not be confused with historical facts, and I have provided many examples that reinforce this important lesson. Since Freud and his followers actively attempted in some instances to distort history and put the father of psychoanalysis in a better light, Freud’s past provides many wonderful examples that demonstrate why critical evaluation is so important. Finally, because a stereotype that “history is boring” currently exists f
or some students, I actively attempt to counteract this misconception because we all are more likely to practice and retain skills when we are interested in the material. My hope is that this approach will benefit college students and anyone else interested in the process of historical research.

  Structure and Content of the Book

  The structure of the book is as follows. Chapter 1 focuses on a fascinating scandal that is particularly useful for students who have a negative view of history, but who may be assigned portions of this book to read for class. Thus, Chapter 1 emphasizes that learning about history does not have to be boring. To achieve this goal, I introduce the sexual scandal that rocked the academic world in 1920 and resulted in the firing of the most prominent experimental psychologist of the time, Dr. John B. Watson. Watson’s case also provides context because experimental psychology and psychoanalysis were then involved in an intense battle to be the true science of the mind. Watson also had strong opinions about Freud and his theories, and these ideas will be briefly presented in Chapter 1 as well.

  Chapter 2 discusses the process of reconstructing the past. I have already stated that the Leopold and Loeb trial furthered American public interest in psychoanalysis, which was in turn necessary for Freud to become a household name. Yet, what type of evidence is used to make such a claim, or any claim, for something that happened many years ago? And how confident should the reader be in accepting this or any other historical interpretation? Chapter 3 will focus on how historical interpretations can go wrong, as the individual who attempts to interpret history faces many obstacles that can ultimately interfere with a correct conclusion (e.g., preconceived views, misleading data, lost or destroyed data).

  Chapter 4 shifts to the celebrated case of Anna O., the founding case of psychoanalysis, while Chapter 5 reviews Freud’s advocacy of cocaine. Both chapters were included because they provide important background information about Freud and reinforce the material covered in the first three chapters. Both chapters also expose the reader to a theme that will reoccur in this book: sometimes there is a difference between Freudian legend and what the historical evidence actually indicates. Freud has sometimes been presented in a better light than he should have been, and he was conscious of maintaining a certain image at the expense of historical accuracy.

  Chapter 6 will discuss two major topics. First, I review some of Freud’s important works that were published after the Anna O. case. The “Seduction Theory” controversy will receive special attention here and provide another example of the importance of critically evaluating historical interpretations. I will also review Freud’s first and only trip to the United States, when Freud was invited to give a series of lectures at Clark University’s 20th Anniversary celebration in 1909. This trip is a significant factor in explaining Freud’s early popularity with American academics and intellectuals.

  Chapter 7 discusses the popularity of Freud’s ideas in America between his 1909 Clark lectures and the Leopold and Loeb trial of 1924. Additionally, I review Freud’s desperate need for money that led to a failed public relations scheme and the tragic breakup of two marriages.

  In Chapter 8, I discuss some of the ways in which widespread popularity generally occurred in America during the early part of the 20th century. And because Freud personally did not receive massive media attention, I also discuss here how memory works, since I ultimately argue that Freud could not have become a household name until his theories were presented to the general public in a context that was personally relevant to them (as during the Leopold and Loeb trial). Also, I evaluate a common interpretation that Freud’s becoming famous was inevitable because of the “power of his ideas.” This interpretation ignores the impact of important historical events.

  Chapter 9 introduces and summarizes the main points of the Leopold and Loeb case prior to the formal beginning of the trial. I focused not only on the important details of the case, but on the intense media coverage generated by this trial. Likewise, I point out some of the many useful resources for readers who want additional information about the Crime of the Century.

  Chapter 10 focuses on the actual trial and how the media portrayed what occurred inside the courtroom. Especially important for this portion of the book is the testimony and media coverage of the Freudian psychoanalysts (i.e., alienists), who would first introduce the general public to Freudian terminology and the “New Psychology” of Freud that ultimately captivated the nation.

  In Chapter 11, I restate my historical interpretation of how Freud became a household name in America, which is consistent with the version provided in this introduction. I will remind the reader (see Chapters 2 & 3) that historical interpretations on such issues should not be confused with historical facts, and that interpretations can be wrong. Here the reader is encouraged to critically evaluate my interpretation, and to find the weaknesses in my supporting evidence. In addition, I also discuss other interpretations of Freud’s American fame, noting that just a handful of authors have commented on the importance of the Leopold and Loeb trial as it relates to the history of psychology. Finally, I provide a few final thoughts in my Conclusions chapter, and point out rumors of another sexual scandal for readers who wish to critically evaluate this fascinating historical claim.

  With respect to content, I reference my statements throughout for readers who want to find out more information about a specific issue or to double-check my interpretation. For example, when I argue that Freud’s book sales could not have made him famous because his books sold only a very limited number of copies prior to the summer of 1924 (see Chapter 11), I provide the reference to support the statement. Also, when possible, I reference additional resources to help interested readers learn more about specific topic areas. For example, some of the psychiatric testimony given by Leopold and Loeb to the defense alienists (the generic term used in 1924 to describe an expert witness testifying about the mental state of a criminal defendant) is available to download on the internet.

  How Should the Book be Read?

  While I suspect that some readers may want to pick and choose from among the various chapters here, I would recommend reading the book in order from start to finish. This advice is especially useful for the reader with a limited background in history because some lessons will carry over from one chapter to the next, and some important points are reemphasized later in the book. The one exception would be for the reader who wishes to learn more about the Leopold and Loeb Case immediately. In this instance, I would recommend starting with Chapters 9 and 10, then returning to Chapter 1 and reading the rest of the book in order.

  One Final Issue

  Why is this book focused solely on Freud’s popularity in America? Surely Freud has become famous across the globe, so why not extend our discussion to other countries as well? First, the decision to limit the scope of this book to the United States was a practical one. If the discussion were extended to other countries, the book quickly would have become unmanageable. However, given the massive amount of publicity generated around the world by the Leopold and Loeb trial, its importance in popularizing Freud is likely to generalize to other countries as well (particularly Canada and the United Kingdom). I will leave the investigation of these issues to others. The second reason for limiting our discussion to the U.S. is that no other country in the early portion of the 20th century embraced Freud and his theories more enthusiastically than America. For those reasons, then, this book limits itself to Freud’s popularization in America.

  Chapter 1: BELIEVE IT OR NOT: HISTORY DOES NOT HAVE TO BE BORING

  Many students’ first exposure teaches them that history is a boring subject area in which nothing more is learned than the memorization of facts (e.g., Thomas Jefferson was the third President of the United States). Even in the Harry Potter books, the one magical subject that is always portrayed as dull is the history course. Unfortunately, too often, this initial experience perpetuates into adulthood. The purpose of this chapter is to counteract this negative view
of history, while also providing some necessary background information that will be useful later in the book.

  Related Information: The Battle Between Psychology and Psychoanalysis

  Prior to presenting a case to counteract the history is boring stereotype; I will provide needed background information on the relation between psychology and psychoanalysis in the early 20th century. This material will be helpful not only for this chapter, but later in the book when the popularization of psychoanalysis in the early portion of the 20th century is discussed in greater detail (see Chapter 7). In the period from Freud’s American visit in 1909 leading up to the Leopold and Loeb murder trial during the summer of 1924, psychology as an experimental discipline and psychoanalysis were unmistakably distinctive as they shared little in common. Yet, both psychologists and psychoanalysts viewed themselves as the legitimate scientists of the mind. An intense and sometimes nasty battle for dominance ensued that extended well past 1924. As Hornstein (1992, p. 254) writes, “There is no easy way to talk about psychology’s relations with psychoanalysis. It is a story dense with disillusionment and the shapeless anger of rejection. Each side behaved badly, and then compounded its insensitivity with disdain. Their fates bound together like Romulus and Remus, psychology and psychoanalysis struggled to find their separate spheres, only to end up pitted against one another at every turn.” For a more detailed discussion than presented below, I refer the reader to Gail Hornstein’s (1992) article, “The Return of the Repressed: Psychology’s Problematic Relations With Psychoanalysis, 1909-1960.”