“Enough of examples. The E.’s findings: an extreme polarization toward society manifested in the practice of d.u.a. in school, where achievement might ‘bring some return,’ but simultaneously of d.o.a. outside of school, where achievement can ‘bring no return.’
“This extreme polarization remains the determining factor in L.B.G.’s life. Now that he is getting older and, motivated by healthy reaction, is liberating himself from ‘indulgence,’ it represents the tension from which he draws his powers of resistance and survival. Until the age of fourteen, shortly before being dismissed from school, L.B.G. becomes for the first time ‘criminal’ in a context which the E. can unfortunately only report but not precisely analyze, since he lacks internal and external access to the aforesaid experience-material, and a precise analysis would require an extensive religio-psychological and historical study. Hence experience-data only will be quoted here:
“L.B.G., whose participation in religious instruction was only sporadic and generally under circumstances that were annoying for both him and the priests, was refused—I use his own expression—‘the sacraments of confession and Communion, by then it was no longer so much a matter of my inadequate baptism but because I was considered obstinate, arrogant, presumptuous, in any event not sufficiently meek, and also because I had taken an interest—only a layman’s, of course, but still with a real desire for knowledge—in religious literature. That irritated the teachers, I mean the priests who taught us religion, since the “administration of the sacraments” was made dependent on one’s “subjection” to them.’ However, L.B.G., who—as he admitted—now insisted on having them administered to him, if only on principle and for mystical considerations, finally, by resorting to ‘a sacrilegious act, to robbery, or, to be exact, altar desecration,’ gained possession of the consecrated Eucharist, which he consumed. There was a scandal. If it had not been for the intervention of an enlightened priest with some experience in psychology, L.B.G. would have been placed under detention as a juvenile delinquent. ‘From then on,’ L.B.G. verbatim to the E., ‘the only way I took Communion was with my mother at breakfast.’
“A further d.u.a. becomes apparent by the age of fourteen: an almost anankastic trait, a heightened love of order, a compulsion to tidiness, that is doubtless related to incipient puberty. Not only does he sweep the street outside the building, the front yard, the apartment—even when out for a walk he engages in tidying activities by picking up leaves, and although his preponderantly female environment hinted that this was ‘womanish’ or ‘girlish,’ his favorite toy between the ages of eight and thirteen is a broom of any kind. As an additional explanation for this psychological phenomenon it might be said that this is one way of demonstrating and practicing cleanliness—again as an aid to polarization—vis-à-vis an environment that consistently abuses and defiles him.
“Dismissed from school in Grade 6, L.B.G., with his not especially charitable report card, had no chance of finding a normal apprenticeship. For a time he worked—again mainly with a broom!—in a nursery garden owned by a certain Pelzer, later at the same type of work for a certain Grundtsch, was then taken over by the cemetery administration, later transferred to the municipal sanitation department, at whose expense he obtained his driver’s license. He has been employed there for six years, and apart from a certain inclination to extended weekends and holidays, and discounting the quite understandable resentment of his obvious d.u.a., his present employer is perfectly satisfied with him. During the past six years, L.B.G.’s d.o.a. was directed exclusively toward his mother, whom he advised to give up her employment although she is still a relatively young and productive person. He found subtenants for her among foreign workers and their families. The fact that one of these workers finally became her lover evoked suspiciously little conflict in L.B.G., about whose extremely strong attachment to his mother there can be no doubt. Even the news that his mother was now known to be pregnant by a foreigner of Oriental descent evoked a spontaneous, the E. would like to maintain, suspiciously spontaneous, ‘Thank God, at last I’ll have a little brother or sister,’ an utterance in which, although only to the trained ear, a certain forced element was clearly audible.
“It would be erroneous to regard this forced element as being rooted solely in the oedipal sphere. It is unquestionably also based on a certain understandable fear of renewed environment problems, problems into which L.B.G. no doubt sees his future sibling drawn and with whose anticipated environment problems he doubtless identifies on the basis of his own experience.
“While it is true that the obvious suspicion of jealousy cannot be discounted, it may be reduced to a minimum. Investigations among L.B.G.’s age-peers and fellow workers show that he not only is popular with women and girls but also does not evade the consequences of this popularity.
“It must be accepted as a fact that the workers in the sanitation department occasionally fulfill special requests of garbage-overloaded householders, resulting in unscheduled contacts. Such ‘infractions’—special requests of householders to remove garbage in excess of the allotted quantity, usually in return for a tip—are tolerated by the administration in view of the extreme inadequacy of available garbage-truck tonnage.
“Relatively harmonious though the picture of L.B.G. to date may seem, certain social conflicts are nevertheless quite clearly present, conflicts which, although explainable in terms of polarization-compulsions developed in self-defense, can still only be described as such.
“Even for a layman in the field of psychology the following are apparent in L.B.G.:
“1. A solidarity complex that is accounted for by the constant compulsion to identify with his father and mother but which, in the boy who has meanwhile become a man, is fixated on foreigners and, after three months of imprisonment, also on his fellow prison inmates. Assuming prison inmates to be likewise ‘aliens in society,’ the solidarity complex gives rise to a further and related complex, 2. xenophilia, of which one manifestation is 3. xenophilology, the desire to learn the languages of foreigners. (For several months now, L.B.G. has been taking a course in Turkish.) A person (here the E. is rather inclined than disinclined, despite some misgivings, to speak of a personality) such as L.B.G., whose highly developed sensitivity and intelligence permit only two alternatives: either to adjust and ‘betray’ himself and his identity fixation points or (in a perpetual state of nonadjustment) to confirm himself and his identity fixation points, finds himself in perpetual conflict between the socially achievable and his talents. Hence this person (personality?) requires an increasing number of new (later artificial) resistances in order to demonstrate confirmation vis-à-vis himself and his environment. Assuming that this person derives advantages (using the word in its generally accepted sense) therefrom (e.g., prolonged stay in hospital, wangling of pensions or leaves of absence, etc.), L.B.G. is a 4. simulator who—in exaggerated terms—simulates for the sake of disadvantages rather than advantages in order thereby to satisfy his solidarity complex and his xenophilous inclinations. To this extent even the check-forging is to be interpreted as a ‘simulation’ rather than as ‘criminal per se.’ The fact that some simulations ultimately brought him advantages (e.g., the proofs of confidence on the part of foreign workers that border on veneration) is part of the dialectic of such an experiment in existence which a social model—or social principle, as my Marxist colleagues would put it—then ‘makes manifest.’
“An explanation must also be given for the fact that L.B.G. displayed d.u.a. Meanwhile promoted to the rank of truck-column leader (‘That’s as high as I want to go!’), he had displayed an astonishing organizational talent. Once familiarized with conditions of garbage-collection and traffic in the series of streets assigned to him, he succeeded in planning the readying and emptying of garbage cans in such a way that his team, without undue haste, reached their appointed target two or sometimes three hours ahead of time. L.B.G. and his team were then caught enjoying surprisingly long breaks which had no adverse effect
whatever on productivity. When required to place his organizational experience at the disposal of the planning section, he refused and went back to performing the work according to rule, complaints from householders over the protracted breaks, especially of foreign workers, having been received and even taken up by the press.
“Such was the behavior that led to the initial interview between the E. and L.B.G., since at that time consideration was being given to some disciplinary action. However, on the advice of the E. the idea was dropped.
“(Here the E. refers to the case of H.M., an employee of the municipal administration, a case in which the E. was also professionally involved and used for the first time the term d.u.a., which has since been adopted by the literature on labor legislation. H.M., who in two and a half hours completed the work assigned to him for eight hours but then, since he was [to this extent unlike L.B.G.] working out a model for his colleagues and was then frustrated by their machinations, became seriously mentally ill; then, fit to work again, this time in a different department, forced to spend six and a half hours ‘doing nothing’ in the office, sued for the ‘restitution of six and a half hours of wasted time daily’ which he claimed as time off. When this action was dismissed, H.M.’s condition deteriorated still further, and since his case aroused some interest he was then employed by an industrial concern where, now fully recovered, he contributes significantly to the firm’s d.o.a. In the case of H.M., in which the E. was also consulted, the reproach of d.u.a. was directed solely at his refusal to sit out the prescribed work period. D.u.a. is a steadily increasing phenomenon that will burden our achievement-oriented society with serious problems.)
“In L.B.G.’s case, the d.u.a. consists in the fact that, although he reaches the target expected of him, his innate intelligence, his organizational talent, are not—even after a considerable increase in wages—placed fully at the disposal of his employer. Granted that the achievement-oriented society can have its minima and maxima and/or averages calculated by computers; nevertheless, the working out of special factors—which in the case of garbage collection are very complex since the unforeseeable (e.g., traffic congestion and traffic accidents, as well as tendencies thereto) varies topographically—can only be performed by an experienced employee, such as L.B.G., who is capable of abstract thinking. Furthermore, if it is remembered that in such a case not only local but also regional and extraregional garbage problems might be considerably rationalized, the damage caused by L.B.G. to the total economy is almost beyond computation. To this extent we may speak of the presence of considerable d.u.a.
“Since it was important for the E. to know that all L.B.G.’s physical functions had been checked out, he caused the prison doctor to check his height, weight, and all organic functions. Result: one hundred percent negative. L.B.G.’s consumption of alcohol and nicotine is also normal, at least there is no evidence of narcotics-induced damage. Apart from a minimal diopter of 0.5 in the right eye, no abnormal or diseased condition was found to be present in L.B.G. However, since on the one hand considerable social conflicts and demonstrably misguided behavior are present, while on the other hand virtually each of these conflicts should be evidenced in L.B.G.’s endocrine system, the E. explains this normality by precisely that permanent and extreme polarity which in this case creates a balance. If, however, this complex balance brought about by constant and extreme inner tensions were to cease to exist, L.B.G. would within a short space of time develop serious diabetes, severe hepatitis, probably renal colic. It is therefore not considered advisable to prerelease him from prison, since it is there that he experiences this polarization and, furthermore, can satisfy both his solidarity complex and his xenophilia. The possibility even exists—at least it cannot be discounted—that L.B.G. has sought the extreme situation of imprisonment in order to maintain a social tension that may have been declining. Since in the meantime, as the E. has been informed, a considerable environmental solidarization has taken place in the case of L.B.G.’s mother, in other words this opportunity for polarization must be regarded as reduced, it is only by serving his full sentence that L.B.G. can be helped at the moment, especially since this would prevent any interruption of the heroizing process among his fellow workers.
“The E. cannot bring himself to adopt and apply to L.B.G. a newly developed theory that has been posited by Professor Hunx. This refers to the formerly controversial concept of ‘normality-simulation’ which Professor Hunx believes to have found in test-subjects who, as a result of ‘hysterically directed compensation’ (Hunx), conceal a strong latent homosexual tendency beneath extreme heterosexual activity. In connection with the new, scientifically accurate analysis of old Inquisition reports, Hunx attributes the ‘beauty’ of witches, their ‘physical charms and fascination,’ their ‘skill in the arts of love’ (which were related to a knowledge of internal secretion that was undoubtedly in advance of their times) to that ‘hysterically directed compensation’ which concealed their ‘true nature.’
“The E. cannot arrive at the conclusion that the case of L.B.G. is one of ‘normality-simulation,’ rather does it appear to be a case of normality-rejection where the natural bent is toward normality. The fact that garbage collection is his occupational desire and aim proves that he has instinctively sought the appropriate polarization: an occupation that serves the purposes of cleanliness but is regarded as dirty.”
12
Letter from a male nurse (B.E.), aged approximately fifty-five, to Leni:
“Dear Mrs. Pfeiffer,
“Your letter to Professor Kernlich came into my hands accidentally when in the performance of my duties I was tidying his desk and sorting the notes needed by him in order to compose some reports, which he usually dictates to me.
“In answering your letter I am guilty of a breach of confidence that would cost me dearly if you did not (which I sincerely ask you to do) preserve the utmost discretion toward Professor Kernlich, my fellow workers, and the nuns who work here as nursing sisters and supervisors. I am therefore taking that discretion for granted. I am reluctant to commit this indiscretion, to break the professional secrecy that has become second nature to me after working for over twelve years at the dermatological clinic. It is not only your grief-stricken letter, not only the remembrance of your deep and intense sorrow as I observed it at the funeral of Mrs. Schlömer; no, in writing to you I am carrying out a kind of mission or trust placed upon me by the deceased, who suffered a great deal from the ban on visitors placed upon her during the last two weeks of her life and which—it must be stressed—was entirely justified by her condition.
“No doubt you will remember me; on two or perhaps three occasions I had the opportunity of conducting you to the deceased, at a time when visitors were still permitted. Since for more than a year I have been occupied almost exclusively in Professor Kernlich’s study, helping him assemble material for written opinions, reports, etc., it is possible that you do not recall me as a male nurse, but possibly you do recall the elderly, stoutish, bald-headed gentleman, weeping immoderately and wearing a dark-brown Burberry, who stood to one side at Mrs. Schlömer’s funeral and whom you probably assumed to be one of her lovers whom you did not know. That is not so, and if I add a not quite convincing, heartfelt ‘unfortunately,’ please do not infer from this any insult to the deceased who was so dear to you, or any intended familiarity. Indeed, it has not been vouchsafed to me to find a permanent life-companion, although on several occasions I have embarked on associations with, to me, honorable intentions, associations which—I wish to be sincere with you—failed to find fruition not only on account of the despicable behavior of the chosen ones but also on account of my occupation (necessitating as it does my being in constant contact with venereal-disease patients) and also of the many night shifts for which I volunteered.
“Professor Kernlich will not be answering your letter because you are not a relative of the deceased and, even if you were, he would not be obliged to supply you with the ‘more detailed inf
ormation’ you desire on Mrs. Schlömer’s death. That is proscribed by a doctor’s duty to remain silent, it is also proscribed by a nurse’s duty to remain silent which I do not wish to violate. There is, I admit, a certain if not total indiscretion in my reporting to you on the last week of your deceased friend’s life, and this is why I enjoin you to make no use of my letter. Naturally the statement on the death certificate as to cause of death is accurate: heart failure, complete circulatory debilitation, but how this point was finally reached, Mrs. Schlömer having been on the road to recovery as far as her acute illness was concerned, is what I would like to tell you.
“To begin with: the severe infection that brought your friend to our ward was contracted by her, as you now know, from a foreign statesman. No doubt you know better than I that during the last two years she had abandoned the frivolous mode of life which she doubtless conducted for many years, and that, after inheriting from her parents, she moved to the country in order to end her days in dignified tranquillity and remorse. By nature she was not, as no doubt you know better than I, in any way a prostitute, or even promiscuous, rather was she a woman forever enmeshed in certain masculine desires. She found it so hard to say ‘No’ when she felt it was within her power to give pleasure. I feel justified in putting it this way since during the night before her death Mrs. Schlömer recounted almost her entire life to me, revealing all the details of her ‘fall,’ and if—after working for twelve years in a university dermatological clinic and especially after the events still to be recounted—if, I say, I am far from inclining to idealize, let alone romanticize, the profession of prostitute, I do know that most of these women die in misery, ill, dirty, the wildest blasphemies on their lips, most of them so riddled with disease that not one of today’s lighthearted sex-magazines would portray them on their covers. It is the most miserable death imaginable: abandoned, riddled with disease, joyless, destitute—and this is why I have gone along to most of the funerals, since usually only a social worker and a routinely functioning priest accompany these women on their final journey.
Group Portrait With Lady Page 44
