Freud’s Dora

Freud’s Dora
A Biography
of Ida Bauer Adler

Marge Thorell

McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers

Jefferson, North Carolina
 Also by Marge Thorell

Karin Bergöö Larsson

and the Emergence of Swedish Design
(McFarland, 2019)

Frontispiece: The famous sofa in Sigmund Freud’s study, shown here in

20 Maresfield Gardens, the Freud Museum, Hampstead, London, where
Freud fled after the Nazis invaded Vienna. The room is set up exactly as
it was on Berggasse 19 in Vienna (Robert Huffstutter, Flickr).

Library of Congress Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

Names: Thorell, Marge, 1940– author.

Title: Freud’s Dora : a biography of Ida Bauer Adler / Marge Thorell.
Description: Jefferson, North Carolina : McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers,
2022 | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2022002709 | ISBN 9781476682792 (print)
ISBN 9781476645346 (ebook)
♾
Subjects: LCSH: Adler, Ida Bauer. | Hysteria—Patient—Austria—Biography. |
Dysfunctional families. | Families—Mental health. | BISAC: PSYCHOLOGY / History
Classification: LCC RC455.4.F3 T465 2022 | DDC 616.85/240092 [B]—
dc23/eng/20220314
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022002709

British Library cataloguing data are available

ISBN (print) 978-1-4766-8279-2
ISBN (ebook) 978-1-4766-4534-6

© 2022 Marge Thorell. All rights reserved

No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form

or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying
or recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the publisher.

Front cover image: Ida Bauer, age 8 in 1890, while living at Berggasse 32
in Vienna, just up the street from Freud’s apartment
and consulting room (taken from Wikimedia Commons);
background © 2022 Shutterstock

Printed in the United States of America

McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers

Box 611, Jefferson, North Carolina 28640
www.mcfarlandpub.com
 To my psychoanalyst,
without whom this and many other things
would not have been possible
I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the
need for a father’s protection.
—Sigmund Freud

If there is one woman who sums up for many what is both

fascinating and repellent, most subtle and most bullied
in Freud’s relationships with women, then that woman is
Dora.
—Lisa Appignanesi and John Forrester,
Freud’s Women
 Table of Contents

Acknowledgments ix
Preface 1
Introduction 9

Part I: Secrets and Lies

1. The Search for Secrets 20
2. The Secret of Freud’s Women 29
3. The Bauer Ménage and Its Secrets 36
4. The Secret Life of Merano 49
5. The K’s Ménage and Their Secrets 62
6. The Nature of Secrets 73

Part II: Dora and Freud

7. The Teenager and the Analyst 82
8. Freud’s Story of the Seductions 91
9. Dreams and Desires 97
10. Dreams and Hysteria 104
11. The Master 111

Part III: Triumph Over Freud

12. The Return 120
13. Marriage 125
14. Motherhood 132
15. The Bauer Family After Freud 137
vii
 Table of Contents

16. The Politics and Power of Otto Bauer 143

17. World War I 147

Part IV: The Aftermath

18. The New World Order 154
19. The Nazi Period 161
20. Kurt in the United States 167
21. Ida’s Escape 172
22. The Aftermath 179
23. The Scholarship 184

Epilogue 190
Chronology 195
Chapter Notes 199
Bibliography 213
Index 219

viii
 Acknowledgments

Nothing is ever done alone, at least not in my experience. For

every project, whether a creative or a domestic one, there are always
many people who help make things happen. In my case, I want to
thank Katharina Adler, the ­g reat-granddaughter of Ida Bauer Adler,
with whom I have had several email conversations and who was kind
enough to provide me with some ­in-depth information about the
story of Ida.
I am also grateful for the help I’ve received, over the years of
working on this book, from Anne Dubuisson, who has reviewed my
manuscript many times and has been most helpful in organizing
my material. Also, thanks to Dannette Bock, who has proofread the
manuscript, offered comments, and created the index—again, many
times.
I am indebted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Penn-
sylvania, Graduate School of Education, where I earned a doctoral
degree and was able to create a dissertation based on psycho-
analysis.
I am deeply appreciative of the work on Ida Bauer Adler (Dora)
that came before me, especially Hannah S. Decker’s definitive work
on Freud, Dora, and 1900 Vienna. This book could not have been
written without Sigmund Freud’s case study Dora: An Analysis of a
Case of Hysteria. I also was happy to find an article by Andrew W.
Ellis and colleagues, who wrote about the “other couple,” the Zellen-
kas—named Herr K. and Frau K. in Freud’s case study. This article,
which appeared in the Journal of Austrian Studies was one of the few
to detail the life and exploits of the Zellenkas and their relationship
with Ida Bauer’s family. I am also grateful for the help and support
from many people at McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers.
ix
 Acknowledgments

I also want to thank dear friends and family who were there for
me as I was writing this book. And I could not have done this book
without the help and support of my husband, Klaus. I am especially
grateful for the ongoing support from Craig Lichtman.

x
 Preface

In September 1939, Sigmund Freud (1856–1939), the founder

of psychoanalysis, having escaped the Nazis in Austria, lay dying of
cancer in Hampstead, London. Up until his last moments, he saw
patients, wrote, and read books. In the same year, his most famous
patient, Dora, was still living in Vienna, where, as a Jewish woman,
she was terrified and alone. She tried desperately to obtain a visa to
travel to France to be with her beloved brother, Otto. Dora finally
succeeded in traveling to France, but only after he had died. Eventu-
ally, she was reunited with her son, Kurt, in the United States. Then,
she, too, died of cancer in 1945 in Manhattan—a few years after
Freud.
Freud and Dora had been together a scant three months in
Vienna, but she, a young girl, would be coupled for eternity to the
analyst by virtue of his most celebrated case study. She was his earli-
est, and arguably his most famous, psychoanalytic patient—and his
biggest disappointment.
Through the years, much has been written about Freud and his
relationship with Dora in everything from academic journals to pop-
ular magazines. Their story has been depicted in plays and movies.
Freud’s behavior surrounding the case, his theories emanating from
the case, the toll the case enacted on his health—all have been dis-
sected and illuminated.
Anyone who has enrolled in a college psychology course is
familiar with Freud and Dora. For many years now, the vocabulary
of psychoanalysis, largely emanating from the Dora case, is part of
the lexicon of the average reader, even those who are not involved
in counseling, medicine, therapy, or literary criticism. Everyone, it
seems, knows about transference, countertransference, hysteria,
1
 Preface

Freud’s home at 20 Maresfield Gardens, London NW3 5SX, in the United

Kingdom was his final home and eventually of his daughter Anna Freud, a
pioneering child psychoanalyst, who lived there from 1938 until 1982. The
home now is the Freud Museum (Rup11, Wikimedia Commons).

displacement, penis envy, repression, and other Freudian terms.

Conversely, few people are knowledgeable about the real person in
Freud’s ­well-known case study. For many, Dora remains a fictive pro-
tagonist, unknown as a person.
It is ironic that such a ­well-known case, one so studied, was con-
sidered by Freud an “exemplary failure.”1 And yet, despite his mis-
calculation, he was determined to write up the case history, initially
completing a first draft in January 1901, entitling it Traum und Hys-
terie (Dreams and Hysteria).2
In the case study, which reads like a novella, Freud recounts the
story of this troubled young woman, an adolescent, who was sexu-
ally assaulted by a friend of her father’s. He describes Dora in great
detail, creating a character that has been compared to Nabokov’s Lol-
ita. Dora, like Lolita—both children—were seduced by older men.3
2
 Preface

Freud’s fascinating portrayal of Dora brings to life a young girl

of some complexity. He describes her physical appearance, thoughts,
reactions, speech, and dreams. He also writes about how she suffered
due to the entangled and highly sexualized family structure that she
was forced to live in. He describes her relationship with her father
and the flawed and unsatisfactory one with her mother—all this in
graphic detail. Freud also recounted how Dora talked back to him,
questioned his analysis, openly discussed sexual matters with him,
and finally walked out on him. Freud did not seem to like her very
much—suggesting that he really didn’t “get” his struggling young
patient. He was singularly unsympathetic toward her.
So, who was this daunting, abused, misrepresented character?
The Dora of Freud’s narrative was a ­strong-willed seventeen-
year-old who suffered with a variety of symptoms, many of which
were attributed to her own nature but also were due to her entangled
and enmeshed family situation. She endured loss of voice, depres-
sion, respiratory illnesses, gastric and intestinal distress, a limp, and
anxiety. Certainly, the dysfunctional family structure she was forced
to live in contributed to her malaise. After openly discussing her life
with Freud and frequently disputing his interpretations of her ail-
ments, she decided to abort the ­six-days-a-week analysis.
Freud’s treatment of Dora, one of his earliest patients, was a
failure, perhaps because he was singularly inept in treating her.
Rarely one to admit defeat or failure, he managed to understand
and even write about the mistakes he made with Dora (he never
actually admitted anything to his young patient, however). He was
thus able to salvage something significant from the broken interac-
tion—his recognition of one of the more significant tenets of psy-
choanalysis, namely the phenomenon of transference, and ultimately
countertransference.
In his defense, Freud was just starting out as a psychoanalyst
and in subsequent years would have a much better understanding of
women and of his own reactions to his patients, as well as to his own
theories. However, as feminist scholars write today, he never really
understood female psychology—and actually appeared to have had
disdain for women.
3
 Preface

Freud’s analytic constructs were characterized by an uncon-

scious redirection or misdirection of feelings from one person to
another, patient to doctor—or doctor to patient, in the case of the
countertransference. This significant psychic and creative discovery
largely came about because of Freud’s miscalculation and mishan-
dling of his relationship with this early patient, Dora.4
On the subject of a therapist’s knowledge of a patient, in an
introduction to Freud’s case history of Dora, Philip Rieff claims,
“The mystery of character never submits entirely, even to the great-
est masters.”5 Freud did get some things right about Dora, but he got
a lot wrong, too. There was a great deal that was unknown or “myste-
rious” to him about Dora.
Freud does acknowledge this, admitting in the case study of Dora
that he failed to understand or even discover the nature of transfer-
ence until it was too late. To say the case of Dora is one of Freud’s
great failures is no critique of mine. Freud himself wrote, “The longer
the interval of time that separates me from the end of this analysis,
the more probable it seems to me that the fault in my technique lay in
this omission [of his knowledge of the transference].”6
In her article “The Strange Case of the Freudian Case History,”
Anne Sealy tells us that Freud’s case studies illuminate his under-
standing of the power of narrative and thus of human psychology.
Yet his stories only provide information within the context of the
case study, which is naturally influenced by the teller’s point of view.
This does not allow readers to see the complete, or at times most
accurate, picture of the subject of the case study.7
Case studies, even flawed ones, have their uses of course and
are effectively discussed in hospital grand rounds, a staple at univer-
sity medical schools. Case studies are also used effectively within the
pharmaceutical industry to discuss and illustrate the adverse events
and benefits of its drugs. Much is learned of diseases and patients’
responses to illness and health through case studies.8 In the telling of
these tales, while dysfunction abounds, no one, as Rieff argues, is a
villain, only a victim9—generally of oneself.
This is surely the case with Ida Bauer, the real person behind
the characterization of Dora, who was a victim of her own lack of
4
 Preface

­self-awareness. And while she clearly did not understand herself, nor
did Freud, today her motives are more comprehended, but only in
relationship to Freud. Within analytic circles today the situation Ida
found herself in would not be viewed as unique and would have been
handled in an entirely different way than it was within the confines
of Freud’s consulting room and the medical environment of 1900s
Vienna.
Ida’s ­real-life story was only an illustrative “fragment” for Freud.
And, it is true, had she not been Freud’s patient, no one would have
known about her or cared anything at all about her symptoms or
her life. But when we understand the totality of Ida’s life, we do care
about her.
Today, feminist scholars have taken up the Dora case, viewing
Ida as someone whose “hysteria developed as a form of protest, a
silent revolt against male power,” according to Toril Moi, in “Rep-
resentation of Patriarchy: Sexuality and Epistemology in Freud’s
Dora.”10
Reams have been written about the case and dissected by schol-
ars, both pro and con. Some believe she was highly dysfunctional and
never should have walked out on Freud. They consider that the case
study of Anna O. is the much better example of a woman improving
her life through analysis and shows how she survived her traumas
and ended up helping to create a social environment that encouraged
women.
However, although much has been written about Dora, what lit-
tle we know of Ida is from Freud himself. But she does have a story to
tell apart from what Freud and academic authors tell us. Her story is
the tale of a Jewish Viennese woman enmeshed in a family dynamic
that was not merely dysfunctional, but by today’s standards would be
viewed as abusive. It is also the heroic story of a woman who tran-
scended not only her family and Freud, but the Nazis as well.
It is my intention to provide a narrative of Ida Bauer that grants
her a life of her own, showing how she confronted Freud, relieved
herself of her symptoms—to some degree—married, had a child, and
even developed a career. Ida lived a difficult life, in a problematic
world, but survived.
5
 Preface

In Part I, “Secrets and Lies,” I illuminate not only Freud’s use of

secrets in psychoanalysis, but also the Bauer family secrets, of which
there were many. These ­not-so-secret secrets created an environ-
ment for Ida that led to a number of her psychiatric ailments and
symptoms. I also tell the story of others who helped traumatize Ida,
such as the Zellenkas, who had their own secrets and amplified Ida’s
issues with their provocative and unthinking behavior toward the
sensitive young girl. Additionally, I write about other women deemed
hysterics by Freud, such as Anna O. And I try to shed some light
on Freud’s understanding of women through his relationship with
his own mother. In examining the lives of other female patients of
Freud, I illustrate how his adoring and unrealistic relationship with
his mother—and his disdain for his father—impacted both his life
and his work and clearly his relationship with Ida.
The Zellenkas, whose story is part of this one, sexually abused
Ida. The husband Hans did so explicitly, and the wife Peppina
engaged in a sexual liaison with Ida’s father, usurping Ida’s mother,
and was complicit in Hans’s seduction. While these sexual entan-
glements were being engaged in, the larger environment of Austria
during both world wars and the rising tide of anti–Semitism deeply
impacted not only Ida but also her family, Freud, and their world.11
The Bauer family was rife with illness: tuberculosis, vision prob-
lems, syphilis, gastric issues—the list of ailments various family
members experienced goes on and on. Her father, her mother, her
favorite aunt, and even her father’s lover, Peppina, all had physical as
well as psychiatric issues, which Ida apparently adopted, consciously
or unconsciously.
In Part II, “Dora and Freud,” Ida meets the young psychoanalyst
for a second time to begin what was to be a formal analysis. Having
been dragged to Freud’s office by her father, the relationship between
Freud and Ida was rocky from the beginning—and Ida was not afraid
of Freud or unwilling to speak openly to him. While his initial knowl-
edge about his new patient came from her father, he did question Ida
about her life as she saw it. To his credit, he did not rely solely on the
narrative of a family member but began the first session by asking Ida
to provide him with the whole story of her life and illnesses.
6
 Preface

Ida was fairly talkative. She spoke about her family members
and particularly her beloved aunt Malvine, her father’s younger sis-
ter, who had recently died. It was apparent to Freud in these first few
sessions that Ida’s family had provided her not only with her natural
gifts—her beauty and intellectual precocity—but also with her predi-
lection to illness. For instance, she seemed to Freud enamored of the
illnesses of the women in her life: her aunt Malvine, as well as those
of her mother and of her father’s lover, Peppina.
From what he learned in those initial sessions with Ida, Freud
believed that Ida’s mother, with her devotion to cleaning and appar-
ent lack of interest in her children, was a contributing factor to Ida’s
illnesses. It was Ida’s interactions with both the Zellenkas, however,
that caused her the most distress and exacerbated her symptoms to
such an alarming degree that her father sought Freud’s help for Ida,
who was contemplating suicide.12
As Freud and Ida continued to meet, she began to speak of the
seduction by Hans Zellenka, whom Freud would call Herr K. in
the case history. She also spoke of her father’s affair with Herr K.’s
wife, Peppina (Frau K.). She expressed disgust for Hans’s seduction
of her and her father’s affair with Hans’s wife.13 During her analysis,
Ida revealed to Freud two dreams that have been made much of in
psychoanalytic literature. She refused to believe Freud’s interpreta-
tion of these dreams, especially the second dream, and abruptly fled
therapy.14
In Part III, “Triumph Over Freud,” I recount Ida’s marriage to
Ernst Adler and the arrival sixteen months later of her only child,
Kurt Herbert. Ida and her husband formally left the Jewish faith as
a result of the growing anti–Semitism—while remaining part of the
Jewish community—after Kurt’s birth and were baptized in the Prot-
estant church. While the Bauers were never religiously Jewish, they
were culturally Jewish, as was Freud. However, following the birth of
their son, Ida and her husband came to understand that the situation
was changing in Austria. Many Viennese Jews saw the turning of the
tide. As Hannah Decker writes, “The urge to convert had strength-
ened at the turn of the century, as increasingly voluble anti–Semi-
tism roused many Jews to ­re-consider their situation.”15
7
 Preface

I also tell the story here of Ida’s brother and of her son, both
of whom had brilliant careers, albeit with somewhat dysfunctional
family lives. Her son, for instance, was married several times and was
known far and wide for his fiery temperament. Ida’s brother did not
marry until the death of his parents, and then, although in an out-
wardly satisfying marriage, became involved with other women, per-
haps unconsciously following the example of his father.
In Part IV, “The Aftermath,” I examine the life of Ida in Nazi
Austria and the repercussions for herself and her famous brother,
Otto, as well as her son, a talented musician and conductor. I also
describe Ida’s eventual escape to the United States, via a circuitous
path, and her life and death there as a refugee. Finally, I explore the
interpretation of her life by feminists, Freudians, and others.
Through several years of research, including for my disserta-
tion, and in several published articles, particularly the article I wrote
about Ida’s analysis with Freud,16 I was able to develop a fuller pic-
ture of this complex woman who played such a significant role in
the annals of psychiatry and psychoanalysis and, by extension, in our
understanding of ourselves. For my doctoral work and while in ther-
apy myself, I read a great deal about psychoanalysis and about Dora
but knew little about Ida. This book is an attempt to learn who Ida
Bauer really was—the real person behind the “Dora” of Freud’s case
study.

8
 Introduction

In 1986, the New York Times acknowledged that Sigmund Freud,

the discoverer of psychoanalysis, was considered the greatest mod-
ern writer. By creating in the grand literary tradition, “the neurol-
ogist who sought a dynamic psychology seems today to have been
a speculative moralist and a mythologizing dramatist of the inner
life.”1 His case studies, for which he is justly famous, contain all the
requisite elements of the novel: character, plot, setting, conflict, and
sometimes resolution. These studies, now classics, exercise a certain
influence on readers of them. They are unforgettable, multilayered,
and multifaceted, and demand rereading to fully enjoy and under-
stand them, just like classics of literature.
Like Flaubert’s Madame Bovary or Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina,
Freud’s works pull us into his stories of women’s conflicts and strug-
gles, as in the case histories of Anna O. and especially the young girl
Dora. Although all his case studies (Rat Man, Little Hans, Wolf Man)
capture our imagination, it is Dora’s that stands out.
Even though his works are nonfiction, Freud, as a physician, was
concerned with literary value, and also of course with the scientific.
He described and came to understand the complexity of neurotic ill-
ness by analyzing his patients’ obsessions, anxieties, and fantasies.
He was thus able to develop his theories based on the treatment of
his patients, many of whom were women. He was especially inter-
ested in hysteria—or conversion disorder as it is frequently called
today—where patients who refuse to or cannot tolerate past and fre-
quently hidden trauma convert their anguish into physical symp-
toms.2 Freud and Josef Breuer (1842–1925) published a book on the
subject.3
One of Freud’s first patients, Ida Bauer (1883–1945)—named
9
 Introduction

Dora by Freud in his case study—was a young girl when she first met
Sigmund Freud, the trained neurologist. He agreed to see Ida at her
father’s behest, as she had been suffering from a multiplicity of phys-
ical symptoms as early as age seven. At that time, she had a com-
plete breakdown, which was treated by hydrotherapy and electric
shock therapies. Her symptoms were brought about, it seemed on
the surface, by her mother’s obsessive cleanliness (which began after
learning that she had contracted venereal disease from her husband).
Later, when Ida was an adolescent, the family’s complex sexual situa-
tion, which was compounded by another family, brought on hysteria,
which manifested it itself in many symptoms.
Freud was fascinated by the results of the “talking cure” as
understood in Josef Breuer’s treatment of one of his patients, Anna
O. Thus, Freud was excited about what he felt he was able to discover
when working with one of his own patients, a girl he called Dora in
his case study. On October 14, 1900, Freud wrote to colleague Wil-
helm Fliess (1858–1928) about his new patient, “a girl of eighteen.”
(She was actually seventeen.) He told Fleiss that the case opened
smoothly to his collection of picklocks.4 As it turned out, this par-
ticular door did not open easily and was one of Freud’s early analytic
failures. His young patient stood up to him and abruptly left therapy
before the treatment was finished. As we shall see, Breuer’s patient,
Anna O., did much better in her therapy with Josef Breuer and had a
more productive life than Dora would come to have.
Much has been written about the relationship between Freud
and his young patient, and his ensuing discoveries, but not too many
know of the life of Ida Bauer. The case, as written up by Freud, is
still intriguing on many fronts these many years later: the cultural
context of Vienna at the time, the facets of Ida’s home life, the dis-
covery of transference—and countertransference—and eventually
the gender issues that came to light in the field of literary and cul-
tural analysis after the deaths of Ida and Freud. Even without these
components, Ida Bauer is an interesting young woman in her own
right.
Before elaborating on the life of Ida Bauer, it’s important to
understand Vienna, the Jewish situation, and the medical practice
10
 Introduction

The Freud family, approximately 1876. Standing, left to right: Paula, Anna,
Sigmund (16 at the time), Emmanuel, Rosa and Marie Freud and their
cousin Simon Nathanson. Seated: Adolfine, Amalia, unknown girl, Alexan-
der and Jacob Freud. The boy at bottom is unidentified (Wellcome Images,
Wikimedia Commons).

during the time of Freud and Ida, which I attempt to do in this work.
At the turn of the century, Viennese Jews were moving out of ghettos,
as they were becoming more economically successful and academi-
cally relevant. The Jewish population within the Austrian empire was
in its ascendancy, rising from 6,000 in the ­mid-nineteenth century
to nearly 150,000 in 1900.5
Decker writes about Vienna:

Historical accounts of the era frequently refer to the feelings of approach-

ing Doom that underlay the superficial air of gaiety and insouciance in
­fin-de-siècle Vienna. But usually these histories do not state clearly enough
the extent to which pessimism about the future reflected the despair of the
Jews and the liberals, as they saw the disintegration of their deeply held
aspirations.6

11
 Introduction

Jews had moved into Vienna, relocating to the metropolitan

area in pursuit of better living conditions, more job and professional
opportunities, and less harassment, which they had experienced for
centuries in their villages, large and small.
At the time, the medical profession had little understanding
of the psychological impact on physical symptoms and diseases,
although there were some pioneers, such as Breuer, who were look-
ing into the issues of the mind and illness.
In working with Ida Freud’s life and his treatment of his friends,
his analysis, and his relationships with other women certainly
impacted his interactions with his young patient. He himself had a
problematic childhood, as his parents had moved from poverty to
burgeoning respectability when they came to Vienna from Mora-
via—but not without trauma to young Freud. One might think he
would have been more empathic toward his patient.
Once in Vienna, Freud’s parents, while not denying their Jew-
ish heritage, found themselves more interested in cultural and social
success than in passing on their Jewish heritage. Freud grew up in
a household that did not celebrate Jewish festivals, and he was not
taught Hebrew. This is not to say that Freud or his parents denied
their identity, but like other Jews at that time, their sense of them-
selves was wrapped up in their “­G erman-ness,” not necessar-
ily their Jewish heritage or culture. This lack of a Jewish religious
life would not keep Hitler’s Nazis from significantly impacting the
life of Sigmund Freud and his family—as well as that of the Bauer
family.
The generation of Jews from which Ida’s father and Freud
emerged, that is to say, male Jews, tended to believe that no posi-
tion in society would be denied them in political, academic, or other
professional circles, even though anti–Jewish sentiment was on the
rise and subtly growing in Vienna. However, being Jewish did impact
Freud’s choice of profession; he wanted to be a lawyer, but that was
not possible, as the profession was closed to Jews. Freud felt, and
rightly so, that there were more opportunities within medicine for
someone like him. Because of the popularity of medicine for Jewish
men, there was a call for quotas for those entering the universities,
12
 Introduction

with lectures by Jewish teachers boycotted at some academic institu-

tions and medical schools.
Thus, assimilating Jews like the Freuds and, as we shall see,
the Bauers, thought that because of their academic brilliance
and increasing financial assets, they could join mainstream Aus-
trian society. This was not the case, as their lives were spent almost
entirely among other Jews.
Young Ida Bauer, for example, while being educated at home,
did not socialize with non–Jewish children—nor would Freud’s
own daughter, Anna, even though unlike Ida, Anna (thirteen years
younger) attended a convent school. Neither made friends with
non–Jews, so mostly the socializing of the Freud and Bauer families
was within the Jewish community. Freud’s practice consisted solely
of Jews for quite some time, and the early psychoanalytic move-
ment consisted almost entirely of Jewish physicians. It was not until
around 1907 that there were any gentile recruits for his burgeoning
therapeutic interventions.
As a result of this closed culture, it has been asserted by many
that Ida’s father would never have chosen anyone other than a Jew-
ish physician for his daughter (or himself ). It has been argued, too,
that this social and cultural isolation set up Ida for hysteria amidst
a clearly dysfunctional family background. And at that time, Vien-
na’s society was one where even bright young women like Ida were
denied any real education, so there could be hardly any outlet for her.
Thus, Ida found herself seeking psychological help, though not
willingly. According to Michael Billig, Ida entered Freud’s life when
hers was gloomy, at the “gloomiest, most isolated point in his life.”7
Ida’s family, for its part, was also experiencing dilemmas—per-
sonal, physical, and social. The Bauers came from Bohemia, where
Ida’s father’s textile business was experiencing difficulties because of
growing anti–Semitism. By moving to Vienna, the Bauers, like the
Freuds, hoped to create a better life for their families and achieve
professional and financial stability.
The families did not actively practice Judaism, even though
the Bauers did have their son, Otto (Ida’s elder brother), circum-
cised. You could say that both Freud and Ida were at the same place
13
 Introduction

psychologically when she entered treatment with him: isolated,

depressed, and hindered by the anti–Semitism of Vienna at that
time.
The cast of characters who made up young Ida Bauer’s life were
both rich and formidable. Ida was born in Vienna on November 1,
1882. Her paternal grandparents had probably moved from Bohemia,
near the Moravian border, in the late 1850s as a result of pressure fol-
lowing the revolution of 1848.
Ida’s father, Philipp Bauer, an industrialist, was frequently ill,
having contracted tuberculosis and syphilis. Her mother, Katha-
rina (Käthe) Gerber Bauer, born in 1862 in what is now north cen-
tral Czechoslovakia, had her own troubles. Some claim (as Freud
did) that she was a strange woman, a pathological house cleaner, and
someone her daughter disliked and did not respect. She died in 1912
of stomach cancer. Ida’s father, Philipp, died shortly thereafter in
1913 from complications of tuberculosis and venereal disease.
Ida’s brother and only sibling, Otto (1881–1938), would become
a leader of the Austrian Socialist Party from 1918 to 1934 and was
its chief Marxist theorist. In 1914 he married a divorcée with three
children, and then maintained a ­long-term relationship with sev-
eral younger mistresses, just like his father. He died prematurely of a
heart ailment.
Because of Philipp’s diagnosis of tuberculosis, he moved the
family from Vienna to a Tyrolean resort town (today in Italy) to more
easily find relief and hopefully effect a cure. It was in Merano that the
family befriended another couple—the previously mentioned Herr K.
and Frau K.
Ida took care of the Zellenkas’ two children, along with her own
sick father. At some point as he became more ill, Philipp was nursed
by Peppina, and they shortly became lovers. At the same time, Pep-
pina’s husband, Hans, began his seduction of the young Ida, a girl
who was continuously neurotic and neurasthenic. Following Hans’s
sexual advances, which no one in the family believed, or wished to
believe, she developed increasingly severe symptoms of hysteria,
including a cough, a limp, and loss of voice.8
Although she consulted Freud in 1898 at the behest of her father
14
 Introduction

(who himself had seen Freud for nervous issues due to his syphilis),
Ida did not go into analysis with him until the earlier part of October
1900. The case study that Freud would construct around his treat-
ment of Ida consisted of her dreams and the foundations of her fam-
ily life: the obsessive mother, the adulterous father, the mistress, and
the seducer who made amorous advances toward Ida.
It is interesting to note, and very revealing about Ida’s charac-
ter, that a young woman of those times was willing to talk—and to
argue—with Freud while undergoing treatment. She was also not
afraid or embarrassed to speak of sexual topics. She was more apt
to disagree with her therapist than to stay silent. This is all the more
surprising as ­m iddle-class Jewish girls and women felt especially
powerless in Vienna and elsewhere, since they were discriminated
against both as Jews and as women. Jewish women were barred from
admission to higher education and careers, for instance. This must
have been particularly galling for the intelligent young woman who
watched her brother, Otto, achieve educational and eventually pro-
fessional success.
The progression of Ida’s life was complicated by her abrupt ter-
mination of treatment with Freud after only three months of analy-
sis. And so it was that on the last day of the year 1900, to the surprise
and chagrin of Freud, she said adieu.
Ida remained somewhat ­s ymptom-free for a number of years
and in 1903 married and shortly thereafter gave birth to a son. She
seemingly recovered her emotional health through her own agency.
Strangely, after all that had transpired between her and the Zellen-
kas, she maintained a relationship with Peppina, her father’s mis-
tress. They became partners as bridge masters, teaching the popular
card game during the 1930s when bridge was all the rage in Vienna.
According to Sheila Kohler, who wrote a fictionalized story
of Ida’s life, Ida was a fierce and formidable mother who urged her
gifted little boy to study music and learn foreign languages. Fearful
of what was happening in Europe, she believed that his knowledge
of other languages and cultures would enable him to leave Austria at
the right moment.9
Because of her brother’s Marxist affiliation, the Nazis sought Ida
15
 Introduction

in the late 1930s. This was a short time after her husband’s death. For-
tunately, she was able to hide from the Nazis until she could secure
transport to Paris, which was arranged for by her brother, who was
living there, and her son, who was living in the United States. Unfor-
tunately, before Ida could leave Vienna, she was informed that her
brother had died.
Eventually, Ida did arrive in Paris, her transport arranged by
friends of her late brother. She stayed there for several years. She
then made her way to Casablanca, where she was taken ill. She had
to delay her trip to the United States for several more months. She
eventually flew to New York and then on to Chicago, where she was
reunited with her son, Kurt, before she died of cancer—like her
mother.
Kurt Herbert Adler, Ida’s son, died in 1988. He is survived by
his third wife, Nancy; two daughters, Kristin Krueger and Sabrina;
and two sons, Ronald and Roman, from a previous marriage; as well
as two grandchildren. Her ­great-granddaughter, Katharina Adler, has
recently written a fictionalized life of her ­great-grandmother, called
Ida.10
Ida’s story is particularly important because she would not allow
herself to be treated with disrespect by male physicians or others,
even as a young woman. Her analysis, written up by Freud and pub-
lished as Dora: An Analysis of a Case of Hysteria, portrayed her in a
poor light. Years later, feminist scholarship took on Freud’s inappro-
priate handling of Ida and the implications for Freudian analysis for
women.
While feminist scholars have written about Ida, she was less
a feminine role model than other Freud subjects, such as Anna O.
who went on to become a famous social worker. But these writers
do not delve into Ida’s entire life—only the segment that reflects on
Freud’s use or abuse of her and other female patients. Over the years,
these feminist theorists have taken up the study of Freud and Dora
and have in essence created an academic cottage industry from her
analysis.
Yet Ida, the real woman rather than the fictionalized Dora, led
a successful life despite the trying circumstances of her family life
16
 Introduction

and her own disabilities. Her family situation resulted in debilitat-

ing symptoms from which she suffered throughout her entire life.
And Austrian society, led by Hitler and his condemnation and per-
secution of Jews, brought her to the depths of despair and poverty.
Despite all this, Ida managed to create a family and a professional life.
It was not until she had to leave Vienna, both because of the activities
of her brother and because of the Jewish situation in Europe, that her
life once again became destabilized.
Not much is known about the full life of this woman, Ida
Bauer Adler, who is mostly written about simply as “Dora.” Like
many unsung heroes and unknown women, Ida lived a precarious
life brought about by male sexual dominance, a medical profession
that demeaned women, and her own mental instability due to those
familial acts of abuse and ignorance. Despite all this, she managed
to survive. She maintained a somewhat stable marriage and raised
a brilliant son, making sure he had the skills to overcome the Nazi
regime. In addition, she provided for herself after her family’s money
was lost following World War I. And, finally, she was able to secure a
new life for herself in the United States with her son.
Ida Bauer’s connection with Freud has always been the reason
articles and books have been written about her. This will be the first
­f ull-scale biography of her in English and will shed light not only on
her “failed” relationship with Freud and her aborted psychoanaly-
sis, but also on her indomitable spirit. She was a remarkable girl and
woman, and her story needs to be told.

17
 Part I

Secrets and Lies

He that has eyes to see and ears to hear may convince

himself that no mortal can keep a secret. If his lips are
silent, he chatters with his fingertips; betrayal oozes out
of him at every pore.
—Sigmund Freud

19
 Chapter 1

The Search for Secrets

Ida Bauer, Freud’s Dora, was complex and confounding. She was
an intelligent, troubled young woman of seventeen when she began
her analysis with Freud. At the time, her family of origin and her
extended family had so many problems and troubles that Ida appar-
ently was forced to shoulder hers alone. At the time of her birth in
Vienna on November 1, 1888, her family resided at Berggasse 32, just
up the street from Freud’s consulting room and family apartment,
making her trek to see him consist of only a few steps. Freud moved
there in 1891, when the building was newly constructed.
Her first visit to the esteemed Dr. Freud occurred when Ida was
only fifteen years old, in the early summer of 1898—years before the
start of the famous analysis. After pushing the buzzer, she and her
father opened the door onto the dingy ground floor and made their
way up the marble stairwell. They reached the first floor and Freud’s
suite of offices, entering the waiting room and then waiting for her
father’s psychiatrist to see her. By this time, she had been suffering
for years from various symptoms and had visited many physicians,
stayed at numerous spas, and had been a patient at many treatment
centers. At the behest of her mother, she had tried hydrotherapy and
electroshock treatments. All to no avail. Now her father wanted her
to visit his physician—the ­up-and-coming Sigmund Freud.
But she would have none of it.
Sigmund Freud’s Dora was born into a family and a culture
that embraced secrets. There was a secret ­Austro-Hungarian plan
to intervene in the Timok uprising in Serbia.1 This had little or no
impact on Ida and her family, but it is illustrative of the secrets that
surrounded Austria and Germany at the time. These and the secrets
Freud was studying would have ­f ar-reaching implications for Ida,
20
 Chapter 1. The Search for Secrets

too.2 Freud himself had secret relationships that compounded and

confounded his life and perhaps his patients. He also delved into the
secrets of other women patients, perhaps doing a better job with
these patients than he did with Ida.
As for the secrets within Ida’s own family, they were legion. It
was those secrets that drove Ida to Freud in the first place. Freud,
a trained neurologist, was making a name for himself at that time
in treating hysteria, a condition primarily seen in women. He would
have far to go, however, from his initial experiments, and in his treat-
ment of “Dora,” to developing ­ground-breaking therapies for psychi-
atric illnesses using what he would eventually call psychoanalysis.
About a year before Ida’s birth, Freud began experimenting with
hypnosis. “During the past weeks I have thrown myself into hypno-
sis and have achieved all sorts of small but noteworthy successes,”
he wrote in a letter to his friend and colleague, Wilhelm Fliess.3 The
field of psychiatry would be changed not only hypnosis by also by
using dreams, talk therapy, and the uncovering of secrets as treat-
ment modalities.4 But with all his burgeoning knowledge about the
human mind, it would turn out that Freud did not understand his
young patient’s clinical situation. As Barron writes, “In the same way
that he conducted a subtle search for secrets in specimen dreams,
he tried to search for Dora’s secrets by paying attention to seemingly
insignificant details of her life. The treatment’s failure led to the dis-
covery of the deeper central secret, the transference.”5 Sadly, Ida, an
ill ­seventeen-year-old when she started her analysis with him, only
wanted peace, not psychiatric discoveries. Their coming together
helped Freud understand certain concepts, but it did little for her. To
understand Ida and her story, we need to begin with Freud.
Sigismund Schlomo Freud was born on May 9, 1856, in Freiberg,
Moravia, in the ­M oravian-Silesian region of the Czech Repub-
lic. His father, Jacob Koloman Freud, was a wool and textile mer-
chant, and his mother, Amalia, was Jacob’s third wife. His father was
not doing well financially at the time of Freud’s birth. New regula-
tions were being established for full freedom of trade in Austria, but
especially in Vienna. Because that city’s economy was growing rap-
idly, Freud’s father thought there would be better opportunities for
21
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

Freud’s birthplace, Freiberg, Austrian Empire (later Příbor, Czech Repub-

lic), was in a rented room in a locksmith’s house (Jiří Jurečka, Wikimedia
Commons).

himself and his family there. In 1860, they moved to the Leopold-
stadt section of Vienna—the ­so-called Jewish ghetto—where Freud
was educated, first at home with his mother and with some help
from his father. Eventually, he entered a formal school and gradu-
ated summa cum laude from the Sperl Gymnasium (Leopoldstädter
­Kommunal-Real-und Obergymansium).6
Freud started classes at Vienna University in 1873 to study med-
icine. Although initially thinking about becoming a lawyer, he came
to understand that in Vienna at that time, the wiser option would be
medicine. (Jews were allowed into medical school but had difficulty
entering law school.) In 1875, Freud changed his name to Sigmund,
dropping Sigismund Schlomo forever. He qualified as a neurologist
in 1881. From 1882 to 1883, Freud was employed at the Theodor Mey-
nert Psychiatric Clinic in Vienna. As a practicing neurologist, Freud
saw many patients while working in the lab as a cerebral researcher.7
22
 Chapter 1. The Search for Secrets

Freud was interested in more than just science. Through-

out his life, he reveled in Shakespeare’s great tragedies, which he
read in English. The works of Shakespeare, Harold Bloom informs
us, cemented Freud’s understanding of human nature and helped
him come to an understanding of what psychology was and how it
impacted people’s lives.8 This is what led to the dramatic nature of
his famous case studies.
Freud’s life was not all medicine and scientific theories, either. In
1882, the year of Ida’s birth, he met and became engaged to Martha
Bernays, the daughter of a prominent Jewish Vienna family whose
ancestors included a chief rabbi of Hamburg and Heinrich Heine, the
German poet, who had an international reputation and great influ-
ence in the world of literature. Martha was from an observant ortho-
dox Jewish family, while Freud appeared to be Jewish in name only,
as his family did not practice any of the Jewish rituals.
While Freud and Martha met in April 1882, they did not marry
until four years later, on September 14, 1886. While they were apart
during their engagement, Freud wrote close to nine hundred let-
ters to his beloved. The engagement was tumultuous, but the mar-
riage of ­fifty-three years would be harmonious, according to many
biographers of Freud—but perhaps not as successful as one would
imagine.9
As their engagement was a long one (Freud would have little
money for marrying for some time), he was able to work on his ideas
and projects. Freud’s inquiring mind was always researching and
experimenting—sometimes with disastrous results, as in his skir-
mish with cocaine.
In 1884, thinking cocaine could be a miracle therapy, he began
to study the physical and psychological effects of the drug; however,
he misunderstood its addictive properties. Shortly after experiment-
ing on himself with it, he left Vienna somewhat in disgrace for his
attempts to use cocaine therapeutically.
On a scholarship, Freud was able to travel to Paris to work with
famous neurologist ­Jean-Martin Charcot from October 1885 to Feb-
ruary 1886. This travelling scholarship enabled him to study the
effects of nervous diseases under Charcot at the Salpêtrière Hospital
23
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

in Paris. Freud was fas-

cinated by Charcot’s
work on traumatic hys-
teria and took from it
the notion that one of
the principal forms of
neurosis came about
when a traumatic expe-
rience led to a process of
unconscious symptom
formation.10
Charcot was using
hypnosis to work with
patients diagnosed with
hysteria, a term used for
many different ailments,
such as depression, epi-
lepsy, and multiple scle-
rosis.11 At the time Freud
was learning about hys- Jean-Martin Charcot, who is considered
the father of French neurology and one of
teria, it was understood the world’s pioneer neurologists (National
that the condition mostly Library of Medicine, Wikimedia Commons).
affected women. It was
through this work with Charcot that Freud came to understand how
powerful the role words play in the treatment of mental illness as
well as physical ailments.12
However, even before Freud’s departure in 1885 for Paris and his
work with Charcot, Freud had begun what would be an auspicious
relationship with Josef Breuer, a physician working in neurophysiol-
ogy. It was Breuer who sowed the seeds of hypnosis and the ­so-called
talking cure in working with patients diagnosed with hysteria. Breuer
had briefly discussed with Freud his work with some of his patients,
especially with Bertha Pappenheim, whom Breuer treated from 1880
to 1882.13 We will learn more about Bertha and other women that
Freud treated as a way of understanding what may have gone wrong
with Freud’s treatment of Ida.
24
 Chapter 1. The Search for Secrets

Following his return from Paris in 1886, the same year he mar-
ried Martha, Freud opened a private practice specializing in ner-
vous disorders. By this time, he was convinced that hypnosis, and
what he was hearing of
the talking cure used by
Breuer in his treatment
of Pappenheim, could
be a useful therapeutic
tool. He was just wait-
ing for the opportunity
to use it on one of his
patients. Freud was con-
vinced that this could be
used with patients suf-
fering from the many
symptoms brought on
by hysteria. The therapy
involved treating mental
disorders by delving into
a person’s unconscious
thought s and moti-
vations. He was “pro-
foundly impressed” with
what he learned from
Breuer and was deter-
mined to try it himself.14
In early 1886, Freud
had an opportunity to
employ Breuer’s therapy
with Mathilde Schle-
icher, a twenty-seven-
year-old musician and
the daughter of the
Bertha Pappenheim (Josef Breuer’s Anna O.) Viennese painter Cöles-
in 1882, when Bertha was twenty-two years
old (archive of Sanatorium Bellevue, Kreu- tin Schleicher, one of
zlingen, Germany; Wikimedia Commons). Freud’s earlier patients.
25
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

She had become seriously ill after abandonment by her fiancé, devel-
oping what was described as a nervous illness. She had been recom-
mended to Freud by Breuer because of her migraines and nervous
disposition. Freud had only recently, in April 1886, set up in private
practice as a doctor treating nervous disorders, a ­s o-called “nerve
doctor.” Freud saw Mathilde for three years using talk therapy and
hypnosis, after which both she and Freud thought she was cured.15
In gratitude, she gave him a history book: Germania: Two Mil-
lennia of German Life, by Mikkel ­B orch-Jacobsen, author of many
works on the history and philosophy of psychiatry, psychoanalysis,
and hypnosis. She had inscribed it, “To the excellent Dr. Freud, with
my affectionate memory. As a token of the deepest gratitude and the
deepest respect. Mathilde Schleicher, June 1889.”16
Unfortunately, Mathilde’s story did not end there. Shortly after
treatment with Freud, she developed mania and again became agi-
tated, sleepless, and grandiose. She was ultimately committed by
Freud on October 29, 1889, to the private clinic of Dr. Wilhelm
Svetlin, where she was given, among other drugs, sulfonal, a pharma-
ceutical that neither Svetlin nor Freud understood well.
Unfortunately, Mathilde Schleicher died on September 24, 1890,
an ugly death, with her urine filled with blood, indicating liver dam-
age. She was buried two days later in the Jewish section of Vien-
na’s Central Cemetery. Freud was puzzled by her death, which came
about because of a ­too-high dose of sulfonal over a long period of
time, which caused the liver damage.17
During the treatment of Mathilde, and undeterred following
the disaster of her death, Freud continued discussing his cases with
Breuer and how talk therapy might be a viable treatment strategy. In
1888, they decided to document a case Breuer worked on and dis-
cussed intensely with Freud—the Anna O. case study. They described
in their book the cathartic talk therapy that had been employed by
Breuer with Bertha Pappenheim, the patient of the case study.
While Freud was becoming established as a neurologist, but
publishing little, Bertha had been explaining to Breuer her symp-
toms: paralysis of the limbs, disturbances of vision and speech, and
an inability to drink water. These had begun following the nursing of
26
 Chapter 1. The Search for Secrets

her dying father, whose illness began in mid–1880. Her father died
on April 5, 1881, after which Bertha’s symptoms became so much
worse that she was admitted—against her will—to a sanatorium. Her
treatments over the years with Breuer resulted in some periods of
stability, but relapses caused her to return to a sanatorium several
times.18
During Breuer’s treatment of her, he noticed that Bertha’s symp-
toms either reduced or disappeared as she spoke about them. As Ber-
tha told more stories, Breuer was able to gain insight into her state
of mind. He concluded that the traumatic experiences from her past
brought on her symptoms, which contributed to his diagnosis of hys-
teria. On October 29, 1882, her condition improved enough for her
to be released from treatment, although she continued to suffer for
years, saved perhaps by her own indomitable spirit.19 As the years
went on, it was instructive to see how well she survived following her
treatment and how much she accomplished as a professional woman,
despite having symptoms until she died. Her recovery was unlike
Ida’s in her treatment with Freud.
While conversing with Breuer and studying his methods, Freud
was himself developing a mixed reputation for his theories. He
started publishing his few pieces of writing and was working with
patients where the emphasis of his treatments was on the sexual.
Even though the works Freud published were frequently ignored or
maligned, he still managed to connect with a coterie of ­like-minded
physicians who thought his revolutionary ideas had merit, such as
Wilhelm Fliess, the Berlin physician with whom he would eventually
have lengthy discussions about Ida.20
By 1891, having married and established both a practice and a
framework for his theories, Freud moved into his new building on
Berggasse 19, near the Bauers. He was treating patients using hypno-
sis and the talking cure. He had several patients, including Anna von
Lieben (called Cäcilie M. in his writings about her) and Elisabeth von
R. It was not until this time that he was able to write up the Anna O.
case study, which he and Breuer published in Studies in Hysteria in
1893.21
In 1900, Freud wrote what would later become known as his
27
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

groundbreaking work, The Interpretation of Dreams (Die Traumdeu-

tung), where the term psychoanalysis was first used.22 Following this,
Freud began analysis on himself, believing that dreams shed light on
feelings and hidden desires. He followed up ­self-analysis by treating
his family and friends, and found that their repressed wishes could
be analyzed in terms of their symbolism.23 He would use his under-
standing of dreams in his analysis of Ida and in the published case
study where he wrote about two dreams that she described to him in
the three months they spent together.
And what of Ida during these years that were so complicated and
challenging for Freud?
While Freud was struggling to make a name for himself, his most
famous patient was also struggling with issues that would remain
intermittently with her for the rest of her life. Ida Bauer, the Dora of
Freud’s most famous case study, was more than a character in a short
story, as she is sometimes viewed by those reading the study. In fact,
she was a troubled young woman who found that Freud could not
help her, so she had to help herself.
But before we look intimately at Ida’s life and come to some
understanding of her relationship with Freud, we need to understand
his relationship with women—particularly with his mother.

28
 Chapter 2

The Secret
of Freud’s Women

As with many men, perhaps all men, the quality of their relation-
ships with parents impacts their other relationships, depending on
what those parental relationships were like. Boys learn about rela-
tionships with other women from their mothers, especially in seeing
how their parents interact with each other, while they learn to live in
the world from their fathers—at least that’s how it was in Victorian
times.1 Ida, too, learned relationships from watching her parents, and
the family dynamic within the Bauer household proved traumatic,
and perhaps complicated her eventual relationship with Freud.
It would be impossible to discover anything about Freud and his
relationship with Ida without first examining Freud’s relationship
with the other women in his life—especially his mother and even-
tually his wife, ­sister-in-law, and daughter. How well mothers and
fathers cared for each other impacts children’s lives, as a loving cou-
ple imparts a certain sensibility to children that carries through to
friends and partners.2
While I might argue that Freud’s lifelong connection with his
mother impacted his interaction with female patients, his father also
contributed to Freud’s personality and psychoanalytic theories, but
in a negative way. And because Freud had somewhat complicated
relationships with both his parents, all of that played out in his life,
his work, and with his analytic patients.
The tension within Freud was apparently because he harbored
a lifelong disappointment with one parent and adored the other,
although neither assessment of Freud’s was totally based on real-
ity. However, the parental conflicts and unresolved issues Freud

29
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

experienced affected all his connections, both professional and

personal.
On the surface, Freud seemed to enjoy male companionship
and entered into a number of fruitful and meaningful relationships
with many of his professional male colleagues—for a time. He would
begin these relationships, mostly professional but which turned per-
sonal, with deep conversations and intimacy, but sooner or later,
Freud, always competitive, would have a falling out, and he would
reject his friend forever, as he did with Wilhelm Fliess and Carl Jung,
to name just two of the people he loved and then pushed away.3
It seems that his relationships with men were more fraught than
those with women. Because of the feeling that his father let him
down and did not provide the emotional support and the modeling
that he needed, Freud always wanted to be the most successful and
knowledgeable partner in any relationship with men. Freud’s rela-
tionship with his father was more complicated than with his mother,
which was less nuanced. He judged his father harshly, by all accounts,
because of his father’s financial ineptitude, among other real or per-
ceived failings.4
Jakob, Freud’s father, entered bankruptcy and was forced to
move his family first to Leipzig in 1859 and then to Vienna in 1860,
pulling his son away from Freiburg, where he had family and friends.
Jakob had hopes of making a better living and providing a happier life
for his family because of this move. Freud was about four years of age
at the time and later wrote that he felt lost and alone, losing every-
thing of importance to him at this very young and impressionable
age. This would also be true for Ida, who at the age of six left a sta-
ble home life because of her father’s illness and moved away from
Vienna.
For most of his life, Freud feared poverty, which he believed was
due to his father’s lack of financial success. “All his life, Freud masked
his disappointment in his father, even from himself,” Ernest Jones
tells us.5 Freud eventually became wealthy, while Ida started out rich
but saw the family fortune obliterated following first one war then
another.
Once in Vienna, Freud’s family apparently lived somewhat
30
 Chapter 2. The Secret of Freud’s Women 

harmoniously in Leopoldstadt. A second child was born, then oth-

ers. Freud felt jealous of the new arrivals, and his feelings of compe-
tition for his mother’s love also stayed with him all his life. Jakob and
Amalia retained their Orthodox Jewish roots in Vienna but did not
foist their religious beliefs on their children. Freud would end up dis-
tancing himself from the religious side of Judaism but would remain
Jewish culturally, also like the Bauer family.
Freud’s mother, Amalia Malka Nathansohn, was born on August
18, 1835. She grew up in Odessa—the home of her mother—and was
the third wife of Jakob Freud, who was forty at the time Sigismund,
as he was originally called, was born. (Ida’s mother would also be
the child of her father’s third marriage.) Freud was his mother’s first-
born and came on the scene when Amalia was twenty years old. At
the time, Amalia and Jakob were living in Freiberg in Moravia, where
Jakob was engaged in the textile business.6
Freud’s birth was special. He was born with a caul, literally a
“helmeted head,” which is a piece of membrane that covers a new-
born’s head and face. It is a rare phenomenon, harmless, and some
said it signified that the child would be special. Birth with a caul is
rare, occurring in fewer than 1 in 80,000 births. (David Copperfield,
one of Freud’s favorite characters, was also born with a caul.)7
Amalia would go on to produce seven other children (one died
in infancy), but seemingly, Sigmund was always her favorite. She also
tried to be a mother to some degree to the two sons from Jakob’s first
wife—Emmanuel and Philip. (Jakob’s second wife had not produced
any offspring.) Jakob’s two sons were adults when Amalia and Jakob
married, and when “Sigi,” as he was called, was born, one brother
already had a son of his own. This boy, who was born a few years
before Freud, became one of Sigi’s favorite playmates. It was this
nephew, John, whom Freud believed influenced all his subsequent
relationships with other men, which, while being friendly, were also
confrontational, loving, and hateful. The two vied for leadership
throughout their relationship, with neither one ending up being the
leader.
Freud was educated by his mother during his early years. His
mother was the major force in the family. Amalia, a ­strong-willed
31
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

woman, was said to be intelligent, ­q uick-tempered, and egotis-

tical but also lively and humorous. According to Ernest Jones, she
called her eldest son “mein goldener Sigi.” 8 If Amalia thought the
world of her Sigi, he thought the world of her, and her domineer-
ing hold over him would last a lifetime and was never fully analyzed
by him, according to many. He eventually came to believe that the
­m other-son relationship was nearly perfect, the most ideal of all
human relationships.9
It has been argued that Freud turned his unsolved and sup-
pressed negative feelings for his mother onto other relationships,
specifically his fiancée and later wife, and his professional col-
leagues. He ultimately had an intensely close relationship with his
­sister-in-law, as well as with his daughter, Anna, who followed in
his professional footsteps, becoming a pioneering child psychia-
trist.
While he was never able to fully maintain adult male relation-
ships, his female relationships seemed to be less complicated on the
surface. Yet even his relationship with his wife, arguably his most
important connection, seemed distant (perhaps partly due to his
close association with Minna, the sister of his wife). Perhaps because
of his adoring yet unrealistic relationship with his mother, he fre-
quently engaged in close and intimate relationships with women—
except for Ida. From the case study he wrote, it seems as if he never
really felt an affinity for this troubled young woman.
Freud’s understanding or misunderstanding of women can in
some ways be illustrated by his famous question, “What do women
want?” Freud also seemed to believe that women were inferior to
men, which aligned with the prevailing opinion in Europe at the
time, so this was not something exclusive to Freud.10
It is little wonder, then, that he had such difficulties with the
­high-spirited and neurotic Ida Bauer, who had tried to educate her-
self and who lived with feelings of inferiority caused in part by her
adoring yet envious relationship with her brilliant brother, Otto.
Ida’s feelings of inferiority were reinforced by Austria’s—and the
rest of Europe’s—sense of women’s place in the world. We also must
remember that Ida was one of Freud’s first female patients, and he
32
 Chapter 2. The Secret of Freud’s Women 

experimented on her with the new techniques that he had been

learning about and thinking about with Breuer and Charcot.
Before he even opened his own practice, or first saw Ida,
Freud had some sense of a woman’s emotional and psychological
life because of Bertha Pappenheim and her relationship with Josef
Breuer. As Freud spent time with Breuer discussing Bertha, they
ultimately wrote up her case study, calling her Anna O. From that
case study and other works, feminist scholars have said that Ber-
tha should be noted as the better feminist psychiatric heroine and
role model—rather than Ida—because her recovery from her hyste-
ria was much more successful than Ida’s. Bertha’s life was more pro-
found and meaningful than Ida’s, as Bertha accomplished much. Was
Breuer a better analyst than Freud? Or was Bertha a more resilient
woman than Ida could ever hope to be?
Born in 1859, Bertha was the third daughter in a traditional Jew-
ish family, with a merchant father and an heiress mother. As just
“another Jewish daughter,” Bertha was conscious of the fact that her
parents would have preferred a son; one did arrive a few years later.
Her life, within an apparently loving family, had its own trau-
mas: her elder sister died of consumption when Bertha was eight
years old. Her younger brother, born a few years after Bertha, was
the son everyone had always wanted, as was Ida’s elder brother Otto.
He attended school to prepare for a distinguished professional life, as
did Ida’s brother. Bertha, relegated to household and cooking duties
with her mother, was jealous of her brother although she loved and
admired him, similar to how Ida felt about Otto. (Bertha had been
forced to leave school at sixteen years of age, while Ida never even
went to school.)11
As has been mentioned, Bertha became ill upon the illness
and death of her father, and between 1880 and 1882 was in treat-
ment with Breuer. Eventually, after many hospitalizations and set-
backs, and her ­long-term treatment with Breuer, Bertha began to
think about writing, ultimately publishing in 1888 under a pseud-
onym. Her work and her writing were both political and social. She
worked in a soup kitchen and in an orphanage for Jewish girls, which
she would later oversee. She established educational activities for the
33
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

girls in her care because she wanted to help young girls see that there
were other avenues for them besides marriage. Bertha remained for
the rest of her life a champion of women’s rights, even translating
Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Woman from
English into German. She worked tirelessly for women’s causes until
she died in 1936.12
Freud, of course, did not treat Anna O., but he did write about
her case in detail with Josef Breuer, so he had to have some appreci-
ation for her greatness. Surprisingly, he did not seem to bring that
appreciation of women’s potential into his treatment of Ida.
After his publication of the therapy of the two women, Bertha
Pappenheim (Anna O.) and Ida Bauer (Dora), Freud would work with
other female patients: the poet HD (Hilda Doolittle), Maria Bona-
parte, and others, as well as analyzing his own daughter. Anna Freud,
Freud’s sixth and youngest child, would be considered the founder
of child psychology and was perhaps the closest to Freud of all his
children.13
Like Ida Bauer, Freud’s daughter, Anna, never had a close rela-
tionship with her mother. She was nurtured instead by her nurse. She
never got along well with her siblings, either. Anna had a history of
illnesses like Ida’s, such as those of a psychosomatic nature, and she
was made to rest at home and was sent to spas—again like Ida. She
may also have suffered from depression, which caused eating disor-
ders. Born in 1895, some thirteen years after Ida, Anna was only five
years of age when Freud was seeing Ida. At sixteen, then, when Anna
might have been going through her difficult times, and thus might
have had some empathy for Ida, Freud was no longer treating Ida.
To be fair, Freud would learn a great deal in the years follow-
ing his involvement with Ida, not only from his theoretical work and
analysis of numerous patients, but also from his relationship with
his daughter, who continued to experience health issues. She began
her professional life as a teacher but resigned from her post in 1920
because of multiple episodes of illness. Had Freud been working with
Ida in 1920, he might have had a better understanding of her based
solely on his reflection of his own daughter’s illnesses. Of course, as
is well known, Anna, like Pappenheim, went on to have a brilliant
34
 Chapter 2. The Secret of Freud’s Women 

career, becoming an outstanding child psychiatrist and analyst, an

exceptional woman in her own right, and a person whose lifelong
partner was another woman.14
In Freud’s analysis of Ida, he determined that she had sup-
pressed lesbian tendencies and desires. In the case study where he
discusses this potential side of Ida, he does not seem condemnatory.
Did he know, perhaps intuitively, that his beloved daughter and men-
tee would eventually engage in a lesbian relationship, one that would
last until the end of her days? Unfortunately for Anna, he was not so
merciful toward his own daughter regarding her potential homosex-
uality as it seemed he was with Ida. Freud wrote a paper about his
daughter and her sexuality and read it to a group where Anna was in
the audience.
Anna later sat in the audience as her father read that paper to
the public. Though he did not share her name with the audience, he
did make it clear that he thought it unlikely that her case would end
well, and it was unlikely she would ever be able to reach “sexual nor-
malcy”—meaning, of course, that a lesbian relationship could not
provide women the sexual intimacy and satisfaction that they desired.
This experience of Freud presenting a paper covertly about her,
in front of her, was what finally ended Anna’s analytic sessions with
her father. Hurt and betrayed, she focused even more on her own
work.15 Nonetheless, regardless of Freud’s clinical assessment, Anna
and her partner Dorothy Burlingham forged a meaningful life part-
nership, by all accounts.
And what of Ida during those years when she was reaching
adulthood, as Freud was raising a family and accomplishing much
in his professional life? Ida was growing up in a family that would
determine the course of her life. That family consisted of an adulter-
ous father, a punitive and withdrawn mother, a brilliant brother, and
several women (including her mother) who had compromising psy-
chiatric conditions. Ida would not only measure herself against these
women but mimic them.
It is with this history of Freud’s relationships with women, both
before his interactions with her and after, that we finally come to
Ida’s story.
35
 Chapter 3

The Bauer Ménage

and Its Secrets

Ida Bauer was the product of two parents who never seemed to be
completely satisfied with each other. The many complications that each
brought to the marriage caused Ida difficulties for most of her life.
Ida Bauer’s parents came from the same area of central Europe,
and both families were involved in the textile business, so they might
have been compatible due to their shared heritage. However, that
was not to be the case. Her parents were dysfunctional almost from
the beginning of their marriage, if not their courtship. And from an
early age, Ida and older brother Otto were aware of the disharmony
within their parents’ marriage.
Ida’s father, Philipp Bauer, was born on August 14, 1853, in the
small market town of Pollerskirchen in the eastern part of Bohemia,
a woody, verdant area. Interestingly, he lived only 120 miles from the
small town where Freud was born. Bohemia, located in the western-
most and largest historical region of what is today the Czech Repub-
lic, has a rich history.1
Philipp Bauer’s family had been established for generations in
Bohemia and was involved in the manufacturing of wool. He was
the son of Jacob Bauer and Babette Mauthner, 2 his father’s second
wife. Philipp had two brothers, Karl and Ludwig, and a younger sis-
ter, Malvine. His sister was born in 1856 when Philipp was three.
Malvine would come to be influential in the life of Ida, Philipp’s only
daughter.3
When Philipp was still only a toddler, possibly around 1855 or
1856, his father, like Freud’s father, made the fateful decision to move
the family to Vienna from the countryside, following in the steps of

36
 Chapter 3. The Bauer Ménage and Its Secrets

Bohemian Jews who sought greater freedom and acceptance in the

Austrian capital.4
There were periods throughout Bohemia’s history when Jews
were persecuted, murdered, expelled from the area, or forced to
resettle elsewhere. At the same time, however, some Jews in some
locales were tolerated, which caused conflicting ideas about their
place in Bohemia and society. Because of this, Bohemian Jews felt
separate from the rest of the population.5
Most Jewish families at the time did not completely identify with
being Jewish. Although the Bauers spoke Czech, as well as the pre-
vailing German language of the area, they did not use Yiddish, if they
knew it at all, as the use of both Yiddish and Hebrew were eliminated
in business records. According to the Yivo Encyclopedia of Jews in
Eastern Europe:
By the close of the 1860s, the Jews of Bohemia and Moravia had already
experienced one modernization: a restructuring of religious practices, polit-
ical identification, and economic profile that had been set in motion by the
reforms of the 1780s. Though still predominantly rural, Jewish society had
abandoned most of its premodern forms. The community had no juridi-
cal autonomy; traditional Jewish education had fallen into disuse, as had the
Yiddish language; and Bohemian and Moravian Jews no longer suffered from
residential, demographic, or occupational restrictions.6

Because of these and other cultural tensions, the Bauers, like

many ­s oon-to-be-prosperous Jews, depended on the good will of
their community. They continually feared the political swings and
turmoil at the national level, and there had been many changes to
the status of Jews over the years, mostly not in their favor. It was not
until the ascension of Emperor Joseph II, king of Hungary, Croatia,
and Bohemia, that things changed for Bohemian Jews, especially in
Vienna.7
Emperor Joseph had enlightened ideas about Jews and wanted
them to be more useful for the state. On February 13, 1782, in the
Edict of Tolerance (Toleranzpatent), he decreed new laws that would
help the Jewish population while also helping him. Although these
laws and edicts were not specifically designed for the improvement
of the status of Jews and did not offer them any special advantages,
they allowed Jews to be treated like other citizens under most laws.
37
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

Joseph opened all forms of trade and commerce to Jewish partici-

pation, encouraged Jews to establish factories, and urged them to
engage more fully in the artisan crafts and agriculture. Yet Jews were
still not allowed to own rural property or attain the rank of master or
citizen in the crafts.8
All these political and administrative improvements would
come to benefit the Bauer family. And while there were still restric-
tions—for instance, the requirement to have a German elementary
education to obtain a marriage license or permission from author-
ities to build a synagogue—individual Jews were slowly allowed to
be encircled in the general culture. The result was that Jews felt as
if they were earnestly invited to become citizens in many parts of
Austria.9
However, it was the development of modern machinery in the
textile mills in the mid–1860s that ushered in the burgeoning Bohe-
mian textile industry, resulting in increased wealth for some, like
Philipp Bauer and his family (and as we shall see, his wife’s family).
While Jews now had the opportunity to be more agrarian under the
new edicts, they had little experience with farming or agriculture. As
they had been peddlers for centuries, a move toward textiles, such
as linen, wool, and cotton manufacturing, seemed to make the most
sense.10
The move to Vienna by Philipp’s parents, from a country to
an urban environment, might have caused stress to the family
and to the toddler. According to Decker, although Philipp was “a
­pleasant-looking child, he was, however, slightly handicapped from
birth by vision in only one eye.”11 A move from familiar and calmer
surroundings to the frantic life of the city could have been frighten-
ing, especially given that Vienna at the time was political and some-
times difficult for the Jewish families who arrived continuously in
search of housing and job opportunities.
At this time, in approximately 1855, a few years following the
Revolution of 1848, many Jewish intellectuals welcomed the oppor-
tunity to agitate for the emancipation of their community. For the
first time in their history, Jews would be accorded the unrestricted
right to reside in and practice their religion throughout Austria via
38
 Chapter 3. The Bauer Ménage and Its Secrets

the constitution. Consequently, the Jewish community in Vienna

grew rapidly: in 1860, the Jewish community numbered 6,200; by
1870, that number had already risen to 40,200; and by the turn of
the century, to 147,000. Jewish families understood that on the sur-
face Vienna supported Jews, with Leopoldstadt being the center of
Vienna and Judaism. Those arriving in the capital congregated there,
in areas that would today be considered ghettos or slums.12
Vienna’s Second District, Leopoldstadt, developed into the
center of Jewish life at this time.13 While somewhat of a hectic,
­crime-ridden, and dirty area (Judenstadt, or Jewish ghetto), this sec-
tion of Vienna, virtually an island in the heart of the city, provided
arriving Jews with everything they needed: housing, taverns, shops,
and employment opportunities. Furthermore, Leopoldstadt was the
terminus for the Northern Railway, which meant cheap transporta-
tion from Bohemia and Moravia to Vienna. By 1860, when Philipp
Bauer’s father moved his family there, Leopoldstadt already had a
strong Jewish sensibility, with not only essentials for living, but also
established synagogues. Almost every arriving Jewish family had rel-
atives in Leopoldstadt with whom they could stay upon arrival—as
Freud and his family did.14
Families like the Bauers and the Freuds would eventually have a
great impact on Vienna society as they became more economically
successful and academically influential. The large number of Jewish
inhabitants, mostly in the Leopoldstadt section of Vienna where the
Bauers settled, led to the area being called Die Mazzesinsel (Island
of Matzo), referring to the unleavened bread eaten during Passover.
There were several important synagogues there, as well as schools,
yeshivas, Orthodox Jewish educational establishments, and stores.15
Leopoldstadt, in the heart of Vienna, was initially home to fab-
ric and tailor’s shops. It is the site of the Wiener Prater, a large public
park, and the home of Vienna’s Riesenrad, a giant wheel, which was
constructed in 1897. At the time that the Bauer family lived there, it
was a robust area that maintained, among other things, numerous
beer gardens, one of which was where the original Czech Budweiser
draught beer was sold. The park was always filled with emigrating
Jews straining to become middle and upper class, which was possible
39
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

This postcard shows the Wiener Prater, Vienna, Austria, with the famous
Riesenrad, the giant Ferris wheel, in the background. As noted on the card,
at the time, the Prater was the largest park in Europe (Library of Congress).

in Vienna at the time. It was the main source of entertainment for

these somewhat impoverished Jewish families.16
As the Bauers and other families moved into Vienna society, they
had the opportunity to practice Judaism, but only in a limited way.
However, because they thought of themselves as progressives and as
Germans, rather than primarily as Jews, they abandoned many reli-
gious and cultural traditions and practices, even though they were
more likely to be allowed to engage in these activities in Vienna than
they were in the Austrian and Czech countryside.
Philipp Bauer and Sigmund Freud’s generation of Jews hoped
that nothing would be denied them in political, academic, or other
professional circles, even though anti–Jewish sentiment was on the
rise and growing, albeit subtly.
Unlike Freud, Philipp, fortunately, did not have aspirations that
were denied to him (that we know of ); yet, not all of Austrian and Vien-
nese society was open to him. For instance, he was easily able to enter
his chosen profession of textile manufacturing because of his family’s
established factories, and he was by all accounts resourceful, forceful,
ambitious, and enterprising. (He would have been a “captain of indus-
try” if he were living in the United States.) Yet, he still lived among his
own Jewish community—not within the wider Viennese society.17
40
 Chapter 3. The Bauer Ménage and Its Secrets

Such was the environment in which Philipp Bauer grew up in

Vienna. Little is known more specifically about his childhood, other
than he was surrounded by extended family who had also moved
to Vienna. Hard-working and energetic, young Philipp was by all
accounts happy, as his family was socially and financially on the
upswing.
As he came to adulthood, Philipp worked in his father’s tex-
tile factories and enjoyed the social life of Vienna. Because men in
Philipp Bauer’s time did not marry until they were in their late twen-
ties or thirties when they were more financially settled, they often
chose to have sex with prostitutes or women from poor families, as
it was generally frowned upon to engage sexually with women from
their own station in life; that is, marriageable women. Consequently,
like other young men, Philipp contracted syphilis at an early age.
Some twenty percent of all young men in Vienna were so afflicted at
the time.18
There was no cure for venereal diseases during Philip’s time, but,
according to Decker, there was no shortage of medical practitioners
offering various ineffectual treatments: “Walking through doctors’
neighborhoods one could read on every sixth or seventh door: ‘Spe-
cialist for Skin and Venereal Disease.’”19
Syphilis has three distinct stages. In stage one, the infected
patient has very few symptoms: no pain, and only a sore around the
mouth or genitals that can last two to six weeks before disappearing.
In the second stage, the patient experiences a rash and sore throat,
which also tend to disappear after a few weeks, with the infection
going into a latent or hidden phase. This stage could last for years.
The third stage is when considerable damage occurs to the eyes,
brain, and entire body.20
Philipp was probably in the second, asymptomatic, stage when
he met and married his wife and conceived children. In about the
tenth year of his marriage, he would enter the third stage and experi-
ence blindness and paralysis, which would catapult his marriage into
a state that would have disastrous effects on his daughter Ida, if not
his entire family.
At age ­twenty-six, Philipp met, courted, and became engaged
41
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

to the ­nine-years-younger Katherina Gerber, or Käthe as she was

called.21 Born in 1861 in Koniginhof, a mountainous village in Bohe-
mia, Käthe, Jewish like her husband, had also come to Vienna with
her family as a young child. Käthe’s mother, Jeanette Gerber Pick
(called Joanna), was the third wife of Bernhard Gerber, a cotton man-
ufacturer. Käthe was the youngest of Bernhard’s six children but the
eldest of her parents’ marriage.22
According to some reports, Käthe had a strange disposition, a
myth perhaps perpetrated by Freud’s assessment of her in the case
study of her daughter. And while there is little written about her, one
can perhaps assume that, as the youngest offspring of older parents,
she might have been quiet and lonely and used to working within
the home to help her aging parents. There is some indication that
she was considered disagreeable and, as her marriage progressed—in
problematic directions—she chose to overlook what was happening
to her daughter and to her marriage right in front of her.23
What little we know about Käthe comes more from Freud than
anyone else. In his writings, Freud is disparaging, describing her as a
woman with “housewife psychosis.”24 Although he never met Käthe,
he wrote that she was largely confined to the household and was
obsessed with order and cleanliness. Strangely, he seemed to have a
limited understanding of a woman’s role in ­upper-middle-class fam-
ily life and took a demeaning tone regarding Ida’s mother, who did
perform on the surface as most upwardly mobile housewives did,
maintaining the household and not necessarily being active outside
the home. Freud describes her as somewhat pathological, and some
of the descriptions of her behavior toward her children do bear this
out. But all this was to come later.
What we know about Käthe’s childhood is that she seemed to
have a desire to pass unnoticed, and once she married Philipp and
became a mother, she stayed within the confines of her perfectly
ordered house. As a Jewish girl, and later woman, perhaps she
thought it best not to call attention to herself. And as the young-
est child of a large family and the daughter of her father’s third wife,
Käthe may not have had the easiest life. Her mother was ­thirty-seven
years old at the time of Käthe’s birth, and while not old by today’s
42
 Chapter 3. The Bauer Ménage and Its Secrets

standards, then it was considered the beginning of old age and a loss
of vitality. And the move from Koniginhof to Vienna sometime in
the late 1860s might have been unsettling for not only Käthe, but for
her mother as well. Little is documented about Käthe’s early years, so
one can only speculate.
Käthe’s father, a cotton manufacturer, was also engaged in wool
processing and no doubt known to the Bauer family. The early 1860s
witnessed a growing increase in Jewish investment and industrial
ventures in textiles, with Jews leading in technological innovations
and business organization methods. In Bohemia, Jewish participa-
tion in the textile industry reached its peak, with approximately fifty
percent of all textile factories being owned by Jews.25
Because of early Jewish peddlers who bought and sold rags,
becoming leaders in the textile industry was not so much of a leap.
At the end of the nineteenth century, Jewish peddlers bought up raw
materials in villages and supplied them to Jewish traders, who then
sold fabrics and clothes in the villages.26
On the surface, textile manufacturing in Bohemia seemed ide-
ally suited for people like Käthe’s father and the Bauers. By 1867, Jews
were allowed unrestricted rights to reside and practice their religion
throughout Austria, especially in Vienna, where Jewish communities
were growing rapidly. At different times, both the Bauer and Ger-
ber families emigrated from Bohemia to that section of Vienna. It
seemed that keeping textile and cotton mills in Bohemia, while liv-
ing in the more cosmopolitan Vienna, gave Jews the best of both
worlds.27
The Bauers and the Gerbers were part of a rapidly burgeoning
Jewish middle class. On the surface, Vienna was liberal, secular, and
metropolitan. Jews could develop a cultural identity, which has been
seen as the most fascinating phenomenon in Jewish history. Erika
Weinzierl, who died in 2014, was the second director of the Depart-
ment of Contemporary History and a professor of history at the Uni-
versity of Vienna. She writes that as Jewish merchants, physicians,
accountants, and bankers began moving up both socially and eco-
nomically, they moved to the Ninth District, known as Alsergrund,
forsaking the ­s o-called Jewish ghetto. The Alsergrund area ranked
43
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

third in number of Jewish inhabitants. It consisted mainly of doctors

who settled in the vicinity of the General Hospital, where the Bau-
ers and the Freuds eventually resided, around the area of Berggasse.28
Because both Philipp and Käthe’s families resided in the very
congenial if crowded Leopoldstadt, and both fathers were engaged
in cotton, textile, and lumber manufacturing, it is not surprising that
Philipp would become engaged to Käthe. Was it an arranged mar-
riage? It is hard to say, as there is little known about what kind of
courtship they had. We do know from historical narratives of Bohe-
mian marriage patterns that they preferred to marry partners from
the same area, as did Galicians and others from around Austria. And
couples seemed to have little choice in who they married.29
According to one historian, “the majority of ­Viennese-born
men refused partnerships with women born somewhere else; they
preferred to marry ­Viennese-born women. Because many ‘West-
ern’ Jews looked down on the Ostjuden (eastern Jews), why would
they marry one of them?” And of those ­Viennese-born women, they
seemingly had to come from the men’s home districts.30
It is possible that the engagement of ­seventeen-year-old Käthe
to Philipp was arranged and the ­two-year courtship uneventful. It
also appears that Käthe had no knowledge of her husband’s vene-
real disease when they married. Ultimately, in marriage, Philipp and
Käthe were seemingly joined together by illness and dysfunction. For
her part, Käthe suffered from gynecologic disorders and gastric and
bowel distress. Still, she was able to get pregnant despite her illnesses
and Philipp’s venereal disease.
The Bauers’ first child, a son, Otto, was born on September 5,
1881, at Leopoldsgasse 6–8, while the family lived in the Leopold-
stadt area.31 And while not actively practicing Judaism, they did have
their son circumcised a week after his birth. Little is known about
Otto’s early life, although he would become a famous figure in Aus-
trian politics.
According to Decker, five months after the birth of Otto, Käthe
was again pregnant. She gave birth to Ida on November 1, 1882. At
that time, the family had moved from Leopoldstadt to an apart-
ment at Berggasse 32 (doors away from where Freud’s apartment
44
 Chapter 3. The Bauer Ménage and Its Secrets

and consulting rooms would be housed about nine years later). This
move was a signal to the tiny world of Jewish Viennese society that
the Bauers had arrived, as the Berggasse area was deemed special
and affluent.32
For Ida’s birth, her mother was assisted by a midwife, Anna
Eichenthal, which was customary at the time. Due to the prosper-
ity of the textile mills owned by Philipp and his family, the move to
the more affluent Alsergrund section of Vienna was a testament to
the family’s increased wealth and status. It also meant that the Bau-
ers were now considered a respectable ­middle-class Jewish family.33
Little is known of the early years of the Bauers’ marriage or of
their life together. Freud would write later about Ida’s father, how-
ever, as a shining object and seemed to think that Philipp was an
exemplary figure. He treated him accordingly in his case study, while
other writers saw Philipp differently. Patrick Mahony, for example,
describes him here:
A wealthy textile manufacturer, he could impress with his shrewdness and
perspicacity. But he appeared crippled in both body and mind—and report-
edly was impotent.
Sickly in youth, Philip
[sic] underwent a series
of serious maladies in
middle age. He was also
given to hypocrisy and
­self-serving secrecy; he
preferred “deviousness
and a roundabout way.”
Philip’s premarital syph-
ilis in every way affected
relations with his wife,
and he transmitted it to
her as part of an unex-
pected dowry.34

Because of Ida’s fam-

ily drama—a mother
who was primarily fo- In 1890, Ida Bauer, age 8, with her beloved
cused on herself and brother Otto (age 9), while living at Berg-
gasse 32 in Vienna, just up the street from
housework and a duplic- the Freuds’s apartment and consulting room
itous father who was (Wikimedia Commons).
45
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

mainly concerned with his image and his business—both Otto and
Ida had problems in their youth. Otto was considered by Mahony as
somewhat humorless with effeminate gestures and unkempt dress,
although otherwise agreeable and quite bright. He was adored by both
parents.35
Ida and Otto, only fourteen months apart in age, were very close
and continued that intimacy for most of their lives. And they shared
some unfortunate symptoms, too: they both wet the bed, which con-
tinued long after the age when children were in school, and both
were frequently ill. One might assume that the bedwetting particu-
larly inflamed their meticulous mother, who would have had to con-
tinuously change the children’s bedding and garments.36
As the family drama unfolded, Ida tended to side with her father
and Otto would take his mother’s side if he had to; however, he fre-
quently refused to get involved at all. Mahony tells the story of how
Otto, studying in his room in winter, had to wear an overcoat, hat,
and gloves because his mother felt that keeping the windows open,
even in the dead of winter, was a healthy thing to do. As he told one
of his visiting cousins, he did not necessarily think this strange.37
The two siblings studied together and were considered pre-
cocious—both bright and engaging, one active, the other more
­inward-focused. Otto was studious while Ida was a tomboy and ram-
bunctious until she was about six. Ida adored her brother: she fol-
lowed him around and perhaps even thought of herself as a boy. In
her early years, she exhibited what in those days would be considered
boyish ways, running, jumping, roughhousing, and was not the least
bit modest or shy. Then an unexplained climbing accident changed
her behavior. This event came at a time when her father, whom she
worshipped, was away on a trip. Freud recounts this event, while
describing Ida’s first bout of chronic dyspnea.
The first onset occurred after a short expedition in the mountains and was
accordingly put down to ­over-exertion. In the course of six months, during
which she was made to rest and was carefully looked after, this condition
gradually passed off. The family doctor seems to have had not a moment’s
hesitation in diagnosing the disorder as purely nervous and in excluding any
organic cause for the dyspnea; but he evidently considered this diagnosis
compatible with the aetiology of ­over-exertion.38

46
 Chapter 3. The Bauer Ménage and Its Secrets

The family was still living in Vienna at the time, but their diffi-
culties were increasing, both emotional and physical. While Philipp’s
business continued to be financially stable, he began having sig-
nificant health issues. At the same time, Ida’s mother was becom-
ing more and more obsessed with housework, almost to the point
of neglecting her children to keep the home pristine. The children,
however, were surrounded by Philipp’s family, and Ida was particu-
larly close to her father’s younger sister, Malvine. Some of the dys-
function of their own nuclear family was mitigated by the closeness
and affection from their extended family, particularly from the Bauer
relatives.
According to Decker, the Bauer family lived an unpretentious
but affluent life in Vienna in a ­four-story dwelling, with Philipp exud-
ing “the air of a solid citizen. He exemplified the liberal values of
Vienna at that time, belonged to the Freemasons, and involved in
charitable activities.” He has been described as someone who did not
“appear Jewish” and was charming, friendly, and intellectually alive.39
But all of this changed when at the age of ­thirty-five Philipp
discovered that, in addition to his syphilis and his ongoing vision
problems, which he had had since childhood, he had contracted
tuberculosis. Because of his increasingly poor health, Philipp made
the decision to move his family to Merano, the Tyrolean resort and
spa town. This meant that Ida would have to leave the support of her
beloved family—grandparents, uncles, cousins, and especially her
aunt Malvine—at a time when Ida was having her own health prob-
lems, which appeared to be of a nervous nature.
In 1888, when Ida was six years old and her brother had just
turned seven, the family made the move to Merano, a town more
salubrious for Philipp’s debilitating tuberculosis as well as his other
conditions, but not so healthy for the rest of the family. Once estab-
lished in Merano, Käthe was not able to visit her friends and family
in Bohemia so easily because of the demands of her ailing husband
and her dissatisfied family. By all accounts, Ida’s mother ultimately
became even more reclusive, escaping family outings and involv-
ing herself less in Philipp’s care. It was here in Merano that she
appeared to devote her entire life not only to housekeeping but also
47
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

to her own illnesses, which were becoming more debilitating for

her.40
As if Ida Bauer did not have enough trouble in her life, including
poor health, mental instability, parental discord, an autocratic and
demanding father, and a somewhat distant mother, the move to the
small insular spa town was problematic. Merano was in many ways a
strange place for children, with secrets of its own.

48
 Chapter 4

The Secret Life of Merano

Due to the health issues of Ida’s father, the family’s relocation

from Vienna to Merano was unsettling. They had to leave their com-
fortable home on Berggasse and access not only to their extended
family but also to the cultural activities of Vienna. There, Otto and
Ida were happy. However, Philipp had a huge business empire to deal
with, with factories in both Náchod and Warnsdorf, which necessi-
tated his getting well in order to take care of his business. He felt that
if his health allowed, he could care for them in Merano.1
His life and that of his family were different in Merano. And
although it was not better for the family as a whole, the more health-
ful way of life was helpful for Philipp. In his thirties at the time and
feeling that he should think of his two young children, who were
closely involved with their extended family, he thought that maybe
he should turn the business over to the management of his brother,
Karl, especially as he found that his own health continued to deterio-
rate even after the move to Merano.2
Merano, a ­mountain-encircled spa town, is both tranquil and
enchanting and has a rich history. Located within a basin, it is pro-
tected from cold, wind, and rain in what is today South Tyrol in
northern Italy. An ancient settlement, its history started in 15 BC
according to some histories, and in more modern times was once
the capitol of the County of Tyrol, until Duke Friedrich VI of Austria
moved the Tyrolean court out of Innsbruck in 1420. According to the
official homepage of Merano,
The blooming markets of Meran lost their importance and the whole city
gradually turned into an anonymous “­cow-town,” whose inhabitants were
mainly craftspeople or peasants. The situation started to change first in
1809, with the struggle led by Andreas Hofer to free the Burggrafenamt

49
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

The Tappeiner Promenade (Tappeinerweg) is situated in the middle of the

city and was built for Empress Elizabeth. This health trail is still popular
today (JFKCom, Wikimedia Commons).
district. The host from the Passer valley and the chanters and travelling
merchants who went all around Europe were the first sort of advertisers of
Meran as a touristic destination. Soon famous scientists and doctors started
to study the mild climate of the city recommending a stay in Meran to
recover from various diseases. The dawn of a new era for tourism in Meran is
to be considered the year 1836, when the countess Mathilde von Schwarzen-
berg, warned by Johann Huber, her personal physician, came from Vienna to
receive treatment in the city of the river Passer. Back in Vienna, Huber pub-
lished a writing recommending the climate of Meran, therefore producing—
so to say—the first advertising leaflet about the Kurstadt. Shortly after and
also thanks to the enthusiasm and the vision of some shrewd town leaders,
Meran turned into an international high class health resort.3

When the Bauers came to Merano, Austria, in 1888, it was widely

renowned for its tuberculosis cures. Its residents consisted of many
international Jewish patients, who flocked there.4 Strangely, despite
this large influx of Jews, there was not a synagogue in Merano until
1901, when the first was inaugurated.5 Providing physical rather than
spiritual comfort was apparently the first goal of the Merano commu-
nity. According to the Judische Gemeinde Meran (Jewish Community
50
 Chapter 4. The Secret Life of Merano

of Merano), hotels and sanatoriums were constructed to cover the

needs of the poor and ailing Jewish community, complete with walk-
ing paths and promenades for relaxation and distraction. The first of
these sanatoriums was built around 1893 at the villa Steiner.6
It took only a few years for Merano to become internationally
renowned and frequented for its thermal health treatments. Many
famous and important personalities spent their vacations in Merano
to undergo the various treatments offered. For instance, Freud, his
wife, and his ­sister-in-law came to the spa town several times, as did
Franz Kafka in 1924, who suffered from lung disease.7
With torrents of people pouring into Merano, there was a
demand for hotels, villas, restaurants, shops, and entertainment.
The need for these establishments was exacerbated by visits from the
popular Empress Elizabeth of Austria, called Sissi, who paid visits
to the town between 1870 and 1897 “seeking rest and recuperation

Franzensbad Spa in Czecho-Slovakia: the interior of the Francis Spring,

where people stand to drink water drawn from the central circular point by
female attendants in white uniforms and caps (Wellcome Images, Wikime-
dia Commons).
51
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

This statue of Empress Elizabeth of Austria sits in a public park in the

town of Merano. The park was created in 1860 and named in honor of
the empress, who was also queen of Hungary. She was assassinated by
an anarchist in Geneva on September 10, 1898 (Gryffindor, Wikimedia
Commons).

for herself and her daughter, Princess Valeria.” With Sissi’s implicit
endorsement, Merano became one of the ­Austro-Hungarian Empire’s
most prestigious health resorts.8
Merano, as lovely as it was, had its secrets. As the city became
more affluent, the Jews established themselves as a secret power in
the town. Eventually, as things worsened due to anti–Jewish feeling,
they were considered responsible for everything negative. Although
their wealth insulated them to some degree, enabling them to live
peacefully, they knew they had to be careful. After the First World
War, a secret treaty (the Treaty of London) between Italy and the
Allies would give south Tyrol to Italy. Merano, which had rich Jewish
traditions, would be compromised because of the Nazis. According
to the Jewish Virtual Library:
52
 Chapter 4. The Secret Life of Merano

Between 1933 and 1939, hundreds of Jews escaped Nazi persecution and
found shelter in Merano, and Jewish schools were established for them.
When the fascist regime adopted the ­Anti-Semitic laws of the Nazis, and the
Germans moved into South Tyrol, foreign Jews were expelled.
The first deportation of Jews from Merano occurred immediately after Ita-
ly’s surrender. The Nazis subsequently occupied the country and ruled this
region as a part of Great Germany (September 1943). Meanwhile, more than
80 Jews perished in the Nazi extermination camps, mainly Auschwitz, in
the concentration camp Reichenau near Innsbruck, or in the concentration
camp established in 1944 by the Nazis in Bolzano.
Merano was in these years, also a main transit point for Odessa, the secret
Nazi organization helping war criminals and political leaders to escape.
Adolf Eichmann and Joseph Mengele were among those who passed through
Merano.9

And during those years (1945 to 1947), more than fifteen

thousand Jewish survivors of the Shoah found a temporary haven
in Merano and the sanatorium, then being run by the Ameri-
can Joint Distribution Committee. Many of these Jews immi-
grated secretly to Palestine with the help of the citizens of Merano.
In 1947, three thousand Jews crossed—by night and on foot—the
­ten-thousand-foot-high Alps near Bruneck, coming from Austria.
Today, the Jewish community of Merano is one of the smallest in
Italy, and the synagogue of Merano is the only one still in use in the
entire region.10
However poorly they were treated later, in the first half of the
nineteenth century, early Jewish families of Merano made a name
for the town and contributed significantly to its fame and wealth.
One such family, which had an impact on the Bauers, was the Bie-
dermann family, who opened a bank and a money exchange office.
Daniel, Jakob, and Moritz Biedermann, who came from Hohenems
and settled in Merano in the 1840s, were related to Peppina Zellenka
(Heumann), who would become the infamous Frau K. in the case
study of Dora. As we shall see in later chapters, Peppina and her hus-
band, Hans, would have a deleterious effect on Ida’s health and would
maintain a ­long-term relationship with her father.
In addition to the Biedermann clan, the Bermann and Schwarz
families also helped to develop South Tyrol and Merano. Not only
did these families contribute to the health, tourism, and commerce
53
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

of the town, which was at one time a small provincial enclave, but the
Schwarz family also established a railway connection throughout the
area. They also built a funicular railway that opened in 1907 and was
Europe’s steepest. So, the Jewish community when Ida and her fam-
ily arrived there were the prime movers of the development and cul-
tural richness of the town.11
Although Merano had a tumultuous and rich past, it would have
a shameful future, and the Bauers’ stay there would in some ways
become problematic. However, at the time of their arrival, Mer-
ano was a lovely, thriving spa town. Nonetheless, it was not a place
the Bauer children wanted to live. At their young ages, Ida and her
brother were forced to give up their enriching life in Vienna for a
life of no friends and a sick father. Ida especially felt the loss of her
father’s family. Leaving Vienna had come at a time when both Ida and
her aunt were having health problems, and for both, their illnesses
appeared to be of a nervous nature.
Ida was much too young to be so unsettled, and so was her
brother, Otto. And Käthe, their mother, was not happy with this
move either—she had no desire or inclination to nurse her sick
husband, or, it would seem, even notice that her daughter was not
doing well. As she could not travel, she was relegated to keeping her
house as clean as she possibly could, no matter how disruptive it
was for her children. This move clearly did not improve her disposi-
tion.
Merano was a ­w ine-growing area, and the waters there were
thought to have curative powers. There was a lovely promenade in
town, the Wassermauer. The fairs, market days, and religious holi-
days provided pleasant diversions. The hotels were opulent, and fam-
ilies could play croquet, listen to concerts, and go for enchanting
walks.12
Philipp, meanwhile, appeared to be regaining his health and
thrived in Merano for a brief period of time. His health improved
enough that he could travel to his factories when he felt up to it. Still,
he experienced one setback after another, as he had several medi-
cal conditions and experienced many symptoms. His eye problems
returned, necessitating that he stay in a darkened room. This was
54
 Chapter 4. The Secret Life of Merano

four years after the family had moved to Merano. And then, turn-
ing the family’s world completely upside down, Philipp’s “syphilis
entered the tertiary stage, and he suffered a meningeal inflammation
that caused some paralysis and mental disturbances.”13
Otto found it all to be trying for the family and, as an adult,
wrote that it was “the evil time out of my childhood.”14 Ida experi-
enced that time as unsettling, too, especially as it was hard for her
to see her beloved father so ill. She adored her father and, at this
time, she was the primary nurse for him, which was no doubt
unhealthy for an impressionable six-, seven-, and ­e ight-year-old
child, especially as her own nervous illnesses returned during this
period.
Eventually, the family made their peace with living in Merano;
Ida and Otto continued their close connection with each other, per-
haps even more so since they had only each other now. They played
together and slept in the same bedroom, enjoying each other’s com-
pany until they were in their teens. The love between brother and sis-
ter would endure for as long as they lived, with only a few periods of
emotional separation. “Dora remembered catching from Otto all his
infectious childhood illnesses.”15 This seemed to please her—that she
would be following in Otto’s footsteps.
The two siblings experienced many parallels in their childhood
years: they received formal instruction together, being schooled at
home with governesses; they each wet the bed; and they struggled
together to understand the family illnesses and their parents’ rela-
tionship, which was becoming more and more strained with each
passing year—especially having tried to navigate a life together in
Merano, a new environment for all of them.
In Merano, Ida became less playful than she was previously. She
began wetting the bed again, after having stopped for a while. Otto
had only stopped this habit at the age of ten. Ida’s ­b ed-wetting less-
ened around her eighth year, but then she began having migraines.
She also had shortness of breath. These conditions seemed to
have no physical cause, and no medical treatments appeared to
help.16
One thing that was not a problem in Merano at the time was
55
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

being Jewish. Interestingly, because of increased religious tolerance

and accessibility, spa towns like Merano allowed Jewish patients to
thrive. According to Zadoff,
Even for a Jewish community the atmosphere was unique. People from
diverse Jewish backgrounds and practices joined together in these towns to
take the cure as well as to socialize. Synagogues were built in these towns
during the 1870s and 1880s as the Jewish populations during peak spa sea-
son from May through September grew. As time went on, Jewish businesses
emerged, such as hotels and restaurants. With the rise in anti–Semitism
elsewhere in Europe, the policy regarding religious tolerance that vari-
ous spa towns like Bad Reichenhall as well as Carlsbad, Marienbad, and
Franzensbad were known for, led Jewish communities to view these loca-
tions as safe havens where they could intermingle with fellow Jews from all
over the world.17

While living in Merano had its downside, it did afford Ida the
opportunity to become closer to her father, whom she adored. As his
own illness progressed, and he was confined to the home, Ida spent
as much time with him as she could. For several years, she continued
to be her ailing father’s main nurse. She spent hours with Philipp,
and they developed a close relationship. As Philipp could not work
and had trouble reading because of his chronic eye problems, Ida
was not only his companion and nurse, but his entertainment as well,
telling him stories, reading to him from the daily papers, and staying
with him constantly—in the absence of his wife. According to Kath-
arina Adler, Ida’s ­g reat-granddaughter, Käthe believed that nursing
her husband was a job even the servants didn’t want, so she would
not care for her husband, leaving that chore to her daughter.18
As nurse to her father, Ida spent most of her time bringing
Philipp food and drink, changing his linens and bedclothes, and
keeping his room dark and quiet due to the detached retina, which
had been diagnosed during one of his worse sieges of illness. No
doubt she also brought gossip and spring flowers to keep him from
getting depressed about his conditions.19
Philipp was very proud of Ida because, despite her ailments,
she was an intelligent young girl, as well as a loving compan-
ion to him who received little in the way of affection from his wife.
Ida read early as a young child and discussed with her brother his
56
 Chapter 4. The Secret Life of Merano

The Franzensbad Spa, which was frequented by Ida Bauer and her mother,
is in the former Czechoslovakia. These two paths lead to the inner part of a
c-shaped building which houses the Natalie Spring (photograph by Zuber,
Photo-Atelier; Wellcome Images, Wikimedia Commons).

studies and classroom activities and homework, as Otto had begun

to attend school in Merano. As they were very close, Otto shared
many things with his sister, including, as best he could, his intellec-
tual development.
While Ida loved being with her father, she had enough under-
standing of the family dynamic to recognize that their closeness put
a strain on the ­already-problematic marriage of her parents. Käthe
became jealous of the attention Philipp paid to their daughter, yet
doing nothing to change that dynamic.
Although happy to be with her father exclusively, Ida contin-
ued to have the symptoms that she would experience for most of
her life: loss of voice, insomnia, various fears, and depression, symp-
toms from which her father was also suffering.20 Father and daughter
developed a special affinity during Philipp’s illness since Ida’s mother
did not take on those responsibilities of nurse and refused to be a
companion to her husband. By this time, Otto was immersed in his
studies and schoolwork and refused to get into any discussion about
57
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

the troubled family’s interactions. Once Philipp’s conditions became

more debilitating, his work was nonexistent, as he was too ill to travel
or take care of the family business—so it was just Philipp and Ida.
About this time, Freud would relate in the case study of Dora,
During the girl’s earlier years her only brother (her elder brother by a year
and a half ) had been the model which her ambitions had striven to follow.
But in the last few years the relations between the brother and the sister had
grown more distant. The young man used to try so far as he could to keep out
of the family disputes; but when he was obliged to take sides he would sup-
port his mother. So that the usual sexual attraction had drawn together the
father and daughter on the one side and the mother and son on the other.21

At as early as the age of eight, Ida developed additional neurotic

symptoms in Merano, which coincided with her mother’s illnesses.
She suffered the usual childhood complaints but as she entered her
adolescence, she began to suffer from hemicranial headaches “in the
nature of migraine, and from attacks of nervous coughing.” These
symptoms were always together initially, but as she got older, the
migraines lessened and the cough, or tussis nervo, as Freud called it,
continued for years.22
As she entered her teens, Ida continued to exhibit other worri-
some symptoms such as sleeplessness, anxiety, and sinus and diges-
tive issues (her mother suffered from gastric and digestive issues as
well). Even before this, the family had begun to feel the repercussions
of their increasingly dysfunctional lifestyle. Ida’s father had always
been somewhat unhealthy due to his vision problems, tuberculosis,
and then with syphilis, as well as other issues, but his health was now
becoming progressively worse. And as her mother’s phobic house-
cleaning took on epic proportions, she became stranger and more
reclusive.23
Ida’s mother has been described, even by Ida’s great-grand-
daughter, Katharina Adler, as overstretched and cold toward her
daughter. She was living with the fact that her husband had already
been infected with syphilis before their wedding, and she herself
also had many ailments for which she spent much time at the spas
in Merano and the surrounding area. According to Adler, she was
also good at maintaining facades.24 Perhaps Ida’s mother’s frantic and
58
 Chapter 4. The Secret Life of Merano

somewhat psychotic housecleaning was due to her desire to keep up

the image of a perfect family. One can only suppose.
Käthe’s cleaning phobia grew worse in Merano. This was prob-
ably because it was there that she first found out that her husband
had a venereal disease and, worse, that he had infected her with it.
In addition, she had no real sense of her children’s interests or who
their playmates were as she basically did nothing but clean and clean
again—even household items that had no need of cleaning.25
In his case study of Dora, Freud described Ida’s mother, whom
he never met, as being
an uncultivated woman and above all as a foolish one, who had concen-
trated all her interests upon domestic affairs, especially since her husband’s
illness and the estrangement to which it led. She presented the picture, in
fact, of what might be called the “housewife’s psychosis.” … This condition,
traces of which are to be found often enough in normal housewives, inevita-
bly reminds one of forms of obsessional washing and other kinds of obses-
sional cleaning. But such women (and this applied to the patient’s mother)
are entirely without insight into the illness.26

The seemingly abnormal need to clean of Ida’s mother led to

estrangement not only from her husband but also from Ida. The
mother and daughter’s only connection seemed to be through their
various illnesses. One of Käthe’s preferred destinations for both her-
self and Ida was the town of Franzensbad, which was noted for its
cures for women’s disorders and nervous conditions. It was also pop-
ular among ­middle-class Jewish women at that time.27
Franzensbad, a bathing spot in Bohemia and a spa town, dates
back to 1707 when it was first used for bathing. With approximately
­t wenty-four mineral springs of saline, alkaline, and ferruginous
waters—the oldest spa being the Franzensquelle—healing various
diseases and conditions was its aim. The waters, whose temperature
was between fifty and ­fifty-four degrees centigrade, were reputedly
good for healing cases of anemia, nervous disorders, sexual disease
(especially for women), and heart conditions. Another health attrac-
tion there was the mud bath that was prepared using the peat of the
Franzensbad marsh, rich in mineral substances such as sulfates of
iron, soda, potash, and other organic compounds. Franzensbad was
also home to several parks and a hospital for poor patients.28
59
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

As mother and daughter tried to cure their ills and find

some common ground, Philipp slowly improved. It was still an
­anxiety-ridden time for his family, as everyone was concerned about
both his future health and the ­well-being of the rest of the family.
The children worried about where and how they would go to school,
and in Ida’s case, if she would even attend school. Käthe wanted to
return to Vienna, where she felt more stable being surrounded by
relatives. Also, there were few children for Ida and Otto to play with
in Merano. Otto seemed to accept the situation in which he found
himself: the lack of playmates, the dissention between his parents,
and the chronic familial health problems, possibly because he had
academic outlets, as he was going to school, while Ida became more
symptomatic.
Even with the reconciliation she experienced with her mother
during their spa trips and the return of her father’s health, Ida was
not happy. Ida and her mother continued to feel secluded and unset-
tled in Merano, leading a life far different from the one they had had
in the capital. Contributing to Ida’s feelings of isolation was Otto’s
attending school in Merano. This left Ida alone at home with only her
father as a companion.
Otto was by now considered a boy genius. As Decker writes:
Just ten, he [Otto] wrote a ­five-act play, Napoleon’s End, as a Christmas pres-
ent for his parents. Among other themes, the drama dealt with the plight
of a daughter caught between her husband’s and father’s rivalry and with
the emotions arising from the triangle of a husband, his former wife, and
his present wife. The capriciousness of fate also occupied Otto. The play
revealed a profound absorption in history and literature for one so young.29

In 1892 at age eleven, Otto entered the Gymnasium in Merano,

which was open only to boys from age ten to eighteen. It was the first
time the two emotionally attached siblings were separated.30 While
Otto attended an academically challenging school, studying Latin,
Greek, German language, literature, history, geography, mathemat-
ics, and physics, Ida was probably educated at home by a governess,
who would later play a role in Freud’s case study.31
Without Otto, it is unlikely Ida had any friends, as it was not pos-
sible for a Jewish girl to socialize with non–Jewish children—even in
60
 Chapter 4. The Secret Life of Merano

Merano. The contrast between Otto’s education and Ida’s “had aca-
demic, social, and psychological significance.”32
This was not only unjust but also difficult for Ida, as she was a
very bright young girl and would have benefited greatly from an edu-
cation such as the one allowed to her brother. She was very inquis-
itive and had a pronounced sense of curiosity. She read a great deal
and was happy to spend time with older people whose conversations
were advanced for a young girl. Unlike Otto’s future, Ida felt that hers
would not be very substantial. Those graduating from the Gymna-
sium became members of an elite group where entry into Austrian’s
hierarchical society was assured. Upon graduation, Otto spoke four
languages, and he would decide to dedicate his life to socialist causes
and public service. By contrast, Ida was dominated by her illnesses
and was beginning to despair of life.33
And if all this was not enough—basically losing her brother and
not being allowed to study in the same way Otto could—her family
started a relationship with the Zellenka family, which would exacer-
bate Ida’s already shaky mental state and upend the family’s already
questionable stability.

61
 Chapter 5

The K’s Ménage

and Their Secrets

While in Merano, the Bauers had become increasingly and inti-

mately involved with Peppina and Hans Zellenka, who would be
called “the Ks” in Freud’s eventual case study of Dora. The subtle but
­e ver-present anti–Jewish sentiment on the rise in Bohemia caused
Hans and Philipp to bond together, as they were both business pro-
fessionals with connections, whose various enterprises could be
jeopardized by anti–Jewish feeling.
And while there were many Jewish families in Merano with
whom the Bauers could have associated, their social life was limited
due to Philipp’s health issues. At the same time that the Bauer and
Zellenka families were becoming closer, the Bauers’ loveless mar-
riage was virtually in tatters, with both partners hobbled by their
significant medical disorders and with totally different viewpoints
on life and raising children. Philipp was interested in his children’s
lives, while Käthe seemed indifferent to them and their progression
through life.
The Zellenkas’ marriage was also somewhat dysfunctional, and
at some point they would not even be living together. Their relation-
ship mirrored that of Philipp and Käthe’s in the coldness between the
partners with limited sexual activity and intimacy. What is known
about Peppina is that she was considered beautiful and possibly had
a millinery business.1 Hans, a prepossessing man, made his living as
a commercial agent and traveled frequently as a result. He initially
went to Merano for employment. Peppina had been living there since
she was six years old. They met and subsequently married in 1889.
Although the Zellenkas gained fame—or infamy, depending on your

62
 Chapter 5. The K’s Ménage and Their Secrets

point of view—due to the Dora case study as the Ks, little was known
about them until recently.2
Of the two Zellenkas, Bella Peppina Heumann, known as Pep-
pina, had the strongest ties to Merano, moving there when she was
six years old. She was born on March 24, 1870, in the coastal town of
Ancona on Italy’s Adriatic Sea. Her parents had previously left their
strong Jewish community in Hohenems, Austria, which was estab-
lished in the early seventeenth century and was near the border of
Switzerland.
Hohenems’s strong Jewish ties began early: A charter of protec-
tion, created in 1617, established the legal basis for the settlement of
Jewish families and the construction of institutions within a Jewish
community. Soon a synagogue would be built, along with a mikvah
(a ritual bath), a school, a poor house, and a cemetery. Jewish busi-
nesses followed, consisting of a coffee house, bank, and insurance
company. The year of 1862 was considered the golden era, when the
town had nearly 600 Jewish citizens—12 percent of the population.3
On the surface, life appeared to be good for Jews. It was during
this time that Peppina’s parents met and married even though Jews
were segregated to the Judengasse—two streets in Hohenems.
Because the constitution of Hohenems allowed Jews to settle freely
all over Austria, many left, going not only to cities in Austria but also
to Switzerland, Italy, Germany, and America. This meant that there
would ultimately be limited work for those left behind.4 Thus, the
move to Ancona, which Peppina’s father thought would provide a
better and more prosperous life.5
Peppina’s father, Isidor Heumann, born in 1826, married his
own niece, Jeanette Biedermann, in Hohenems in 1868, at the age of
­forty-two. His bride’s father, Moritz, was the master baker in Hohen-
ems; her mother, the daughter of Isidor’s sister Julia. At the time of
their marriage, there was very little work in the town of Hohenems,
so Isidor and Jeanette decided to travel to the port of Ancona on Ita-
ly’s Adriatic coast. Bella Peppina, as she was called as a child, was
born there, as was a son, Marco. Another son was thought to have
been born there, also, but died in infancy.6
Even though Peppina’s parents had intended to stay in Ancona,
63
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

this was not to be, as they were still looking for financial security,
which they did not achieve there. When Peppina was about six, her
family moved to Merano, where Jeanette’s family, the Biedermanns
(mentioned previously because of their development of Merano)
were making a name for themselves—namely, the brothers Jakob,
Daniel, and Moritz, the aforementioned baker of Hohenems, and
Peppina’s maternal grandfather. All three brothers had recently set-
tled in Merano, where they opened first a small shop in a hotel selling
jewelry and leather goods and then, as a side enterprise, exchanged
money for foreign visitors. This eventually led to the creation of
the Biedermann Bank, which shortly became quite a prosperous
enterprise.7
According to Andrew Ellis:
It was Jakob and Daniel’s good fortune that in 1837, Johann Nepomuk Huber,
doctor and resident of Meran, published a pamphlet in Vienna extolling
the benefits of Meran’s moderate climate and cool, dry air for tuberculo-
sis sufferers, of which there were a great many at that time. Huber’s pam-
phlet increased the number of people wanting to visit Meran and hence the
demand for hotels, villas, restaurants, shops, and so forth. That demand
was further boosted when the hugely popular Empress Elizabeth of Austria,
known as “Sissi,” paid four visits to the town between 1870 and 1897, seek-
ing rest and recuperation for herself and her daughter, Princess Valeria. With
Sissi’s implicit endorsement, Meran became one of the ­Austro-Hungarian
Empire s most prestigious health resorts, with the Biedermann Bank at the
heart of its development.8
Because Jakob and Daniel never married, they worried that
there would be no one to take over the management of their busi-
nesses when they were too old to continue working or when they
died. It was because of this that Peppina’s father, Isidor, husband of
the brothers’ niece, was asked to come to Merano to become a direc-
tor of the bank. And so, because of this great opportunity, Peppina’s
family left their coastal Italian home for Merano.
At the time, Peppina’s mother was ­twenty-eight years old and
Peppina and Marco were six and four years of age, respectively. The
Heumanns would add several more children once they became set-
tled in Merano—Moritz and the twins, Julian and Rosa—all three of
whom would die at relatively young ages.9
As a side note, it is interesting that Peppina, who would come to
64
 Chapter 5. The K’s Ménage and Their Secrets

have a huge effect on Ida, also had experienced numerous neurotic

symptoms in childhood—symptoms which were similar to Malvine
Bauer’s symptoms. This loss of proximity to her aunt was perhaps
one reason why Ida did so poorly in Merano and gravitated toward
Peppina, as it seemed that she was looking for a maternal figure,
given that she had little respect or fondness for her own mother.
A word about Malvine: At the age of ­t wenty-three, she mar-
ried Edward Friedmann, a ­twenty-six-year-old goldsmith born in
Hungary. As Ida had spent a great deal of time with her aunt as a
child, while the Bauers were living in Vienna she was almost like a
member of their family. Malvine had two daughters around Ida’s
age, and the marriage was an unhappy one, similar to the marriage
of Ida’s mother. Malvine was also frequently ill. While never having
Malvine as a patient, Freud, who knew the family in Vienna, diag-
nosed Malvine as having a severe form of psychoneurosis “without
any characteristically hysterical symptoms.”10
It appears that Malvine found respite from her sadness and
ill health in her relationship with her niece, as Ida was bright and
fun-loving and no doubt lavished love on Malvine and her two girls.
Ida loved being a part of Malvine’s family and played with her cous-
ins frequently when she lived in Vienna. They were so intimate that
Malvine openly discussed her marriage and ill health with her young
niece, when Ida was still barely a ­teenager, making Ida feel special
and loved. (Peppina would repeat this pattern, too, of inappropri-
ate conversations with her young friend.) Ida’s original role model for
female behavior, her mother, was replicated by both her aunt and her
father’s lover.11
The attachment Ida and Malvine shared was a peculiarly emo-
tional one. Ida experienced great sadness when they moved away
from Malvine, and would subsequently recapture that female inti-
macy with Peppina. Freud would record in the Dora case study that
she took on the symptoms of her aunt, as well as that of her mother
and Peppina. Ida seemed to develop a strong connection with ill
women.12
Freud seemed to think that Ida mimicked the illnesses of these
women because of her devotion to them. But her symptoms were
65
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

also brought on by stress and lack of openness about her family situ-
ation. Everything would come to a head for Ida, however, when Hans
and Peppina, each in their own way, brought Ida to a place so dread-
ful that she eventually contemplated suicide.
Peppina—like these other women in Ida’s life to whom she was
closely aligned—suffered the same type of nervous disorders. Ellis
writes:
The future Frau K grew up from the age of six as part of a small but influen-
tial Jewish community in a fashionable health resort with a father who was a
director of the increasingly prosperous Biedermann Bank, a younger mother,
two brothers, and a selection of aunts, uncles, and cousins. Freud says that
at some stage Peppina had “been an invalid and had even been obliged to
spend several months in a sanatorium for nervous disorders because she had
been unable to walk.” Freud does not provide any further information about
the nature of Peppina’s illness, but he does note that she made a good recov-
ery and matured into a “young and beautiful woman” who was “healthy and
lively.”13

As Peppina got older and entered womanhood, she apparently

left her disabilities behind her. And as a beautiful woman from an
increasingly wealthy and important Merano family, there was a ques-
tion of whom she would marry. Unfortunately, at the time, there were
but a few healthy Jewish men residing in Merano whom the family
would consider appropriate for Peppina. It was at this time that Hans
Zellenka entered the picture.
Johan Zellenka, or Hans (or Hanns) as he was called, was born
in Vienna on December 22, 1860. Like the Bauers, his father, Ignatz,
had moved from a small town in Bohemia to Vienna, where they, too,
settled on Leopoldstrasse with other emigrating Jews. It was here
that he met and married Hans’s mother, Charlotte (Lotte). She had
previously been married to a merchant “called Wilhelm Beer” with
whom she had two children, Leopold and Regina. Wilhelm Beer died
in 1857, leaving Charlotte in her late twenties with two young chil-
dren. Three years later, she married Ignatz Zellenka in the Leopold-
stadter Tempel.14
Hans’s father was a dealer in medicinal leeches (his wedding
recorded him as a “Blutegelhändler”).15 Because he was both ill and
financially unsuccessful, Hans’s mother was forced to open a little
66
 Chapter 5. The K’s Ménage and Their Secrets

shop selling women’s underwear. Hans’s early life was not easy due in
part to his father’s ill health, poor business skills, and frequent mov-
ing within Vienna, leaving Hans and his mother with limited finan-
cial or emotional support. Eventually Hans’s father disappeared,
leaving his mother to support herself and her children. To make ends
meet and to find some stability, they moved many times, ending up
in ­working-class Ottakring, a town in the Sixteenth District, some
distance away from Leopoldstadt. His older stepbrother eventually
found a job in a bank to help the family out. Hans’s life was in stark
contrast to that of his future wife, who lived in Merano in the lap of
luxury.16
Where Peppina was beautiful, Hans was unattractive; where she
came from a wealthy and loving family, he came from a poor and
dysfunctional one. It was only due to his mother’s example of pro-
viding for her family that Hans and his ­half-brother, Leopold, were
prepared for the world of work. And it was in Merano that he found
work that would lead him to his future bride.
In Merano, Hans took several jobs before managing to impress
one Philipp Haas, the owner of a progressive company with “a
­well-developed social conscience.”17 It was in the circle of Daniel Bie-
dermann, Isidor Heumann, and Friedrich Stransky, the leaders of the
Haas Company, that Hans began his career working for this presti-
gious company, where he was seen as an ambitious young man with
potential, not as just a shopkeeper as he would be portrayed by Freud
in the Dora case study. As Ellis writes, “He was clearly considered a
suitable match for Peppina Heumann.”18
Hans and Peppina married in Merano on Sunday, September 22,
1889, at the Merano synagogue, about a year after the Bauers had
moved to Merano. Interestingly, the wedding was attended by the
Bauer family, including Ida and Otto. As they had been invited to the
wedding, they may have become friendly before the Zellenkas were
even married. But as the Jewish community in Merano was small,
perhaps all the influential Jewish families of Merano were invited to
the celebration.
At the time of the wedding, Hans was ­twenty-eight years old
and Peppina only nineteen; Ida was seven. Fifteen months after the
67
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

wedding, on January 5, 1891, Peppina gave birth to a son, Otto, and

then eleven months later to a girl, Klara, who was ill from birth with
a congenital heart condition. The couple continued to reside in Mer-
ano at Pfarrplatz 8, “adjacent to the cathedral and close to Peppina’s
parents’ home on Postgasse, as well as to invited to Hans’s office and
the Biedermann Bank on Habsburgerstrasse.”19
It seems clear that the Zellenkas, had they not befriended the
Bauers, would not even be a footnote to history. According to Ellis,
“The Zellenkas would be long forgotten were it not for the fact that
they became involved in Meran with Dora and her family.”20 As the
families became closely entwined, Ida was a frequent visitor at the
Zellenka home, taking care of Hans and Klara, the Zellenka chil-
dren. Peppina often spent time in a sanatorium. Ida would note that
Peppina’s illnesses appeared to ebb and flow. Ida was quick to also
note that Peppina would be well when Hans was away—which was
often, as he traveled for his job—and ill when he returned. Ida was an
observant child to have noticed this change in Peppina’s health based
on the travels of her husband.21
As for the Bauers, while living in Merano and when feeling rea-
sonably well, Philipp became involved in the active and wealthy Jew-
ish community by joining the board of trustees of the Königswarter
Foundation. The family would spend eight or nine months “staying
in hotels or rented villas”22 and found this organization, the König-
swarter Foundation, to be the very center of Jewish life.
The foundation was started in 1872 by Baron Isaak and Lisette
Königswarter to honor their son, Emil, who had died suddenly and
unexpectedly. They capitalized on the foundation’s money and influ-
ence, which helped them purchase property, including a plot of
land that served as the Jewish cemetery. The Königswarter money
was also used to construct a sanatorium to treat impoverished
Jews.23
Following his marriage to Peppina, Hans became regional agent
for possibly the most important retailer of quality textiles in the
­Austro-Hungarian Empire. And because of Philipp’s involvement in
the resident Jewish community, he had frequent contact with Isidor
Heumann and Friedrich Stransky, ­co-directors of the Biedermann
68
 Chapter 5. The K’s Ménage and Their Secrets

Merano, view toward the northwest, with Zielspitze (center) and Tschigat
(right) in the background (Noclador, Wikimedia Commons).

Bank, and thus with Hans, as well as with the family of the lovely and
charming Peppina.
Through their bank, Peppina’s family also was involved in
improving the quality of the life and health of the many international
Jewish people, patients who at the time were flocking to Merano. The
Jewish people who eventually settled in Merano, began to change its
society for the better. The creation of spas, hotels, boardwalks, parks,
and coffeehouses brought guests, both ill and well, to stay in Merano
for months at a time, traveling from one spa to another, just as Ida
and her mother did.
While Merano was thriving, conversely, things were getting
worse again for Philipp Bauer, who in 1892 suddenly lost vision in
his good eye. Ellis writes, “His other eye had never functioned well,
so Philipp faced the prospect of being almost blind. The oculist who
treated Philipp was overheard discussing with him the possibility
that his eye condition might be linked to a ­long-standing syphilis
infection.”24
Up until this time, Philipp’s wife had no idea that her husband
had contracted a venereal disease in his premarital days. She was
not only shocked by his condition, but also found out that he had
69
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

infected her, which led to further estrangement between the couple

that was never resolved. It was at this time that Peppina stepped into
the breach.
The recommended treatment for Philipp’s condition was prolonged rest in
a darkened room. Käthe declined to nurse her husband, who turned instead
to Peppina Zellenka, now ­twenty-two years old with two small children.
Philipp’s eyesight improved considerably, while a mutual attraction between
Philipp and Peppina flourished in the darkened room. The affair that ensued
was conducted with little attempt at concealment: Dora told Freud that her
father would visit Peppina “every day at definite hours, while her husband
was at business,” adding that “everybody had talked about it.” … Dora also
admitted to Freud that she had been complicit in the affair, helping to look
after Peppina’s children while Peppina and her father were together.25

Eventually, Philipp became so unwell as to necessitate a return

to Vienna to visit a physician—none other than Sigmund Freud, who
was becoming famous for his effective treatment of patients with
psychosomatic conditions. Freud had also made a study of syphi-
lis and its effect on the nervous system. After only one visit, Freud
diagnosed Philipp’s many symptoms as the result of chronic tertiary
neurosyphilis and set about combating the symptoms with an “ener-
getic” course of treatment that would have involved the administra-
tion of mercury salts in the form of pills, ointments, or injections.
Philipp made a good recovery. Freud believed that the success of this
treatment was the reason Philipp brought his daughter to him for
treatment six years later.26
Philipp had been accompanied to Freud’s consulting office by
Hans Zellenka, of all people. Later, when Freud began his treatment
of Ida, he had an insider’s understanding of the familial situation,
having met the major players (with the exception of Ida’s mother). At
the same time that Philipp and Käthe were no longer enjoying con-
jugal activities, neither were Hans and Peppina. As Ida noted, Pep-
pina was often too ill to be with Hans when he returned from his
business travels—but not too ill to interact with Philipp, sexually and
otherwise.
By the time Ida was thirteen years old, she was quite attractive.
Perhaps as a way of getting back at Philipp—and Peppina—because
of their affair, which was conducted fairly openly, Hans began the
70
 Chapter 5. The K’s Ménage and Their Secrets

seduction of Ida. The first time was when he lured her, under false
pretenses, into his place of business on Habsburgerstrasse in Mer-
ano and kissed her on the lips. Ida was disgusted; she tore herself free
from the man and hurried past him.27
As for Ida’s parents, they thought Hans’s attention to their
daughter was simply avuncular interest in an intelligent and interest-
ing young girl. Decker writes that Ida herself had ambivalent feelings
about her relationship with Hans Zellenka. “It certainly was pleas-
ant—considering the deficiencies of Meran for a young, intelligent
girl, as well as the handicaps her fluctuating health imposed on her
activities—to have a dependable and attentive walking companion
and to receive regular letters and gifts from a man highly regarded
by her father.”28 These thoughts occurred to Ida before the encoun-
ter in Hans’s office. Once that happened, Ida became somewhat fear-
ful of Hans.
Ida did sense, or perhaps even knew, that the relationship with
Herr K., as Freud would call him, was inappropriate. After other
encounters that left her somewhat unsettled, she determined not
to be alone with him, and she again developed phobic symptoms.
Unfortunately, this was not something she felt she could discuss with
her parents; consequently, she never mentioned the encounter until
she met with Freud in the fall of 1900—and she continued to accept
frequent gifts and letters from Hans.29
This was a time in which Ida was very lonely. Otto was busy with
schoolwork, her mother was ill, and her father was either away on
business or ill himself. Ida, although wary of Hans, began to feel con-
nected to Peppina. With Peppina she developed a strong and inti-
mate relationship in which they discussed sex, emotions, jewelry,
clothing, and even children, as Ida took care of the Zellenka’s two
small children, similar to how Peppina was taking care of Philipp. It
was Ida’s task to mind the Zellenka children while Peppina was with
Ida’s father, who had begun taking over the nursing duties from Ida.
The Bauers continued their relationship with the Zellenkas,
which, when looked at from the perspective of an outsider, was
quite bizarre and complicated: Ida’s mother kept her distance from
Philipp; Philipp was sexually involved with Peppina; Hans continued
71
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

his sexual pursuit of Ida, the daughter of his wife’s lover; and Ida was
looking after Peppina and Hans’s children.30
Ida continued to be very careful around Hans—never allow-
ing herself to be alone with him—as her phobic reactions were exac-
erbated by her encounters with Hans. As Decker explains, “From
then on she would not walk near a man and a woman who seemed
attracted to each other.”31

72
 Chapter 6

The Nature of Secrets

By crashing into each other’s lives, the Bauers and the Zellenkas
created a world that exacerbated many of Ida’s symptoms, most of
which would be with her for the rest of her life—and had been with
her since she was about six years old. Ida’s persistent distress was
complicated by secrets, those held close to the hearts of Ida’s father,
her mother, Hans, Peppina, and even those of her own. Adding to all
those secrets, Sigmund Freud had his own secrets, which would not
only complicate his eventual analysis of Ida, but would contribute to
his own failure as therapist in his analysis of his young patient.
It appears that there was little or no apparent concern from the
adults about the gross and abominable secret perpetrated against the
pubescent Ida—seemingly agreed upon by both her father and her
father’s friend, Hans, with tacit understanding from her mother and
Peppina. Ida therefore had no recourse but to acquiesce to Hans’s
importuning. Ida hid the facts of Hans’s gross advances until she
could no longer keep it to herself and divulged to her mother what
was happening with Hans.
One of the more distressing events happened when Ida was fif-
teen years old, in the summer of 1898. The amorous encounter took
place against the backdrop of the ­not-so-clandestine relationship
between Hans’s wife and Ida’s father.1
Philipp and Ida were visiting the vacation home of the Zellenkas
in the Austrian Alps. The plan was that Philipp would return alone
to Merano and Ida would be left with the Zellenkas to care for their
two children—odd, since a young German governess was also in resi-
dence there. The governess was hired to provide lessons for Otto and
Klara. We shall come to see how this added to the sexual drama at
the Zellenka home.
73
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

Hans, up to his old tricks, had successfully seduced—and made

declarations of affection toward—the governess, who had given in to
his passionate inclinations and believed that there was a future for
her with Hans. It is hard to believe that she would think that Hans
would leave his wife and two children for a governess, but that appar-
ently was her fantasy.
Immediately having made the conquest of the young woman,
Hans dropped her—possibly because Ida was on her way to the Zel-
lenka summer villa or perhaps just because he felt he was finished
with her. Hans was not a particularly nice person, even as the young
German woman was foolish. When asked to leave the villa, the gov-
erness refused. Even though she claimed to hate Hans, she was
hopeful that he would return to her. She eventually saw that he had
discarded her, and she did leave the villa, but not before she told Ida
about her own encounters with Hans.2 It was in this atmosphere that
Ida once again experienced a seduction by Hans.
Ida had been apprehensive about her visit to the Zellenkas
because of the situation with Hans—both the earlier seductions
and her ambivalence about being alone with him—and because her
coughing spells, headaches, and aphonia3 had not abated since they
had come to Merano. Also, hearing the sordid tale from the govern-
ess and how he used the same words with her as he had with Ida, “I
get nothing from my wife,” was disheartening.4
It was on one of the little boat trips on and around the lake that
Ida and Hans took shortly after she and her father arrived at the
Alpine villa that things fell apart for Ida. Hans, true to form, made an
advance and used the same line he used with the governess—that he
got nothing from his wife. Ida was irate and slapped him in the face
and walked off. While she wanted to return to the villa on her own,
she realized it was a ­two-and-a-half-hour jaunt, and so she returned
to the boat and Hans, who begged forgiveness and asked her not to
tell anyone. He wanted it to be their secret, I suppose.
That, of course, was not the end of it. Upon returning to the
villa, Ida took a nap. “She lay down in the bedroom and fell asleep
but suddenly awoke to find Herr K. standing beside her. She asked
him ‘sharply’ what he was doing there.”5 As she would later tell Freud,
74
 Chapter 6. The Nature of Secrets

Hans arrogantly and unrepentantly told her he would not be pre-

vented from coming into his own bedroom. The next night Ida asked
for a key to the room, but soon she found the key gone and assumed
that Hans had taken it so he could continue to enter her room at will.6
Ida surely must have felt totally unprotected and uncared for
by the adults in her world: her parents and the family for whom she
was babysitter and ­quasi-governess. For while she was being sexu-
ally harassed by Hans—afraid to get dressed or undressed for fear
he would enter her bedroom—her father and Peppina were having
their own amorous adventures. Philipp had decided for his own rea-
sons not to stay at the villa but was residing at a nearby hotel, which
allowed Peppina to join him for early morning walks and ­day-long
excursions. When it came time for her father to leave, Ida deter-
mined that she would return with him, despite the plan that she
would stay with the Zellenkas.7
Once home, Ida waited a few weeks before telling her mother of
Hans’s sexual advances. Her mother then told Ida’s father, who spoke
with his older brother, Karl. It was because of the pressure from his
wife that Philipp first wrote to Hans demanding an explanation. Two
of Philipp’s brothers confronted Hans, who denied ever having an
encounter with Ida. Hans went so far as to speculate about Ida’s men-
tal state, claiming that Peppina had told him that Ida was obsessed
with sex. He said that Ida had aroused and ­over-excited herself by
reading sexually oriented books—textbooks, as it turned out—and
that she imagined the whole scene with Hans.8
Ida continued to be unnerved by her experience with Hans and
realized that she was being used as a pawn: if her father could have
Peppina, then Hans could have her. Ida’s symptoms returned in full
force, and she continued to see physicians who prescribed hydro-
therapy and electrotherapy. At the time, both these therapies were
common practice, especially in places like the spa town Merano.
As early as age twelve, Ida’s physician had recommended that
she undergo intensive sessions of electrotherapy. Under examina-
tion, her larynx was normal, but her adductor muscles were partially
paralyzed, even though when she coughed the adductors were able to
come together. As Gilman writes:
75
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

This would have been seen through the use of the laryngoscope. To treat her
the physicians would have applied current directly to the larynx, but—as
was clear when Freud examined her—without any ­long-term success. Elec-
trotherapy simply did not work, as it should have done. Dora’s physicians
were expecting a lesion; Freud came to understand the psychogenetic nature
of her illness. … Freud saw in this case of failed electrotherapy a return to
early childhood patterns, not a lesion of the nervous system. “Many of my
women patients who suffer from disturbances of eating, globus hystericus,
constriction of the throat and vomiting, have indulged energetically in suck-
ing during their childhood” (SE, 7: 182). This was his new reading of the loss
of voice, a core symptom in the case of Dora. Freud’s complicated account
of this case stressed the sexual fantasy that lies at its core. But his treatment
was the talking cure. Electrotherapy was never considered.9

The electroshock treatments had taken place in Vienna. While

the family was living in Merano, Ida also tried hydrotherapy, proba-
bly at a spa in Franzensbad, the Bohemian spa visited by both Ida and
her mother in 1890.10 But with limited success.
Experts recommended above all the general douche—a jet of water to the
body; the force of the water was considered as efficacious as its temperature.
Brief bursts of water at ­forty-five degrees Fahrenheit were given for fifteen
seconds, or bursts of water at fifty degrees for twenty to thirty seconds.
If the patient could not tolerate the cold water or its pressure, then the
“Scotch” douche was tried. Warm water (100 degrees Fahrenheit) was
sprinkled on the patient for as little as ­one-half minute to as long as three
minutes. Then, when the patient was felt to be ready, the ­cold-water jet
was introduced.11

Other hydrotherapy treatments existed: transition douche;

wrapping patients in cold, wet sheets; hot sheets. It is unclear which
if any of these treatments Ida received; we only know that none of
them worked and both types—hydrotherapy and electrotherapy—
helped to alienate Ida from the medical profession.12 By the time
she was fifteen years old, these treatments had resulted in her hat-
ing medical treatments and those who performed them. It was at this
time that she apparently saw Freud for the first time at his office up
the street from her own home on Berggasse 19.
She was in the midst of one of her coughing attacks, and at that time saw
Freud, probably because her father thought highly of his doctor and pushed
her at least to meet the man and talk to him—what could she lose? So it was
that Dora [Ida] met Freud who summed up her history as “merely a case of
‘petite hystérie.’” Freud proposed psychological treatment; Dora said she

76
 Chapter 6. The Nature of Secrets

Home of Sigmund Freud at Berggasse 19, Vienna, Austria, now the Freud
Museum, where Ida Bauer met with Freud six times a week (Gryffindor,
Wikimedia Commons).
would think it over, and then when the episode passed, she declined on the
grounds that she was better.13

By now, Ida was exhausted by her disabilities and by the chronic

secrets and seductions within her own family enclave. Ida had been
seeing physicians since she was six years old and, once in Merano,
went for treatments to the spas and health resorts with her mother.
She was sick of seeing physicians and found that they did not help
her. “Although Freud proposed treating her with entirely novel meth-
ods, she was adamant that she would not begin yet another round
of fruitless appointments and refused any treatment,” according to
Decker.14
This was a time in Vienna, and indeed in Europe, when women
were not necessarily treated fairly by physicians. In many ways, Ida
was right in refusing treatment when she was first brought to see
the Vienna physician. Ida had a great love for her father, but she had
77
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

distrust and disdain for men in general and for doctors in particu-
lar. At that time, most physicians were men and non–Jewish. Jew-
ish female physicians, who might have had empathy for Ida, made up
only one fifth of the female physicians in Central Europe.15
Because of Freud’s emerging interest in psychoanalysis, a sci-
ence of the mind, he was a fairly good choice of physician for Ida.
Vienna in 1900 was the greatest medical center in Europe—and psy-
chiatry was being vigorously aligned with neuroanatomy, which
many doctors thought was the source of Ida’s condition. Psychother-
apy was first introduced in Vienna by Richard von ­Krafft-Ebing in
1889 at around the same time as Freud was becoming increasingly
interested in the science of the mind. Freud’s approach to treating
patients was moving toward psychoanalysis and away from neurol-
ogy, his area of expertise and education. At the time he first saw Ida
and her father, Freud was aligning his ideas not just to the work of
­Jean-Martin Charcot and Pierre Marie Félix Janet but also to others
in the Vienna medical circle. Both of these French theorists practiced
at the ­Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris, where Freud went to study
as a newly minted neurologist.16
The Salpêtrière was originally a gunpowder factory, but at the
time that Freud worked there, it was one of France and Europe’s most
esteemed institutions, as it is today. Many studied and worked there
over the centuries, such as Charles Darwin and Georges Gilles de
la Tourette, and many especially came to work with Charcot to wit-
ness his clinical demonstrations. Freud was 29 years old when, while
on scholarship, he worked in Charcot’s labs. It was Freud who trans-
lated Charcot’s lectures into German and whose interpretation of
Charcot’s lectures on hysteria formed the foundations of Freud’s own
understanding of how the mind works.
This may have been the perfect time for Ida to visit Freud and
work with him to undertake analysis that could help her with her
symptoms, which many physicians besides Freud saw as psychoso-
matic. As Philip Rieff writes, she was the daughter of a sick father,
who had a sick mistress, who had a sick husband, who proposed him-
self to the sick daughter as his lover.17
The first time she saw Freud, Ida wanted none of what Freud had
78
 Chapter 6. The Nature of Secrets

This photograph shows the Mazarin entrance to the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hos-

pital, Paris, a teaching hospital in the 13 arrondissement, where Freud
worked with Jean-Martin Charcot (Vaughan at English Wikipedia).

to offer. Still, she did not know how to deal on her own with the con-
sequences of the many familial, as well as societal, secrets swirling
about her. Freud would eventually conclude that she simply refused
to give up those secrets. He felt that if she would do so, she would be
happier and more functional.
79
 Part I. Secrets and Lies

While Ida was hiding her secrets, Freud was hiding his as well.
He was discovering the secrets of dreams and had begun to analyze
his own dreams. Although dedicated to unearthing the secrets of
both nature and of the people he saw in consultation, he was “ambiv-
alent about revealing secrets about his private life.”18 That being said,
Freud’s pivotal consideration in psychoanalysis was that secrets must
be expressed, no matter how excruciating they might be, for him or
for his patients.
Nonetheless, Ida held firm in her distrust. She would divulge two
critical dreams to Freud in her short and aborted analysis, but she
refused to agree with Freud as to the implications of those dreams.

80
 Part II

Dora and Freud

A child in its greed for love does not enjoy having to share
the affection of its parents with its brothers and sisters;
and it notices that the whole of their affection is lavished
upon it once more whenever it arouses their anxiety by
falling ill. It has now discovered a means of enticing out
its parents’ love and will make use of that means as soon
as it has the necessary psychical material at its disposal
for producing an illness.
—Sigmund Freud

81
 Chapter 7

The Teenager
and the Analyst

Since girls were not admitted to the Gymnasium, or even to the

Realschulen, which was “the more recently established and slightly
less prestigious secondary school,”1 Ida was in all probability being
further educated at home by a governess, while her brother, Otto,
was attending school. Some authors have argued that Ida went to the
convent school in Merano, but her ­g reat-granddaughter, Katharina
Adler, disputes this. In an email, she wrote,
I know of no records showing that Ida actually attended the convent school
in Merano although I am aware this convent school has been mentioned in a
couple of publications without mentioning any sources. More likely Ida did
not go to school at all. Instead she was educated at home by a governess who
also plays a role in Freud’s text.2

Whether in school or at home, Ida was lonely. As a Jewish girl,

she would not have made friends with the non–Jewish young women
in Merano, and in any event, the spa town did not have an overabun-
dance of young people inhabiting it. Since she had lived in Vienna
and Merano in Jewish enclaves, it would have been at school where
she would have been exposed to anti–Semitism. In Austria, teachers,
students, texts, and curricula degraded and vilified Jews. Accord-
ing to Harold Blum, Jews were seen at the convents and other places
as being “Christ killers.”3 Perhaps it was good that she did not go to
school.
Bright as Ida was, she was no doubt envious of Otto who, by
attending school and studying exciting subjects, was able to inter-
mingle with people who would become important to him later in life.
With her many interests, Ida was both worldly and intelligent, but

82
 Chapter 7. The Teenager and the Analyst 

she was “locked in a repressed society with limited opportunities for

Jewish people in general and for Jewish women in particular.”4
You could say that Ida did not have viable female role mod-
els, since women in ­nineteenth-century Vienna and elsewhere had
restricted access to education and employment. There were few pro-
fessional women or female university students until the end of the
nineteenth century.5 Ida entered young womanhood with ineffec-
tive female role models: Peppina Zellenka, her aunt Malvine, her
mother, and her final governess, who was infatuated with her father.
All either betrayed her or modeled illness and mental instability—
and Ida appeared to be easily influenced.
As a result, instead of experiencing enriching activities that
school might have provided for her or having the example of achiev-
ing women, she continued to jump from one ailment to another. Her
most serious illnesses began around the age of twelve, when she suf-
fered from migraines, loss of voice, and a chronic cough. In between
bouts of illness and seeing one doctor after another, Ida was edu-
cated by governesses.
Ida initially liked one governess who was with Ida until she
reached the age of seventeen, the last one to be employed by the
Bauers. The governess has been described as an older and ­well-read
woman, perhaps thirty or forty years of age. She held liberal views
and discussed sexual subjects with Ida and suggested that Ida read
books with mature content. The governess, whose name has not
been identified, appeared to know about Philipp and Peppina’s affair
and urged Ida—and her mother—to put a stop to it. She told Käthe
that it was incompatible with her (the governess’s) dignity to tolerate
such intimacy between her charge’s father and his lover.6
The governess and Ida engaged in subversion; the governess
shared her very mature reading views with Ida but “cautioned against
letting her parents find out.”7 Although Ida’s parents recognized after
some years that the governess was educating Ida somewhat beyond
her years, they did not stop it. The governess seemed to have a sense
of the family dynamic: keep everything secret.8
Peppina was a second governess for Ida and, as Decker explains,
“filled the ‘no questions asked’ role.” While Peppina was viewed as a
83
 Part II. Dora and Freud

family friend, she, too, was providing Ida with materials that her par-
ents and perhaps Viennese society would not have approved of. She
shared Mantegazza sex manuals and other books with explicit sexual
content with her young friend. All of this was also kept secret (until
Hans, in an effort to defend himself against the seduction charge,
told her family about Ida’s reading habits).9
Apparently, Ida still had mixed feelings about the women in
her life. Despite the fact that Ida was still fond of Peppina, she was
ambivalent about whether or not to break off relations because of the
situation with Hans. Ida also believed that the governess was more
interested in Philipp—perhaps even as a lover—than in her.10 Thus,
it was the governess’s indifference to Ida that caused Ida to turn her
against her. Ida believed that the governess pretended to like her but
was actually enamored of her father, because her voice and conduct
would change around Philipp.
The affair between Philipp and Peppina obviously impacted
both families and anyone associated with the family. Once, while
the Bauers and Zellenkas were vacationing together and taking a
suite of common rooms in a hotel, Philipp and Peppina both com-
plained about their rooms; Peppina, because she was sharing her
room with her children. Philipp soon gave up his room and they both
managed to occupy rooms at the end of a long corridor in order to
keep their amorous ­goings-on private from their respective families.
As Freud pointed out in the case study, “They had both moved into
new rooms—the end rooms, which were only separated by the pas-
sage, while the rooms they had given up had not offered any such
security against interruption.” 11 Once back in Merano, the couple
became open about their relationship. Ellis tells us that the “affair
was conducted with little attempt at concealment,” with Philipp vis-
iting Peppina every afternoon in Merano. Ida would later admit that
everyone talked about the two lovers, and she felt complicit in the
affair since she was helping to look after Peppina’s children while
the two were together.12 Nonetheless, Ida enjoyed looking after the
Zellenka children: Otto was a bright young boy about eight years
younger than Ida, and Klara was eleven months younger than him.
Although Klara was often ill because of her cardiac issues, Ida spent
84
 Chapter 7. The Teenager and the Analyst 

enjoyable times with both children, functioning as a ­quasi-governess

for them as well as playmate.13
While Philipp and Peppina conducted their affair openly,14 Pep-
pina avoided conjugal duties with her husband, using the excuse of
her alleged illnesses.15 The two families continued in this way for
some time, with Philipp’s wife ignoring the situation and Peppina’s
husband attempting a sexual relationship with Ida.
The affair between Ida’s father and Peppina went on for many
years while both families were living in Merano (and even later in
Vienna). Philipp often showered Peppina with money and gifts, and
because of such obvious largess, he felt the need to spend an equal
amount on his wife and daughter to make his gifts to his mistress
less conspicuous. Consequently, Peppina, who “had been obliged
to spend months in a sanatorium for nervous disorders because
she had been unable to walk, had now become a healthy and lively
woman.”16
Ida continued to have a great deal to contend with: her ill-
nesses, her father’s illnesses, the strain of her parents’ relationship,
her father’s ongoing relationship with his mistress, the aftereffects
of Hans’s sexual advances, and her feelings of betrayal by her adored
father. To make matters even worse for Ida, her aunt Malvine, her
favorite role model, was ailing. Now, after years of being ill, she took
a turn for the worse.
Sometime around February or March of 1899, Ida traveled on
her own to Vienna to visit her aunt when she was dying. Psychoso-
matically, Ida developed a high fever and abdominal pains, which
were misdiagnosed as appendicitis. Freud would later tell Ida that
her attack was a fantasied childbirth since it occurred nine months
after Hans’s sexual advances. It could also be that she was turning
grief into symptoms, for she knew that her beloved aunt was dying.
And indeed, it was following these symptoms that Malvine died on
April 7; “Dora stayed on for a while with her uncle and the two Fried-
mann girls who were close to her in age.”17
Sometime in the same year, the Bauers briefly moved to Reichen-
berg, the site of one of Philipp’s mills. The town had a twisted history
where Jews were concerned. Before 1860, while they were permitted
85
 Part II. Dora and Freud

The town of Liberec, August 2009, called Reichenberg in the 1890s. Philipp
Bauer had several textile mills in the surrounding area, and the family
stayed there during part of 1899 (Daniel Baránek, Wikimedia Commons).

to trade there, they were not allowed to live there. Yet it was the Jew-
ish fabric distributers and factory workers who developed the city’s
textile industry. By the time the Bauers moved there from Merano,
Jews were more or less tolerated, the Jewish population being 3.5
percent of the city. In addition to business concerns, Philipp also
wanted his son, Otto, to “attend the local textile technical college
there and then ‘join the family firm.’”18
The Bauer family stayed only a short while in Reichenberg. Otto
had decided not to enter the family business, demanding to attend
university in Vienna. Also, and perhaps given the family history, even
more reason to move back to the capital, Peppina had decided to
leave Merano and move to Vienna. Thus, in 1900, the Bauers per-
manently returned to Vienna. Ida had wondered about the abrupt
return to Vienna, but she knew the reason when she found out that
the Zellenkas had also returned to Vienna. Hans had taken a new
86
 Chapter 7. The Teenager and the Analyst 

A postcard of the town of Reichenberg, Bismarck Plaza, 1900. The Bauer

family stayed here for a bit following their stay in Merano, as Philipp Bauer
had textile plants in the area (Zeno.org, Wikimedia Commons).

“position with the flagship store of Philipp Haas and Sons in central
Vienna that was similar to his role in Meran (regional agent) but on a
much larger scale.”19
The Bauers’ return to Vienna could have been an interesting and
exciting time for Ida, as women were now being admitted to univer-
sity and were also afforded other opportunities. According to Decker,
Ida “was both stimulated and discouraged,” but all of this while expe-
riencing frequent illnesses and depression. It was difficult for her to
take advantage of these new freedoms that could have been invigo-
rating and engaging for the bright and curious young woman. She
was also unhappy because she saw what kind of life her brother was
making for himself at university. Nonetheless, she began to travel a
bit and tried to engage in the cultural activities and progressive cli-
mate that was emerging in Vienna.20
Ida persevered in trying to educate herself. She attended art
exhibitions. She traveled to Dresden and went to the Zwinger, the
famous art museum. She also seemed to seek out controversial
87
 Part II. Dora and Freud

exhibitions, such as the Gustav Klimt exhibit during the summer of

1900. As Decker explains:
Klimt, formerly an Establishment artist but now a leader of the Secessionists,
had been commissioned by the Ministry to Culture and Education in 1894 to
design three ceiling paintings for the University of Vienna. ...Klimt had rad-
ically altered his style, one new feature of which was the sensual portrayal of
women with seductively long hair. ...Eighty-seven faculty members signed a
petition ... [Ida’s] interest [was] piqued by the scandal.21

With this cultural and artistic progression in Vienna, Ida should

have been happily pursuing an intellectual life. But there was strife
and conflict in Austria. In a town close to Philipp’s former village
of Pollerskirchen, there were attacks by the military because of vio-
lence sparked by labor troubles in factories and mills. This exacer-
bated Ida’s already despairing nature, feeling that she had very little
control over her personal life, as some of the agitation in and around
the family’s village was due to anti–Semitism.22
It wasn’t long, however, before Ida began to give in to her fears
(Vienna was ruled by an anti–Semitic mayor) and began to isolate.
Further, she started to consciously dislike her father after years of
having affection and great love for him. Her continuously poor rela-
tionship with her mother worsened and she experienced depression,
irritability, tiredness, and a loss of appetite. She “even lost her fond-
ness for jewelry and stopped wearing any.” It was during this period
that she began actively to think about killing herself and went so far
as to write a suicide note that she made sure both parents would find.
She did not actually attempt suicide, but a day later became very ill:
she lost consciousness, became delirious, and had convulsions—
then remembered nothing of the incident.23 It was time, her father
told her, that she must see Freud.
In late October of 1900, Ida, also concerned about herself, finally
agreed to be analyzed by Freud. Upon meeting Ida for the second
time, he wrote in his famous case study that she was “by that time in
the first bloom of youth—a girl of intelligent and engaging looks. But
she was a source of heavy trials for her parents.”24
Some authors have written that Freud failed to appreciate how
young Ida was, evident in both his manner and his interpretation of
88
 Chapter 7. The Teenager and the Analyst 

her.25 Freud himself wrote that she was eighteen years old, but she
was seventeen and should have been treated as an older adoles-
cent or a young girl—not as a woman. It can be argued, and many
have, that Freud was prone to male prejudice and lacked empathy for
women, which is evidence of his limitations as an analyst.
Freud learned from Ida that she was dissatisfied with both her-
self and her family. She had become disenchanted with her beloved
father and continued to feel disdain for her mother. Before Ida even
had a chance to talk about herself to Freud, her father had given
Freud a sense of things. He mentioned to Freud that Ida had dis-
cussed with her mother the two incidents of attempted seduction by
Hans Zellenka. Freud wrote that Philipp went on:
She keeps pressing me to break off relations with Herr K. and more partic-
ularly with Frau K., whom she used positively to worship formerly. But that
I cannot do. For, to begin with, I myself believe that Dora’s tale of the man’s
immoral suggestions is a phantasy that has forced its way into her mind;
and besides, I am bound to Frau K. by ties of honourable friendship and I do
not wish to cause her pain. The poor woman is most unhappy with her hus-
band, of whom, by the way, I have no very high opinion. She herself has suf-
fered a great deal with her nerves, and I am her only support. With my state
of health I need scarcely assure you that there is nothing wrong in our rela-
tions. We are just two poor wretches who give one another what comfort we
can by an exchange of friendly sympathy. You know already that I get noth-
ing out of my own wife. But Dora, who inherits my obstinacy, cannot be
moved from her hatred of the K.’s. She had her last attack after a conversa-
tion in which she had again pressed me to break with them. Please try and
bring her to reason.26

By now, the Bauers were living on Berggasse in Vienna’s Ninth

District, just up the street from Freud’s apartment at Number 19,
where he kept his office on the first floor of his family’s apartment.
At the time that Freud began analyzing Ida in earnest, he was per-
haps in his unhappiest, least successful period: he was struggling in
gaining professional approval and had significant financial difficul-
ties. According to Billig, this was when Freud was at the most iso-
lated point in his life, “when he was experiencing a bitter sense of
rejection from mainstream, or Christian, Austrian society.”27 Ida, of
course, was also having issues: she was living in a society that dispar-
aged Jews and she had a father who did not believe her when she told
89
 Part II. Dora and Freud

of Hans’s seduction of her—not to mention having the myriad physi-

cal ailments previously mentioned.
And so it was that the two came together at a time that was not
ideal for either: a teenage girl who had frustrations about being a
woman who was compromised by lies and deceit and a frustrated
physician who could not achieve the recognition he so dearly sought.

90
 Chapter 8

Freud’s Story
of the Seductions

It seems appalling that a grown man with two young children

of his own and a wife—be she adulterous or not—would attempt the
seduction of a close friend’s young daughter, a teenager who was the
babysitter of his children. But that’s just what Hans Zellenka did,
according to Ida. Perhaps he felt entitled due the seduction of his
own wife by his close friend, Philipp, but that seems like a specious
argument, and I am sure it did not comfort poor Ida at all.
While Ida’s father was engaging in a sexual liaison with Peppina,
a woman described by many as young and beautiful, he foisted her
husband, Hans, on his own daughter. From the time Ida was thir-
teen, Hans had made sexual overtures. It was following an espe-
cially repugnant sexual encounter with Hans—and her father’s
subtle insistence that she continue the relationship with him—that
she developed severe symptoms and considered suicide, as detailed
previously.
During this time, Ida was practically acting as a mother figure to
the two Zellenka children.1 While Peppina had been tending to Ida’s
father, Ida cared especially for Klara, as she suffered from a debilitat-
ing illness and needed a great deal of care, which her mother left to
the young Ida. This job of babysitter also more or less entailed keep-
ing the children away from the lovers, Peppina and Philipp, which
is why Ida came to detest her father. Even though Ida knew of her
father’s adultery with Peppina, she herself continued to be “intimate
friends with Peppina, to the point where, on the joint summer hol-
idays the families would take, Ida shared a bed with her, while Herr
Zellenka was evicted from the marital chamber.”2

91
 Part II. Dora and Freud

No wonder she attempted suicide, even if it was purely a call for

help, not really a wish to die. Clearly, she needed help, which is why
her father sought out Freud—again.
It was in 1896 that Sigmund Freud first used the term psy-
choanalysis (“psychoanalyse”) in a French journal. The article,
“L’hérédité et l’étiologie des névroses,” referred to a new idea in clin-
ical psychology.3 The beginning of his theory of the mind resulted in
Freud’s coming to understand how psychoanalysis could work, which
he did by embarking upon ­self-analysis. This theory of his emanated
from the work that both he and Breuer had developed from their
joint studies involving early trauma in their patients.
Then in 1899, a year before he began analyzing Ida, Freud pub-
lished what would be one of his most important and ­long-lasting
works, The Interpretation of Dreams. Here, he described what he
called dream work, where what happens at night in sleep was seen
by Freud as a type of “­wish-fulfillment.” Freud considered dreams the
royal road to ­s elf-knowledge. He believed that the dreamer would
ultimately be able to access an unconscious part of themselves,
thereby having the ability to resolve conflicts. Freud believed that
many desires were unacceptable to the conscious mind and were
thus disavowed. Within the dream world, Freud would argue, the
mind’s act of censorship would weaken, allowing forbidden desires
to become visible and thus capable of being understood through
symbols and metaphors. It was in The Interpretation of Dreams
that Freud’s most significant contributions to psychology emerged:
the Oedipus complex and the elaboration of his model of human
psychology, for instance.4 It was into this scholarly world that Ida
entered when she was more or less forced to visit Freud following her
significant thoughts of suicide.
In accepting Ida as a patient, Freud saw a way to illuminate his
new theories and experiment with them. His ultimate analysis elu-
cidated “aspects of the cultural matrix that informed Freud’s theory
building,” according to Adele Tutter. She argues that Freud used not
only the data from the case history itself but also an ­in-depth exam-
ination of literary fiction. One such novel, Madame Bovary, Flau-
bert’s masterpiece, dissects an unhappy sex life coupled with a desire
92
 Chapter 8. Freud’s Story of the Seductions 

for romance by a ­f antasy-driven young woman. Freud, who only

wrote one case study of a woman, turned to fiction about women:
It is posited that the suggestive text in Dora acts both as a literal agent of
dangerous suggestion, and as a figurative symbol of the occult literary influ-
ence that intrudes upon the text, impacting Freud’s formulation of his sub-
ject; his documentation of her case; and his ensuing conceptualization of the
transference. The author [Tutter] ventures that literary fiction and other cul-
tural products function as important objects, shaping our fantasy life, object
representations, and transferences.5
Ultimately, Freud would fictionalize Ida—giving her the pseud-
onym of Dora for good reason. He did not do well with his young
patient. When she departed from analysis before it was formally ter-
minated, Freud was distressed and distraught. Philipp, who had been
treated by Freud earlier, had hoped that Freud would be able to help
his daughter. When he initially broached the subject of treating Ida,
Philipp suggested that the “supposed” seduction by the lake, which
Ida attributed to Hans Zellenka, never took place.
Much of the Dora case study was fictionalized—contribu-
tions from which came from Philipp Bauer, Hans Zellenka, Peppina
Zellenka, and Freud himself. And so, much of Ida’s life was fictive
because of the interpretations of her father especially and also of
Hans Zellenka. One wonders where her mother was in all of this.
Other than telling her husband about the “seduction” as reported to
her by her daughter, there is very little about her response regarding
her daughter’s situation and her health.
Of course, by now we know that Ida’s father was indeed having
a sexual relationship with Peppina and that Hans had been proposi-
tioning Ida for a number of years—while her parents and the Zellen-
kas pretended that the seduction was “all in her head.”6 That is to say,
again, a “fiction.”
It should be noted that Freud was just beginning to think about
psychoanalysis and how he could work with patients using this new
technique. “Freud enthusiastically greeted Ida as a patient who
would provide him with a suitable test of his theories of hysteria, his
techniques of analysis and of the interpretation of dreams.”7 It would
appear, too, given he was a prolific writer, that he knew immediately
that he was going to write up the case of “Dora.”
93
 Part II. Dora and Freud

In the treatment sessions, Freud pushed Ida to discuss the sex-

ual aspects of her relationship with Hans Zellenka. Given that the
scene at the lake was explicitly sexual, Freud (and Breuer) believed
that such an unambiguously sexual scene could be a traumatic event
that pushed Ida further into hysteria mirroring Hans’s pushing his
erect penis against her body.8
Years later, other writers “protest at Freud demanding of Ida”
that she address and respond to the erect penis of Hans. Ida was dis-
gusted and expressed her disgust, but Freud insisted that she was
repressing her real feelings, which might have had the response of a
grown woman—in other words, that she would have been titillated
by this event.9 Freud consistently refused to acknowledge that Ida
was a young girl, not a woman.
There was also much triangulation in the treatment of Ida. Freud
knew the major players in her life, some of whom he met socially,
but others, like her father and Hans, he met in the consulting room.
He listened to an account by Ida’s father prior to his analysis of her,
recalling that Hans was told by his wife that Ida was only interested
in sexual matters. In discussing this with Ida’s father, Hans appar-
ently made reference to Ida’s reading of sexual manuals, which were
very popular in Vienna at the time (such as Mantegazza’s Physiology
of Love).10
By this time in his career, Freud had a sense of the personal-
ity dynamics of those who came to him for treatment. To his credit,
while he listened and internalized the information received from
others, he assumed that most of what Philipp was telling him was not
true. He noted, too, later in the case study, that Philipp tried to put
the blame for Ida’s distress on her mother, whose peculiarities made
the “‘house unbearable’ for everyone.”11
And so it was that Philipp, in some desperation, marched his
daughter from their apartment to Freud’s apartment and consulting
room at Berggasse 19. The family worried about Ida’s suicidal desires.
Freud began to listen to his patient, to the “other side”—Ida’s side—
rather than relying upon what Philipp told him about his daughter.
“Her father’s words did not always quite tally” with what Freud knew
to be true and with what Ida herself told him.12
94
 Chapter 8. Freud’s Story of the Seductions 

Over the years, other authors have weighed in on Freud’s han-

dling of his young patient. M. Guy Thompson, for example, argues
that Freud used Ida as an experiment. Unfortunately, if true, it was
one that did not produce the results that he wanted: “What he got
instead was a lesson in how unpredictable an analysis can be!” 13
While Freud was apprehensive about accepting Ida as a patient, he
thought he understood enough about dreams, hysteria, secrets, and
desires to be able to help her. “But how many patients would enter
in to analytic treatment in the first place if they understood from
the beginning that its success depended on revealing their ­best-kept
secrets to a person they didn’t even know?”14
So it was that Ida entered Freud’s consulting room, a young
woman “in the first bloom of youth—a girl of intelligent and engag-
ing looks.”15 What Freud learned was that she was on bad terms with
her mother, she had withdrawn from social activities, and she was
quite unhappy; she had shifted her attitude from loving her father to
being on unfriendly terms with him.
The analysis began with Ida’s telling about her earliest interac-
tions with Hans. She spoke to Freud of her disgust at the situation
that Hans put her in over the course of several years. She somatized
her feelings. She had kept most of these encounters secret until she
relayed them to Freud, although she did mention the situation by
the lake to her mother. “She declared that she could still feel upon
the upper part of her body the pressure of Herr K.’s embrace.” Freud
explains:

I believe that during the man’s passionate embrace she felt not merely his
kiss upon her lips but also the pressure of his erect member against her body.
This perception was revolting to her; it was dismissed from her memory,
repressed, and replaced by the innocent sensation of pressure upon her tho-
rax, which in turn derived an excessive intensity from its repressed source.
Once more, therefore, we find a displacement from the lower part of the
body to the upper.16

This situation with Hans brought on strange behaviors in Ida: she

did not like walking past any man whom she thought was in a state
of sexual arousal. She constantly lived with disgust, the sensation of
feeling pressure on the upper part of her body, and she avoided any
95
 Part II. Dora and Freud

men who seemed to be engaged in affectionate conversation. From

reading the case study, it seems that Freud and Ida initially had good
communication. She was always frank and prompt in her answers
and discussions about the sexual details of her symptoms.17
Ida was open to discussing her symptoms, her fear and dis-
gust, and her understanding of sexuality, if not her own sexuality.
She told Freud that although she had knowledge of the sex act, she
didn’t quite understand it. Freud thought this was important, as he
saw sexual issues and the repression of sexual issues as central to his
understanding of the symptoms of hysteria. But much of what would
later fall apart between them was due to the lack of understanding of
the transference. As Lakoff and Coyne write, Freud did not under-
stand until later that Ida “had fallen in love with him as representa-
tive of her father … and Herr K., whom—according to Freud—she
had desired and wished to marry, himself a ­stand-in for her father.”18
One could say that the therapy of thirteen weeks limped along in
the beginning: Freud was engaged in discovery without much inter-
pretation; at least, this was what Ida thought. He did have thoughts
about what was going on with her, though. He felt that Ida’s under-
standing of her father’s relationship with Peppina was for the pur-
pose of suppressing Ida’s own love for Hans, which had once been
conscious. It also served to conceal her love for Peppina, which was,
in an even deeper sense, unconscious. Freud theorized that “these
masculine or, more properly speaking, gynaecophilic currents of feel-
ing are to be regarded as typical of the unconscious erotic life of hys-
terical girls.”19
Even though Freud was not convinced that seeing Ida would be
revelatory for his theories and hypotheses, as he considered her case
one of petite hystérie, he did think that an analysis of Ida’s dreams
would help resolve some of her symptoms, if not her conflicts, which
were unknown to her.20

96
 Chapter 9

Dreams and Desires

On some level, Ida and Freud were in similar situations when

they met; they both had their dreams and their desires—she for
health and normalcy, perhaps; he for respectability and acceptance.
You could say they were paired for their seductions, too. While Ida
was trying to deal with and keep secret the unwelcome attention she
was receiving from Hans Zellenka, it has been alleged that Freud was
secretly seducing his ­sister-in-law, Minna Bernays.
The irony of their combined situation is that in the summer
before Freud’s second and final treatment period with Ida, he “had
just spent five glorious days with Minna” at Lake Garda, the site of
Hans’s second seduction of Ida, which had sent Ida into a tailspin—
and onto Freud’s couch.
In the foreword to Romano’s Freud and the Dora Case, Rud-
nytsky writes, “This circumstance must have decisively impacted
Freud’s treatment of Dora.”1 The meaning of this, of course, was that
Freud himself was allegedly involved in an extramarital affair with
an unmarried woman. It isn’t only Romano and Rudnytsky who have
suggested that Freud was involved with his ­sister-in-law at the time
of treating Ida. Other scholars and authors have also suspected that
something was going on between the two.
Minna had been nursemaid and governess to Freud’s six chil-
dren since 1896, which was when she moved in with Freud and his
wife, Martha, at Berggasse 19. If indeed it is true about his affair with
his ­sister-in-law, perhaps Freud felt some guilt about treating Ida,
who was in an analogous relationship.2
Minna, four years younger than her sister, Martha, was the
youngest in the family, born on June 18, 1865, in Hamburg. Minna
was four years old when the family moved from Hamburg to Vienna,
97
 Part II. Dora and Freud

following her father’s four-

year jail sentence for bank-
ruptcy fraud. Little is known
about her childhood.3
We do know that when
her father died in 1869,
she was taken care of by
her mother and, strangely
enough, Sigmund Pappen-
heim, the father of Bertha
Pappenheim—better known
as Anna O. (Pappenheim
was legal guardian to all the
Bernays children, given that
the two families had been
close for years.)4
Minna suffered from
tuberculosis, never mar-
ried, and worked briefly
as a tutor and companion.
She had been engaged to
Ignaz Schonberg, a schol-
arly friend of Freud’s, until The Bernays sisters: On the left, Martha
he died of tuberculosis in (holding hat on her lap). The two sisters,
with Martha seated and Minna standing.
1886, after which Minna The photograph was created on January
resigned herself to her sin- 1, 1882 (Library of Congress).
gle state. She took care of
her mother in Hamburg and worked as a lady’s companion until, in
the mid–1890s, she moved in with the Freuds at Berggasse 19, a wel-
come permanent guest. She was “Aunt Minna,” who lived through
her nephews and nieces, taking them to spas, and suffering (she once
told Freud) from “obligatory migraines.”5
It was after many attempts at finding a place for herself in the world
that she moved in permanently with the Freuds. She remained there for
the rest of her life, taking care of the household and the children, espe-
cially given that Freud’s wife was often absent from the home.6
98
 Chapter 9. Dreams and Desires

While it is known that Freud and his ­sister-in-law traveled for an

extended time without Martha, it still appears to be speculation as to
whether they had a love affair. It does seem that they were close. And
there is evidence that they signed into a hotel as “Dr. Sigm. Freud u
Frau,” registered to room 11, on Saturday, August 13, 1898. While sus-
picious, this on its own does not necessarily indicate that they were
lovers. To be fair, others dispute this, claiming that letters between
the two “do show a relationship of mental and personal intimacy, as
between siblings, but they do not in any way hint at a love affair.”7
Whether or not they had a sexual relationship, they did have an
intimate one, living in the same household (and Freud implored her
to move in with them) and corresponding sometimes secretly for
years. Peter Gay writes:
The two were close enough, indeed, to exchange letters in secret, keeping
Minna Bernays’ mother from reading them. “Dear Minning,” Freud wrote
on April 28, 1887, “my effort to appear as an affectionate ­son-in-law, in addi-
tion to my lack of time, has led to the cessation of our private correspon-
dence….” He wanted to resume it, especially since he sensed that she was in a
bad mood “…for which I do not want to be even partly responsible.” Again he
canvassed the possibility of her visit, which both Freuds so cordially desired.
In fact, he told her in confidence, they wanted more: “We firmly intend to
keep you with us until you establish your own household or after you, follow-
ing our previous discussions, begin university studies at thirty.” He pleaded:
“Dear child, don’t be grumpy. Come to us and let us consider together how
we can move Mama here.” These were not matters the two could discuss
openly, since Frau Bernays, exacting and pious, would feel uncomfortable in
the Freud household.8

If Freud had a close relationship with his ­sister-in-law, he always

had an interesting one with his wife. Much more has been written
about the connection between Freud and his wife. Their letters show
a couple devoted to each other who worked in a united way: she
raised the six children and ran the household (with a great deal of
help—much of which came from Minna), and he established himself
as a professional physician, scholar, and author. It should be noted
that following the birth of the last child, the couple resigned them-
selves to practicing abstinence as a means of contraception. “Martha
was clearly a strong, capable woman who had to stretch her affec-
tions across the Bernays ménage, a narcissistic husband, and six
99
 Part II. Dora and Freud

children.” By all accounts

she did that exceedingly
well, with or without sex
with Sigmund.9
D e cker makes an
interesting point about
Freud’s relationship with
his wife and his descrip-
tion of Ida’s mother.
Like Philipp, she writes,
Freud acceded to the
rule of his wife within the
household:
Furthermore, in light of
Freud’s personal experi-
ences with his wife, one
can see why he was not
sympathetic to Käthe Bau-
er’s predicament and
lacked insight into the
dynamics of the Bauer fam-
ily’s pathological constel-
lation. Martha Freud, too,
seems to have been a com-
pulsive cleaner. If not so
drastic a one as Käthe, she Sigmund and Martha, in June 1885 (Library
nonetheless resembled her of Congress).
in having “unremitting”
call to domestic duty. Freud took note of Martha’s ways immediately follow-
ing their honeymoon and wrote to his new ­sister-in-law, Minna Bernays,
after four months of marriage: “My wife scolds only when I spill something
or leave something lying about in disorder, or when I lead her across a filthy
spot on the street. It is generally said that I am henpecked. What should one
do against that?” The words might have been Philipp Bauer’s as a newlywed.10
All of this about Minna and Martha and Freud should be taken
with a grain of salt, but you could say, given the possibility of an
affair between Freud and Minna, that the lives of both Freud and Ida
appeared to be involved in sexual activity and seduction around Lake
Garda. Because of this, perhaps unconsciously, Freud began ask-
ing Ida about dreams that had something to do with the lake visit
100
 Chapter 9. Dreams and Desires

with Hans. The first dream they discussed had to do with that holi-
day. This was a recurring dream of Ida’s, but until she recounted it to
Freud, she had not recollected that it was indeed recurring. Here is
the dream:
A house was on fire. My father was standing beside my bed and woke me up.
I dressed myself quickly. Mother wanted to stop and save her ­jewel-case; but
Father said: “I refuse to let myself and my two children be burnt for the sake
of your ­jewel-case.” We hurried downstairs, and as soon as I was outside I
woke up.11

Freud explained to Ida that she should take the dream apart, bit
by bit. As she had already had some training in dream analysis, Ida
knew that this way of looking at her dream might elicit new material.
From the case study:
“Something occurs to me,” she said, “but it cannot belong to the dream, for it
is quite recent, whereas I have certainly had the dream before.”
“That makes no difference,” I replied. “Start away! It will simply turn out to
be the most recent thing that fits in with the dream.”
“Very well, then. Father has been having a dispute with Mother in the last
few days, because she locks the ­dining-room door at night. My brother’s
room, you see, has no separate entrance, but can only be reached through
the ­dining-room. Father does not want my brother to be locked in like that at
night. He says it will not do: something might happen in the night so that it
might be necessary to leave the room.”12

After suggesting to Ida that she “pay close attention to the exact
words you used. You may have to make use of them,” he asked her
about the risk of fire. She then remembered about that trip to the
lake and how there was no lightning conductor on the house that the
Zellenkas were staying in. This caused her father some distress, she
recalled. They continued analyzing the dream and the issue of fire,
and how her father was openly afraid of fire and concerned when he
saw the Zellenkas’ wooden home without that “­lightning-conductor,”
or lightning rod, as we know it today. She further allowed that she
had this dream several times while she was with the Zellenkas at
the lake. After discussing the dream with Freud, she also remem-
bered that while they were at the lake and following the seduc-
tion at the lake, she had returned to the cottage and taken a short
nap.
101
 Part II. Dora and Freud

Ida: I suddenly awoke and saw Herr K. standing beside me….

Freud: In fact, just as you saw your father standing beside your bed in the
dream?
Ida: Yes. I asked him sharply what it was he wanted there. By way of reply
he said he was not going to be prevented from coming into his own
bedroom when he wanted; besides, there was something he wanted to
fetch. This episode put me on my guard, and I asked Frau K. whether
there was not a key to the bedroom door. The next morning (on the sec-
ond day) I locked myself in while I was dressing. In the afternoon, when
I wanted to lock myself in so as to lie down again on the sofa, the key
was gone. I am convinced that Herr K. had removed it.13

In Romano’s chapter “The Dream of the Burning House,” his

explication of the Dora case and the first dream is that the dream
“had been instigated by the episode on the lake with Herr K., while
on the second occasion, it occurred when the patient was clarify-
ing ‘an obscure point of her childhood’ with her analyst.” 14 He goes
on to suggest that while the dream replicates Ida’s experience on the
lake with Hans, it also has a connection with “what is happening in
the analysis”—and also what happened during Ida’s childhood, which
Freud decides he “will not satisfy the reader’s curiosity on this point,
as he does not reveal what he knew or had deduced about the nature
of this obscure childhood episode.”15
Freud’s analysis of the dream continues with his interpretation of
Ida’s father standing over her bed not as a protector but as a voyeur,
while it is Hans who in reality stood at her bed as a voyeur. Freud also
understands the issue of the father’s etiology in hysteria and the link
between Hans and Dora’s father of standing over her bed in the dream.16
According to Freud, the participants in Ida’s dream, the father
and the ­w ould-be lover, signified an unconscious desire on Ida’s
part to engage in a sexual act. Freud believed that Ida was in love
with Hans, despite her protestations, and he used the “­j ewel-case”
of the dream to illustrate that. In fact, Decker explains, “One of the
presents K. had given Dora was an expensive jewel case, which was
also a slang expression for a woman’s genitals.” There was to be an
exchange—his gift for her vagina. Freud used this dream and the
many interpretations he made to argue that Ida was preoccupied
with sex, either through intercourse or masturbation.17
102
 Chapter 9. Dreams and Desires

During one of their sessions, Ida came in with a purse hanging

from her waist. Ida kept opening and closing the purse and playing
with it. Freud concurred that her actions mimicked what she wanted
to do with her own genitals—to masturbate.18
Freud spoke openly about sexual issues with Ida, and he
informed her that he had trained himself to detect all kinds of sym-
bolism. He said, “Before him, ‘no mortal [could] keep a secret. If [the
patient’s] lips are silent, he chatters with his ­fi nger-tips; betrayal
oozes out of him at every pore.’”19
Unfortunately, from the beginning of her analysis with Freud,
Ida conflated her father and Hans, both of whom she believed used
her in a sexual way. While Freud was not sexual with Ida, he certainly
had no hesitation in speaking of sexual matters to the young woman.
According to Decker:
Freud intensified Dora’s identification of himself with the other two older
men, and, indeed, heightened her fears of adult sexual involvement, by his
insistence on discussing sexual matters with her very early in the psycho-
analysis. It was never clear to Dora what Freud’s motives were for seeing
her and what was the basis for his inquiries about her sexual knowledge and
thoughts.20

It seems that Freud had some sense that Ida was wary of his sex-
ual discussions, but he never really came to understand her uneasi-
ness about these talks, especially those brought on by his analysis of
the first dream, which was detailed in the case study. As the dream
was interpreted, Ida felt threatened by the thought of Hans stand-
ing at her bed (instead of her father, as in the dream), but also of
Freud himself. It was this unease, Freud would tell her later, that led
to her ultimately deciding to leave analysis. Decker suggests, “It was
not until Dora left Freud and he was writing up the case did it occur
to him that he had overlooked the feelings Dora had transferred from
Hans onto him.”21
However, before Ida left her analysis with Freud, there was a sec-
ond dream to analyze.

103
 Chapter 10

Dreams and Hysteria

It was several weeks later that the second dream occurred, which
Freud used in the Dora case study. It was the analysis of this dream
that would terminate the relationship between Freud and Ida. This
second dream was more extensive and complex than the first dream.
Here it is in its entirety, as presented in the case study.
I was walking about in a town which I did not know. I saw streets and squares
which were strange to me. Then I came into a house where I lived, went to
my room, and found a letter from Mother lying there. She wrote saying that
as I had left home without my parents’ knowledge she had wished to write to
me to say that Father was ill. “Now he is dead and if you like you can come.”
I then went to the station [Bahnhof ] and asked about a hundred times:
“Where is the station?” I always got the answer: “Five minutes.” I then saw
a thick wood before me which I went into, and there I asked a man whom I
met. He said to me: “Two and a half hours more.” He offered to accompany
me. But I refused and went alone. I saw the station in front of me and could
not reach it. At the same time I had the usual feeling of anxiety that one has
in dreams when one cannot move forward. Then I was at home. I must have
been travelling in the meantime, but I know nothing about that. I walked
into the porter’s lodge, and inquired for our flat. The maidservant opened
the door to me and replied that “Mother and the others were already at the
cemetery [Friedhof ].”
To this she subsequently made an important addendum: “I saw a monu-
ment in one of the squares.”
To this came the addendum: “There was a ­question-mark after this word,
thus: ‘like’?”
In repeating the dream she said: “Two hours.”
In the next sitting Dora brought me two addenda to this: “I saw myself
particularly distinctly going up the stairs,” and “After she had answered I
went to my room, but not the least sadly, and reading a big book that lay on
my writingtable.”1

This dream is clearly more involved than the first, and, as Freud
recounts, there was some difficulty with the interpretation. This was

104
 Chapter 10. Dreams and Hysteria

partly due to the fact that Ida had been asking Freud about the “con-
nection between some of her actions and the motives which presum-
ably underlay them.” She wanted to know why she waited so long to
tell anyone about the scene by the lake, and why she even bothered to
tell her parents.2
Freud’s answer to this was to wonder aloud why she would ask
such questions, suggesting that a “normal girl” would deal with this
situation by herself. But Ida was only seventeen years old—a mis-
understanding that Freud consistently called out in the case study,
assuming that Ida was a woman, not a girl.3
In Freud’s assessment of the dream, he began by trying to iden-
tify the town she was in, which turned out to be not Merano but a
town that Ida had seen in photographs in a book sent to her by a
friend. The young man who sent her the book was a ­quasi-suitor,
someone who probably was more interested in Ida than she was in
him.4 Walking around in the strange town was in some way related
to her first visit to Dresden, when she wandered the city on her own,
specifically to visit the Sistine Madonna. Her cousin had wanted to
show her around, but Ida wanted to be alone. She remained for two
hours in front of the Sistine Madonna, according to Freud, “rapt in
silent admiration.”5
In the dream, Ida asked “about a hundred times” where the “sta-
tion” was, which Freud interpreted as looking for the jewel case,
i.e., the genitals. Ida related to Freud that on the evening before
the dream, the Bauers had company. Her father asked her to fetch
him a brandy, so Ida asked her mother where the key to the side-
board was. When her mother, deep in conversation, did not answer,
Ida exclaimed impatiently, “‘I’ve asked you a hundred times already
where the key is.’” Since this replicated her query about where the
station was in the dream, Freud came to the interpretation that the
station equaled the jewel box, which equaled genitals.6
Freud then went on to discuss the letter in the dream indicat-
ing that Ida’s father was ill, and the discovery that he had died. Freud
associated this with the letter that Ida herself had written to her
parents about wanting to kill herself, which gave her parents such
a fright that her father took her to see Freud as soon as he could.
105
 Part II. Dora and Freud

According to Freud, Ida’s intent in writing that letter was to shock

her father into giving up Peppina—or to take revenge on him for his
association with her, who, strangely enough, Ida still cared about.
(Freud took Ida’s father “craving the brandy” to imply that it repli-
cated Ida’s craving for revenge.)7
Freud went further into the dream, suggesting that the question
mark after the word “like” (“Now he is dead and if you like you can
come”), which Ida added in the addendum, signified her recollection
of a letter received from Frau K. inviting Ida to the lake for a visit,
saying, “If you would like to come.” Freud then writes, “Here we were
back again at the scene by the lake and at the problems connected
with it.” He then asked Ida to describe the scene at the lake in detail.8
Ida again described in detail the scene at the lake where Hans
had inappropriately attempted to seduce her, forcing himself on
her. She recalled that she tried to leave him but found that walking
back to the villa from where they were would take two-and-a-half
hours, so she went back to Hans, who begged her not to tell any-
one. Freud pulled out the significant words: bahnhof (train station),
friedhof (cemetery or ­peace-court), and vorhof (vestibulum; literally,
forecourt; an anatomical term for a particular region of the female
genitals).9
“This might have been no more than a misleading joke. But now,
with the addition of the ‘nymphs’ visible in the background of a ‘thick
wood,’ no further doubts could be entertained. Hers was a symbolic
geography of sex!”10 Anyone, Freud claimed, who used these terms
and those above as Ida did must have taken them from an encyclo-
pedia—“the common refuge of youth when it is devoured by sex-
ual curiosity.” Thus, Freud concluded that this must be the fantasy
of defloration, of a man seeking to force an entrance into the female
genitals.11
Freud added one more point about the dream which had some-
how been forgotten; it had to do with a piece of the dream where she
said, “She went calmly to her room, and began reading a big book
that lay on her ­w riting-table.” Ida further explained to Freud that
her dream determined that the book was an encyclopedia (which
he put in a footnote in his case study). Believing this to be true and
106
 Chapter 10. Dreams and Hysteria

adding to the mix that children didn’t tend to read forbidden subjects
such as she might have found in the encyclopedia, Freud and others
believed that since her father was indeed dead—in the dream—she
could read whatever she wanted to read: “She could read or love as
she pleased.”12
These meetings between Ida and Freud where her dreams were
analyzed, including the second dream, took place between Octo-
ber 14 and late December 1900. In his interpretations, Freud took
many liberties with what he believed was Ida’s unconscious. He was
sure that Ida was in love with Hans and that her protestations were
merely her resistance in acknowledging that. Following these reve-
lations and interpretations that Freud found or thought he found,
especially in the second dream, which he tied to her hysteria—or as I
might argue, her ­so-called hysteria—things went from bad to worse
for Freud and his patient.
Freud believed the two sexual attacks perpetrated by Hans Zel-
lenka were “the traumatic roots of her hysterical symptoms,” accord-
ing to Sharon Heller. Freud reasoned that Ida thought that Hans was
attractive and alluring; thus, the first kiss, which she said disgusted
her, only hid her sexual interest, which Freud further argued was the
root of Ida’s “hysterical” reaction.13
Freud claimed that this disgust is not uncommon—albeit neu-
rotic—given that the male sexual organ reminds some women of uri-
nation. Ida’s ­long-standing chronic and nervous cough displaced the
positive sensation of arousal from genitals to mouth. Hans Zellenka
would likely have had an erection when he assaulted Ida. She told
Freud that she hallucinated that she experienced Hans’s embrace on
her upper body but felt it in her lower body.14
Freud’s leap from mouth to genitals fit with his newly develop-
ing libido theory in which the mouth was the first erogenous zone. A
thumb sucker for many years, Ida had a memory of sitting content-
edly on the floor as a child, sucking her thumb as she tugged at her
brother’s ear. Freud theorized that Ida continued to derive sensual
pleasure from sucking through her middle childhood years and spec-
ulated that she unconsciously fantasized oral sex between her father
and Frau K. Apparently, Ida believed that her father was frequently
107
 Part II. Dora and Freud

impotent and that Frau K. used oral stimulation to satisfy him sex-
ually. These sexual fantasies produced an oral symptom of hysteria:
her persistent cough. After Dora “tacitly accepted” Freud’s interpre-
tation, the cough disappeared.15
Just as Freud was getting to the point of analyzing Ida’s hysteria
in depth, she decided to leave treatment. He asked her when it was
that she first began to think about leaving, to which she replied that it
was two weeks prior—this on the day she left him. Freud interpreted
this to mean that she was giving a ­two-week notice, like what the
governess for Hans Zellenka’s children had given—after Hans had
rejected her sexually and otherwise. This is the same young woman
who fell in love with Hans Zellenka, then felt betrayed by him since
he did not divorce Peppina and stay with her as she had hoped. Freud
believed this was not only the governess’s wish, but Ida’s as well—
that Hans, her nemesis, would leave Peppina and marry her. Freud
felt this was a replaying of the oedipal conflict: Ida loved her father
and was jealous of her mother, which in many ways is a universal
feeling in early childhood—one which Ida had discussed.16
Ida refused to believe Freud’s theory. Interestingly, particularly
for a young woman of those times, Ida was willing to talk about the
most personal of subjects in her life—and to argue with her thera-
pist about his theories, at least as Freud interpreted her discourse.
She was generally more apt to verbally disagree with Freud than to
stay silent, and she was not afraid or embarrassed to speak about sex-
ual topics. This is all the more surprising as ­middle-class Jewish girls
and women felt especially powerless, being discriminated against as
Jews—and as women.
It is entirely possible that Freud’s theory was a misrepresen-
tation of his young patient. According to Katharina Adler, Ida’s
­g reat-granddaughter, “This is the way Freud presented it in his case
study. However, there are strong indications that this might have
been spurious. Freud may have misrepresented some details here in
order to protect himself.”17
At the Library of Congress, there is an interview with Ida’s
cousin, Elsa Foges, who claims that Ida told her during the time of
her analysis that it was Freud who informed her how babies were
108
 Chapter 10. Dreams and Hysteria

made. This disavows Freud’s claim that Ida had good sense of sexual
activities prior to entering treatment.18
Freud’s analysis of Ida was thwarted by her abrupt termina-
tion of treatment nearly three months after it began. In many ways,
Freud’s inability at the time to understand the transference—where
Ida looked upon both Freud and Hans Zellenka as her father—was
what drove her from analysis at a time when she very much needed
the guidance and interpretation of the transference. Freud, too,
would have benefited from having a better understanding of his own
countertransference, which he did not completely understand until
sometime after the analysis ended.
Freud had tried to communicate to Ida the configuration of the
people in her life, but he was woefully unable to do this adequately.
Freud’s assessment was that Ida could be helped by admitting to her
sexual desires—that she was leading on Hans and that she did in fact
want to have sex with him. He expressed that she could freely submit
herself to the acknowledgment of this situation without any guilty
feelings. Ida disbelieved Freud’s assessment, as she was consciously
repulsed by Hans Zellenka. Years later, many would argue that Freud
had set up a situation of mastery and submission—and Ida would
have none of it. As Niall Boyce wrote in the Lancet:
Freud’s way of seeing things was understandably unpalatable to Dora, who
walked out, and it is to his credit that he was not afraid to discuss his defeat,
and to reconsider what it meant for his practice—in this case, in terms of the
phenomenon of transference. Perhaps this frankness, persistence, and ability
to cope with setbacks by learning from failure is one of the reasons psycho-
analysis is still going strong, albeit at some remove from mainstream psy-
chiatric practice, of which it is frequently critical. Are those who continue to
use it historical ­re-enactors, the mental health equivalent of the Sealed Knot
society? I don’t think so: whatever one’s view on the clinical effectiveness and
publicly funded provision of psychoanalytic services, Freud’s work is still rel-
evant for modern mental health. That does not mean that Dora should be
taken as an instruction manual…. I would say that Dora remains shocking,
infuriating, enthralling, and inspiring. It is an indispensable text for anyone
wanting to get to grips with psychiatry.19

Since Ida did not believe Freud’s interpretation of her or her

dreams, she was done with Freud. Her last visit with him was on
December 31, 1900, following his interpretation of the second
109
 Part II. Dora and Freud

dream. This conversation with Freud about the dream had upset Ida.
Her abandonment of him and the analysis came as a complete shock
to Freud. He began writing his case study of her almost immediately
and apparently finished early in 1901, calling it “Dreams and Hyste-
ria.” He then sent it off to the Journal of Psychologie und Neurologie.20

110
 Chapter 11

The Master

Freud’s narrative of his treatment of Ida, his longest case study,

combines his recitations of her life with his interpretations of her life
and the events it comprised. Because she was happy with neither his
perceptions of her nor his way of interacting with her, she left him
after seeing him six days a week for about three months.
Freud was upset that she left, and there is some suggestion that
he was angry with her. It may even be said that he was not emotion-
ally centered enough to engage adequately in an analysis with his
young patient. As noted earlier, Freud diagnosed Ida as being hys-
terical; he looked at her physical symptoms as a path to her psycho-
logical difficulties. Prior to seeing Freud, Ida had been diagnosed
by two physicians as having appendicitis when she presented with
symptoms of cramps and stomach pain. Freud, however, disagreed
and speculated that she had a case of hysterical pregnancy—given
that she had those encounters with Hans Zellenka around the time of
the ­so-called appendicitis attacks. Many have written that Freud bul-
lied his young patient, demanding that she admit her sexual attrac-
tion for Zellenka. He also told her that she suppressed her sexuality,
given that she masturbated. And most damning of all perhaps was
when he told her that he knew all her secrets. As one author put it,
“all her dirty secrets.”1
But what about his secrets? Freud was ­forty-four years old, three
years younger than Ida’s father, at the time he began his analysis of
Ida. As noted earlier, there have been more than several suggestions
that Freud was having an affair with his ­sister-in-law, Minna Bernays.
And while he may not have had intercourse with her, he was involved
with her emotionally. Minna was his confidante, and it seems that he
turned more to her than to his wife. If this wasn’t enough “baggage”
111
 Part II. Dora and Freud

to bring into the

consulting ro om,
he was also expe-
riencing bouts of
depression and anx-
iety. Shortly before
Freud began treating
Ida, his father, Jacob
Freud, had died in
October 1896 at the
age of ­e ighty-one,
following an illness
that began in June.
Freud would call the
death of a father—
his father—the most
significant event of a
man’s life. He wrote
to his friend, Wil-
helm Fliess, “I do
not begrudge him
the ­w ell-deser ved Sigmund Freud at the age of eight with his father
rest that he him- Jakob (Wikimedia Commons).
self desires. He was
an interesting human being, very happy with himself, he is suffering
very little now, and is fading with decency and dignity.” He also told
Fliess that the death of his father affected him deeply. Yet, while he
could extoll the virtues of his father upon his passing, Freud had not
had such sanguine feelings for his father during his lifetime.2
Shortly thereafter, Freud began the practice of analyzing his own
dreams, slips of the tongue, lapses of memory, and everyday occur-
rences, which helped him with his continuous experimentation with
theories, eliminating ones that did not seem to work, like his seduc-
tion theory of neurosis. According to Peter D. Kramer, “By the late
1890s, an analysis of his own mental functioning had become Freud’s
central project.”3
112
 Chapter 11. The Master

One thing that Freud did believe in was a child’s desire for “an
exclusive relationship with the parent of the opposite sex and jeal-
ousy—even hatred—of the parent of the same sex, which perhaps he
came to from this examination of his own life and his relationship
with his parents. He thought the child’s feelings were complicated by
simultaneous love and animosity toward both parents. This under-
standing was a new idea that would come to be known as the theory
of instinctual infantile sexuality.”4
In dealing with his patients’ “demons,” Freud had to look into
his own. And if his multiple symptoms are any indication, then his
demons were man-
ifold. He was a man
of deep fears, espe-
cially of dying, and
had unresolved
issues regarding his
parents . He con-
tinued to be dev-
iled by phobias that
remained with him
for most of his life,
like his fear of travel.
He had migraines.
He fainted. He ex-
amined his earliest
dreams and memo-
ries, many of which
were both exciting
and dangerous, but
became “grist for the
psychoanalytic mill.
His pinnacle discov-
eries reveal both the Freud apparently idealized his mother, who bore
man and the origin eight children, but considered her son Sigmund
“mein goldener Sigi.” Freud was sixteen years old
of key ideas.”5 when this picture was taken (Wikimedia Com-
With regard to mons).
113
 Part II. Dora and Freud

his residual feelings toward his father, or lack thereof, Freud analyzed
them exhaustively. According to Freud, his father was weak and inef-
fective and, indeed, had lost a great deal of money over the years,
which threw the family into poverty. Because of his father’s disposi-
tion, Freud’s mother, Amalia, became the head of the family. Freud
also believed that his father did not appreciate him, his own son, and
this belief dominated Freud for most of his life.6
As Freud’s ­s elf-analysis progressed, darker and more sinister
depths of his unconscious spilled out beyond hostile feelings for his
father. Freud discovered a sexual interest in his mother, jealousy of
an older brother as his rival, and a wish for the death of a younger
sibling—in short, the makings of Freud’s own oedipal stirrings and
the fodder for his quickly evolving ideas of the ­then-preposterous
notion of childhood sexuality.7
Despite struggling with all his fears and anxieties, just before
working with Ida, Freud was extremely creative, writing and publish-
ing works that are still relevant and important today. Yet even with
this success, he continued to feel discouraged and deprived. During
the period before Philipp Bauer brought Ida to be analyzed, Freud
suffered one of his most hurtful and recurring professional defeats,
which contributed to his feelings of worthlessness.
In September 1900, he was once again passed over by the
Ministry of Education for promotion from lecturer to associate
professor. This promotion was important for a physician and con-
ferred great status as well as the ability to earn much higher fees.
Freud believed that he was denied tenure because of being Jew-
ish. These societal concerns about anti–Semitism in Vienna, as
well as his personal concerns, worried Freud. He feared for his
children’s future in a society that abused and debased Jews. If this
were not enough, he was despondent about the poor reception of
his epic work, The Interpretation of Dreams. This tome, recognized
by many as the definitive work on dreams, was virtually ignored for
years.8
Freud believed that the path to understanding oneself was to
analyze one’s dreams, which he continuously did. In The Interpre-
tation of Dreams, he presented himself as the detective, a Sherlock
114
 Chapter 11. The Master

Holmes, “detecting the obscure in the seemingly obvious and the

obvious in the obscure.”9
As to Freud’s discoveries about himself, at the turn of the cen-
tury, he found that he was extremely unhappy about being “mid-
dle aged.” According to Decker, nothing made him happy—not his
famous cigars, sexual intercourse, or his contact with people. In
May, on his ­forty-fourth birthday, he told himself that he was “an old
somewhat shabby Israelite.”10 Apparently, he could not analyze him-
self into feeling better about the aging process.
A word about the cigars: Freud was “fatally addicted to his cigars,
smoking twenty a day for years.”11 Beginning when he was about
­twenty-four, like his father before him, he became a heavy smoker, and
continued until he was ­eighty-one. He had many symptoms caused
by the cigar smoking: nasal catarrh and breathlessness, to name but
two. There has been speculation as to why Freud continued to smoke
when he knew it could eventually cause him to develop cancer. Wil-
helm Reich speculated that Freud’s denial was a result of his unhappy
sex life with his wife, Martha. Freud considered that smoking was a
substitute for the ­so-called primal addiction, masturbation, although
he has also famously said, “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.”12
When Freud began analyzing Ida, he brought into the consulting
room all his anxieties, fears, phobias, disrupted relationships, and
hostilities. With his own mental and emotional issues, was it any sur-
prise that Ida would quit therapy? She no doubt had entered a ther-
apeutic relationship with him in the beginning, not only with hopes
to resolve some of her symptoms, but also in the “hope of a sympa-
thetic ear to her position as a pawn in an adult chess game of sex-
ual ­trade-offs.” Instead, she was told that she unconsciously wanted
to bed the scoundrel who had taken advantage of her innocence and
who repelled her, and that the person she really wished to have sex
with and marry was her father.13
Freud was domineering and unsympathetic toward Ida—sur-
prising, given that some of his issues were similar to her issues, such
as that she wanted to marry her father and he wanted to marry his
mother, and she was symptomatic because of unexpressed thoughts
and he was symptomatic because of repressed thoughts.
115
 Part II. Dora and Freud

While Freud did think Ida was an engaging young woman (per-
haps because she was the daughter of a wealthy and successful man-
ufacturer), he certainly did not seem to care for her. He was also
careless about details concerning her life, writing that she was older
than she was. She was, after all, only thirteen years of age when Zel-
lenka first attempted to seduce her. Freud did not really account for
how young she was and thought that she should have acknowledged
that when Zellenka’s penis pressed against her ­thirteen-year-old
body, she might actually have felt desire, rather than displacement—
with a sensation upward, reversing excitation into disgust.14
As mentioned, Ida did not like his interpretations, and this
annoyed Freud. As Kramer writes:
So annoyed was Freud that when his young patient approached him sixteen
months later over a facial neuralgia, he refused to tend to her. In the interim,
Bauer had made progress on her own, by confronting the Zellenkas. She
got the husband to admit to having propositioned her, while the wife tac-
itly acknowledged the affair with Bauer’s father. Freud wrote that though
he would not treat Bauer further, he “promised to forgive her for having
deprived me [him] of the satisfaction of affording her a far more radical cure
for her troubles.”15

So much for Freud’s technique and empathy. However, the fail-

ure of Freud’s analysis of her allowed him to develop his theories of
transference and countertransference, so the three months he spent
with Ida were not wasted—at least not from his perspective. It was
some time after she abruptly left therapy with him that Freud came
to an understanding of what had happened. Even though he was furi-
ous at her when she left, believing that she was taking the revenge on
him that she wanted to take on her father and Hans Zellenka, he was
able to create a historic case study that is still examined and reflected
upon today.16
In the postscript to the case study, Freud explains that he called
the study a “fragment,” and goes on to explain that “the reader will
have discovered that it is incomplete to a far greater degree than its
title might have led him to expect.” Freud remarks that much was
omitted because the “work was broken off.”17
While Freud takes great pains to explain the analysis and the
aftermath in his case study, much is left out—Freud’s thoughts about
116
 Chapter 11. The Master
.

Ida, for one thing. And it was Freud’s contention that patients like
Ida needed to use words, not body language, with Ida being a master
at body talk versus word talk. However, it could be that if Ida talked
with her body, it might have been because no one listened to her
words. In fact, according to Kuriloff, “If Dora speaks with her body
because she feels unheard in any other way, Freud’s imposing mean-
ings on her behavior perpetuated this familiar, unfortunate sense of
herself with others.”18
Freud himself was not too willing to engage with Ida. Kuriloff
goes on to explain:
Freud was ambivalent regarding therapeutic embroilment. With Dora, he
recognized that the thorny path of transference was a resistance. Later, in
1912, he knew that it was the road to cure, providing the assurance that,
rather than burn the neurosis “in absentia or effigie”—or interpret the
embodied fantasy and attendant fears with words alone—transference
ensured the reliving of the patient’s desire and conflict in the moment. The
inference here is that transference’s immediacy, akin to that of pointed
bodily sensation, provides something more than words—that psychoanalysis
is an acute unfolding between two people. In this way, Freud was really the
first interpersonal psychoanalyst.19

While Freud knew that Ida’s leaving analysis did not allow her to
complete the journey of finishing her treatment with him, he knew
only too well that his own errors had caused her to abandon him, and
now it might be too late to help her.

117
 Part III

Triumph Over Freud

The great question that has never been answered, and

which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my
thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is “What
does a woman want?”
—Sigmund Freud

119
 Chapter 12

The Return

Even as Ida left Freud’s couch at the end of 1900, offering a warm
­good-bye to her doctor, she was ever the gracious Viennese young
woman. With a “Happy New Year,” she sailed out of his office, down
the steps, and out to the street, knowing she would not be returning
to him in the New Year. Despite urgings from her father to continue
with Freud—six days a week of treatment—Ida demurred. She sensed
that her father only wanted her to continue analysis so he could con-
tinue unimpeded in his amorous relationship with Peppina. (Philipp
had hoped that Freud would convince Ida that the relationship with
Peppina was a positive thing for all concerned.)1
Treatment with Freud did not remove the obstacles of dys-
function and loss from Ida’s life. Her parents, while somewhat con-
cerned about her health, were more interested in fulfilling their own
impulses and fantasies—her father with his mistress and her mother
with her fanatical housecleaning. About a year before Ida began anal-
ysis with Freud, she had lost her aunt Malvine, whom Freud would
describe in the case study as a woman who “gave clear evidence of a
severe form of psychoneurosis without any characteristically hyster-
ical symptoms.”2 Ida had loved and emulated Malvine.
Freud would continue to write in his “fragments” that Ida’s
sympathies had always been with her father’s family. He suggested
also that Malvine’s symptoms were incorporated into Ida’s psyche—
that she had been a role model of dysfunction for her young niece.3
Given that Malvine and Ida were close, and that when Ida was in
Vienna she spent a great deal of her time with her aunt and her two
cousins, it would make sense that the impressionable girl would adopt
the characteristics of the woman she admired. Sadly, in April of the
year before Ida began analysis with Freud, Malvine died. Ida had
120
 Chapter 12. The Return

returned to Vienna from Reichenberg, where her family had moved

after leaving Merano, to be with her ailing aunt. Following her death,
Ida stayed in Vienna for several weeks to be with her two cousins.4
Prior to her analysis and during it, Ida was also missing her
brother, Otto. The two siblings had been so close that their bedwet-
ting occurred in tandem, as did the development of other childhood
illnesses and symptoms. As Otto entered adolescence, he removed
himself somewhat from the family dynamic, and from his sister, to
concentrate on schoolwork and studies. Otto was ambitious and was
not going to let his family’s significant issues get in the way of his
professional advancement.5
Ida brought all these losses into her analysis with Freud, but
once Ida abruptly terminated the analysis, the same grief and issues
remained: family promiscuity, ill health, loss of intimacy, inability
to flourish, and repression of women in Viennese society. Despite
all this, Ida did begin to thrive within the first few months of her
departure from Freud’s couch. “Her attacks of aphonia and coughing
became less frequent and her depression lifted.”6
Then, a tragic event occurred, one that led Ida to getting the
affirmation she desired. On May 17, 1901, Klara, the ill daughter of
Peppina and Hans, died from congenital heart disease. Ida decided
to make a call of condolence to the Zellenkas and was greeted by the
two as if nothing had happened between her and Hans or between
the two families. It was her decision, however, not only to pay her
respects to the family but also to demand answers and accountability
from the grieving parents.7
Ida got what she came for. Peppina acknowledged that she and
Philipp had, and continued to have, a love affair, and, more surpris-
ing, Hans confessed that he had made an overture of a sexual nature
to Ida when she was younger. As Decker writes, “She then returned
home and gave this news to her father. Unfortunately, we do not
know his reaction.”8
This “confession” by the two Zellenkas must have eased Ida’s
mind a great deal. Her health continued to improve as she studied
privately and went to lectures, continuing her own ­s elf-education.
She seemed healthy and to be enjoying life. However, about five
121
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

months after her visit to the Zellenkas, she ran into Hans, and this
seemed to frighten her a great deal. Hans, too, was so shocked at the
accidental meeting that he stepped off the curb in surprise and was
run over by a carriage. Fortunately, he was not seriously hurt. While
seeing Hans catapulted Ida back into her symptoms, she continued
to study and vowed never to marry.9
Then, in March 1902, following a ­two-week bout of facial neu-
ralgia, Ida returned to Freud on April 1—fifteen months after she had
walked out on him. But Freud was still more than just a little annoyed
at her having abruptly left his analysis and told her frankly that he
would not take her on as a patient. Ida took the time during that visit
to tell him that Klara Zellenka had died, that her father and Peppina
were still involved, that she had seen Hans on the street in Vienna,
and that both Peppina and Hans had confessed to sexual impropri-
eties. It appeared that she was happy to report Hans’s confession
about the incident at the lake, confirming that it was a not a figment
of her imagination as everyone had declared.10
Freud, still refusing to take her back as a patient, told her that
her facial pain came about because she had noted in the newspaper
his promotion to associate professor, which he had finally recieved
after many years of striving. He went on about her pain:
It was ­self-punishment for having slapped Mr. K in the face and transfer-
ring her feelings about him onto Freud. But Freud adamantly refused to take
Dora back as a patient, declaring that he did not know what kind of help
she wanted from him. Instead he “promised to forgive her for her having
deprived [him] of the satisfaction of affording her a far more radical cure for
her troubles.” Dora left and never saw Freud again.11

Even though Philipp called on Freud several times, promising him

that Ida was going to return to him to complete the analysis, Freud
knew this would not happen, even after she did indeed return on that
day in April to request his assistance. Freud believed that Ida broke off
her analysis as a way of engaging in revenge upon men in general and
Freud in particular, as a ­stand-in for other men in her life. She had been
betrayed and injured by the men in her life, and she seemingly could
take it out only on Freud. “He felt hurt and wounded by her behavior.”12
As Steven Marcus writes in “Freud and Dora,” even though Ida,
122
 Chapter 12. The Return

by his refusal to see her, considered herself finished with Freud, he

certainly was not done with her. He had begun to write up the case
study almost before she walked out the door that last day in 1900,
and he continued to feel, if not obsessed with her, that he had learned
a great deal from her aborted analysis. He clearly wanted to make his
emerging knowledge known.13
Following this failed treatment of Ida, Freud ruminated for
about four years before he made his case study public, even though
he had completed it in the three weeks following her departure.
Freud initially submitted the manuscript, and it was accepted for
publication, in January 1901. However, for unknown reasons (about
which there has been much speculation), Freud also offered the man-
uscript to another publisher, but then pulled it from that publication.
He then asked for it back from another publisher and then let it sit
for four years unpublished. The manuscript was eventually published
in the Monatsschrift in 1905.14
Why did Freud delay publication when he had several potential
publishers and had finished the case study shortly after Ida left anal-
ysis? Decker has a few theories and concludes:
Unconsciously Dora was many things to Freud. She was Dora the servant
and childlike wife, over whom he could exercise superiority and a certain
amount of control. In this way a threatened physician was able to deal with
the challenges presented by an hysterical female patient. She epitomized
as well Freud’s lack of sympathy for the ­well-to-do, ­quasi-functional young
women who formed a part of his practice.15

Freud felt that Ida’s abrupt departure from analysis was the acting
out of a revenge fantasy, an emasculating of men, which prevented
him from successfully completing the analysis. He seemed singu-
larly unconcerned about the consequences for Ida of the aborted
analysis; his ego was his main concern. Freud lived with a great
deal of “disappointment” his whole life: disappointed by his father,
Jung later in life, and now he was disappointed and frustrated by a
­seventeen-year-old girl. Freud had “been drawn by Dora’s youth and
attractiveness, had probed her most secret sexual thoughts and feel-
ings, and out of his inexperience had allowed an antitherapeutic sex-
ual tension to develop.”16
123
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

It seems only natural that Ida bolted. Ida’s biggest threat in life
had been the licentious predator who had invaded her family and the
overt sexuality in which her father and his paramour engaged. She
didn’t need another threat, and in her treatment room, no less. And
yet, it was because of her time with Freud that she was able to lead a
somewhat normal life.
While Freud dithered about whether to publish the case study
of Dora, Ida’s life was strange in the New Year. In truth, her symp-
toms abated, but she was puzzled and confused by what had hap-
pened in her analysis with Freud. At the same time as she was trying
to recover from her association with Freud and the fantasy world he
demanded that she recreate for him, real life was intruding.
It is in this case study of Dora, so famous and so frequently
read, even today, that Freud looks his worse. Ida had turned to him
for help, and he told her that she must recognize her desire for her
molester. Many have written that the case of Dora is remarkable in
that is describes a patient’s rejection of the physician. Freud was a
train wreck in the treatment of Ida, according to Kramer:
Freud’s narcissism is on display at a distressing level. He fails his patient and
makes it out that he is the injured party. It is a tribute to Freud’s skill at sto-
rytelling that this example of blaming the victim stood more or less unchal-
lenged between its appearance in 1905 and the mid–1960s, when Freud’s
developmental theories and his attitudes toward women came under new
scrutiny.17

But perhaps Ida got revenge, not only on the Zellenkas by finally call-
ing them out for what they did to her, but also on Freud, because she,
spunky as she was and a fighter, went on to have a reasonably good
life. Shortly after being rejected by Freud, she met someone, married
him, and subsequently had a child she adored.18

124
 Chapter 13

Marriage

What did triumph over Freud look like?

By her own admission, Ida did not appear to want what other
women of her time wanted: a husband, a home of her own, or even
children. She had mentioned to Freud during her last visit with him
that she wanted to continue her “work.” What this work entailed is
hard to say, other than perhaps her studies, lectures, and museum
attendance. She was no doubt diligent in wanting to learn and might
have been endeavoring to follow in the footsteps of her brilliant
brother. As she told Freud, that was preferable to marrying.1
However, something changed her mind about marriage. Maybe
she was lonely with her brother gone and her family fairly in tatters.
Or maybe she met someone at just the right time. Or perhaps her
desire for a child catapulted her into more positive thoughts about
marriage. In any event, about a year after her last meeting with
Freud, she met someone, became engaged, and married. And Ida
loved children. She cared deeply and consistently for the Zellenka
children. It has been argued that she had strong maternal feelings.
Perhaps it was because her own mother disappointed her so deeply
that she wanted to be able to do for another child what had not been
done for her. And Freud seemed to believe from what Ida told him
in passing that these urges of hers, these maternal cravings, were
deeply rooted in Ida.
Freud came to these conclusions after hearing from her about
her visit to the Zwinger in Dresden, which was a palatial complex
of gardens and artwork. There, she viewed the Sistine Madonna,
also called the Madonna di San Sisto because that is the name of the
church where it was first seen in Piacenza, Italy.
This oil painting by Italian artist Raphael was commissioned
125
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

in 1512 by Pope Julius II for the church of San Sisto, to be its altar-
piece. The canvas was one of the last of the Madonna paintings done
by Raphael and is a magnificent work. The piece was purchased in
1754 by King Augustus III of Saxony for his collection in Dresden.
The painting was very influential in Germany, sparking debate on
the questions of art and religion.2 It seems that Ida was transfixed
by the painting, not because of the lessons that could be learned, but
because it was a signifier for her of motherhood, and perhaps her
desire to bear a child.
Ida was on a trip with a cousin when she visited the Zwinger
complex and, as she told Freud, stood before the Madonna for about
two hours. Freud asked Ida what it was that so fascinated her about
the painting, of the young mother, but she did not know. Freud felt
that if the analysis had continued, the issue of mothering and Ida’s
maternal longing for a child would have been revealed to her.3
But to have a child in Vienna and elsewhere in 1903 one had
to have a husband. Ida’s primary view of marriage came from the
lives of three women whose marriages were a disaster: her mother,
her aunt Malvine, and Peppina. She may have had other role models
where being a wife was something positive, but if so, they were few
and far between. Ida’s prevailing view of marriage would likely have
been what she witnessed in the marriages of those three women.
That, coupled with her distrust of men—her father, Hans Zellenka,
and Freud—was good enough reason to eschew the marital state.
Still, she did enter into marriage with Ernst Adler on Decem-
ber 16, 1903. It’s hard to say what motivated Ida to marry, as little is
known of the courtship between them, only that he lived in Leopold-
stadt and was an unsuccessful composer and engineer.
Born in 1873 in Budapest, Ernst initially lived with his father and
mother, Ignaz and Josephine (von Sonnenthal Adler). An only child,
Ernst was a musician by avocation but an engineer by profession.
According to Ellis, following the death of his mother in Budapest,
he moved to the Vienna home of his maternal uncle, “the celebrated
Jewish actor Adolph Ritten von Sonnenthal, a ­well-regarded come-
dic and tragic actor.”4
Like Ernst, Ritten von Sonnenthal was born in Budapest in 1834
126
 Chapter 13. Marriage

The Dresdner Zwinger is a palatial complex with gardens in Dresden, Ger-

many, and is one of the most important buildings of the Baroque period
in Germany. Along with the Frauenkirche, the Zwinger is the most famous
architectural monument of Dresden (Stephan Czuratis [Jazz-Face], Wiki-
media Commons).

under the trying circumstances

of poverty, which no doubt was
similar to how Ernst’s mother
was raised. As a young boy, Rit-
ten apprenticed as a tailor, but
he developed a love of the the-
ater after seeing a performance

Adolf Ritten von S onnenthal

(1834–1909) was a famous Aus-
trian actor. He visited the United
States in 1885, and again in 1899
and 1902, achieving great suc-
cess (Portrait Collection Friedrich
Nicolas Manskopf at the library
of the Johann Wolfgang Goethe—
University Frankfurt am Main,
Wikimedia Commons).
127
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

by Bogumil Dawison, one of Germany’s great actors of his day. Dawi-

son both fostered young Ritten and trained him for the stage. As a
professional actor, Ritten was beloved, playing a wide variety of roles.
He performed across Germany and Budapest, eventually becom-
ing engaged by Heinrich Laube, the dramatist, novelist, and theater
director for the ­world-renowned Burgtheater in Vienna, where he
performed the role of Mortimer in Schiller’s Maria Stuart.5
Adolf Ritten was not handsome, but he excelled in drawing-
room comedy and was reputed to be a great interpreter of Shake-
speare, Goethe, Schiller, and Ibsen. Among his most impressive roles
were Romeo, Hamlet, Macbeth, Wallenstein, and Faust. He became
Oberregisseur (assistant director) of the Burgtheater in 1884 and its
provisional general manager in 1887–88 and 1889–90. Ritten was
a practicing Jew and more than once was a target of anti–Semitic
attacks; nonetheless, he resisted all attempts made to convert him.
The emperor made him a nobleman in 1881, and he made guest
appearances as an actor in Russia and the U.S.6
And so it was that, prior to marrying Ida, Ernst was likely sur-
rounded by a world of culture, especially of music and theater, as he
had been living with his uncle and his father. Marrying Ernst gave
Ida access to the glittering world of Viennese theater from an insid-
er’s perspective. Always a lover of Vienna’s cultural world, Ida would
have been fascinated while traversing this rarefied community of
theater and music.
They may have met through mutual friends, as Ida had an affin-
ity for Viennese theater and the arts. It would seem likely that Ernst,
a ­would-be musician, frequented the world of his uncle, which inter-
sected with Ida’s world. What changed Ida’s mind about marrying
can only be guessed. Did she feel a kinship with Ernst because of
their shared love of the arts? Was it because they were both involved
in the Jewish cultural world of Vienna? Or was it a grand passion?
Decker asks some of the same questions:

What happened to change Dora’s mind? Did she simply succumb to conven-
tional pressures? Had her parents urged her to wed in spite of her inclina-
tions? Did she experience a romance that momentarily swept all before it?
Had she been moved by feelings of wanting a child? There is evidence only to

128
 Chapter 13. Marriage

support the latter, although much else probably played a role. Clearly Dora
had found a great emotional satisfaction in mothering the K.’s two children.7

Ernst was nine years older than his bride, which was the same
age difference as between Ida’s mother and father. As her new hus-
band was not successful in his field of engineering or in music, he
accepted a position with Ida’s father, working in one of his factories.8
Freud apparently knew of the marriage between Ida and Ernst
and believed it to be good for Ida, basing it on his knowledge of her
two dreams. In Ida’s first dream, he would recall, she turned away
from a man she loved toward her father, which Freud believed signi-
fied her movement from health to sickness. Freud believed Ida’s sec-
ond dream signaled her intent to turn away from her father toward
health and the realities of life.9
About the wedding itself, Decker writes:
The wedding was celebrated in Vienna’s fashionable Reform temple located
on Seitenättengasse in the Inner City. Like her mother, Dora married a man
nine years older than herself, and like her Aunt Malvine, she chose a man
from Hungary. Dora’s parents had serious misgivings about her bridegroom,
but Otto, true to character, refrained from joining in their negative voices,
thus giving the impression—true or not—of solidarity with his sister.10

While Ida’s parents were not thrilled with Ernst, her father hired
him for work in his factories and continued to “indulge his daugh-
ter materially.” Despite their misgivings about the marriage, the fam-
ily appeared to have accepted it and even celebrated it. In support of
Ernst, Philipp once hired musicians to provide Ernst with the oppor-
tunity to hear his musical compositions played by a full orchestra.11
Ida also seemed to have an appreciation for her new husband’s
family (of course, she did not know his parents) and for what he
brought to the marriage. Decker writes, “Her husband’s family, even
before they had moved to Vienna, had become as acculturated a
part of the Hungarian secular world as the Czech Jews had of the
Viennese.”12
There being no apparent indication of a wedding trip, immedi-
ately following their marriage, the couple moved into Alsergrund,
the Ninth District, where both her parents and Freud lived, as well
as other prosperous and famous people. Upwardly mobile Jewish
129
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

physicians, merchants, and factory owners inhabited that neighbor-

hood. It would also later be the area of Vienna where Viktor Frankl,
famous author, psychoanalyst, and survivor of the Holocaust, lived.
Other famous people lived there as well: Theodor Herzl, the Jewish
­Austro-Hungarian journalist and father of Zionism; Schubert lived
and composed music there; and Beethoven died there at his apart-
ment at Schwarzspanierstrasse 15.13
Ida and Ernst settled into married life, living in a building on
­Julius-Tandler-Platz. The area was a hub for academics, musicians,
arts, and science as it was the home of the University of Vienna, the
General Hospital (Allgemeines Krankenhaus), theaters, concert halls,
and parks. Today, the area is a commercial hub in Vienna, nowhere
near as elegant a street as it was in Ida’s time. The building, however,
still exudes a gracious, elegant ambiance.14

This is the building where Ida and Ernst Adler started their married life
and where their son, Kurt Herbert, was born. The building, on Julius Tan-
dler-Platz, now faces the Franz Josefs train station and shows the grandeur
of a bygone age (Papergirl, Wikimedia Commons).

130
 Chapter 13. Marriage

In the early days of their marriage, Ida seemed to be in good

health and spirits, as far as can be determined, and it can be assumed
that Ida and Ernst were compatible. They certainly took advantage
of the various cultural activities that Vienna had to offer, especially
given that Ernst’s uncle, the actor, would have introduced them to
the world of the arts and especially the theater. And Ida herself had
already been enjoying the intellectual and cultural opportunities
that Vienna had to offer. They walked the streets surrounding their
apartment in the Ninth District, shopping, going to parks, and visit-
ing friends and relatives. By all accounts, Ida and Ernst had much in
common: they were both Jews who were more secular than not, hav-
ing been brought up and assimilated into Western society.
I, too, have walked the streets of the Ninth District on my own
pilgrimage to Freud’s consulting office. As it is now, the neighbor-
hood in Ida’s time consisted of large apartment buildings, certainly
more elegant than Leopoldstadt in the Second District, where most
of the Jewish residents of Alsergrund lived in Ida’s time. The aus-
tere buildings of the University of Vienna are there, and of course
the Vienna Sigmund Freud Museum is still located at Berggasse 19
where, six days a week, Freud analyzed Ida and other famous people.
The Danube Canal is at Alsergrund’s eastern border, and the
foothills of the Vienna Woods tiptoe into the Ninth District. Alser-
grund is separated by the Danube Canal as it runs from Brigittenau
to Leopoldstadt. I can imagine Ida walking the streets of Alsergrund,
just as I did, taking in lectures, attending concerts in the Golden Hall
in the Musikverein, and reading papers in the famous coffee houses
of Vienna (such as the Weiner Kaffeehaus). Vienna was then, and still
is, a fascinating city, and I can easily believe that Ida enjoyed all it had
to offer following her marriage to Ernst.

131
 Chapter 14

Motherhood

While Ida appeared to enjoy marriage and the Viennese life she
was living, she awaited the prize that she really valued and sought,
motherhood. On February 4, 1905, sixteen months after her mar-
riage, ­twenty-two-year-old Ida gave birth to Kurt Herbert Adler at
home. Decker writes:
If Dora had indeed married to gratify her maternal longings, her labor and
delivery dealt her a grievous blow. After her son was born, she felt she could
not undergo the pains of labor again and vowed to have no more children. In
more than one way, this was a decisive period in her life. On June 14, 1905, a
few months after their infant son’s birth, Dora and her husband formally left
the Jewish community. The following day they were baptized in the Protes-
tant church.1

Kurt himself has this to say about his birth:

I was born in Vienna, in 1904…. I was a premature child—I think I was a
­seven-month baby—and I was born on a Sunday night at 11:30 p.m. There is
a saying—or was, at least—in Austria, that a child born on a Sunday would
be a lucky person. So my mother absolutely wanted a Sunday child, and she
made every effort that I would be born on Sunday, the second, and not on
Monday, the third, as it appeared I would. I was born at home. It was cus-
tomary in Europe then that children were born in the home of parents who
had an adequate apartment, and not in hospitals. And so it was.2

At about the same time that Ida gave birth to Kurt Herbert,
Freud finally gave birth to the case study of Dora, which had lan-
guished in his filing cabinet for four years following the analysis of
Ida.3 The case study was condemned in its first review as a form of
mental masturbation, an immoral misuse of his medical position. 4
But others enthusiastically reviewed the case, and by the ­mid–1900s,
Freud and his case had gained general psychoanalytic acceptance.
Little is known of what Ida thought of the case study once it was

132
 Chapter 14. Motherhood

published, but she did tell several physicians whom she visited that
she was the “Dora” of the case, and seemed proud of this fact.
Ida had more important things, however, to think about and take
care of than Freud and his case study of her. Even though her preg-
nancy and delivery had been terrible, she now had a son she adored,
and she was, by all accounts, both a devoted and a fierce mother. Ida
coddled her son, as she and Ernst were wealthy and had every advan-
tage to pass on to their child.
Ida was aware of the growing anti–Semitism in those years,
which is one reason that she, Ernst, and their son, converted to Prot-
estantism, a very common act by Jews during that time. Decker
writes about her conversion:
She had been mistreated socially as a Jew and a woman, her love for her
father and Mrs. K. had been rewarded by their sacrificing her for their own
ends, she had been used by Mr. K. as a servant, and she lived in an emotional
void created by her angry and compulsive mother. If there had ever been a
human being who yearned for acceptance, it was Dora.5

Ida had an understanding of what was happening in Vienna and

in Austria as she was ­well-read and informed. Prior to meeting Ida,
Ernst had been turned down for employment on religious grounds.6
Ida did not want her son to have any such impediments to a good life,
and so she made sure that Kurt was prepared for the future. Espe-
cially in light of the rising anti–Semitism, she taught him English,
among other languages. In any event, learning English was the cus-
tom for ­middle-class families living in Vienna. According to Kurt, he
also learned French when he was five years old, which was the lan-
guage they all spoke at home. They never spoke German, although
they knew it. He also learned Italian.7
Despite what must have been going on in Vienna and the rest of
Austria, it appears that Kurt had a privileged childhood. In the inter-
view he conducted in July 1985, he has this to say about his early
years:
We stayed in that apartment until 1907 (the apartment on ­Julius-Tandler-
Platz). That means I was two years plus when we moved to the next apart-
ment, in a house in which we remained until 1934. Strangely enough, I
remember the moving and the arriving in this apartment. It was a very light
apartment, surrounded by gardens and trees, while the other one had been

133
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

in the real city, you know, without trees, only with noise, and near a railroad
station with steam locomotives which one heard! I don’t remember seeing
them when I was that young, but I remember the noise.
I started going to school in Vienna when I was about six, and I went to
what would be primary or grammar school—! I am really not quite familiar
yet, probably never will be, with the way you describe it here—in Vienna. I
went to a private school which had five grades. But, being a good student and
ahead of my classmates, they made me skip the fifth grade, and I went after
four years to the Gymnasium, all within five minutes of my parents’ apart-
ment, the schools being next to each other.8

Kurt attended preparatory schools in Vienna. As his father was a

musician, from a young age Kurt would likely have been given musi-
cal instruction as well as instruments. He began piano lessons when
he was five years old.
Later in his life, Kurt mentioned in an interview that he “got into
the music business when I was 13 years old. I ­sight-read the score
of Walküre. I’d never heard it, and the man who heard me told my
mother that I’d better go to a good teacher. I regret that I’ve never
conducted that one, and I know it very well.”9 Kurt also described in
adult reminiscences, corroborated by his childhood friends, that the
Adlers lived a ­well-to-do but not ostentatious lifestyle. He recounted
that his parents, as well as the rest of Ida’s family, enjoyed a prosper-
ous life in the period before World War I.10
Ida’s father was still wealthy, as his factories were successful. Ida
continued to attend social events, and, while no longer Jewish, the
Adlers still socialized within the confines of the Jewish community.
In 1911, when Kurt formally started his education, Vienna was still
the intellectual as well as the material capital of Austria. Both its uni-
versity and its medical faculty had worldwide reputations. From the
1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Vienna:
As a general rule, the Viennese are gay, ­pleasure-loving and genial. The Vien-
nese women are justly celebrated for their beauty and elegance, and dress-
ing as a fine art is cultivated here with almost as great success as in Paris. As
a rule, the Viennese are passionately fond of dancing; and the city of Strauss,
J.F.K. Lanner (1801–1843) and J. Gung’l (1810–1889) gives name to a “school”
of waltz and other dance music. Opera, especially in its lighter form, flour-
ishes, and the actors of Vienna maintain with success a traditional reputation
of no mean order. Its chief place in the history of art Vienna owes to its musi-
cians, among whom are counted Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Schubert.

134
 Chapter 14. Motherhood

The Viennese school of painting is of modern origin; but some of its mem-
bers, for instance, Hans Makart (1840–1884), have acquired a European
reputation.11

In various publications, Kurt has discussed his parents:

My mother was born Bauer, Ida Bauer, and some of her ancestors came from
Czechoslovakia. She grew up in Vienna, and spoke only very little Czech.
Her father, Filip Bauer, whom I recall as an especially kind man, was a textile
manufacturer. He had factories in Bohemia, which at that time was a part of
the ­Austro-Hungarian monarchy, ­Austro-Hungarian Empire, if you wish.
My father, Ernst Adler, was born in Budapest, but his parents died, I
believe, when he was a baby; I certainly didn’t know them. He grew up in
Vienna in the house of the famous actor, Adolph Ritter [sic] von Sonnenthal,
who was made a nobleman by the Emperor Franz Joseph. He was one of the
most famous actors in the Burgtheater, which was the imperial, legitimate
theater. Sonnenthal and Kainz, Joseph Kainz, are the names one remembers
most from the turn of the century, and slightly before, as the most success-
ful and prominent actors in the capital of Austria. My father tried, from what
I’ve heard, to imitate Sonnenthal, who was a very elegant man, at least as far
as clothing goes. I’ve seen photos of my father in his young years where he
wore the same clothes as I have recognized in photos of Sonnenthal.12

As Kurt was growing up, he became more and more interested

in music, perhaps because of the reputation of his uncle, but also
because Ida had exposed him not only to theater and opera but also
to music lessons at a very young age. Did Ida foresee that her son
could have a brilliant musical career, or was this something that was
brought into being by his father, the frustrated and unsuccessful
musician? Was Kurt living out his father’s dream?
There is no record of his motivation for choosing music as his
career, only what Kurt says in his interview—that his parents encour-
aged him in his exposure to music. As he recounts, however, there
was a small problem:
I was about thirteen, fourteen years old, but at that time, I didn’t go too often
(to the opera).
There was another small problem: my father, who was more or less on the
capitalist side, didn’t like it too much if I went to this “­Social-Democratic”
box, you know? But he got used to it, and the more I studied music, the more
he realized how good it was for me, how important the attendance of those
performances was. He did something else. He was a bridge partner of the
then–opera director, Franz Schalk. And Mr. Schalk invited me to attend any

135
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

rehearsal I wanted to attend. So, if I wanted to, I could start in the morning
and stay in the opera house until night.13

Life was good for the Adlers. Ida was healthy, it appeared Ida
and Ernst were compatible and experienced little to no friction
in their marriage, and their son was on his way to an eventful life.
Decker explains,
Neither her husband’s career nor Dora’s way of life was at stake. He had a job
with his wealthy ­father-in-law and did not have to worry about a civil ser-
vice or professional position. She was not a poor young woman who wanted
to rise through marriage or a ­working-class woman who simply wanted to
marry a Christian man she had met at her job.14

136
 Chapter 15

The Bauer Family

After Freud

From 1880 to 1910, the population of Vienna doubled. This great

influx of people created housing shortages, social deprivation, and
­w orking-class unrest, which created a social threat, especially to
prosperous Jews. Nonetheless, Jews still played a leading role in the
artistic and intellectual life of the city, and Vienna was still one of the
leading scientific centers of Europe. It was also a city where Adolf
Hitler spent his formative years.1
In 1912, Ida’s son Kurt was seven years old and attending school.
His father, Ernst, was working for Ida’s father, Philipp, and his mother
was taking care of her home, rearing her son, and, one imagines, vis-
iting with her parents and brother and staying involved in the arts.
She was also the driving force behind Kurt’s education.
In those early months of 1912 when Kurt was in primary
school, things went on normally as they had for some time for the
­Bauer-Adler family. Notwithstanding being Jewish, both Ida and her
husband felt that nothing was unavailable to them in Austria, and
Ida believed that her son could achieve anything he wanted. As Kurt
went through his school years, he continued to have a strong interest
in music, which was encouraged at home.
Again, from Kurt’s recollections about life with his parents:
Speaking about my father, he was in a position to hire orchestras, and he lis-
tened to his ­not-very-good music by hiring an orchestra to play it. Some of
his works were also published, by Doblinger in Vienna, a firm that still exists.
I always wanted to find out if there are any plates left, because now even his
bad music would interest me.
[My] father was also an admirer of the first record players, which played
with a big horn and an incredible weight, and the records also were heavy.

137
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

He had an enormous collection of recordings. And he owned what probably

was the first portable record player. He had a trunk which he designed built
specially so he could take the record player, the horn, and a fairly large num-
ber of records along when he traveled. I was terribly impressed—not neces-
sarily favorably, because my mother made fun of my father’s addiction to the
portable record player.
I should mention something else about him: he was one of the first indi-
viduals to own a private car in Vienna, around 1900. Later on, he did not
keep cars in Vienna, but rather he kept them at the factories in Bohemia,
because he did not wish for me to grow up as a child who had a car at his dis-
posal. That seemed to my parents as something one just didn’t do, if one
didn’t want to be considered nouveau riche or whatever.2
Vienna must have been a magical—and musical—place in the
early 1900s, especially for Ida and her family. In addition to Kurt’s
maternal ­g reat-uncle, Adolf Ritten von Sonnenthal, Kurt had other
relatives in the musical world: one of his father’s cousins was the
composer and pianist Rudolph Reti. Kurt recalled that as a child he
went to Reti’s recitals, “sitting impatiently in the first row with white
gloves, because a child of my standing and class had to wear white
gloves for a recital.”3 Apparently, Kurt hated those white gloves, but
one can assume that his parents, particularly Ida, would have wanted
the family to bow to the conventions of the day. Kurt explained:
I had also to wear those white gloves when, on Sundays, we rode in a
­two-horse carriage taking either my grandfather, my mother and me, or my
father, my mother and me to the Prater, which was “the thing to do.” The
Prater is a very beautiful place, and not only the amusement park, which
most people know. It has lovely meadows and woodsy parts, and it is not so
far from the Danube. We went in this carriage, and I had to have my hands in
my lap with the white gloves—and I was annoyed that I couldn’t go in dirty
clothes to the Prater, where the amusement park was.4

Ida’s parents, Philipp and Käthe, must have been thrilled with
Otto’s accomplishments, but also somewhat worried about his pro-
fessional beliefs, which were not the same as theirs. I would assume
they were happy that their daughter had regained some equanim-
ity and peace in her roles as wife and mother. They must also have
been pleased with the emerging accomplishments of their grandson,
Kurt.5
Ida’s satisfaction with life would not last forever, however. Into
this bright world of adulthood came a number of challenges for
138
 Chapter 15. The Bauer Family After Freud 

both of the Bauer children, Otto and Ida. First, their mother, Käthe,
became ill with colon cancer. It can be assumed—and hoped—
that Ida helped her mother in her final years, although this is not
recorded; nor is it known whether Otto helped to care for her. Käthe
died in August of 1912 at fifty years of age.6 All the Bauers continued
to live in the same area in the Ninth District of Vienna.
Shortly thereafter, Philipp Bauer became increasingly and pro-
gressively ill from his almost lifelong diagnosis of tuberculosis,
although the death certificate would read “degeneration of the pros-
tate.” It has been recorded that Ida again took up nursing duties for
her father, caring for him tenderly, with the singular devotion that
she had exhibited when she was a young girl. Otto also helped to
nurse his father—strangely, as he had been more intimate with his
mother over the years than with his father, often siding with her
when he would side with anyone at all.7
It appears that Peppina did not have contact with the Bauers
and was not involved with Philipp at this time. We do know that by
the time that Philipp died, the Zellenkas had moved to Opernring,
part of Vienna’s fashionable inner ring road (Ringstrasse), close to
the opera house. The Zellenkas were out of the picture around the
time that Ida and Otto’s parents died and they disappeared from the
­Bauer-Adler circle, even though they were living in Vienna. By 1913,
according to Ellis, Hans and Peppina were still married, despite fre-
quent discussions about divorce. By this time, Hans had been pro-
moted to deputy director of Philipp Haas and Sons.8
Philipp died in July of 1913, less than a year after the death of
his wife, and just one month before his sixtieth birthday.9 Kurt has
said that his grandfather was an especially kind man, and so was per-
haps saddened by his death. Kurt would have turned eight just three
months before his grandfather died.10
Several notices of Philipp’s death appeared in Vienna’s Neue
Freie Presse, and there were also articles about him in various Mer-
ano newspapers thanking him for his “continued efforts as a fund-
raiser for the humanitarian developments there that had continued
even after his departure from Meran in 1887.”11
Following the deaths of her parents, Ida’s various symptoms
139
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

began to reemerge. As war was on the horizon and her son was
becoming more and more independent, there were good reasons for
a woman who somatized her feelings to again fall ill.
World War I began on July 28, 1914, after the assassination of
Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie, and lasted until
November 11, 1918. It pitted Germany, ­Austria-Hungry, Bulgaria,
and the Ottoman Empire against Great Britain, France, Russia, Italy,
Romania, Japan, and the United States. While there had been ten-
sions in Europe for a while, it was the assassination that sparked the
­four-year conflagration.
In his interview, Kurt recalled the assassination:
On June 28th, 1914—I was nine years old—we (my parents and the family
of one of the most prominent directors of a main bank in Vienna) were on
the Kalmberg in the Kaffeerestaurant for coffee in the afternoon. A military
band was playing. Suddenly, the bank director was called to the telephone.
An instant later the band stopped playing, and when the bank director came
back, he said, “The Crown Prince has been shot in Sarajevo.” And of course
everybody felt that was not the end of it, and felt what was coming, which
was the First World War.
Speaking about music, it was amazing to the ears of a child that a military
band stopped in the middle of the bar.12

The war would take a heavy toll on the ­B auer-Adler family.

Otto entered the war and was decorated for bravery; however, he
was also captured and became a prisoner of the Russians for three
years, unable to return to his prior life until September 1917. Ernst,
Ida’s husband, was initially thought to be too old at ­forty-one to be
called into service; yet, a year later in the spring of 1915, he was called
up. Unfortunately, Ernst was never the same following the war. He
returned handicapped, having suffered from head and ear injuries.
As a result, Ernst suffered in a number of ways: his memory was
impaired, he had lifelong balance issues, and he seemed to be affected
psychologically. Additionally, Philipp’s brother, Karl, who had taken
over the family business following the death of Philipp, died of heart
failure, which left the family enterprise without a leader.13
Obviously, Kurt was too young to have any involvement in the
war, but, like his mother, he felt the deprivations brought on by it. It
must have been frightening for the young man to have his uncle be
140
 Chapter 15. The Bauer Family After Freud 

a prisoner of war and his father a casualty of it. Additionally, there

was never enough food to eat, hardly any fuel for those who still had
motor vehicles, and the mounting inflation would endure for several
years. The end of the war came with the signing of the Treaty of Ver-
sailles on June 28, 1919, but there was no end yet to the deprivation.
Still, Kurt continued with both his academic and musical stud-
ies. He was fourteen when the war ended and continued his edu-
cation at the preparatory school. He entered the Vienna Academy
of Music in 1922, and from 1923 to 1927, he attended the Vienna
Conservatory of Music and the University of Vienna. Kurt made his
musical debut in 1925 as an orchestral conductor at the Vienna the-
aters, which were managed by noted European theatrical producer
Max Reinhardt. Kurt continued in that capacity until 1934, while
at the same time acting as a coach, accompanist, chorus director,
and instructor. From 1934 to 1937, he conducted at opera houses in
Germany, Italy, and Czechoslovakia. Eventually, he assisted Arturo
Toscanini at the 1936 and 1937 Salzburg Festivals and, during the
summers, served as an instructor at the Salzburg Mozarteum.14
Although the war ended, Austria and Germany would not be the
same, and the affairs of the ­Bauer-Adler family were changed forever
as well. As Ellis writes, “Czechoslovakia was granted independence
and responded by nationalizing ­foreign-owned businesses, includ-
ing the factories owned by the Bauer family. Much of the Bauer fam-
ily’s wealth was lost.” The Zellenkas did not fare any better. Peppina
had always received income from the Biedermann Bank in Mer-
ano, which survived until 1932, but it was never as profitable as it
had been. And while Hans was able to keep his position with Philipp
Haas and Sons, Austria was in economic collapse.15
Ida’s personal situation was not at all good either: her par-
ents were dead, her finances greatly reduced, and her husband was
no help to her given that he was now nearly an invalid. Ida needed
money—most especially, according to Ellis, to support the musical
education of Kurt, “who was proving to be a child prodigy.” And so it
was that Ida, always the survivor regardless of her situation, rented
out rooms to people who wanted to play bridge, which was all the
rage with fashionable women in Vienna.16
141
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

As to how Freud survived in Vienna during and after the war,

like everyone else, he had to become accustomed to a different way of
life. Decker writes that he took food in lieu of payment and “relied on
food packages, money, cigars, and clothing from English and Amer-
ican relatives, wealthy followers, and friends and pupils in Holland
and Switzerland. All his old fears and resentments of penury were
reawakened.”17
All was not lost, however. By 1921, things began to improve in
Austria. Freud’s practice began to pick up again, and he would be
even more celebrated than he had been prior to the war. Ida’s brother
would bring honor to the family because of his political activism and
leadership, and, most of all, Ida had great plans for her incredibly tal-
ented son.18
Ida had her dreams, but she also had her ailments—all while her
brother was achieving fame across Europe.

142
 Chapter 16

The Politics and Power

of Otto Bauer

During the years when Ida was seeing Freud, getting married,
and having a child, Ida’s brother and for many years her close com-
panion was achieving professional success and accolades. To please
his father, Otto had achieved a law degree at the University of Vienna
and went on to obtain a doctoral degree in law in 1907. Always polit-
ical, he joined the Social Democratic Party of Austria and founded
Der Kampf, the theoretical journal of the party. By 1912, he was con-
sidered a leading leftist socialist.1
When Otto was entering his adult years, following his educa-
tion, he was fluent in four languages, was a habitual cigarette smoker,
and decided to dedicate his life to socialist causes, much to the con-
sternation of his father, who wanted him to enter the manufacturing
business.2
Otto was apparently influenced in his ideas and ideals by his
father’s bachelor brother, Karl. According to Decker, this uncle was a
favorite of Otto’s in much the same way that their aunt Malvine was
of his sister. Like Malvine, Karl loved spending time with Philipp and
Käthe’s children. In his case study of Ida, Freud mentioned Karl, a
man he had met and called a hypochondriacal bachelor. Freud felt
that Ida’s propensity for hysteria might have come from her father’s
side of the family, as both Karl and Malvine had problems, according
to Freud.3
Otto’s ideas about socialism were enhanced by Karl, but his
socialism came much earlier—in Merano. He realized there that the
source of his father’s prosperity “was the labor of the weavers in the
Bauer factories and that only the weavers’ work and poverty made it

143
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

possible for him to dedicate himself to his studies, an opportunity

‘forever denied’ them.”4
Otto had sympathy for those less fortunate than him. He felt a
need to reverse the injustice that he saw around him all the time. He
himself felt the sting of life’s unfairness at age seven or eight, when
his father became ill and uprooted the family. This had repercussions
for Ida, as we saw earlier, but for Otto as well. Otto also seemed to
understand that his father’s health, or lack thereof, undermined his
parents’ marriage and created great unhappiness for his mother—
that and his affair with Peppina. Otto felt it was these things that
brought about his mother’s increasingly dysfunctional houseclean-
ing. Otto also felt burned by the injustice of being a Jew. Even though
he was not an observant Jew, he chose not to convert and lived
openly as a Jew, the repercussions of which were felt both socially
and professionally.5
Otto was also influenced in his politics and social views by
Socialist Party leader Victor Adler (1852–1918), whom he came to
worship. Adler had converted from Judaism and appeared to experi-
ence ­self-hatred, which was largely theoretical. He believed that Jews
had created their own anti–Semitism because of their fanatical adop-
tion of capitalism. He—and Otto—adopted Marxist views that capi-
talism would fall and Jews “would at last find acceptance.”6
Otto made learning, and then politics, his world. He became less
involved with his family, especially Ida. And he continued to refuse
to take sides in the battles that were ongoing in the Bauer household.
Ida and Otto had completely opposite views of their father’s affair
with Peppina: Ida would complain to Otto about it; Otto professed
not to care one way or another what his father was doing, claiming it
was not their business.7
From 1907 through 1936, Otto would write and publish a num-
ber of books. During his university years, it appeared that he did not
have much of a social life or love life. Kurt explains that Otto was
a Social Democrat—and “incredibly clever and talented.”8 Appar-
ently, he wrote a Napoleonic drama when he was seven years old and,
according to Kurt, “it is really quite an opus. I have the manuscript
of it.”9
144
 Chapter 16. The Politics and Power of Otto Bauer 

Kurt spoke very admiringly of his uncle:

After the collapse of the ­Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1918, he became the
first Secretary of Foreign Affairs for the new Austrian Republic. He was fur-
thered by an older Social Democrat with the name of Viktor Adler—no rela-
tive. He was the leader of the party; he liked my uncle very much, and it was
he who opened the doors for his political career.10

According to the lengthy interview that Kurt gave many years

after Otto’s death, his uncle was a man “with such a memory. He
wrote volumes of books and when he quoted, he quoted from mem-
ory.” He goes on to recall that even when proofreaders would check
his books and quotes within the books, there was never an error.
Kurt said that his uncle was a genius in the field of politics and social
development. “He was brilliant in all respects; there is no other
word.” Kurt was exposed to his uncle’s brilliance at a young age, as
Otto and Ida were so close.11
Although Jewish (Ida and her family eventually converted
to Christianity; Otto did not), both Ida and Otto felt that nothing
was unavailable to them in Austria. Otto felt strongly that Jews and
Christians would be so intermingled in Europe that there would be
no differentiation between the two. According to Decker, “That is
why he rejected his sister’s limited, and to him, ineffective solution
of conversion and instead advocated intermarriage.” While Ida had
converted and lived as a Christian, as did her son and husband, Otto
preferred to live openly as a Jew.12
It was not until the death of his parents that Otto married. He
was ­thirty-three at the time and chose a woman ten years older than
himself, Helene Landau, who already had three children. Despite
his lifelong belief that Jews should intermarry, he did not, Helene
also being Jewish. Perhaps he rationalized this decision since he
did not have children by Helene, thus avoiding “placing any Jews
on earth.” Later in life, at the age of ­forty-five, and still married to
Helene, Otto fell in love with another woman who was also Jewish.
Hilda ­S chiller-Marmorek was a beautiful married woman who was
ten years younger than him—and, like his wife, a committed social-
ist. While both Hilda and Otto spoke often of divorcing their current
partners to marry each other, that did not happen. Otto ultimately
145
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

followed in his father’s footsteps, taking a younger, beautiful woman

as a mistress and remaining married to his older wife.13
Strangely, Otto, like his father and sister, also sought the advice
of Freud. He visited him for reasons that are not readily known but
possibly because of professional unhappiness, as Freud tried to con-
vince Otto to become a university professor. Otto, however, was
having none of that; he continued working professionally as a poli-
tician. Freud did suggest that if he was trying to make people happy
by being a political force and changing the world for the good of the
people, it would never work. According to Freud, people don’t want
to be happy.14
Even though neither Otto nor Ida lived near Freud, Freud
seemed to have kept track of the Bauer family. Freud knew that Ida
had married and had a son, and he knew that Otto was a prolific and
respected political writer and steady contributor to the Socialist
Party publications. There is some suggestion that Otto’s visit, which
didn’t seem to impact Otto in any discernible way, might have had
repercussions for Freud. Decker writes: “Nonetheless it is a distinct
possibility that Otto’s visit evoked in Freud memories of a ­long-ago
failure and thoughts of the theoretical and technical strides he
had made in the intervening time. For it was just in the four previ-
ous years that Freud had begun to publish a series of findings that
seemed directly linked to Dora’s treatment.”15
In papers Freud had written just prior to World War I, he sug-
gested that he knew he had made mistakes with Ida, and he wrote
about the difficulties he encountered with his patient, specifically
his lack of understanding of the countertransference. Freud had
matured, as had Ida. And perhaps in seeing Otto and talking to him,
learning as he must have about his family, he saw that Ida had made
progress and appeared to be stable.

146
 Chapter 17

World War I

In the beginning of 1914, Freud, Ida, and Otto were all matur-
ing and both enduring the hazards and experiencing the happiness
of growing older. Freud was more accepting of his “minority status”
and had decided to make a virtue out of necessity—meaning that he
knew who he was, and he had a modicum of professional success and
a somewhat happy family situation. While Freud considered himself
German in all aspects of his life, he understood that he was also a
Jew.1
For her part, Ida continued to try to be part of the majority; she
had converted to Christianity and had enough money to enjoy all the
accoutrements of wealth and privilege. She had arrived after striv-
ing for social acceptance “at the highest possible level,” all the while
abandoning the intellectual pursuits of her earlier years. By the age of
­thirty-two, Ida had abandoned her previous ­avant-garde literary and
artistic interests, apparently without remorse. She was now inter-
ested in decorating and attending the opera. Along with her hus-
band, they encouraged their son’s musical aptitude. Ida had great
hopes for her son.2
Otto was professionally successful and politically savvy. He
founded Der Kampf, the theoretical journal of the Socialist Party in
1907, and from 1907 to 1914 he was secretary of the party. He was
viewed as successor to his mentor, Viktor Adler, as party leader.
All three, Freud, Ida, and Otto, were enjoying the fruits of their
labor, but by August 1914, the clouds of war would envelope all three.
The possibility of war had been apparent for some time. What
would be known as the Great War began because of a compli-
cated set of factors; primarily, however, the worldwide conflagra-
tion began because of an assassination. On June 28, 1914, a great
147
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

friend of Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany, Austrian Archduke Franz Fer-

dinand, along with his wife, Sophie, were on a state visit to Sara-
jevo in Bosnia—which had been annexed by ­Austria-Hungary.
The couple were scheduled to inspect the imperial armed forces in
­B osnia-Herzegovina. As they were touring in an open carriage, with
little or no security, someone threw a bomb at their car, which rolled
off the back of the car. This shook them up but did not hurt or injure
them; it did, however, wound an army officer and some bystanders.
As they continued touring, they apparently took a wrong turn some-
where near Gavrilo Princip, a ­nineteen-year-old dissident and mem-
ber of the nationalist Young Bosnia movement. Armed with weapons
supplied by a Serbian terrorist organization and awaiting his chance,
Princip fired at ­p oint-blank range, fatally wounding both the arch-
duke and his wife. Princip then attempted to turn the gun on himself
but was restrained by onlookers until the police arrived. The assassi-
nated royal couple were rushed to hospital, where both died within
an hour. ­Austria-Hungary had no choice but to retaliate in response
to such an aggressive and egregious crime, so with Germany’s sup-
port, they declared war on Serbia on July 28, 1914.3
Following this, on August 1, Germany declared war on Russia,
Serbia’s ally. Russia then invaded France, via Belgium, which forced
Britain to enter the conflagration, declaring war on Germany. Over
the next four years, others would become involved—Italy, Japan, the
Middle East, and the United States. More than twenty million sol-
diers died, and ­twenty-one million more were wounded, while mil-
lions of people fell victim to the influenza pandemic of 1918 that the
war helped to spread.4
In his interview with Timothy Pfaff, Kurt Adler has spoken
about this period:
As a child I was brought up as a typical bourgeois child, where money was
available (which I did not know), but also as a child who had an insight into
the ideals and philosophy of the Social Democrats who took over in 1918.
Took over in Austria, I should say—as well as in Germany.
In 1918 my father was still in the Austrian army, although he was an invalid
because he had a very bad ear problem, which was caused by coming back
to Vienna from the Polish front too late for an operation. He lost his hearing
in the left ear, and also it affected his entire nervous system in a very adverse

148
 Chapter 17. World War I

way. But he was still in the Ministry of War, active in the army, until 1918. My
mother and I were in Czechoslovakia, which at that time was still Bohemia,
at the house of a friend of the family whose name was Dr. Richard Strauss,
but not the composer: he was also a manufacturer, textile manufacturer.5

Having lost her father the year before, Ida would now lose her
brother, with whom she was still extremely close, perhaps closer to
him than to anyone. Otto was off to war. He was decorated for brav-
ery and then captured and sent to a Russian prison, not to return
until September 1917. And her husband, who for some time had been
kept out of the war, was finally called up. Decker writes: “Dora’s hus-
band, at ­forty-one, was not called up for a year, but in late spring of
1915, he too went off.” Ernst would return a changed man, perma-
nently disabled from head and ear injuries that affected his sense of
balance and his memory.6
As if that were not enough, Philipp’s older brother Karl, whom
Otto thought of as a mentor in his earlier years, died of heart fail-
ure. Since he had been the head of the family firm upon the death
of Philipp, Karl’s death meant that the business was without leader-
ship. And it was that business, which had been so successful under
Philipp’s leadership—and Karl’s—that allowed the Adler family to
live the lifestyle to which they, and Ida, had become accustomed.7
Freud, too, would have a difficult time during the war years, as
his sons were serving in the ­Austro-Hungarian army. And, like the
Bauers, Freud depended on international support for his lifestyle and
his professional livelihood. The war ended those connections, and he
began to suffer financially as well as emotionally—like Ida and Ernst.
Freud also became increasingly less healthy, suffering from diarrhea,
constant fatigue, and a chronic mild depression.8
Nonetheless, Freud was still productive in the period leading up
to the war and during it. He continued his infighting with members
of various international psychoanalytic societies. By 1914, Freud was
up to his old tricks again: he would take on mentees and receive pro-
fessional accolades and then would throw them off, which he was
ready to do with Carl Jung, as well as other professional colleagues
whom he considered to be his patients.9
During the war years and for some time following the war, Freud
149
 Part III. Triumph Over Freud

was fearful about the political fate of his profession of psychoanaly-

sis. As Kramer writes, “He favored organization over their members
and systems of thought over fellow feeling.”10 And personally, Freud
worried about his family as well. While he was very productive in
terms of writing papers, he also expressed feelings of helplessness,
fearing impoverishment and death.11
Overall, Ida and her son fared better than Freud, Ernst, and
Otto. Decker explains about the terrible winter of 1917 that Austria
endured, as did Ida and Freud to some degree. The hardships of food
scarcity, mounting inflation, lack of fuel, and a thriving black mar-
ket created an immense weariness.12 However, Ida was better off than
most. Because of the friend Kurt mentioned in his reminiscence of
the war years, true to form, Ida was able to capitalize on social con-
tacts and draw on their inherited resources. “They spent part of the
summer of 1918 on vacation in Bohemia, at the home of a friend of
the family, and that fall were able to afford music lesions for their
talented son with the president—the first oboist—of the Vienna
Philharmonic.”13
The war eventually ended in November 1918, with Austria
becoming a ­t hird-rate, ­l and-locked, small, and inconsequential
nation. Due to the war, new countries were formed and preexisting
countries enlarged at the expense of Austria. South Tyrol was given
to Italy, and Austria was “deprived of the provinces that had made it
an industrial and agricultural force. The Bauer factories were now on
foreign soil in Czechoslovakia, and the family lost its wealth.”14
The famous Viennese coffeehouses now served ersatz coffee and
artificial beer and chocolate. And according to Decker, if you could
get bread and potatoes, they were rotten. Milk, meat, soap, fuel,
and paper were not to be had at all. Families had to wear coats and
hats indoors during the winter months to keep warm. Both Ida and
Freud’s family had a bit more than most, but still, they had lost much.
Ida’s inheritance disappeared almost overnight, and “by 1923, the
Austrian currency had completely collapsed.”15
Ida—and Freud—survived. By 1921, things in Austria improved
somewhat, but Ida was faced with the recognition that she and her
family had lost the industries that provided them with wealth and
150
 Chapter 17. World War I

status. Almost all Ida had now were big dreams for her son—but Ida
was always able to dream big and to survive. She also “believed that
the political prominence of her brother in the new Austrian Republic
would prove valuable to her family.”16
Ida was nothing if not a striver and an achiever, especially as she
could see that her son might achieve greatness now that he had a
focus. As Kurt has recounted:
I took conducting classes at the Vienna Conservatory under Rudolf Nilius,
an Austrian conductor, who gave the students the opportunity to lead the
orchestra, which was quite large. At the Academy, the teacher of the con-
ducting class was a Dutchman who never let the students conduct. Since I
felt that this was very important for the development of a young, aspiring
musician and conductor, I joined the Conservatory, and there took orches-
tration and ­score-reading as well.
I also attended opera classes at the Conservatory. Unforgettable to me was
an opera class given by the famous Danish tenor Erik Schmedes, who was
singing all the important Heldentenor roles at the opera. He taught mainly
by demonstrating. When it came to the Bridal Chamber Scene in Lohengrin,
he would pick out a student (usually a pretty student) and act it with this girl.
I learned then, already, how the personality and the appearance of the singer
had to be respected. Speaking about Lohengrin, I remember how Schmedes
taught the Gral narrative.17

While life was somewhat manageable for the ­Bauer-Adler family

following the war, given that they had friends to help them, the start
of the new decade would bring insurmountable challenges.

151
 Part IV

The Aftermath

No one who, like me, conjures up the most evil of those

­half-tamed demons that inhabit the human breast, and
seeks to wrestle with them, can expect to come through
the struggle unscathed.
—Sigmund Freud

153
 Chapter 18

The New World Order

The situation in Vienna in 1922 was not at all good for Austria,
and it soon became clear that it was not boding well for Ida and her
family. During the war Ida lost her money, as her father’s factories
were shut down, but because of friends and her brother’s connec-
tions, she managed to hold onto her social and economic position.
While it was not what she had previously enjoyed, she still had some
semblance of status.
Ida and son Kurt had spent some of those years living in Czecho-
slovakia at the home of friends. But Ida began to see that Jews were
afraid in this new world order and must have wondered what it
meant for her.
Ida was not afraid, as she and her family had converted to Chris-
tianity, which she had done to protect her family, especially her son,
from the consequences of ­Austrian-German anti–Semitism. Yet she
could not shelter herself or her family from the rampant violence in
Vienna in those years following the war.1
Austria, a landlocked country, was in turmoil. Street gangs
roamed the city. Harassment of Jews was common. Street clashes
were not infrequent, so just shopping or walking around town was
problematic. Schoolboys who looked Jewish were beaten up by gangs
of young boys.2
The government and the people of Austria, including Ida, did
not know how to move forward. The country was now under demo-
cratic rule instituted by a new constitution. Otto Bauer, Ida’s beloved
brother, who had spent three years in a Russian prison camp, had
returned to Austria in 1917. Then, following the death of Viktor
Adler in 1918, Otto had become the leader of the Austrian Social
Democrats. From November 1918 to July 1919, the Austrian Social
154
 Chapter 18. The New World Order

Democrats formed a coalition government with the Christian Social

Party, and Otto Bauer was appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs.
He had proposed that ­nation-states be created, and he was one of
the principal advocates of Austrian Anshluss (unification) with Ger-
many. As a foreign minister of the new government, Otto signed a
secret agreement with Germany to solidify unification. However,
this was rejected by the Allies, as the treaty of Versailles expressly
prohibited the union of Austria and Germany.3 Ultimately, he would
resign his post in protest but would nonetheless remain a leader of
the country for decades.4
While things were difficult for Ida and her family, she did find
some bright spots in her life. Certainly, one of those bright spots and
very comforting to Ida was the knowledge that Otto was always there.
She had always been proud of him and his illustrious career, and they
still were very close, almost as close as they had been when they were
children. She felt that she could depend on her older brother to help
her, and, due to his ­high-ranking position, he somehow was able to
make life a little easier for her. No doubt he was one of the few men
that she felt she could trust, having found that her father, Hans Zel-
lenka, a number of physicians over the years, and even Freud had let
her down, betrayed her, ruined her. Otto never let her down.
Still, while she was happy with her relationship with her brother,
she was unsettled by her son. In the years after the war, Kurt was
beginning to live his own life. By 1922, at seventeen years of age, he
had just graduated from Gymnasium. He was unsure what he wanted
to do next, and this worried Ida. She had high standards for him and
had been prepping him for years to be successful and accomplished,
like her brother. Kurt has said, “My mother was so ambitious that the
best grade was never good enough for her. So I really had to work in
the early years at Gymnasium.”5
Ida was afraid that after all her hard work raising Kurt, all the
money spent on education, music lessons, and other accoutrements
of fine living, he would just float around and not make something
of himself. Using her brother as a role model for her son probably
did not go over very well with the young man. He had been unhappy
about a number of things within his family for some time. He felt
155
 Part IV. The Aftermath

his parents did not provide him with what he thought was due him.
Decker writes that Kurt “was raised austerely. Growing up, he had
next to no money at his disposal.” He possibly did not understand or
know of the financial ruin that was facing the Adler family.6
In later years, he would talk about his childhood and his feel-
ings of not ever having enough. It has been said that perhaps his tem-
per and his cantankerous nature, which were feared but respected in
the world of opera, originated in those early years. In Kurt’s defense,
by the time he was seventeen, there had been a war, his father was ill
and unable to work, his grandparents had died, his family wealth had
disappeared, and his mother was relegated to opening up her house
to bridge players in order to make money for the family. At his age,
he just wanted to meet girls and party—of course.
Ultimately, however, things finally resolved for Kurt, and he
began making decisions that were in line with his mother’s think-
ing and her desires for her son. He decided to enter the Vienna Acad-
emy of Music in 1922 and then the University of Vienna the following
year. Ida was indeed happy about Kurt entering university and pur-
suing his own interests, but she was not too happy about his leaving
the nest to live a life of his own. And she was unhappy about a lot of
other things.7
Whenever Ida became unhappy or things did not go her way,
she became symptomatic. Now with Kurt about to leave home—and
her—she began to manifest several symptoms. One of Ida’s more
troubling physical symptoms at the time was a hearing problem.
She had been seeing an ear, nose, and throat specialist who
treated her for an inner ear disturbance. But she had other physi-
cal symptoms as well. Because she smoked, she had coughing fits.
She walked with a limp in her right leg, which she had had since she
was seeing Freud. Also, she and Ernst had little or no contact—and
they certainly did not enjoy a robust sexual life. And even if they had
wanted to have sex, she probably would not have been able to enjoy
it or endure it as she had premenstrual issues every month, vaginal
discharge, and constant constipation, like her mother before her.
Ernst seemed to care little about Ida’s problems.8 He apparently had
enough of his own woes to deal with. And to make matters worse,
156
 Chapter 18. The New World Order

she suspected that Ernst was unfaithful to her, without any real evi-
dence. She could not bring herself to divorce him, however, like Pep-
pina and Hans.
Now, with her husband uninvolved in her life and her son off on
his own, Ida’s illnesses resurfaced. She was seeing a physician who
had diagnosed one of her conditions as Ménière’s disease, an inner
ear issue, which produced dizziness. This condition was keeping her
bedridden. Ménière’s disease is a disorder of the inner ear that can
lead to hearing loss as well as dizzy spells; it mostly affects only one
ear. She also heard continual noises in her ear that prevented her
from sleeping. Her ear, nose, and throat specialist suggested that she
see a physician by the name of Felix Deutsch. Although Freud had
lost touch with Ida and Otto, it was through Deutsch, a psychoan-
alytic personal physician, that Freud was able to keep up with the
­goings-on of the ­Bauer-Adler family.9
Born in Vienna in 1884, Felix Deutsch was educated at the Uni-
versity of Vienna and held Zionist convictions. He graduated from
medical school in 1908, having studied internal medicine. He met
Helene Deutsch, the famous psychoanalyst, in Munich in 1911. They
were married shortly thereafter and remained married for ­fifty-two
years. Dr. Deutsch likely became interested in psychosomatic med-
icine because of his wife and because he was Freud’s personal phy-
sician for a short period. He would become a leading expert in the
emerging field of psychosomatic illness.10
As to his famous wife, from whom he perhaps gained some
of his psychoanalytic theories, Helene Rosenbach Deutsch was a
­Polish-American psychoanalyst and colleague of Freud. Her concern
and theoretical interests were the psychology of women. Following a
youthful affair with socialist leader Herman Lieberman, Helene mar-
ried Felix Deutsch in 1912. After some miscarriages, she gave birth to
a son, Martin. In 1935, she fled Germany, immigrating to Cambridge,
Massachusetts. Her husband and son joined her a year later, and she
worked there as a ­well-regarded psychoanalyst up until her death in
1982.11
When she was referred to Deutsch, Ida knew that she was going
to be seeing a preeminent physician of internal medicine, someone
157
 Part IV. The Aftermath

with connections to Freud and with a strong background in psycho-

analysis. Apparently, one of the first things she confided to Deutsch
was that she had been Freud’s patient—that she was the famous
Dora.
It was in the late fall of 1922 that, as Deutsch writes, “an oto-
laryngologist asked my opinion about a patient of his, a married
woman, ­forty-two years old, who for some time had been bedridden
with marked symptoms of Ménière’s syndrome.”12
Ida’s initial appointment with her otolaryngologist took place
with Ernst present, but he “left the room shortly after he had listened
to her complaints, and did not return.” Ida gave a recitation of her
complaints, which included migraines, and then went on a “tirade,”
according to Deutsch, about her husband’s indifference to her suf-
fering and her unfortunate marital life. She then discussed the long-
ing she felt for her son, who had begun to neglect her. Ida recounted
how one night when Kurt was out carousing, she waited for him
throughout the entire night. This led her to continue speaking about
her difficulties with her husband and how she could not have another
pregnancy because she could “not endure the labor pains.”13
It was to Deutsch that she began to talk about her unfaithful
husband and denounced men as selfish, demanding, and unforgiving;
she was quite open about the fact that she did not like men. She also
relayed to him the saga that she had discussed with Freud. Deutsch
felt that her primary symptom, ringing in the ear, was connected to
her relationship with her son. When he said that she was continually
“listening for his return from his nightly excursions, she appeared
ready to accept it and asked for another consultation with me.”14
At the next consultation with Deutsch, Ida discussed her dislike
for her mother and her disgust with marital life, her premenstrual
pains, and a vaginal discharge after menstruation. She discussed
with Deutsch her “unhappy childhood because of her mother’s exag-
gerated cleanliness, her annoying washing compulsions, and her
lack of affection for her.” She also spoke with pride of her brother’s
career and her fear that her son would never measure up to Otto.
At the end of this consultation, she told Deutsch that she felt bet-
ter, thanked him profusely, and left. Her brother, however, called him
158
 Chapter 18. The New World Order

several times to express his satisfaction with her recovery and how
difficult it was to get along with her “because she distrusted people
and attempted to turn them against each other.”15
Decker writes about Ida’s meetings with Deutsch:
When Deutsch revisited Dora’s home, he found her out of bed; she declared
that her dizziness and tinnitus were gone. She thanked him “eloquently” and
said she would send for him once more if she got sick; however, she never
called again. Shortly after Deutsch’s visit, Otto telephoned him several times,
“expressing his satisfaction with her speedy recovery. He was greatly con-
cerned about her continual suffering and her discord with … her husband….”
Otto requested an office appointment with Deutsch, who declined in view of
Dora’s improvement.16

In summing up his meetings with Ida, and then writing about

her in an article, it is interesting that Deutsch openly disparages
Ida, questioning her ability to be happy and suggesting she possi-
bly brought about her husband’s eventual early death because of her
paranoid behavior. (The article was written in 1957 after the death of
Ida’s husband, Ernst, although at the time of seeing him, her husband
was still alive. Deutsch also mentioned Ida’s death in New York.)
There are many pieces of information and conclusions he makes in
the article that do not line up with what other writers have said about
Ida: that she was ­self-absorbed and had a “propensity to use her sen-
sory perceptions in her hysterical symptoms.”17
Deutsch closes his article by saying that Ida’s death was a bless-
ing to those who were close to her: “She had been as my informant
phrased it, one of the most repulsive hysterics he had ever met.”18
Interestingly, scholars will continue to debate whether Deutsch
and Freud were right in their analysis of Ida. Deutsch’s article is an
attempt to exonerate Freud, as Decker argues, “for overlooking the
transference,” as he blamed Ida for her own continued illness.19
Incidentally, it was during the time when Deutsch was Freud’s
physician that Freud was secretly dealing with a growth in his mouth.
The side effects of smoking finally caught up with him. He was oper-
ated on more than once, and his cancer was thoroughly excised.
According to Decker, he was fitted with a large prosthesis to replace
the parts of his right palate and upper and lower jawbone that had
been removed by the surgeries.20
159
 Part IV. The Aftermath

At this time when Ida was still plagued by symptoms and

unhappy at home, Kurt made his musical debut in 1925 as an orches-
tral conductor at the Vienna theaters managed by noted European
theatrical producer Max Reinhardt. Now Ida was able to find great
solace, not only in the achievements of Otto but also those of her
son, Kurt.21

160
 Chapter 19

The Nazi Period

Bridge was all the rage between the two world wars. While her
husband was sinking into invalidism and her son was making his
way across Europe as a prominent musician, Ida used the card game
to try and pull herself together. To do this, she partnered with Pep-
pina Zellenka, of all people.1 It was the fashion in Vienna in 1930 to
play bridge, and every Viennese coffeehouse wanted to hire a female
bridge teacher. Traditionally, bridge was a card game played by men
in their clubs, but it was now no longer the purview of men exclu-
sively. Women were taking to the game in droves, opening up oppor-
tunities for excellent bridge players like Ida and Peppina, her former
nemesis.2
Invention was always Ida’s trump card—to use a bridge term.
She often turned adversity into something positive, although with a
lot of struggle. Perhaps she took up bridge initially because her hus-
band had been an excellent player and his enthusiasm for the card
game rubbed off on her. It’s possible she watched him play for years
and thus became familiar with the rules. Because money was in short
supply for Ida and other Viennese people after the war and prior to
the start of the second one, she was always looking for ways to take
care of her family. At one point, she made extra money by renting a
room in her house where people could come to play the popular card
game. She also helped out at a bridge club in Vienna and joined pri-
vate bridge circles where women could be taught by other women
who had mastered the card game—as she herself had done.3
An offshoot of whist, a British card game, bridge came into its
own in the 1930s, both in Europe and the United States. The game
has more rules and regulations than any other pastime other than,
possibly, chess. Two international clubs set up the agenda and the
161
 Part IV. The Aftermath

rules for playing bridge: the Portland Club of London and the Whist
Club of New York. With the rise of duplicate and tournament bridge
in the 1930s and 1940s, the American Contract Bridge League and
the European Bridge League became the predominant rulemakers.4
Bridge became so famous in Vienna that there is even a hand
named after it: the Vienna coup. According to the Encyclopaedia Bri-
tannica, “The characteristic of the Vienna coup is that a high card
must be played early, apparently establishing a card in an opponent’s
hand but actually subjecting him to a squeeze that could not have
been effected had the high card remained unplayed.”5
Ida was in her element. She was good at the game, so good that
she taught the game to others—even Peppina, her partner in her
­bridge-teaching enterprise. Peppina, now in her fifties, had some-
how stayed in contact with Ida and maintained friendly terms with
her. After Hans died in 1928, Peppina took up the bridge craze
and joined Ida. Bridge filled the hole in Ida’s life for some time. As
Decker writes, “At least for a while Dora found a rewarding outlet
for her intelligence. She also had something tangible to fill her hours,
because by 1930, her son was no longer at home.”6
But the situation in Austria was getting perilous, and as Vienna’s
fortunes fell, so did Ida’s. While she might have had a small inher-
itance from her parents, she was mostly lucky that there were still
some women with enough money to continue taking bridge lessons.
It was during this time that Ida experienced a setback. On
December 28, 1932, not unexpectedly, Ernst Adler died of coronary
disease. At the time of his father’s death, Kurt, who had recently mar-
ried, was conducting the Volksoper in Vienna.7 Upon learning of the
death of his father, Kurt came to Ida’s side.
As Kurt tells it:
I had already been on an engagement in the opera houses in Germany at that
time, and he, on Christmas Day, 1932, had a heart attack, after having been
examined three weeks earlier and declared in perfect health. Did I say he
was ­fifty-two years old? He never had been sick with the heart; his only trou-
ble was his ear. There were two Christmas holidays, the 25th and the 26th
of December, in Catholic countries like Austria, and we couldn’t find a heart
specialist. Everybody was out of town; only the old family doctor was avail-
able. My father spent a horrible night, which I will never forget; he was in

162
 Chapter 19. The Nazi Period

incredible pain, from the 27th to the 28th of December. And on the 28th,
we finally had a specialist at the house. In the morning he said, “I don’t think
he can survive this.” He came back in the afternoon around five o’clock, and
said, “Well, since he pulled through so well until now, I think we made it.” At
­eight-thirty in the evening he died, in his sleep, a few hours later.8

In the aftermath of Ernst’s death, Ida herself began to have heart

problems in the form of palpitations, which could have been due
either to her cigarette smoking or to a psychosomatic response to
her husband’s death. In any event, she became frightened of the pal-
pitations and fearful of dying herself. Life became quite intolerable
for Ida in the aftermath of Ernst’s death. On one hand, it is surprising
that she reacted so strongly, as he was a husband she did not seem
to love and with whom she had not had conjugal relations for many
years. Yet, on the other hand, as Decker explains, she was a woman
who somatized her emotions, so if she was feeling regret or sadness,
it came out in symptoms. Decker also explains that Ida became diffi-
cult, using her ailments and her grief to gain sympathy from whom-
ever would listen to her.9
Ida continued going from one doctor to another, having one
gynecologic operation after another, as attempts to “clean herself,”
which of course goes back to her mother and her cult of cleanliness.10
To add to Ida’s woes—and Europe’s—Hitler came to power in
Germany in January 1933. This emerging situation was fraught with
peril not only for Ida, whose concern was primarily financial, but
also for Otto. The rise of Hitler signaled the potential demise of the
democratic state, of which Otto was a proponent and prime mover.
Otto “had spent his life trying to oblige his relatives, avoid confron-
tation, and keep the peace at all cost,” according to Decker. He had
lived a life of appeasement within his family. Now, he saw this qual-
ity affecting not only those closest to him, but his country as well.11
Democracy, as envisioned by Otto Bauer, was doomed to fail
due to political rather than economic factors, which were dire but
eclipsed by what was going on in politics: a weak parliament, ossifi-
cation and bureaucratization of political parties, the personal cha-
risma of authoritarian politicians, and even the Catholic Church,
which was much more involved in national and international politics
163
 Part IV. The Aftermath

than it ought to have been.12 All of this brought about instability in

Vienna and for Ida—again.
It is clear that Otto had his own troubles. The change in the gov-
ernment and the political climate caused Otto to flee, first to Czecho-
slovakia. As a consequence, he was not readily available to Ida for the
support and comfort he normally offered her. Even if he had been
beside Ida, however, there was not much he could do to help her; he
was barely able to take care of himself. Decker writes of Otto and his
behavior at that time, “Like Hamlet, he knew what ought to be done;
but also like Hamlet, he could not bring himself to do it.”13
Decker concludes that Otto, from a very young age, around the
time he was ten, worried about internecine strife, spending his life
trying to oblige relatives and keep the peace at all costs. It had always
been Otto’s fate to try and hold not only a family together, but as
he entered politics, to keep a nation together, all of which started
in childhood: Otto’s ­s elf-involved parents had set the stage for the
Herculean task of making sure that Otto could hold everything
together.14
Surprisingly, the Jews of Austria were not worried about Hit-
ler initially, even though the Nazis were destroying books, censoring
the press, overlooking terrorism perpetrated against Jews, and fir-
ing Jews from government jobs. Freud, for one, although he felt that
the climate was not good, nonetheless held on to an optimism that
would not serve him well ultimately.15
During the next few years, things began to change drastically
as Austria’s independence began to fade. In July 1936, the chancel-
lor of Austria, Kurt von Schuschnigg, made a pact with Germany in
the hopes of appeasing Hitler. He allowed the outlawed Austrian Nazi
party to become members of his cabinet and let them go about their
business.16 Nevertheless, von Schuschnigg would not be able to hold on
to Austria’s autonomy as Hitler’s troops crossed the border into Austria
and German bombers raided the skies over Austria’s cities, includ-
ing Vienna. Then on March 14, 1938, Hitler entered Vienna, receiving
a rapturous hero’s welcome. The general population of Vienna waved
swastika flags to welcome Austria’s son back home as Nazi Germany
annexed Austria and removed its chancellor from office.17
164
 Chapter 19. The Nazi Period

M a ny o f th e
city’s Jews began to
try to emigrate from
Austria. To do so,
they had to stand
in long lines, night
and day, at the Sankt
Margarethen police
station to obtain
visas and any other
documentation that
would be necessary
for them to leave
the country. In addi-
tion, they had to pay
an exit fee and regis-
ter all their immov-
able and most of
their movable prop-
erty, which was then
confiscated.18
Then, toward
the end of 1938, an During the Second World War, Hitler spoke
event took place that to hundreds of thousands of Austrian citizens
gathered in the Heldenplatz in Vienna to hear
was to signal a turn- his declaration of annexation, March 15, 1938
ing point for Jews in (photograph by Heinrich Hoffmann, National
Austria and other Archives).
­G er man- sp e aking
countries. Over two days, November 9–10, Nazi leaders unleashed
a series of pogroms against the Jewish population of Germany and
recently incorporated territories, which was called Kristallnacht, or
the Night of Broken Glass. The synagogue in Vienna was burnt down
and people were pulled from their homes, spit upon, and made to
clean up the streets. Mobs attacked Jewish people, and many would
be ultimately rounded up and sent to “work camps” later.19
And what of Ida during all of this? As horrible as this must have
165
 Part IV. The Aftermath

been for her and her family to witness, she nonetheless felt safe,
unlike Freud, as they were no longer Jewish, having converted to
Christianity when her son was born.
And what of Freud? As far as he was concerned, he would not be
affected as much as other Jewish physicians and academics because
he was famous and had important connections—or so he thought.
Nevertheless, his home was indeed entered by the Nazis. At one
point, his son was imprisoned for a day; afterwards, he was contin-
ually harassed by the Gestapo. Freud finally saw the handwriting on
the wall and tried to get a visa, which the German authorities were
not inclined to give him. In fact, they refused to give him and his
family passports. Freud had not been entirely sure he wanted to leave
Vienna, but his influential friends, especially Ernest Jones, urged
him to move to England. The Nazis again came to his apartment, this
time taking away his daughter, Anna. She spent a day in prison, and
it was only through Freud’s famous friends that she was not sent to a
concentration camp.20
Freud was now thoroughly convinced that he needed to leave
Vienna, and so it was that he and his family left Austria on June 6,
1938. It was due to those influential friends of Freud’s that he, his
wife, and daughter were provided with visas, tickets, money, and
passports. He also found support from the United Kingdom and was
able to emigrate there. However, other members of his family, includ-
ing his sisters, were left in Austria and perished in the Holocaust.21

166
 Chapter 20

Kurt in the United States

While all hell was breaking out in Europe, Kurt was still play-
ing music and interacting with some of Europe’s greatest musicians:
Richard Strauss, for one; and others such as Leo Blech; Otto Klem-
perer; Bruno Walter. At some point during his career in Europe as a
musician while he was playing the piano and the violin, he was asked
if he ever thought about conducting, which he had not. However,
he did get his chance in December at Christmastime. As he tells it,
“While I was in Kaiserslautern, which was four seasons, I conducted
both opera and operetta” during the years 1928 to 1932.1
Kurt was also working for Otto Preminger, the famous movie
director, and traveling all over Austria, as well as being somewhat
settled in Kaiserslautern. He was not only playing and conducting,
but was also engaged in administrative duties. Kurt was supposed
to go on tour in 1932, following those four years in Kaiserslautern.
“That was at a time when Germany already was threatened by the
Nazi movement. As an Austrian citizen, I needed a permit to work,
which expired in the summer of ’32. I was told that I couldn’t get
it extended.” Kurt returned to Vienna and worked both in Italy and
Austria.2
Between 1933 and 1934, while Kurt was conducting at the
Vienna Volksoper, he was likely able to visit with his mother as well
as his uncle, Otto, who was by then having his own problems. In 1933
when Hitler came to power and Kurt was making music, Otto was
still an official of the Austrian government. In this same year, Engel-
bert Dollfuss, with help from the Christian Social Party, created
an authoritarian dictatorship in Austria. Decker writes that Otto
knew what had to be done, knew what he had to do, but could not.
By 1934, Otto was living in exile, having fled into Czechoslovakia
167
 Part IV. The Aftermath

on February 13, leaving Ida completely alone. He and other Austrian

socialists set up headquarters in exile.3
Soon, the Nazis attempted a takeover of the Austrian govern-
ment. The takeover was unsuccessful, but Dollfuss ended up being
killed during the attempted coup. As Decker explains, “It failed, but
Dollfuss was killed…. The new chancellor was Kurt von Schuschnigg,
a studious, distant ­thirty-four-year-old lawyer who continued to gov-
ern an independent Austria under emergency decrees.”4
Ida, living in Vienna alone and under Nazi regime, did not feel
that she or her son were safe, regardless of having converted to
Christianity, which would be undone by the Nazi Nuremberg Laws
of 1936. In them, it was declared that anyone with even one sin-
gle Jewish grandparent was a Jew. With Otto and Kurt no longer in
Vienna, Ida was very lonely. She could still travel to Czechoslovakia
to visit Otto, but he would be too busy to have much of a visit. And
from 1935 to 1938, Kurt was traveling and performing, only to come
back to Vienna briefly.5
One spring day in Salzburg in 1937 when Kurt was sitting in the
library, he was asked if he spoke English, which he did. He was told
that there was a woman from Chicago who had fired several musical
coaches, and Kurt was asked if he would be willing to be her coach.
Kurt asked, “What for? She will fire me, too.” But he did make the
appointment to see her, and as he described, “there was a very tall
lady.” She was not identified by name, but she had a brother and other
friends from the United States, all of whom wanted Kurt to come
with them back to the States. He declined, as he had other commit-
ments in Salzburg, Reichenberg, and Berlin. At some point, however,
this ­still-unnamed woman wrote to Kurt saying that it looked like
war in Berlin. “Wouldn’t you like to come to the States now?” But
Kurt was still not ready. Kurt had an American friend, however, who
was acquainted with the United States secretary of state, Cordell
Hull. Hull told Kurt’s friend that he had a voucher for him to come to
the States whenever he was ready—regardless of quota. Kurt’s Amer-
ican friend was Janet Fairbank.6
During this time, Kurt was married to a woman he had met when
he was in Kaiserslautern during his last season. Gertrud Moellnitz,
168
 Chapter 20. Kurt in the United States

called Trudl, was a ­mezzo-soprano. “She was an excellent actress,

with a faulty vocal technique, fabulously ­good-looking and very suc-
cessful. She got letters all the time asking her for dates.”7
Kurt recalls:
Then we got married. She came to Vienna after we both left Kaiserslaut-
ern. She was from Leipzig, in Germany. We were married in 1932. She per-
formed, also, in various special music theater groups in Vienna, and a talent
scout for Warner Brothers saw her and wanted her to come to Hollywood.
She learned English, and when the time came that a decision had to be made,
I opposed her going to Hollywood.
Well, when I decided to go to Chicago she opposed leaving Europe, and so
she didn’t go with me. But we met again after the war, and now my present
wife, and she and her husband, and I we’re all very good friends. She visited
us here, and we visited her in Hamburg, where she lived.8

The breakup of his marriage to Trudl, his first wife, whom he

married in Europe, took place while Kurt was in Chicago, having left
her—and his marriage. There was no divorce, as Trudl obtained an
annulment; thus, Kurt would be able to say that he was married only
twice. (But as we shall see, he actually had three wives.)9
This annulment between Kurt and Trudl dissolved their mar-
riage in 1938. In 1940 in Chicago, he married Diantha Warfel, an
American writer, often considered his first wife. They were married
for ­twenty-three years, from 1940 until 1963, and from this mar-
riage, they had two children.
In his interview with Timothy Pfaff, he spoke of this marriage:
Diantha and I met in a very strange way. For a while, I conducted an amateur
orchestra in this very wealthy suburb of Chicago. The Chicago Musician’s
Union didn’t like my working with amateurs. At one rehearsal, there was a
young girl present who was a friend of the girl who managed the orchestra.
She was a student, no less.
When the union forced me to give up conducting this orchestra, not so
long thereafter, Diantha wrote me a note, saying that she was glad to hear
that I had to give up the rehearsal, because I was the only one who took them
seriously. The members of the orchestra wanted, really, not only to play their
instruments, but to play around, and my efforts were too sincere for that.
The letter was so fascinating that I called her. But she had never time, and I
had never time, so our dates were very scarce. Frequently I had to drive to
rehearsals with a chorus, which I directed outside of Chicago; so she rode
with me to the rehearsals.

169
 Part IV. The Aftermath

And then, in the summer—it was 1940—while I was training the new
Chicago Opera Chorus (which was a daily rehearsal time of seven hours),
I decided to take off a few weeks in July. I wanted to go to the mountains.
Actually, I had asked Diantha earlier if we shouldn’t get married, but she had
said no. When I asked her to go with me to the mountains, she said, “Well,
I’m sorry, my parents would never agree that I go with you without being
married.” So we got married quickly and went to Estes Park, and Grand Lake,
and other places in the Rockies—on honeymoon.10

Kurt felt himself to be very lucky: “The circles in which I moved

in Chicago were rather ­high-level financial circles.”11 These friends in
high places helped Kurt not only professionally but also personally.
They were able to bring his mother to the United States, as things
were getting very difficult for Ida in Vienna.
While all this ­love-making, ­music-making, and marriage was
taking place with Kurt in the United States, back in Austria, Ida was
somehow able to distract herself from her bodily concerns. Accord-
ing to Decker, “In those times, it was through pride in the sure prog-
ress of her son’s career” that she was able to forget her somewhat
imagined ills.12 The city of Vienna exploded with signs and symbols
of Nazism. Huge swastikas appeared on house walls. Mobs roamed
the streets. If someone even looked Jewish, they were tormented. As
Decker writes:
Even before the German Nazis entered the city, local Nazis and impulsive
mobs unconnected with National Socialism began to molest and beat Jews
and plunder and destroy business and residential Jewish property. Soon cus-
tomers of Jewish merchants and wholesalers, and clients of Jewish doctors,
dentists, and lawyers, stopped worrying about paying their bills.13
And the police looked away.

Ida’s most severe torment began on May 20, 1938, as that was
when Ida’s citizenship was torn away from her and she was declared
a Jew. She watched as Jews—people she knew, prominent Viennese—
were carted off to concentration camps. She now realized that she
must leave Austria.
So began the trek from one office to another gathering forms—a
passport, especially. And one can assume that while Ida was pre-
paring to leave her homeland, Kurt was in the United States work-
ing with his wealthy and famous contacts, trying to get his mother
170
 Chapter 20. Kurt in the United States

to the States. At the same time, Otto, who now resided in Paris,
was trying to get his sister to France. Ida was ­f ifty-six years old
and alone, but she was determined and “dedicated herself to sur-
vival.”14
And then Ida received the worst possible news.

171
 Chapter 21

Ida’s Escape

At the start of the New Year in 1938, both Ida’s brother and
her son had either left Vienna or were preparing to do so, each for
reasons of their own. Her parents and husband were deceased. Ida
was no doubt desolate. She loved her son, adored him in fact, and
depended upon her brother. And things in Vienna were becoming
increasingly complicated.
At the time, there were more than 170,000 Jews living in Vienna,
as well as some 80,000 people, like Ida, of mixed ­Jewish-Christian
background; in other words, converts from Judaism. Approxi-
mately ten percent of the city’s inhabitants were Jewish in one form
or another. Vienna was, and had been for some time, an import-
ant center of Jewish culture and education, with Viennese Jews
­well-integrated into urban society and culture as physicians, aca-
demics, writers, and artists—the cultural elite, if you will.1
On the surface, the city of Vienna remained the same as always
in those early days of 1938. But almost daily, events happened, one
after the other it seemed, that would change not only Vienna, but
Austria as well.
Hitler was pushing for Austria to agree to a union with Ger-
many. Austria, surrounded by fascist countries, was having difficulty
avoiding economic and political upheaval. In a vain attempt to avoid
a takeover of Austria by German forces, the chancellor of Austria,
Kurt von Schuschnigg, met with Hitler on February 12, 1938, in der
Fuhrer’s Berghof residence in the Bavarian Alps. Hitler presented the
chancellor with an ultimatum: hand over Austria to the Nazis or else.
According to several accounts, Hitler was abusive and threatening
to von Schuschnigg, who had no choice but to capitulate to Hitler’s
demands.2
172
 Chapter 21. Ida’s Escape

Unsurprisingly, the handover of Austria to Hitler created an

upheaval in the Austrian government, with von Schuschnigg try-
ing desperately to hold onto power by reorganizing his cabinet to
include former and potential adversaries and allies. In the meantime,
Hitler made a speech before the Reichstag, broadcast by the Aus-
trian radio network, suggesting that all ten million Germans, living
in different countries and areas, should be part of the Reich. Austri-
ans were divided by his speech, but that did not matter to Hitler. Von
Schuschnigg was forced to resign on March 11. The next day, German
troops flooded into Austria and were greeted by delirious crowds of
Austrians. Austria was now incorporated into Nazi Germany. This
became known as the Anschluss.3
Immediately, the Nazis applied German anti–Jewish legislation
to Vienna and the Austrian hinterland. Nonetheless, Ida felt safe as
she was not technically Jewish and had important friends, although
many of them were leaving the country as fast as they could.4
With all this political upheaval, Ida was now experiencing her
own personal upheaval as well; she was forced to say ­good-bye to
both her son and her brother. According to Decker:
He [Kurt] had been coaching a young American soprano, daughter of an
influential lawyer. Right before the Anschluss, she had gotten her father to
get a visa for her teacher from the secretary of state, Cordell Hull. Dora’s son
arrived in the Midwest early in 1938 and became the conductor of an opera
company. Two years later he married again and in 1941 became a naturalized
citizen. Otto remained in Czechoslovakia for several weeks, watching help-
lessly, assessing his own safety and the future of his host country. In May he
wisely concluded that he should leave, and he flew to France.5

Unfortunately, Ida’s feelings of safety did not last for very long
after the Anschluss. Her son was now living in the United States,
her brother had left Czechoslovakia for Paris, and even Freud was
gone—not that Ida knew or cared. Not only that, but she was soon
declared a Jew by the Nazi regime, and her citizenship and her right
to vote were revoked by the German Nuremberg racial laws, which
had been introduced into Austria. She watched in horror as hun-
dreds of Jews were sent to the camps—even the wealthiest and most
influential families in the Jewish community. She finally realized that
she, too, would have to leave Austria. The process of acquiring the
173
 Part IV. The Aftermath

Immediately after the Anschluss, Vienna’s Jews were forced by the local
population to clean the city’s pavements. Here, Austrian Nazis and local
residents look on as Jews are forced to get on their hands and knees and
scrub the pavement, March 1938–April 1938, Vienna, Austria (United
States Holocaust Memorial Museum, National Archives).

necessary papers to emigrate out of ­G erman-led countries, however,

was torturous for Jews, and it was no less so for Ida.
During the time when Ida was trying to get out of Austria, tra-
versing from one office to another to get her papers in order, some
1,800 Jewish men were sent from Vienna to Dachau. Hitler’s May 24
order called for the immediate capture of criminal and other Jews; in
other words, to the Nazi regime, this meant the entire Jewish pop-
ulation of Vienna. Families were separated, men were broken down
physically and spiritually, and Nazism was already in the early stages
of genocide, according to Illana Fritz Offenberger. Vienna’s Jews were
now more vulnerable and increasingly more willing to cooperate
with the German regime, just for the chance to escape the terrors of
the Third Reich.6
It was amidst this horror going on all around her that Ida began
174
 Chapter 21. Ida’s Escape

her journey out of Austria—and it was not easy. Again, Decker

writes:
Dora began the weary trek that all potential Jewish emigrants faced by
going to pick up the necessary forms, but she had to do so at a special office
for ­so-called “racial Jews”—that is, Christians or those without religious
affiliation who were defined as Jewish according to the Nuremberg Laws.
Although the emigration process contained many enervating detours, the
basic steps in getting a passport were to procure the correct forms and then
clear the police, the economic and financial authorities, and finally, the
Gestapo. If the ­would-be émigrés were successful, they got passports for a
very short while. Along the way they lost most of their property.7

Daily life for Vienna Jews continued to be awful. People were

arbitrarily interrogated; they were afraid to converse in public, and if
they met people on the street, they were too fearful to stop and talk
to them.
It is estimated that approximately 201,000 people living in
Austria in 1938 were Jewish, many residing in the capital. Accord-
ing to the Austrian Academy of Sciences, during the years 1938–
1939, the Jewish population in the Austrian provinces was expelled
and forced to relocate to Vienna, following which the local Jewish
community organizations were successively abolished. A first major
wave of escape and emigration began with 91,530 individuals consid-
ered to be Jewish by Nazi definition, who remained in Vienna. Thus,
Vienna had the highest number of Jews of any city in the entire Ger-
man Reich. And it was from Vienna that most Jews were deported.
The majority of deportations—about 45,527 women, men, and chil-
dren—took place from Vienna’s Aspangbahnhof, the Aspang railway
station, in ­forty-five transports to ghettos and extermination sites in
the East.8
During the early spring of 1938 and for several years after, both
Otto and Kurt made attempts to get Ida out of Austria. They each, in
their own way, probably tried many avenues to help Ida escape the
frightful situation she found herself in. Ida was the most desperate
she had ever been, with real and imminent danger all around her. Ida
surely must have thought that life could not get any worse, but she
was wrong.
Otto died of heart failure in a small Paris hotel on July 4, 1938,
175
 Part IV. The Aftermath

four months after Austria had become part of the Third Reich. He
was ­fifty-seven years old and living in a modest furnished apartment
on the Rue Turgot. Ewa ­Czerwińska-Schupp writes:
His close friend and ­long-time editorial assistant of Vienna’s Arbeiter-
Zeitung, Otto Leichter, who was called to Bauer’s death bed by his wife Hel-
ena, wrote, “There was no doubt to anyone who was able to spend Bauer’s
last months with him that he died of a broken heart in the truest and saddest
sense.” Bauer passed away believing that he was responsible for the defeat of
the party and unhappy about his forced emigration and separation from his
native country. He was also distressed over the fate of his comrades and the
new party, the Revolutionary Socialists of Austria, after Hitler’s Anschluss.9

Otto had always had a somewhat troubled personal life. While

his parents were alive, he did not marry. At the time of his death, he
was married to Helene ­Gumplowicz-Landau, whom he met at the
Café Central in Vienna when she was still married to the lawyer Max
Landau. She was ten years Otto’s senior and a published author, hav-
ing written many works in economics. She was also an influential
figure in the Polish Social Democratic Party of Galicia, a “territo-
rial organization.” “Her open but critical mind and vivid tempera-
ment put a spell on Bauer—he married her in 1920. The couple had
no children but their choice turned out to be right for both. In spite
of Bauer’s many affairs, she remained his closest partner in intellec-
tual work and party activism until the end of his life.”10
Ida may have learned of her brother’s death from his sister-
in-law. According to Decker, “If she did get the news of his stately
funeral, attended by socialist leaders from all over Europe, with
orations by the highest dignitaries, such as Léon Blum, the former
French prime minister, she might have drawn a bit of comfort.”11
But she was also still struggling to escape Austria. Since Ida
frequently took on the ailments of the people she loved when they
died—especially as she did for her husband—she might have begun
having palpitations again. Regardless, she had an increasingly urgent
need to get out of the country as the situation for Jews was becoming
more and more difficult.
Come the New Year in 1939, Ida was still in Vienna, unfortu-
nately. The Nazis continued rounding up Jews, Ida among them,
from certain apartment houses. “Jews living in ‘Aryan’–owned
176
 Chapter 21. Ida’s Escape

apartments were evicted, and Jewish owners had to take in the

evicted Jews.” By the mandate of the regime, Ida even had to change
her name to one more Jewish: Sara. Finally, with her name changed
on official records, she managed to obtain a visa to France. That
notwithstanding, life was very difficult for her, both because she
was Jewish and because of the known activities of her deceased
brother.12
To emigrate to Paris where friends of her brother’s would help
her, Ida was forced to hide for some time in ­s eventy-year-old Pep-
pina’s home in Vienna while she waited to receive her visa and other
necessary papers. Thanks to support from political allies of her
brother, both in France and America, she eventually obtained per-
mission to travel to Paris in 1939. During her travels, Ida had the mis-
fortune of developing typhoid.
Ultimately, Ida had to flee Paris ahead of the German occupa-
tion of that city, which took place in June of 1940. She then trav-
eled through the South of France to Casablanca in Morocco. It was
not until September 1941, according to Ellis, that she finally trav-
eled to America on board the SS Serpa Pinto to be reunited with her
son.13
Like so many before her, ­fifty-eight-year-old Ida landed at Ellis
Island and would now be attempting to make a new life for herself in
a foreign country. Fortunately, in addition to being fluent in French,
German, and Italian, Ida could also speak English. According to her
­great-granddaughter in her novel, Ida, Kurt was conducting in Chi-
cago at the time of her arrival in America and could not meet her, so
he sent a friend in his place—Martin Magner.14
As it turned out, Martin Magner, Ida’s first contact in the United
States, was a German. He had been befriended by Kurt, as they
had both worked in Prague together directing operas. George Ber-
nard Shaw was a fan of Magner and, ironically, Sigmund Freud had
offered to train him as a lay psychoanalyst on the strength of a play
he wrote about a psychiatrist. In 1936, Magner immigrated to the
United States and settled in Chicago, where Kurt was also working
in the theater. Magner did radio work for a while, and then eventu-
ally television, working as a producer and director for ­twenty-five
177
 Part IV. The Aftermath

years, first for NBC and then from 1950 to 1965 for CBS in New
York. His work included pioneering shows like Studio One, The Gold-
bergs, Lamp unto My Feet, and Robert Montgomery Presents. 15 So
even though Kurt was not there to greet his mother, Ida was in good
company.

178
 Chapter 22

The Aftermath

After passing through Ellis Island, Ida took the train from New
York City to Chicago to be reunited with her son—finally, after years
on the road. Once in Chicago and together with her son, she met his
second wife, Diantha, an American writer who was born in India-
napolis. Unbeknownst to Ida, Diantha was pregnant with their first
child at that time.
Born in 1917, Diantha Warfel graduated from the University of
Chicago, after which she studied nursing at Presbyterian Hospital in
Chicago. She was an avid fencing enthusiast, winning several medals
in Illinois. She and Kurt married on July 7, 1940, and ultimately had
two children, Kristan and Ronald. Eventually, the family left Chicago
and moved to San Francisco, where Kurt became general director of
the San Francisco Opera. Diantha won the Boys’ Life ­D odd-Mead
Writing Award for her fencing book entitled On Guard!, which was
published in 1961.1
Not surprisingly, Ida was a difficult ­mother-in-law. She confused
and annoyed her ­daughter-in-law and was not much help in the rais-
ing of her new grandchild. She apparently tried to fit in, but it was
difficult for her, and even the arrival of her first grandchild was not
something that thrilled Ida.
Once Kurt and his family left Chicago for San Francisco, Ida
returned to New York, where she lived as a subtenant with a socialist
comrade. According to Friedrich Adler (a friend of Otto Bauer, not a
relative), she worked at a factory.2
Gaetano Merola, then general director of the San Francisco
Opera, had heard of Kurt Herbert Adler. It would appear that he was
quite an admirer: over the telephone, he invited Kurt to be the cho-
rus director for the San Francisco Opera in 1943. So while Ida lived
179
 Part IV. The Aftermath

and worked in New York, her son was making a name for himself in
San Francisco.
Living in the United States was difficult for Ida. Because of her
personality and disposition, she did not get along well with people.
Ida also continued to suffer from her various complaints, eventually
succumbing to the same illness that killed her mother: colon cancer.
Decker writes of her time in the United States:
It is likely that Dora did not live with her son in the Midwest and later on
the West Coast where he again went to work with an opera company but
instead resided in New York. By now almost sixty, she lived out the war years
unhappily with many of her familiar physical problems. Then her consti-
pation worsened. Did Dora suspect that she was suffering from her moth-
er’s mortal illness? Did she avoid seeking medical advice in order not to hear
the dreaded diagnosis? By the time her cancer of the colon was diagnosed it
was too late for a successful operation. Judging by her reactions to previous
stressful periods she had endured, it is likely that her anxiety at this juncture
was great. In 1945 her son accepted an engagement in New York, probably
to be near his mother. Dora died the same year in Manhattan’s Mount Sinai
Hospital.3

In his interview with Pfaff, Kurt recalls his mother’s final days.
My mother came to the United States in 1938. When I left, she was still in
Vienna, but going to France. Leon Blum, the famous socialist Prime Minister
of France, had been a close friend of my uncle’s. My uncle had been asked by
the Czech government, where he lived from 1933 to ’38, to leave Czechoslo-
vakia, because the situation with Germany and Czechoslovakia had become
very ticklish. So he went to Paris and died there suddenly; he was born in
1873 and died in Paris in the summer of 1938. Leon Blum insisted that my
mother come to Paris, which she finally did after I had left. He arranged for
her to leave the night before the Germans occupied Paris, for the south of
France. She spent quite a few difficult years there, and finally came here via
Casablanca, where she was interned in a hospital and came down with chol-
era, had Arabian male nurses, and had her visa expire. I succeeded in hav-
ing it renewed because the foreign office in Washington was ­well-acquainted
with my uncle and certainly wanted to open the doors for his sister, after he
had died. So she came to this country—I forget the exact years. She lived first
in Chicago with me, and then moved to New York, where I also moved. She
died of cancer in 1943. ­Sixty-three years old at the time.
I was here, but only for a short part of the year. In 1942 it was at the sug-
gestion of my predecessor, Maestro Merola, that I moved from Chicago to
New York. So in 1945 I returned from here to New York instead of Chicago;
my mother was already there. She died in our apartment after having been

180
 Chapter 22. The Aftermath

operated on, but it was too late, and I think probably the knowledge of how
to handle cancer operations wasn’t quite advanced enough.4

And what of the rest of the characters in the “Dora” saga?

Peppina and Hans Zellenka’s son, Otto, renounced the Jewish
faith in 1924. But like Ida, this did not protect him from the anti–
Semitism of the Nazis. According to Ellis, Otto was “pensioned off
from his job as part of the purging of Jews from government posi-
tions, despite being only ­forty-six years old. He left Austria in 1939,
sailing to New York, where he lived in Manhattan.”5
As for Peppina, she was one of a few Jews who managed to stay
in Vienna in the same place as she had lived with Hans—Opernring
15. Ellis continues:
Toward the end of 1939, Jews in Vienna began to be forcibly moved from
their homes into shared apartments. We assume that Peppina’s move in
August 1939 to Gonzagagasse in the First District (Innere Stadt) was part of
that process. From May 1942 onward, all Jews in Vienna were forcibly reset-
tled in the Second, Ninth, and Twentieth Districts to facilitate later deporta-
tion. In August 1942 Peppina moved once again, this time to Glockengasse in
the Second District, where her lover Philipp Bauer and the young Sigmund
Freud had both grown up. By this time, Peppina would have worn the yellow
star on her clothing at all times.6

Unfortunately, that was not the end of it for Peppina. At

­seventy-two years of age, she was deported to Theresienstadt Ghetto,
the concentration camp near Prague, and admitted into the camp
under the name of Bettina Zellenka. The Nazis called this camp a
Home for the Aged, for wealthier Jews—in other words a model
ghetto. It’s possible that Peppina paid for the opportunity to live
there, but in all probability, she, like other new arrivals, was robbed
and then moved into shameful living conditions and put to work.7
Ellis continues: “When Theresienstadt was liberated by the
Soviet Army in May 1945, Peppina Zellenka was among the 17,000
people found alive. She was ­s eventy-five years old, one of just 169
survivors from the 1,300 Jews deported from Vienna on Sep-
tember 24/25, 1942. She had survived Theresienstadt for thirty
months.”8
Peppina lived for a short while in the Hotel Pension Kumbichl,
dying on January 16, 1949, at the age of ­seventy-nine. The cause of
181
 Part IV. The Aftermath

death was heart failure, influenza, and bronchial pneumonia. She

was buried in the Jewish cemetery in Innsbruck next to her husband,
Hans.9
As for Ida’s son, Ida would have been thrilled to know that Kurt
became one of the most famous impresarios in the United States. In
the years following his move to San Francisco, Kurt took on more
and more administrative details as Merola’s health and energy dimin-
ished. While Adler was not the board’s natural choice to replace
Merola at the time of his death in 1953, after three months of acting
as the company’s artistic director and with the help of its president,
Robert Watt Miller, Adler was confirmed as general director. Like his
mother, he was never considered an easy person to get along with.
Nonetheless, he would go on to win fame as the autocratic director
of the San Francisco Opera Company, where he introduced to the
American public famous European musicians such as Birgit Nilsson,
Renata Tebaldi, and Leon-
tyne Price. He would even-
tually record albums with
Luciano Pavarotti and Plac-
ido Domingo.
Kurt divorced his sec-
ond wife, Diantha, in 1963.
He married Nancy Good-
hue Miller of San Fran-
cisco on August 23, 1965.
He was sixty years old at
the time, and his wife was
­t wenty-three years old.
They had two children:
Sabrina, born in 1980, and
Curtis Roman, born in
1983. Kurt died of a heart
Katharina Adler, great-granddaughter attack at his home in Ross,
of Ida Bauer Adler, who has written a fic- California, on February 9,
tional account of her famous relative’s
life, entitled Ida (photo by Christoph 1988. He was survived by
Adler, courtesy Katharina Adler). his wife, Nancy Miller; two
182
 Chapter 22. The Aftermath

daughters, Kristin Krueger and Sabrina; two sons, Ronald and Curtis
Roman; and two grandchildren.10
Ida has survived to this day—as Dora. In recent years, feminism
has taken on Freud’s handling of Ida. Several leading feminist schol-
ars, including Toril Moi and Hélène Cixous, would see Dora, as writ-
ten up by Freud, as a symbol of silent revolt against male power over
women’s bodies and women’s language. Conversely, Catherine Clé-
ment argued that as a silent hysteric who abandoned treatment, she
was less a feminine role mode than Anna O., who went on to become
a famous social worker. These are only two of the many interpreta-
tions of Dora’s fragment of an analysis. Over the years, feminist the-
ory has delved into the study of Freud and Dora, in essence creating
an academic subfield on her life and analysis. This renewed interest
in Freud’s case history of Dora stems from feminist questioning of
psychoanalysis.11

183
 Chapter 23

The Scholarship

The critical response to the Dora case study was not univer-
sally positive during Freud’s lifetime. As Ernest Jones recalled, it was
deemed “mental masturbation, an immoral misuse of his medical
degree.” Yet it led Jones to his own calling to the study of psychoanal-
ysis. Carl Jung, who would become one of Freud’s mentees (only to
be rejected later), thought the study of Dora was masterful.1
By the middle of the twentieth century, the work had become
overwhelmingly accepted, with Ida’s cough and her mutism signal-
ing internal conflicts and desires.2 Later, admiration for the techni-
cal expertise shown in the work was taken up by Jacques Lacan. Erik
Erikson expanded upon the issue of Ida’s positive response to Herr
Zellenka’s advances. Then feminist critics took up the banner from
Erikson, claiming that Freud was openly insensitive to the young
patient’s abhorrence of what was happening to her, both Hans Zel-
lenka’s advances and her father’s dismissal/allowance of them. Some
feminists accused Freud of phallocentrism and considered the case
study a perfect illustration of patriarchy in general but especially
within the medical profession.3
Janet Malcolm, who has written extensively about psychia-
try and psychoanalysis, was somewhat sympathetic to Freud, but in
general felt that the tone he used with his young patient was inap-
propriate. And she concluded, even as Freud did, that both counter-
transference and transference needed to have much more attention
than it did in the early years of psychoanalysis.4 Sadly, Ida was a sac-
rificial lamb to psychoanalytic theory.
While Ida died in 1945 and Freud in 1939, their lives go on, for
better or worse, because of the intense interest in the Dora case study,
which is his longest, and is part and parcel of the psychoanalytic
184
 Chapter 23. The Scholarship

canon. With so many mistakes made, it is a wonder that the case sur-
vived. Just one of the many mistakes is his having imputed bisexu-
ality to his young patient. As mentioned in an earlier chapter, since
Freud potentially had an affair with his ­sister-in-law, it can perhaps
be argued that he projected some of his own issues (the counter-
transference, unacknowledged at the time) onto Ida Bauer. And it
has been argued by Shengold Leonard that the subject of her alleged
bisexuality might have come out of the rupture in his relationship
with Fliess, Freud’s greatest intimacy with another man in his adult
life—again, the countertransference. It was during Freud and Fliess’s
final meeting, at Achensee, that “turned out to be a climax in their
personal and theoretical entanglement over bisexuality.”5
Leonard also remarked on Freud’s bullying that was exhibited in
the case study:
Dora’s case history exemplifies a remarkable amount of coercion. A male
adult forced himself upon a young female who afterward was forced by her
father into therapy sessions where the therapist elected to force or “direct”
her associations, the pursuit of his own theories perforce interfering with his
­free-floating attention. Freud built gratuitous reconstructions, projecting
onto the young Dora his own excitability and wishes for her excitation and
corralling her desires within the orbit of his knowledge and ambitions.6
While Leonard was mulling over his ideas in 1990, the pub-
lished books and articles on the subject continue to this day, and
Daniela Finzi still calls the Dora case study one of the most import-
ant and interesting studies that Sigmund Freud ever conducted and
described. In the preface of her book, she calls it “a watershed in the
history of psychoanalysis,” even though it was considered a failed
study by Freud himself. She also describes how important the issues
of sexuality were and are today as the driving engine of psychoneu-
rosis and neurosis in general, as described by Freud.7 And Hélène
Cixous believed Ida was a victim of men’s power—even as she both
rejected that power and rejected someone else’s interpretation of her
own body, symptoms and all.8
Clément and Cixous had a lively debate about Dora, which is
described with clarity in Gilman:
In her debate with Cixous in The ­Newly-Born Woman, Catherine Clém-
ent was more skeptical about the ultimate power of hysteria as a form of
185
 Part IV. The Aftermath

feminine subversion. She maintained that the hysteric is unable to commu-

nicate because she is outside of reality and culture—that, in Lacanian terms,
her expression remains in the Imaginary, outside the Symbolic. Thus “hyster-
ical symptoms, which are metaphorically inscribed on the body, are ephem-
eral and enigmatic. They constitute a language only by analogy.” Hysterics
should be classed not with feminist heroines, but with deviants and margin-
als who actually reinforce the social structure by their preordained place on
the margin. Indeed, their roles are ultimately conservative: “Every hysteric
ends up inuring others to her symptoms, and the family closes round her
again, whether she is curable or incurable.” With regard to Dora, Clément is
cool and ­level-headed: “You love Dora, but to me she never seemed a revo-
lutionary character.”9 In order to affect the symbolic order, or the material
world, she argues, the hysteric must somehow break through her private lan-
guage and act. Thus for Clément, the “successful hysteric” is one, like Anna
O./Bertha Pappenheim, who becomes a writer, social worker, and feminist
leader.10

As we can see, not all feminists agree that young Dora, as portrayed
by Freud in his case study, should be viewed as a feminist icon.
Even practicing physicians, not just psychoanalysts, have been
interested in the Dora case. The Lancet, a premier medical journal,
wrote about Dora. Boyce wrote that if Freud submitted his famous
case to a medical journal, a reputable one such as The Lancet, it
wouldn’t even get past a first read. Case studies with only one per-
son’s issues illustrated, he writes, are “regarded with suspicion.” Also,
there was a ­five-year gap between the end of the treatment and the
publication of the case study. Still, the most striking aspect of the
case, Boyce writes, is that “Freud’s Dora, one of the seminal docu-
ments of psychoanalysis, is a thorough report of a negative result.”11
Boyce concedes that while the case would at some level not
be worthy of publishing in The Lancet, on another level, it was to
his credit to admit defeat and to see what this failure meant. “Per-
haps this frankness, persistence, and ability to cope with setbacks
by learning from failure is one of the reasons psychoanalysis is still
going strong,” he concludes.12
Not all of Freud’s patients fared as poorly as Ida Bauer did. Take
for instance the case of one of his last living patients, Margarethe
Walter. In his analysis of Margarethe, he did much better than he
did with Ida. And as Linda Oland Danil argues, although Freud often
seemed to disparage women, within the confines of the Margarethe
186
 Chapter 23. The Scholarship

Walter session, he emphasized that Margarethe should follow her

own desires, to the exclusion of what her father dictated.
Apparently, Margarethe saw Freud when she was roughly the
same age as Ida—eighteen years of age. Unlike with Ida, Freud dis-
missed her father and believed Margarethe about all aspects of her
life. He wanted her to know that he listened to her fully and saw her
as a person in her own right, not as an appendage of men. Marga-
rethe herself said, “Sigmund Freud was [the] first person in my life
who really listened to me emphatically, who wanted to find out and
learn something about me, the one who truly listened. He looked at
me without interruption, he looked at me, and his active empathy
surrounded and contained me.”13 This was in sharp contrast to how
he treated Ida—but then, Margarethe came to Freud toward the end
of his career, while Ida came at the beginning.
Regardless of Freud’s many missteps and the distrust he some-
times engendered, the gossip that endured, the tattered friendships
that he seemed unable to sustain, his legacy remains intact. For all
his eccentricities and failings, Freud was seen as a superstar in many
ways in Europe and even on his visit to the United States. When he
finally left Austria for London, following the interrogation of his
daughter by the Gestapo, he made his way—on the Orient Express—
and his reputation preceded him. He was interviewed by the BBC
and wined and dined by the Hogarth Press, which had been Freud’s
British publishers. Of course, the publishers were Virginia and Leon-
ard Woolf. As Louis Menard recounts in a New Yorker article, Woolf
wrote in her diary, “A screwed up shrunk very old man: with a mon-
key’s light eyes, paralyzed spasmodic movements, inarticulate: but
alert.”14 So much for stardom. However, upon reflection, Leonard
wrote in his autobiography that he felt a great gentleness in Freud as
well as great strength. “A formidable man.”15
Although he died at his house in Hampstead on September 23,
1939, three weeks after the start of the Second World War, his legacy
continues to thrive, particularly in America. Many in America were
taken with the cardinal Freudian principle that “sources of our feel-
ings are hidden from us, that what we say about them when we walk
into the therapist office cannot be what is really going on.”16
187
 Part IV. The Aftermath

Numerous books have been written about Freud since his death.
Even literary scholars began to review and analyze texts using psy-
choanalysis. But over the years, there have been dissenting views
on how important Freud is or was, how useful psychoanalysis is or
was in therapeutic settings or in analyzing literary texts. As I men-
tioned above, Freud’s legacy was in dispute; he was hammered by
feminist scholars who took the side of Dora. His cocaine use was also
questioned.
Additionally, many drugs put out by the pharmaceutical indus-
try made analysis somewhat redundant since it is both costly and
involved hours, months, and years “on the couch.” In the late twen-
tieth century, psychoanalysts were sometimes viewed as tricksters
who provided nothing of value for the patients.
Freud’s legacy has gone up and gone down, then back up again,
and recently he has been seen as a literary lion rather than a medical
one. His case studies are viewed as literature, and although his sci-
ence is not universally recognized as having value, his skill in pro-
ducing narratives continue to earn praise and applause. And it is the
Dora case study that seems to be his highest literary offering.
Perhaps the legacy we should be talking about and thinking
about is that of Ida Bauer Adler. Students read the case study in
college and therapists study Freud’s account of her seductions and
traumas and learn about the beginnings of transference and coun-
tertransference from the Dora case, but Ida herself was a surprisingly
resourceful woman. Was she flawed? Yes—but how hard she tried to
overcome her awful familial situation. What I think of as the great
tragedy of Ida’s life is not so much what happened to her during her
life, but what happened after. Ida remained Dora—a fictive charac-
ter without any personhood, which is basically what feminists have
argued all along: Dora may have lost her voice, but Ida gained hers.
The real woman of the case study was able to leave the cloak of mute-
ness behind her through her marriage, her motherhood, her profes-
sional life, and her relationships—with her brother and, yes, even
with Peppina.
At the conclusion of the case study, Freud explains that Dora’s
leaving him was an act of revenge. He wrote:
188
 Chapter 23. The Scholarship

I knew Dora would not come back again. Her breaking off so unexpect-
edly, just when my hopes of a successful termination of the treatment were
at their highest, and her thus bringing those hopes to nothing—this was an
unmistakable act of vengeance on her part. Her purpose of ­self-injury also
profited by this action. No one who, like me, conjures up the most evil of
those ­half-tamed demons that inhabit the human breast, and seeks to wres-
tle with them, can expect to come through the struggle unscathed. Might I
perhaps have kept the girl under my treatment if I myself had acted a part,
if I had exaggerated the importance to me of her staying on, and had shown
a warm personal interest in her—a course which, even after allowing for my
position as her physician, would have been tantamount to providing her with
a substitute for the affection she longed for? I do not know.17

But maybe this was not all about vengeance. Maybe Ida Bauer,
even as a ­seventeen-year-old, knew how to take care of herself amidst
her many travails and symptoms. She never really became well; she
suffered for years. But she was able to accomplish a great deal given
a chaotic family life and a dire social setting in increasingly anti–
Semitic Vienna. She married, had a child, and maintained some rela-
tionships. Was she difficult? Probably, but given the cards she was
dealt, she was able to make a full life for herself.

189
 Epilogue

What is the significance of the story of “Dora”?

Although no longer considered an illness, hysteria was predom-
inantly diagnosed as a condition that afflicted women, not men. This
was a common interpretation of women’s psychological impairment
until well into the ­mid-twentieth century and one recognized as early
as ancient Greece. In this “female” condition, the patient developed
a multiplicity of symptoms, from fainting and heart palpitations
to limb malfunction. According to Sigmund Freud, who studied it
exhaustively, it stemmed from sexual experiences generally in child-
hood that had a traumatic effect.1
Freud was a pioneer in psychoanalysis and hysteria. His most
prominent case was that of the young woman he called Dora, and
while that case study was deemed a failure by Freud, it is still after
many decades premier in the annals of case studies, women’s psy-
chology, psychoanalysis, and trauma brought on by sexual miscon-
duct of one kind or another.
The significance of the Dora case revolves around the impor-
tance of “talk therapy,” the use of dreams in analysis, the concepts
of transference and countertransference, and the narrative structure
of the patient’s history. The case effectively introduces the notion of
family therapy as well, unheard of in the Vienna of Ida’s time, that
when one in a family is psychologically ill, the entire family is also.
You could say that psychoanalysis was built upon the dysfunction of
a young girl and her struggle against powerlessness brought upon by
male dominance and maladjustments of the social order.2
We know today how family relationships negatively or posi-
tively impact the children of the family. The notion of the “identified
patient,” who in Freud’s case study, would have been Dora, extends
190
 Epilogue

to the interactions among all family members. According to Pamela

Broderick and Christina Weston in Psychotherapy Rounds,
… although one family member may be the “symptom bearer,” the whole
family is in distress. Interventions in family therapy are geared toward the
family as a unit with the perspective that some individual symptoms are
products of relationship struggles within this unit. These individual symp-
toms are viewed as arising from and being complicated by the family system
matrix. Family therapy is considered more of an orientation than a specific
type of therapy.3

Freud did not analyze Ida with the rest of the family in mind.
He seemed to admire the father, had disdain for the mother, and
ignored the brother. And he did not recognize that the father, who
brought his daughter to the analyst, lied about her situation. He
never changed his opinion of Philipp during the course of his work
with Ida. In addition to all this, Freud’s clinical ability “left much to
be desired.”4
Strangely, Ida Bauer, with her unbelievable desire and need for
­s elf-determination, managed to save herself, against all odds. She
renounced Freud by aborting her analysis. In leaving Freud, she left
not only her therapist, but her father as well.
As Decker points out, reading the Dora case study was at one
time, for psychoanalytic students, a way to examine not only the
genius that was Freud, but also his limitations. “Freud,” Decker
writes, “was blind to his own impulses and reactions.” Today thera-
pists and analysts realize that the sexual impulses they may have are
an occupational hazard and something to use to the patients’ bene-
fit—not something to hide from.5
Since hysteria is no longer a diagnosis that men tack onto
women, we might say that Dora has done us a great service. The Dora
case study, illuminating as it did Freud’s inadequacies, especially in
dealing with a troubled, adolescent female, provided a way out of
that type of treatment. In its place now, however, we have anorexia
nervosa, bulimia, borderline personality disorder—all conditions
leveled at females. The distress of anorexia, which has supplanted the
symptoms that beset Ida, still has its roots in familial denial and sex-
ual misunderstandings.

191
 Epilogue

Without help, young women like Ida who have been traumatized
by family or society have difficulty completing the tasks that make
for a meaningful adulthood. Ida as an example of a young girl try-
ing to overcoming the vicissitudes of trauma did, on the surface, gain
some mastery over her life; however, she was plagued with physi-
cal symptoms for most of her life and never did seem to understand
that some of her issues were due more to her inability to handle her-
self and her relationships than with the society and culture within
which she lived. Because of this, her problems followed her into mar-
riage and motherhood and complicated her situation during the Nazi
occupation.
Even though we have made great advancements in the treatment
of people with mental conditions through the use of drugs, talk ther-
apy, cognitive therapy, and other modalities, there is still a stigma—
subtle perhaps, but a stigma nonetheless—attached to mental illness,
which can be seen in the lack of parity in fees and insurance cover-
age. And while there have been many changes in mental health care,
some studies argue that up to one in five children experience men-
tal health problems. Although there have been many changes and a
great deal of progress, it is unclear, according to William Bor and his
colleagues, whether the rates of internalizing and externalizing prob-
lems have changed in young people.6
A recent literature search by Bor and colleagues included stud-
ies on toddlers, children, and adolescents (2,349 abstracts in total
reviewed). Their findings indicate that recent generations of adoles-
cent girls are at greater risk of internalizing problems and show that
there are “gender difference in rates of depression and anxiety dis-
orders with women more likely to experience these disorders than
men.”7
This epidemic of relational and psychological issues still being
seen in adolescent girls—those around the age of Ida—says some-
thing about our inability or physicians’ inability to help young
women, as they were unable to do in Ida’s Vienna. So the story
of Dora, as outlined in Freud’s case study, can be seen as a gift.
­Jean-Michel Rabaté argues that “using Dora as a fictional name for
Ida Bauer may prove to have been Freud’s most lasting stroke of
192
 Epilogue

genius.” In transforming his patient into the Greek word meaning

“gifts,” he provides us with a story that is as useful today as it was
then. Using a child as bride or bribe is as dreadful a parental activity
today as it was then. Ida was given to Hans Zellenka to compensate
for her father’s affair with Peppina Zellenka.8
Ida Bauer was indeed a gift. The case study even today is poi-
gnant, but Ida’s life affirms that the human spirit can survive and
transcend. Ida did have a problematic life and she lived in a problem-
atic time, but she was able to survive. Life should be about more than
survival, but in Ida’s case, the fact that she did is amazing.

193
 Chronology

1853 Birth of Philipp Bauer, father of Ida, on August 14 in

Pollerskirchewn, Úsobí, Czechia (Czech Republic)
(Freiberg, Moravia).
1856 Birth of Malwine Friedmann (Bauer), favorite paternal
aunt of Ida’s, on January 6, in Pollerskirchen, Úsobí,
Czechia (Czech Republic).
Birth of Sigmund Freud, May 9, Příbor,
­Moravian-Silesian Region, Czech Republic, named
Sigismund Schlomo Freud.
1859 New regulations establish full freedom of trade; Vien-
na’s economy grows rapidly, and with it the city’s
population.
1860 Freud’s family moves to Vienna and settles in
Leopoldstadt.
1861 Birth of Katharina Bauer (Gerber), mother of Ida, on
October 18, Königinhof, Dvůr Králové nad Labem,
Czechia (Czech Republic).
Birth of Martha Bernays, July 26, in Hamburg, Ger-
many; future wife of Sigmund Freud.
1873 Birth of Ernst Adler, husband of Ida, on February 12,
in Budapest.
Freud graduates summa cum laude, Leopoldstädter
­Kommunal-Real-und Obergymansium, Vienna,
Austria.
Freud enters Vienna University to study medicine.
1875 Freud changes first name from Sigismund to Sigmund.
1880 Josef Breuer works with Bertha Pappenheim (Anna
O.) until 1882; Freud very interested in Breuer’s
work.

195
 Chronology

1881 Birth of Otto Bauer, brother of Ida, September 5, in

Vienna in Leopoldstadt.
Freud qualifies as a doctor of medicine.
1882 Bauer family moves to Berggasse 32, in the Ninth Dis-
trict, a few doors from Freud’s eventual office and
apartment at Berggasse 19.
Freud meets and shortly becomes engaged to Martha
Bernays.
Birth of Ida Bauer (Freud’s Dora), November 1.
1884 Freud begins study of physical and psychological
effects of cocaine.
1885 Freud travels in October to Paris to study with
­Jean-Martin Charcot; he works with the famous
neurologist until February 1886.
1886 Freud opens private practice in Vienna in April, spe-
cializing in nervous disorders.
1887 Freud marries Martha Bernays.
Freud takes on Mathilde Schleicher, a ­2 7-year-old
musician with nervous disorder, as a patient.
Philipp Bauer’s first encounter with Freud.
1888 The Bauer family moves to Tyrol area due to Philipp’s
tuberculosis and failing health.
The Pappenheim case study is written up by Freud and
Breuer.
1889 The marriage of Hans and Peppina Zellenka in Mer-
ano; Ida is 7 years old.
1890 Mathilde Schleicher dies, September 24.
1891 Freud moves into Berggasse 19.
1892 Freud treats “Elizabeth von R.” (Ilona Weiss) in what
he described as his first ­full-length analysis of
hysteria.
1894 Ida definitively diagnosed with hysterical symptoms.
Philipp recovers from blindness; moves into his syphi-
lis tertiary stage.
1895 First use of the term “psychoanalysis” by Freud, in Zur
Ätiologie der Hysterie.
1895 Anna O. case study is published in Studies in Hysteria.

196
 Chronology

1898 Ida first visits Freud at fifteen years of age.

1899 February–March, Ida returns alone to Vienna, shortly
after the death of her aunt Malvine Friedmann
(Bauer), April 7, at the age of 43, in Vienna.
Bauers move to Reichenberg, near one of Philipp’s
plants; Philipp appears to be recovered from his
illnesses.
1900 Bauers move back to Vienna.
Freud begins analysis of “Dora” (Ida Bauer), in
October.
Ida leaves analysis abruptly on December 31.
1901 Freud begins writing up case study of Dora, titling it
Traum und Hysterie (Dreams and Hysteria; draft
sent to journal but rejected because of sexual
content).
1902 Ida returns to Freud, her last visit, in April.
Freud is appointed Professor Extraordinarius, Uni-
versity of Vienna, Vienna, Austria, after three failed
attempts.
1903 Ida marries Ernst Adler, a frustrated violinist.
1905 After much deliberation and thought, Freud publishes
the Dora case study.
Kurt Herbert Adler, son of Ida Bauer, born on Feb-
ruary 4 (will become head of the San Francisco
Opera).
Freud publishes “Bruchstück einer ­Hysterie-Analyse”
(Dora case study), Monatsschrift für Psychiatrie und
Neurologie 18:285–310.
1907 Otto Bauer receives a degree in law from the Univer-
sity of Vienna.
1912 Death of Ida’s mother, Katharina “Käthe” Bauer (Ger-
ber), on August 12, at the age of 50, probably in
Vienna.
1913 Death of Ida’s father, Philipp Bauer, on July 3, at the
age of 59, in Vienna.
1914 First World War begins in July.
1919 Signing of the Treaty of Versailles, ending the war.
1921 Things turn around for Ida and her family.

197
 Chronology

1922 Kurt is 17 years old and in university.

Ida visits Felix Deutsch.
1923 Freud is diagnosed with cancer of jaw and palate.
1925 Kurt makes his debut as conductor, travels to Ger-
many and Italy.
1932 Death of Ernst Adler, on December 28, at the age of
59, in Vienna.
1933 Public burning of books by the Nazis on May 10 in
Berlin, Germany; included were books by Freud.
1936 Kurt assists Toscanini at the Salzburg Festival.
1938 Hitler invades Austria, March 12 (the Anschluss).
Kurt emigrates to U.S.
May 20, German Nuremberg racial laws of 1935 intro-
duced into Austria.
Ida is declared a Jew.
Ida arrives in Paris.
Death of Ida’s brother, Otto, on July 5, at the age of 56,
in Paris (before Ida’s arrival).
Daughter of Sigmund Freud, Anna, is arrested and
interrogated by the Gestapo; Freud, Martha, and
Anna escape to London.
Kristallnacht, November.
1939 Death of Sigmund Freud, on September 23, at the age
of 83, in London.
1941 Ida sails into NYC; is reunited with son, Kurt.
1945 Death of Ida Bauer Adler, at the age of 63, in New York
City.
1988 Death of Ida’s son, Kurt Herbert Adler, on February 9,
at the age of 83, in San Francisco, California.

198
 Chapter Notes

Preface argues that the Dora case needed to be

longer than usual because it was “inter-
1. Appignanesi and Forrester, Freud’s nally complex enough to warrant such a
Women, 146–70. This discusses Freud’s long description”; Ibid., 38.
case concerning the young woman whose 9. Rieff, introduction to Dora, 10.
symptoms emanated from her highly dys- 10. Moi, “Representations of Patriar-
functional and sexually exploitive family. chy,” 60–74. This journal article examines
2. Freud, Dora, 1–122. Freud’s first works on feminist theory and women’s
version of his case study about Dora, as writing on the intersections of literature,
mentioned in the text, was titled Dreams philosophy, and aesthetics.
and Hysteria. Much about the case is 11. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
explained by James Strachey in the edi- 106. Decker has written the definitive
tor’s note to Freud’s “Fragment of an book on Ida Bauer, Freud, and Vienna
Analysis of a Case of Hysteria.” during Freud and Ida’s lifetime. Much of
3. Sheila Kohler, “Nabokov’s Lolita what I learned about Ida Bauer first came
and Freud’s Dora.” Kohler writes about from Decker’s work.
both writers needing to hide the identity 12. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The Ks,”
of the people who will be in the case his- 8. This is one of the few works that exam-
tory and the novel. Nabokov, according to ines both Peppina and Hans Zellenka,
Kohler, seems to be influenced by Freud’s who, if it weren’t for their interactions
case study. with Freud and especially with the Bauers,
4. Freud, Dora, 138. This edition of would not even be a footnote in history.
Freud’s case study of Dora includes an 13. Ibid., 9. Ida was aware that every-
introduction by the editor, Philip Rieff, an one in Merano talked about the liaison
American sociologist and cultural critic. between Peppina Zellenka and Philipp
Rieff taught sociology at the University of Bauer. Ellis writes, “The affair that ensued
Pennsylvania from 1961 until 1992 and was conducted with little attempt at
has authored a number of books on Sig- concealment.”
mund Freud and his legacy. 14. Freud, Dora, 81–132. The first
5. Rieff, introduction to Dora, 12. dream, which is short, is told by Ida and
Rieff ’s introduction provides the reader analyzed by Freud. Here, he notes that
with an overview of Dora’s case and the ­d ream-thoughts behind the dream
Freud’s interpretations. included a reference to “my treatment”;
6. Freud, Dora, 142n2. Ibid., 113–32. The second dream was
7. Sealey, “Strange Case,” 36–50. Sealey recounted to Freud a few weeks after the
argues that the long case history served as first dream. “And when it had been dealt
an exemplar in psychoanalysis and medi- with the analysis was broken off,” Freud
cine. She examines how it came to be used writes. One can assume that this second
by Freud and how his case studies became dream was the straw that broke the cam-
institutionalized. el’s back, since it led to Ida’s leaving anal-
8. Ibid., 40. In this article, the author ysis with Freud.

199
 Notes—Introduction and Chapter 1

1 5 . D e c k e r, Fr e u d , D o r a , a n d befriended the Bauer family while both

Vienna, 152. Through my personal cor- families were living in Merano—and who
respondence with Katharina Adler, caused such havoc for Ida Bauer.
Ida’s ­g reat-granddaughter and the 9. Kohler, “Nabokov’s Lolita and
author of Ida, a fictive account of her Freud’s Dora.” In this fictionalized version
­g reat-grandmother’s life, Adler affirms of Ida’s and Freud’s relationship, Kohler
that Ida was aware of the growing anti– suggests that although Freud accused Ida
Semitism in the early 1900s. This is why of denial, perhaps it was Freud who was
she, her husband, and her son converted in denial.
to Protestantism, a very common act by 10. Adler, Ida, ­1 –456. Ms. Adler’s
Jews during that time. novel has been published in German and
16. Thorell, “Teenager and the Ana- Spanish.
lyst,” 158–65; Thorell, “A Psychoanalytic
Study of Narrativity,” 16–27.
Chapter 1
1. Lackey, “Secret ­Austro-Hungarian
Introduction Plan,” 149–59. This altercation had no
1. Bloom, “Freud.” Bloom has called direct bearing on Ida’s life but is represen-
Freud the greatest modern writer because tative of the chaotic times in Vienna and
of his great storytelling abilities. central Europe at the time of her birth.
2. Dimsdale, “Conversion Disorder.” 2. Barron et al., “Sigmund Freud,” 143.
The word hysteria originates from the In this article, the authors examine the
Greek word for uterus, and the condition secrets that Freud held dear. The article
was thought to occur mainly in women. focuses on two aspects of his work: 1) the
3. Freud and Breuer, Studies on Hyste- development of his theory and technique
ria, 1–376. These two physicians worked with regard to holding secrets and 2) his
closely together for several years. In this motivation to unveil those secrets.
work, they describe the symptoms of hys- 3. Carnochan, Looking for Ground, 45.
teria and illustrate the case studies of a In his earliest work with patients, Freud
number of patients with whom Breuer would begin with a hypnotic induction
had worked. placing patients in a trance to see if they
4. Philip Rieff, introduction to Dora, 7. could recall where their symptoms were
5. “Virtual Jewish World: Vienna, coming from.
Austria,” Jewish Virtual Library, https:// 4. Barron et al., “Sigmund Freud,” 152.
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/­v ienna- 5. Ibid., 153.
austria-jewish-history-tour. Judaism was 6. “Sigmund Freud,” Encyclopedia Bri-
in its ascendancy in Vienna during the early tannica, https://www.britannica.com/
years of Ida Bauer’s life, with Jews creating biography/­S igmund-Freud. Although
a number of institutions including hospi- Freud had two older ­h alf-brothers, his
tals, Gymnasia, and places of worship. strongest, if also most ambivalent, attach-
6. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 33. ment seems to have been to a nephew,
7. Billig, “Freud and Dora,” 8. Bil- John, one year his senior, who provided his
lig wrote that when Ida and Freud came model of friendship. He later hated him as
together, he was depressed and unsuccess- a rival, a situation which Freud reproduced
ful and she was depressed and unhappy. often at later stages of his life. Freud’s
They made a strange pair, as she felt alien- father was authoritarian, while his mother
ated from her family and from the culture was possessed of a softer personality. Per-
she grew up in, and he felt a bitter sense of haps this is why he gravitated to his older
rejection from mainstream society. nephew as a release from his father.
8. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The 7. Freud Museum, “Sigmund Freud
Ks,” 10. In one of the few published arti- Chronology.” The Freud Museum in
cles about “the Ks,” the name Freud gave Vienna is located on Berggasse 19, in the
to Herr and Frau Zellenka, Ellis and actual consulting room and apartment
colleagues described the couple who building where Freud lived and worked.

200
 Notes—Chapter 1

8. Bloom, Western Canon, 345–66. 18. Borch-Jacobsen, “Bertha Pappen-

Freud is quoted as saying that psychology heim (1859–1936).” Sigmund Pappenheim
is a Shakespearean invention. had inherited a grain trading company
9. “­Freud-Bernays, Martha (1861– and was considered a millionaire. Bertha’s
1951),” Encyclopedia Britannica. Martha mother, Recha Goldschmidt, came from
came from a distinguished Hebrew fam- an old Frankfurt family which counted
ily. She was the daughter of Berman Ber- among its members the poet Heinrich
nays, a merchant, and his wife, Emmeline Heine. The Pappenheims were strictly
Philipp Bernays. The intelligent, well- Orthodox, and Bertha received the tradi-
educated Emmeline shared her husband’s tional education of a höhere Tochter (girl
Jewish orthodoxy, as did Martha. Martha of the upper middle class waiting to be
was also intelligent without pretensions, sent on the “marriage market”).
svelte, attractively pale, and gracious. She 19. Robert Kaplan, “O Anna,” 62.
had a warm personality and many friends, Kaplan tells the remarkable story of Anna
as well as male admirers; “Sigmund Freud,” O. and her recovery from multiple symp-
Encyclopedia Britannica, https://www. toms brought on by the death of her
britannica.com/biography/­S igmund- father. She was committed to a number
Freud. Martha and Freud would have six of mental institutions but would go on to
children, one of whom was Anna Freud, a live a meaningful and important life.
noted psychoanalyst in her own right. 20. Davis, “Freud’s Dora,” 1. In the
10. Freud Museum, “Sigmund Freud case study and other places, Freud dis-
Chronology.” cusses his difficulty in choosing a name,
11. Ibid. as he wanted to provide Ida Bauer with
12. Webster, “Freud, Charcot and Hys- anonymity. He called her Dora after his
teria.” Charcot was one of the earli- daughter Rosa’s maid and also after Josef
est influencers of Freud, as Freud was Breuer’s daughter Dora.
impressed by Charcot’s work on trau- 21. Appignanesi and Forrester, Freud’s
matic hysteria. Freud came to understand Women, 171–72. This book describes
that one of the principal forms of neuro- Freud’s relationship with women—
sis came about when a traumatic experi- patients, relatives, friends—and estab-
ence led to the processing of unconscious lishes Freud’s views on femininity.
symptom formation. 22. “Sigmund Freud,” Enc yclope-
13. Kumar et al., “Jean-Martin Char- dia Britannica, https://www.britannica.
cot,” 47. As a practicing neurologist, Char- com/biography/­S igmund-Freud. Fliess
cot saw a range of patients with neurologic and Freud maintained a close ­fifteen-year
conditions. He is credited with first seeing relationship, with Fliess providing invalu-
the correlations between the clinical fea- able insight into Freud’s theories. It has
tures of multiple sclerosis (MS) and patho- been argued that Freud’s notions of sex-
logical changes noted postmortem. Hunter, uality, particularly that of infants, could
“Hysteria, Psychoanalysis, and Feminism,” be attributed to his relationship with and
466. This is the story of Bertha Pappen- discussions with Fliess; Freud, Interpre-
heim and her analysis with Josef Breuer, tation of Dreams. It is here that Freud
who suppressed her identity, as we came introduces his theory of the unconscious
to know from her biography from later with respect to dream interpretation.
sources. She came from a prestigious fam- He revised the book at least eight times,
ily and was considered attractive and highly which indicates his changing views of
intelligent, but she suffered from hysteria. dreams and the unconscious.
14. Ibid. 23. Gay, Freud, 103. This biography
15. ­B orch-Jacobsen, “Mathilde Schle- traces Freud’s life and education. This
icher (1862–1890).” Freud would write exhaustive work is admiring of Freud and
that Mathilde came from a distinguished his legacy and, as Gay indicates, has left
family but was prone to nervous illnesses. open some issues where evidence is too
16. Ibid. fragmentary to permit accurate conclu-
17. Ibid. sions, such as the question of whether

201
 Notes—Chapters 2 and 3

Freud had a love affair with his wife’s geni.com/people/­Jacob-Bauer/60000000

sister. 10132848169. Acccording to this source,
Jakob had two wives, but it appears
that Babette was the mother of all of
Chapter 2 Philipp’s siblings; Decker, Freud, Dora,
1. Cole, “Men’s Mother Complex.” and Vienna, 42. Ida’s aunt Malvine, with
2. Ibid. whom Ida spent much time growing up,
3. “The Famous Break Up of Sig- was a woman with many physical and psy-
mund Freud and Carl Jung Explained in chological issues—issues that Freud felt
a New Animated Video,” Open Culture, Ida copied.
http://www.openculture.com/2018/06/­ 4. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
famous-break-sigmund-freud-carl-jung- 42.
explained-new-animated-video.html. 5. “Bohemia, Czech Republic,” Ency-
4. Josh Jones, “Young Dr. Freud.” clopedia Judaica, https://www.jewish
5. Ernest Jones, Life and Work, 32– virtuallibrary.org/bohemia. Bohemia was
33. once a duchy of Great Moravia, then later
6. Josh Jones, “Young Dr. Freud.” an independent principality, then a king-
7. “The Baby Born with Her Head dom in the Holy Roman Empire, and ulti-
Inside Her Amniotic Sac: Incredible mately a part of the Habsburg Monarchy
Photos Capture the ­1-in-80,000 ‘Bubble and the Austrian Empire. Prague was and
Birth’ of Miracle Girl,” Daily Mail Online, is its main and most famous city and was
November 12, 2020; Charles Dickens, a haven for the Jewish population that
David Copperfield (CreateSpace Indepen- had settled there as early as the tenth
dent Publishing Platform, 2015). century.
8. Gay, Freud, 11, 503–5. 6. “Bohemia and Moravia,” Yivo Ency-
9. Stevens, Sigmund Freud, 144–46. clopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe,
10. Ernest Jones, Life and Work, 421. https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.
11. Jensen, Streifzüge durch das Leben, aspx/Bohemia_and_Moravia.
21. 7. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
12. “Pappenheim Bertha (1859–1936),” 18. Joseph II’s edict had a definite effect
Encyclopedia.com, https://www.encyclo on Bohemian Jews, as it marked them off
pedia.com/women/encyclopedias-alma as different from most other Jews in the
nacs-transcripts-and-maps/pappenheim- Habsburg Empire.
bertha-1859-1936. 8. Ibid., 18, 19. While there were
13. Shapiro, Jewish 100, 276. advantages for the Jews from Joseph II’s
14. Darling, “Jan 29 Anna Freud.” edict, there were also concerns, such as
15. Ibid. heavy and harassing taxation.
9. “Austria Virtual Jewish History
Tour,” Jewish Virtual Library, https://
Chapter 3 www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/­a ustria-
virtual-jewish-history-tour, accessed
1. “Filipp Bauer,” Geni, https://www. August 30, 2020.
g e n i . c o m / p e o p l e / Fi l i p p - B au e r / 6 0 0 10. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
0000010132981567. In most accounts 47. The area where the Bauer family
that describe Ida’s father, his name is came from was home to linen weavers at
spelled “Philipp,” which is the way I chose least since the sixteenth or seventeenth
to spell it; Decker, Freud, Dora, and century.
Vienna, 42. Pollerskirchen was a small 11. Ibid., 42.
market town in the ­B ohemian-Moravian 12. Ibid., 22–24. Most Jews coming to
hills, where Jews had resided for genera- the city, wealthy or not, first resided in
tions among the Czech Catholics. Leopoldstadt, which was where they
2. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, would find friends and relatives who
42. could provide a place to stay and a sense of
3. “Jakob Bauer,” Geni, https://www. familiarity and orientation; “Leopoldstadt

202
 Notes—Chapter 3

district, Vienna, Austria,” Encyclopedia Käthe was a child of elderly parents. Also,
Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/ since she moved from what she appar-
place/Leopoldstadt, accessed August 30, ently considered her beloved country vil-
2020. District 2, in Vienna, Leopoldstadt, lage to the big city of Vienna, she may
was an area allotted to Jews in 1622. Until have felt somewhat unsettled. She also
the Nazi regime, Jews resided and worked was dealing with her husband’s illnesses,
there, only leaving in 1938 when driven especially his syphilis.
out. 24. Ibid.
13. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 25. “Encyclopedia Judaica: Textiles,”
14. At the time of the Bauers’ arrival, Jewish Virtual Library, https://www.
the Second District was an area that was jewishvirtuallibrary.org/textiles, accessed
more ghetto than village. December 25, 2018.
14. Ibid., 22. Leopoldstadt, located on 26. Ibid.
the other side of the Danube Canal, was 27. Ibid.
a mixed residential and business area, 28. Weinzierl, “Jewish Middle Class.”
with houses, shops, doctors’ offices, and 29. Beckermann, ed., Die Mazzesinsel,
entertainment. 33–35.
15. Grabinsky, “The Ghost Archi- 30. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
tect of Vienna,” Tablet, November 9, 51–53.
2017, 3. The Island of Matzo, as the Sec- 31. “Hoffnung auf sozialistische Rev-
ond District was called, has been the cen- olution,” ­Austria-Forum, https://­austria-
ter of Jewish life since the days of the for um.org/af/Wi ss enssammlungen/
­s eventeenth-century ghetto. Most of E ssay s/Politik/O tto_B auer_s oz i ali s
Vienna’s Jews still live there today. tische_Revolution, accessed August 10,
16. Czernin, “Vienna Prater,” https:// 2020; Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
w w w.dascapri.at/en/stories/­v ienna- 43.
prater/, accessed August 20, 2020. At one 32. Ibid., 14.
time the Prater was reserved as a hunting 33. Ibid.
area for royalty; however, since 1775, the 34. Mahony, Freud’s Dora, 5. Here,
Prater has belonged to the people, with Mahony claims that this case study is not
its recreational areas, beer gardens, cof- a model of treatment but a remarkable
feehouses, and bocce courts. It is home to exhibition of the rejection of a patient by
the famous Vienna Riesenrad. a clinician, an inkblot test of Freud's mis-
17. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, apprehensions about female sexuality and
24. While they would not stay within the adolescence.
Jewish “ghetto” of Leopoldstadt, the Bau- 35. Ibid., 3, 4.
ers (and Philipp’s wife’s family) still would 36. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
“cluster” together in the more fashionable 40.
sections of Vienna. 37. Mahony, Freud’s Dora, 3.
18. Ibid., 43. 38. Freud, Dora, 36. Freud recounts
19. Ibid. that Ida went through the usual infectious
20. Mandal, “Cause and Transmission diseases of childhood without suffering
of Syphilis,” 3. any damage. She told him that Otto was
21. “Bernhard Gerber,” Geni, https:// the first to start an illness, then she would
w w w. g e n i . c o m / p e o p l e /­B e r n h a r d - follow suit.
Gerber/6000000016237776796, accessed 39. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
December 26, 2018. 44.
22. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 40. Ibid. At this time, Merano was a
15. Ida’s mother was born in northern health resort for older, ailing, and wealthy
Czechoslovakia about 25 miles from the Jewish families. And it was here that the
Polish border. It is likely that her family Bauer family would encounter Herr K.
came to Vienna in the 1860s. and his wife, Frau K., so called by Freud
23. Freud, Dora, 34. Perhaps the need in his case study. The ensuing relationship
to clean and keep order was because with this couple, the Zellenkas, and their

203
 Notes—Chapter 4

two children would cause the tattered Italy,” Jewish Virtual Library, https://
Bauer family to completely unravel. www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/­m erano-
italy - je w ish-histor y - tour, accesse d
August 28, 2020. The Jewish community,
Chapter 4 although small, runs the cultural cen-
1. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, ter and library in Merano for Jews and
47. ­non-Jews alike, to improve the knowledge
2. Ibid., 44. of the Jewish community in Merano.
3. “Merano City Guide 2020,” https:// 10. Ibid.
www.kundenbereich.it/media/­33a95195- 11. “The History of the Jewish Com-
e9f8-4097-8d62-be91447c46c7/nocache/­ munity in Merano,” Judische Gemeinde
cityguide2020-part1.pdf, 14, 16, accessed Meran, http://www.meranoebraica.it/en/
September 1, 2020. Today, Merano (Ital- node/12, accessed December 11, 2020.
ian; Meran, German) is still viewed as 12. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
a salubrious spa town for the wealthy, 44.
who take to the waters for their curative 13. Ibid., 45.
effects. 14. Ibid., 55.
4. “Virtual Jewish World: Merano, 15. Ibid., 6.
Italy,” Jewish Virtual Library, https:// 16. Zadoff, Next Year in Marienbad,
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/­m erano- 26–30. Dr. Zadoff ’s research and teaching
italy-jewish-history-tour, accessed May 4, have focused on Jewish history, culture,
2019. The history of the Jewish commu- and Holocaust studies.
nity in Merano dates to the first half of the 17. Adler, Ida, 1–456. Katharina Adler
eighteenth century, when the Tyrol region (b. Munich, 1980) is the great-grand-
belonged to Austria. daughter of Ida Adler, whose name before
5. Ibid. It was the Königswarter family her marriage to the not-very-successful
who, through their donation to the Jew- composer Ernst Adler was Ida Bauer.
ish community of Merano, established Adler’s novel is written in German.
a sanatorium for poor Jews suffering 18. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
from tuberculosis (1873), two cemeter- 43.
ies in Bolzano and Merano, and the first 19. Freud, Dora, 35.
synagogue. 20. Ibid.
6. “The History of the Jewish Commu- 21. Ibid., 36, 37.
nity in Merano: The Jewish Sanatorium 22. Tolmach Lakoff and Coyne, Father
in Meran,” Comunita Ebraica di Mer- Knows Best, chap. 2.
ano, http://www.meranoebraica.it/en/ 23. Freud, Dora, 34.
node/12, accessed September 1, 2020. 24. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
The Jewish community had a wish to help 53, 54.
other people, which was the underlying 25. Freud, Dora, 34.
rationale for turning a villa into a sanato- 26. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
rium for poor Jewish patients. 53.
7. “History,” Meranerland.org, https:// 27. Masadilová, “Františkovy Lázně
www.meranerland.org/en/highlights/ (Franzensbad).” Františkovy Lázně is sur-
history/, accessed September 1, 2020. rounded by vast green spaces of parks and
Merano has a long history as a health forests that are the pride of the town and
resort and was considered one of the provide visitors (and patients) with an
first tourism strongholds of the era of the indispensable repose.
Habsburgs. Many famous people came 28. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
to Merano for their health. In addition 56. Decker writes that it was a cousin, Elsa
to Kafka, Freud and his family also came Foges, who remembered Otto as a “boy
here. genius.”
8. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The 29. Ibid., 53.
Ks,” 4. 30. Ibid., 57.
9. “Virtual Jewish World: Merano, 31. Ibid., 58.

204
 Notes—Chapter 5

32. Ibid. 12. Ibid.; Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst,

33. Ibid. “The Ks,” 4.
13. Ibid.
14. Ibid., 5. The Leopoldstadter Tem-
Chapter 5 pel, where Hans’s parents were mar-
1. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, ried, was an imposing synagogue that
65. stood in the Leopoldstadt District until
2. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The its destruction by National Socialists in
Ks,” 1–26. This is one of the few articles 1938.
that fully detail the life of both Hans and 15. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
his wife, Peppina. Ks,” 5; Sig et al., “Medicinal Leech Ther-
3. “History: Jew’s Lane—Christian’s apy,” 337–43. In Austria, during the time
Lane,” Judisches Museum Hohenems, that Hans’s father was involved in sell-
https://www.­jm-hohenems.at/en/­jewish- ing leeches, leech therapy was an import-
quarter/history, accessed November 4, ant primary treatment for a number
2020. of conditions; today, treatment with
4. “Austria: Hohenems,” JGuideEurope, leeches is complementary and/or integra-
https ://jguideeurope.org/en/region/ tive.
austria/hohenems/, accessed November 16. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
5, 2020. Ks,” 5. Hans Zellenka, who was not con-
5. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The sidered a very nice person, was much
Ks,” 2, 3. more successful than his father. This was
6. Ibid., 3. probably due to the discipline and enter-
7. Ibid., 4. Merano became one of the prise of his mother.
area’s most prestigious health resorts, due 17. Ibid., 6. In 1867, the company’s
in part to the Biedermann Bank, which founder, the original Philipp Haas, was
became the heart of its financial and cul- awarded the Edward the Great Cross of
tural development. the Order of Franz Josef for achievements
8. Ibid., 3, 4. that included building homes for the
9. Ibid. It is unclear whether Isidor, company’s workers and creating a pen-
Peppina’s father, had any banking expe- sion fund for retired workers.
rience, but the Biedermann relatives did 18. Ibid. Hans was not the ineffec-
not want to leave everything to him. A tive shopkeeper that Freud describes
younger Jewish banker, Friedrich Stran- him as being in the case study of Dora;
sky, was brought in to work alongside he was ambitious and worked for an
Isidor. It is also unclear if this was a prob- ­up-and-coming influential company.
lem for Isidor, but Stransky enhanced the 19. Ibid.; “Otto Zellenka,” Geni, https://
holdings of the entire Biedermann family www.geni.com/people/­O tto-zellenka/
by his astute banking knowledge. Addi- 6000000053832859020, accessed Septem-
tionally, he cemented his value to the fam- ber 1, 2020.
ily by marrying Peppina’s mother’s sister, 20. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
Rosine Biedermann, who came from Ks,” 8.
Hohenems. 21. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
10. Freud, Dora, 34. Here, Freud dis- 65.
cusses Philipp Bauer’s sister, Malvine, 22. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
whom Freud had met, possibly in Mer- Ks,” 8.
ano as well as in Vienna. In the Dora case 2 3 . “ Kö n i g s w a r te r Fo u n d at i o n ,”
study, Freud makes assumptions about Judische Gemeinde Meran, http://www.
her without having seen her in a diagnos- meranoebraica.it/en/node/9, accessed
tic setting. He also calls her Philipp’s older May 3, 2020.
sister, but, according to other authors, she 24. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
was his younger sister. Ks,” 8.
11. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 25. Ibid., 9.
50. 26. Ibid.

205
 Notes—Chapters 6 and 7

27. Freud, Dora, 33; Ellis, Raitmayr, Education permitted women to take
and Herbst, “The Ks,” 10. the ­s chool-leaving examination but did
28. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, not allow the marks of this examina-
69. tion to be entered in a student’s report
29. Ibid., 68, 69. card, which was mandatory for access
30. Ibid., 69. to the universities. In 1896, the ministry
31. Ibid. allowed girls, once they turned age eigh-
teen, to take their final examination at
certain boys’ secondary schools, but it
Chapter 6 retained the restrictions on the posting of
1. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, grades.
69. 6. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
2. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The 75.
Ks,” 11. 7. Ibid.
3. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 8. Ibid., 76.
70. 9. Ibid.; Paolo Mantegazza, an Italian
4. Ibid., 77. neurologist, physiologist, and anthropol-
5. Ibid. ogist, wrote notable books on sexology,
6. Ibid. which Ida read under the direction of
7. Ibid., 76. Peppina. His position was a liberal one.
8. Ibid., 78. He became the object of fierce attacks
9. Gilman, “Electrotherapy and Mental because of the extent to which he prac-
Illness,” 347. ticed vivisection.
10. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 10. Freud, Dora, 52.
image between 178–179. 11. Ibid., 48.
11. Ibid., 12. 12. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
12. Ibid., 13. Ks,” 9.
13. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The 13. Ibid., 8.
Ks,” 11. 14. Ibid., 9.
14. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 15. Ibid., 10.
4. 16. Freud, Dora, 49.
15. Pass Freidenreich, “Jewish Women 17. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
Physicians,” 79–105. 48.
16. Makari, Revolution in Mind, 134– 18. Ibid.
35. 19. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
17. Rieff, introduction to Dora, 10. Ks,” 11, 12.
18. Barron et al., “Sigmund Freud,” 20. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
145. 80.
21. Ibid., 81–83. The Secessionists were
Chapter 7 a feature of the cultural life of upper-
middle class citizens of Vienna at the
1. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, time. The formation of the Vienna Seces-
57. sion in 1897 marked the beginning of
2. Adler (great-granddaughter of Ida modern art in Austria. Their work illus-
Bauer Adler), correspondence with the trated the new instinctual and cultural
author, April 2020. Ms. Adler’s own book, flowering of Vienna.
Ida, written about her famous relative, is a 22. Ibid., 83–84.
fictional account of “Dora’s” life. 23. Ibid., 84, 85.
3. Blum, “­Anti-Semitism in the Freud 24. Freud, Dora, 38.
Case Histories,” 83. 25. M. Guy Thompson, Truth About
4. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, Freud’s Technique, 93.
57. 26. Freud, Dora, 41, 42.
5. Weinzierl, “Jewish Middle Class,” 27. Billig, “Freud and Dora,” 8.
12. In 1878, the Ministry of Culture and

206
 Notes—Chapters 8, 9 and 10

Chapter 8 releases/bernays-freud-minna-1865-
1941, accessed September 20, 2020.
1. Appignanesi and Forrester, Freud’s 4. Ibid.
Women, 146. 5. Gay, “Sigmund and Minna?”
2. Ibid., 150. 6. Ibid.
3. Freud, “L’hérédité et l’étiologie des 7. Maciejewski, “Minna Bernays as
névroses,” 161–69; Élisabeth Roudinesco ‘Mrs. Freud’: 5–21. Once this article was
and Michel Plon, Dictionnaire de la psy- published, it was a sensation, and other
chanalyse, 1216. rumors spread: that Minna was pregnant
4. Freud, Interpretation of Dreams, and had an abortion. None of this is ver-
262. ified; Hirschmüller, “Evidence for a Sex-
5. Tutter, “Sex, Subtext, ­Ur-text,” 523– ual Relationship Between Sigmund Freud
48 and Minna Bernays?” American Imago
6. Freud, Dora, 41, 42. 64, no. 1 (2007): 125–29, DOI:10.1353/
7. Appignanesi and Forrester, Freud’s aim.2007.0013.
Women, 149. 8. Gay, “Sigmund and Minna?” 134.
8. Ibid., 150. 9. Galef and Galef, “Freud’s Wife,” 514.
9. Ibid. This is an extensive description of the
10. Freud, Dora, 42. relationship between Freud and his wife—
11. Ibid. the good and the bad—as well as Freud’s
12. Ibid. relationship with Minna and the possi-
13. M. Guy Thompson, Truth About bility of sexual involvement between the
Freud’s Technique, 97. two. The authors suggest, however, that
14. Ibid., 98. Freud had sublimated his sexual desires
15. Freud, Dora, 38. early in his life.
16. Ibid., 45. 10. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
17. Ibid., 46. Freud goes on to explain 202.
that this was a riddle which her memories 11. Freud, Dora, 81. This was recounted
were unable to solve. She forgot where her by Dora in the case study.
sexual knowledge came from. 12. Ibid., 82.
18. Tolmach Lakoff and Coyne, Father 13. Ibid., 83–85.
Knows Best, 113. 14. Romano, Freud and the Dora Case,
19. Freud, Dora, 80, 81. 53–54.
20. Ibid., 39. 15. Ibid.
16. Freud, Dora, 83.
17. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
Chapter 9 114.
1. Rudnytsky, foreword to Freud and 18. Ibid.
the Dora Case, xii. This, as we shall see 19. Freud, Dora, 96.
later, contributed to Freud’s blindness 20. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
about the countertransference involved 114.
in his treatment of Ida, which he did not 21. Ibid., 118.
fully recognize until sometime after the
aborted analysis.
2. Ralph Blumenthal, “Hotel Log
Chapter 10
Hints at Illicit Desire That Dr. Freud 1. Freud, Dora, 114. The dream is
Didn’t Repress,” New York Times, Decem- recounted in full in the case study and is
ber 24, 2006, https://www.nytimes. much more involved and detailed than
com/2006/12/24/world/europe/24freud. the first dream.
html, accessed September 20, 2020. 2. Ibid., 114–15.
3. “­B ernays-Freud, Minna (1865– 3. Ibid.
1941),” Encyclopedia.com, https://www. 4. Ibid., 116. The young man in this
encyclopedia.com/psychology/diction passage probably sent the book to Ida to
aries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press- keep his existence present in her mind,

207
 Notes—Chapters 11, 12 and 13

as he saw himself a potential suitor for 10. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
her hand—once his financial position 91.
improved. 11. Heller, Freud A to Z, 41.
5. The Sistine Madonna, also called 12. Ibid., 40, 41.
the Madonna di San Sisto, shows the 13. Ibid., 88.
Madonna holding the Christ Child. It 14. Kramer, Freud: Inventor, 100.
was commissioned by Pope Julius II and 15. Ibid., 101.
painted by Raphael in 1512. The painting 16. Heller, Freud A to Z, 88.
was moved to Dresden in 1754. 17. Freud, Dora, 135.
6. Freud, Dora, 117. 18. Kuriloff, “What’s Going On with
7. Ibid., 118. Dora?” 73.
8. Ibid., 118, 119. 19. Ibid.
9. Ibid., 119.
10. Ibid., 120.
11. Ibid.
Chapter 12
12. Leckie, Culture and Adultery, 254. 1. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
Leckie expands upon the importance of 148. Philipp wanted Freud “to bring Dora
the letter Ida received in the dream telling to reason.”
of her father’s death, which would then 2. Freud, Dora, 34.
allow her to “read whatever she wanted.” 3. Ibid.
In fact, the author goes on, the reading of 4. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
the encyclopedia is also a way of deter- 50.
mining for herself, through letters and 5. Ibid., 55, 56.
books: “Is this geneaology of women’s 6. Ibid., 149.
writing one way that Dora might rewrite 7. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The Ks,”
… her history?” 12. I would assume that Ida was deeply
13. Heller, Freud A to Z, 84. saddened by the loss of Klara, whom she
14. Ibid., 84–85. had spent a great deal of time with, serv-
15. Ibid., 86. ing as the child’s babysitter, when they
16. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, were in Merano.
96. 8. Ibid., 149, 150.
17. Adler, email to the author, April 26, 9. Ibid., 150.
2020. 10. Ibid.
18. Freud, “Sigmund Freud Papers: 11. Ibid.
Interviews and Recollections, 1914– 12. Marcus, “Freud and Dora,” 398,
1998,” Set A, 1914–1988; Interviews and; 399.
Foges, Elsa January 7, 1953 13. Ibid., 399.
19. Boyce, “Art of Medicine,” 949. 14. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
20. Freud, “The Unconscious,” 59– 146.
78. 15. Ibid.
16. Ibid., 147.
17. Ibid.
Chapter 11 18. Kramer, Freud: Inventor, 102.
1. Ouweneel, Freudian Fadeout, 42.
2. Kramer, Freud: Inventor, 80, 81.
3. Ibid., 81.
Chapter 13
4. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 1. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
89, 90. 151.
5. Heller, Freud A to Z, 5. 2. Vincent Finnan, “The Sistine
6. Ibid., 7. Madonna,” Italian Renaissance Art.
7. Ibid., 8. 3. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
8. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 151; Freud, Dora, 116.
90, 91. 4. “Ing. Ernst Adler,” Geni, https://
9. Kramer, Freud: Inventor, 83. w w w. g e n i . c o m / p e o p l e /­I n g - E r n s t-

208
 Notes—Chapters 14, 15 and 16

Adler/6000000016255032507; Ellis, Rait- 10. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The

mayr, and Herbst, “The Ks,” 13. Ks,” 13.
5. “1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/ 11. “Vienna,” transcription of the 1911
Sonnenthal, Adolf von,” transcription of Encyclopædia Britannica article, on
the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article, Wikisource.org, https://en.wikisource.
on Wikisource.org, https://en.wikisource. org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_
org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_ Britannica/Vienna.
Br itannic a/S onnenthal,_Adolf_von, 12. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 13.
accessed December 2, 2020. 13. Ibid., 4, 5.
6. “Sonnenthal, Adolf Ritten Von,” 14. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
Encylopedia.com, https://www.encyclo 154.
p e d i a . co m / rel i g i o n /­e n c y cl o p e d i a s -
a l m a n a c s - t r a n s c r i p t s - a n d - m a p s /­
sonnenthal-adolf-ritter-von, accessed
Chapter 15
December 2, 2020. 1. Bourne, Who’s Who, 17.
7. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 2. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 7, 8.
151. 3. Ibid., 8.
8. Mahony, Freud’s Dora, 14. 4. Ibid., 9.
9. Freud, Dora, 118. 5. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
10. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 159.
151, 152. 6. Ibid.
11. Ibid., 152. 7. Ibid.
12. Ibid., 153. 8. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
13. Mark Brownlow, “On the Trail Ks,” 13.
of Famous Viennese,” Visiting Vienna, 9. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
2005–2020, https://www.visitingvienna. 158, 159.
com/­famous-people/. 10. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 3.
14. Pam ­Cooper-White, “Where ‘Dora’ 11. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
Walked,” Vienna Blog, February 3, 2014, Ks,” 13.
https://pcooperwhite.wordpress.com/ 12. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 8, 9.
2014/02/03/­where-dora-walked/. 13. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
165.
14. “Adler, Kurt Herbert,” Social Net-
Chapter 14 works and Archival Context (SNAC),
1. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, https://snaccooperative.org/ark:/99166/
152. w6c85nvz.
2. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 1. 15. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
3. Freud, Dora, 119. Ks,” 14.
4. Ernest Jones, Life and Work, 383. 16. Ibid.
Jones, the eminent biographer of Freud, 17. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
had little positive to say about the case 167.
study. An English physician, he became a 18. Ibid.
psychoanalyst upon reading and review-
ing the Dora case study.
5. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
Chapter 16
155. 1. Bourne, Who’s Who, 17; Pfaff, “Kurt
6. Ibid. Herbert Adler,” 7, 8.
7. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 2, 3. 2. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
8. Ibid., 1, 2. 58.
9 . “A d m i n i s t r a t o r / C o n d u c t o r 3. Freud, Dora, 34.
Kurt Herbert Adler: A Conversation 4. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
with Bruce Duffie,” http://www.bruce 58.
duffie.com/khadler.html, October 11, 5. Ibid.
1986. 6. Ibid., 59.

209
 Notes—Chapters 17, 18 and 19

7. Ibid., 61. 7. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 13;

8. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 3. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 171.
9. Ibid. 8. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
10. Ibid. 171.
11. Ibid., 4. 9. Ibid.
12. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 10. “Deutsch, Felix (1884–1964),” En-
157, 158. c yclopedia .com, https ://w w w.enc y-
13. “Adler, Kurt Herbert,” Social Net- clopedia.com/psychology/­d ictionaries-
works and Archival Context (SNAC), thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/­
https://snaccooperative.org/ark:/99166/ deutsch-felix-1884-1964.
w6c85nvz. 11. “Female Psycholog y—Helene
14. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, Deutsch 1884–1982,” American Psy-
158–60. choanalytic Association, https://web.
15. Ibid., 161. archive.org/web/20120722204459/http:/
apsa.org/About_Psychoanalysis/Noted_
Psychoanalysts.aspx#deutsch, accessed
Chapter 17 October 18, 2014.
1. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 12. Deutsch, “Footnote to Freud’s
164. Fragment,” 159–167.
2. Ibid., 165. 13. Ibid.
3. Annette McDermott, “Did Franz 14. Ibid., 163; Decker, Freud, Dora,
Ferdinand’s Assassination Cause World and Vienna, 171, 172.
War I?,” History, https://www.history. 15. Deutsch, “Footnote,” 163.
c o m / n e w s /­d i d - f r a n z - f e r d i n a n d s - 16. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
assassination-cause-world-war-i. 172.
4. Ibid. 17. Ibid.
5. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 9. 18. Deutsch, “Footnote,” 167.
6. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 19. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
165. 170, 172.
7. Ibid. 20. Ibid., 174.
8. Ibid. 21. “Adler, Kurt Herbert,” Social Net-
9. Kramer, Freud: Inventor, 147. works and Archival Context (SNAC),
10. Ibid., 149. https://snaccooperative.org/ark:/99166/
11. Ibid., 150. w6c85nvz; Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,”
12. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 12.
165.
13. Ibid., 166.
14. Ibid.
Chapter 19
15. Ibid., 166, 167. 1. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
16. Ibid., 167. Ks,” 14.
17. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 12. 2. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
175.
3. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
Chapter 18 Ks,” 14.
1. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 4. “Laws of Bridge,” Encyclopedia Bri-
170. tannica, https://www.britannica.com/
2. Ibid. topic/­bridge-card-game/­L aws-of-bridge.
3. Bourne, Who’s Who, 17. 5. “The Vienna Coup,” Encyclopedia
4. “Otto Bauer,” Encylopaedia Britan- Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/
nica, https://www.britannica.com/biog topic/­b ridge-card-game/­The-Whitfeld-
raphy/­Otto-Bauer. six#ref256399.
5. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 13. 6. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
6. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 175.
170. 7. “Gertrude Trude Adler (Moellnitz),”

210
 Notes—Chapters 20, 21 and 22

Geni, https://www.geni.com/people/ Chapter 21

Gertrude-Trude-Adler/60000000261656
10074; “Ing. Ernst Adler,” Geni, https:// 1. “Vienna,” United States Holocaust
w w w. g e n i . c o m / p e o p l e /­I n g - E r n s t- Memorial Museum, https://encyclopedia.
Adler/6000000016255032507; Decker, ushmm.org/content/en/article/vienna.
Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 175. 2. Hibbert, Benito Mussolini, 115;
8. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 117, Rees, The Holocaust, 111–12.
118. 3. “Vienna,” United States Holocaust
9. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, Memorial Museum, https://encyclopedia.
175. ushmm.org/content/en/article/vienna.
10. Ibid. 4. Ibid.
11. Ibid. 5. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
12. Ibid., 177. 184.
13. ­C zerwińska-Schupp, Otto Bauer 6. Offenberger, Jews of Nazi Vienna,
(1881–1938), 88. 99–127.
14. Decker, 177. 7. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
15. Ibid. 185–86.
16. Ibid., 178. 8. “Deportations from Viennas [sic]
17. Ibid., 181. Nordbahnhof, 1938–1945,” ÖAW, https://
18. Chas Early, “March 14, 1938: Hit- www.oeaw.ac.at/en/ikt/research/­sites-of-
ler Receives a Hero’s Welcome on His memor y-spaces-of-memor y/­d eporta
Return to Vienna,” British Telecom, tions-from-viennas-nordbahnhof-1938-
March 8, 2018, https://home.bt.com/ 1945.
news/on-this-day/march-14-1938-hit- 9. Czerwińska-Schupp, Otto Bauer, 1.
ler-receives-a-heros-welcome-on-his-re- 10. Ibid., 14.
turn-to-vienna-11363967774018. 11. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
19. “Vienna,” United States Holocaust 187.
Memorial Museum, https://encyclopedia. 12. Ibid., 188.
ushmm.org/content/en/article/vienna. 13. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
20. “History Stories,” History, https:// Ks,” 16, 17.
www.history.com/news/kristallnacht- 14. Adler, Ida, trans. Jamie Lee Searle
photos-pogrom-1938-hitler. (Rowholt ­e-book, 2018), https://­rowohlt-
21. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, theaterverlag.de/fm90/592/Adler_IDA_
183. sample%20translation.pdf.
15. “Martin Magner: Celebrated The-
ater, Radio and Television Director,” Vari-
Chapter 20 ety, January 30, 2002, https://variety.
1. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 27, 28. com/2002/scene/­p eople-news/­m artin-
2. Ibid., 36. magner-1117860017/.
3. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
177–79.
4. Ibid., 180.
Chapter 22
5. Ibid. 1. Donald Eugene Thompson, Indiana
6. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 40– Authors.
42. 2. “Friedrich Adler Papers,” Interna-
7. Ibid., 48. tional Institute for Social History, http://
8. Ibid. hdl.handle.net/10622/ARCH00135.
9. Ibid. 3. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
10. Ibid., 53. 189.
11. Ibid., 57. 4. Pfaff, “Kurt Herbert Adler,” 18.
12. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna, 5. Ellis, Raitmayr, and Herbst, “The
180. Ks,” 16.
13. Ibid., 182. 6. Ibid., 17.
14. Ibid., 186. 7. Ibid.

211
 Notes—Chapters 23 and Epilogue

8. Ibid., 18. 11. Boyce, “Art of Medicine,” 948–49.

9. Ibid., 18, 19. 12. Ibid.
10. Janos Gereben, “Kurt Herbert 13. Linda Roland Danil, “A Few Re-
Adler: Biography,” archived from the marks on Freud and Women,” https://
original on June 30, 2007, http://www. vers ob o ok s .com/blo g s/­4 022-a-fe w -
mrichter.com/opera/files/adler.htm, remarks-on-freud-and-women.
retrieved August 11, 2007. 14. Louis Menand, “Why Freud Sur-
11. Patricia Kristof Moy, “Remem- vives,” New Yorker, August 28, 2017, https:
bering Kurt Herbert Adler,” San Fran- //www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/
cisco Classical Voice, 2005, archived 08/28/­why-freud-survives.
from the original on September 27, 2007, 15. Ibid.
https://web.archive.org/web/200709272 16. Ibid.
05400/http:/www.sfcv.org/arts_revs/ad 17. Freud, Dora, 131.
lertribute_4_12_05.php, retrieved August
11, 2007.
Epilogue
1. Freud and Breuer, Studies on Hyste-
Chapter 23 ria, 4, 5; Cohut, “Controversy of ‘Female
1. Ernest Jones, Life and Work, 383. Hysteria,’” https://www.medicalnewsto
2. Gay, Freud, 761. daylcom/articles/the-controversy-of-fe
3. Fenichel, Psychoanalytic Theory of male-hysteria, accessed January 20, 2021.
Neurosis, 221–24. 2. Bogousslavsky, ed., “Hysteria,” 109.
4. Malcolm, Psychoanalysis: The 3. Broderick and Weston, “Family
Impossible Profession, 96. Therapy.”
5. Leonard, Freud’s Dora, 12. 4. Sachs, “Reflections on Freud’s Dora
6. Ibid., 143. Case,” 49.
7. Finzi and Westerink, eds., Dora, 5. Decker, Freud, Dora, and Vienna,
Hysteria and Gender, muse.jhu.edu/ 191.
book/61919. 6. Bor et al., “Are Child and Adolescent
8. Burd, “Portrait of Dora,” 2–32, DOI: Mental Health Problems Increasing in the
10.2307/465136. 21st Century?” 606–16.
9. Cixous and Clément, ­Newly-Born 7. Ibid., 613.
Woman, 154. 8. Rabaté, “Dora’s Gift,” 92.
10. Gilman et al., Hysteria Beyond
Freud, 332–33.

212
 Bibliography

Adler, Katharina. Ida. Berlin: Rowohlt Verlag GmbH; 1st edition (July 24, 2018).
Appignanesi, Lisa, and John Forrester. “Early Friends, Early Cases, Early Followers.” In
Freud’s Women: Family, Patients, Followers. New York: Basic Books, 1991.
_____. Freud’s Women: Family, Patients, Followers. New York: Basic Books, 2005.
Barron, James W., Ralph Beaumont, Gary N. Goldsmith, Michael I. Good, Robert L.
Pyles, ­Ana-Maria Rizzuto, and Henry F. Smith. “Sigmund Freud: The Secrets of Nature
and the Nature of Secrets.” International Review of ­P sycho-Analysis 18, no. 2 (1991):
143–63.
Beckermann, Ruth. Die Mazzesinsel: Juden in der Weiner Leopoldstadt 1918–1938. Ham-
burg: Löcker, 1984.
Benvenuto, Sergio. “Hysteria, Again: Dora Flees ... Is There Anything Left to Say About
Hysterics?” Journal of European Psychoanalysis 21 (2005): 3–32.
Bernheimer, C., and C. Kahane, eds. In Dora’s Case: Freud—Hysteria—Feminism. New
York: Columbia University Press, 1985.
Billig, Michael. “Freud and Dora: Repressing an Oppressed Identity.” MS, pp. 1–22,
https:// academia.edu/2543725. Theory, Culture, & Society 14, no. 3 (1997): 29–55.
_____. Freudian Repression: Conversation Creating the Unconscious. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University, 1999.
Bloom, Harold. “Freud, the Greatest Modern Writer.” New York Times, March 23, 1986.
https://www.nytimes.com/1986/03/23/books/­f reud-the-greatest-modern-writer.
html. Accessed August 2020.
_____. The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Harcourt, 1994.
Blum, Harold P. “Anti-Semitism in the Freud Case Histories: A Prologue to the Psycho-
analysis of Social Prejudice and Racism.” Psyche 63, no. 3 (2009): 256–80.
Bogousslavsky, J., ed. “Hysteria: The Rise of an Enigma.” Frontiers of Neurology and Neu-
roscience 35 (2014): 109–25.
Bor, William, Angela J. Dean, Jacob Najman, and Reza Hayatbakhsh. “Are Child and Ado-
lescent Mental Health Problems Increasing in the 21st Century? A Systematic Review.”
Australian New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 48, no. 7 (2014): 606–16.
­B orch-Jacobsen, Mikkel. “Bertha Pappenheim (1859–1936).” Psychology Today, January
29, 2012. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/­f reuds-patients-serial/201201/­
bertha-pappenheim-1859-1936. Accessed August 2020.
_____. “Mathilde Schleicher (1862–1890).” Psychology Today, March 4, 2012. https://
www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/­f reuds-patients-serial/201203/­m athilde-
schleicher-1862-1890. Accessed August 2020.
Bourne, J.M. Who’s Who in World War One. New York: Taylor and Francis ­e-library,
2002. Accessed via Google Books, February 21, 2011.
Boyce, Niall. “The Art of Medicine: Dora in the 21st Century.” Lancet 386 (2015): 948–49.
DOI:10.1016/­S0140-6736(15)­00111-7.
Broderick, Pamela, and Christina Weston. “Family Therapy with a Depressed Adolescent.”

213
 Bibliography

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719446/pdf/PE_6_01_32.pdf.
Accessed January 30, 2021.
Burd, Sarah. “Portrait of Dora.” Translated by Hélène Cisoux. Diacritics 13, no. 1 (1983):
2–32.
Carnochan, Peter G.M. Looking for Ground: Countertransference and the Problem of
Value in Psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic, 2001.
Cherry, Kendra. “Anna O’s Life and Impact on Psychology.” VeryWellMind. https://www.
verywellmind.com/­who-was-anna-o-279585. Accessed August 2020.
Cixous, Hélène. “Portrait of Dora.” Diacritics 13, no. 1 (1983): 2–32.
_____, and Catherine Clément. Newly Born Woman. Translated by Betsy Wing. Twin Cit-
ies: University of Minnesota Press, 1986.
Cohut, Maria. “The Controversy of ‘Female Hysteria.’” Medical News Today. https://www.
medicalnewstoday.com/articles/­the-controversy-of-female-hysteria. Accessed Janu-
ary 20, 2021.
Cole, Richard. “Men’s Mother Complex—Rape of the Heart.” St. Pancras Relationship
Counselling (blog). https://www.relatenow.co.uk/content/­m ens-mother-complex-
rape-heart. Accessed August 2020.
Czernin, Lucia. “Vienna Prater.” Das Capri Ihr Weiner Hotel. https://www.dascapri.at/
en/stories/­vienna-prater/. Accessed August 20, 2020.
­Czerwińska-Schupp, Ewa. Otto Bauer (1881–1938): Thinker and Politician. Translated by
Maciej Żurowski. Boston: Brill, 2017.
Darling, Laura. “Jan 29 Anna Freud Part II.” Making Queer History. https://www.
makingqueerhistory.com/articles/2019/1/29/­a nna-freud-part-ii. Accessed August
2020.
Davis, Doug. “Freud’s Dora: A Victorian Fable.” Haverford College. http://ww3.haverford.
edu/psychology/ddavis/fdora.html. Accessed August 2020.
Decker, Hannah S. “The Choice of a Name: ‘Dora’ and Freud’s Relationship with Breuer.”
Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 30, no. 1 (1982): 113–136.
_____. Freud, Dora, and Vienna 1900. New York: Free Press, 1991.
Deutsch, Felix. “A Footnote to Freud’s Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria.” Psy-
choanalytic Quarterly 25 (1957): 159–67.
Dimsdale, Joel E. “Conversion Disorder.” Merck Manual, July 2018. https://www.
merckmanuals.com/home/­mental-health-disorders/­somatic-symptom-and-related-
disorders/­conversion-disorder. Accessed August 2020.
Ellis, Andrew W., Oliver Raitmayr, and Christian Herbst. “The Ks: The Other Couple in
the Case of Freud’s ‘Dora.’” Journal of Austrian Studies 48, no. 4 (Winter 2015): 1–26.
Erikson, E.H. “Reality and Actuality: An Address.” In In Dora’s Case: Freud—Hysteria—
Feminism, ed. C. Bernheimer and C. Kahane, 44–55. New York: Columbia University
Press, 1985 (1961).
Fenichel, Otto. The Psychoanalytic Theory of Neurosis. New York: W.W. Norton, 1946.
Finzi, Daniela, and Herman Westerink, eds. Dora, Hysteria and Gender: Reconsidering
Freud’s Case Study. Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press: 2018.
Freud Museum. “Sigmund Freud Chronology: 1887–1888.” Accessed September 24, 2021.
Freud, Sigmund. Dora: An Analysis of a Case of Hysteria. New York: Collier/Macmillan,
1963.
_____. Dream Psychology: Psychoanalysis for Beginners. Hamburg: Classic, 1921.
_____. “Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria.” In The Standard Edition of the
Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. 7: A Case of Hysteria, Three
Essays on Sexuality and Other Works, 1–122. Available at https://www.sas.upenn.
edu/~cavitch/­pdf-library/Freud_SE_Dora_complete.pdf.
_____. “L’hérédité et l’étiologie des névroses.” Revue neurologique 4, no. 6 (1986): 161–
69.
_____. The Interpretation of Dreams. New York: Macmillan, 1913.
_____. “Sigmund Freud Papers: Interviews and Recollections, 1914–1998; Set A,

214
 Bibliography

1914–1998; Interviews and; Foges, Elsa, 1953; Jan. 7, 1953.” Manuscripts. Library of
Congress. https://www.loc.gov/item/mss3999001463/.
_____. “The Unconscious.” In General Psychological Theory: Papers on Metapsychology.
New York: Collier/Macmillan, 1963, 59–78, 116–50.
Freud, Sigmund, and Josef Breuer. Studies on Hysteria. Translated by James Strachey.
New York: Basic Books, 1980.
Fritz Offenberger, Illana. “Turning Point: From Vienna to Dachau.” In The Jews of Nazi
Vienna, 1938–1945. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.
Galef, David, and Harold R. Galef. “Freud’s Wife.” Journal of the American Academy of
Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry 32, no. 3 (2004).
Gay, Peter. Freud: A Life for Our Time. New York: W.W. Norton, 1988.
_____. “Sigmund and Minna? The Biographer as Voyeur.” New York Times, https://mov-
ies2.nytimes.com/books/98/10/25/specials/gay-minna.html, accessed November 17,
2020.
Gilman, Sander L. “Electrotherapy and Mental Illness: Then and Now.” History of Psychi-
atry 19, no. 3 (2008): 347.
Gilman, Sander L., Helen King, Roy Porter, G.S. Rousseau, and Elaine Showalter. Hyste-
ria Beyond Freud. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993. http://ark.cdlib.org/
ark:/13030/ft0p3003d3/. Accessed August 2020.
Grabinsky, Alan. “The Ghost Architect of Vienna.” Tablet, November 9, 2017.
Green, D. Freud Versus Dora and the Transparent Model of the Case Study. Jerusalem:
Modan, 1998.
Heller, Sharon. Freud A to Z. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley, 2005.
Hibbert, Christopher. Benito Mussolini: A Biography. London: Reprint Society, 1962.
Hirschmüller, Albrecht. “Evidence for a Sexual Relationship Between Sigmund Freud and
Minna Bernays?” American Imago 64, no. 1 (2007).
Howes, Ryan. “A Client’s Guide to Transference.” Psychology Today, June 18, 2012. https://
www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/­in-therapy/201206/­clients-guide-transference.
Accessed August 2020.
Hunter, Diane. “Hysteria, Psychoanalysis, and Feminism: The Case of Anna O.” Feminist
Studies 9, no. 3 (1983): 464–488.
Jensen, Ellen M. Streifzüge durch das Leben von Anna O./Bertha Pappenheim: Ein Fall für
die Psychiatrie—Ein Leben für die Philanthropie. Translated by the author. Frankfurt
am Main: ZTV Verlag, 1984.
Jones, Ernest. Life and Work of Sigmund Freud. New York: Basic Books, 1961.
Jones, Josh. “Young Dr. Freud: A Film by David Grubin.” PBS Newshour. https://www.pbs.
org/youngdrfreud/pages/family_father.htm.
Kaplan, Marion. “Bertha Pappenheim (1859–1936).” Jewish Women’s Archive. https://
jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/­pappenheim-bertha. Accessed August 2020.
Kaplan, Robert. “O Anna: Being Bertha Pappenheim—Historiography and Biography.”
Australasian Psychiatry 12, no. 1 (2004): 62. DOI:10.1046/j.1039–8562.2003.02062.x.
Kohler, Sheila. Dreaming for Freud: A Novel. New York: Penguin, 2014.
_____. “Nabokov’s Lolita and Freud’s Dora.” Psychology Today, September 11, 2014.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/­dreaming-freud/201409/­nabokovs-lolita-
and-freuds-dora. Accessed September 24, 2021.
Kramer, Peter D. Freud: Inventor of the Modern Mind. New York: Harper Perennial,
2006.
Kumar, David R., Florence Aslinia, Steven H. Yale, and Joseph J. Mazza. “­Jean-Martin
Charcot: The Father of Neurology.” Clinical Medicine & Research 9, no. 1 (2011): 47.
Kuriloff, Emily A. “What’s Going On with Dora? An Interpersonal Perspective.” In Freud
and Dora: 100 Years Later, ed. Susan S. Levine. Boca Raton, FL: Routledge, 2005.
Lackey, Scott W. “A Secret ­Austro-Hungarian Plan to Intervene in the 1884 Timok
Uprising in Serbia.” Austrian History Yearbook 23 (1992): 149–59. DOI:10.1017/
S0067237800002940.

215
 Bibliography

Leckie, Barbara. Culture and Adultery: The Novel, the Newspaper, and the Law, 1857–
1914. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999.
Leonard, Shengold. Freud’s Dora. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1990.
Maciejejewski, Franz. “Minna Bernays as ‘Mrs. Freud’: What Sort of Relationship Did
Sigmund Freud Have with His Sister-in-Law?” American Imago 65, no. 1 (2008).
Mahony, J. Patrick. Freud’s Dora: A Psychoanalytic, Historical, and Textual Study. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996.
Makari, George. Revolution in Mind: The Creation of Psychoanalysis. New York: Harper
Perennial, 2010.
Malcolm, Janet. Psychoanalysis. The Impossible Profession. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1988.
Mandal, Ananya. “Cause and Transmission of Syphilis.” News Medical Life Sciences 2.
https://www.­news-medical.net/health/­What-is-Syphilis.aspx. Accessed September
24, 2021.
Marcus, Steven. “Freud and Dora: Story, History, Case History.” Psychoanalysis and Con-
temporary Science 5 (1976): 398, 399.
_____. Freud and the Culture of Psychoanalysis. New York: W.W. Norton, 1987.
Masadilová, Alena. “Františkovy Lázně (Franzensbad).” Mgr. Alena Masadilová busi-
ness web site. https://www.visit2prague.cz/tours/spas/item/­132-frantiskovy-lazne-
franzensbad. Accessed January 20, 2020.
Masson, Jeffrey Moussaieff. Against Therapy. Chapter 2: Dora and Freud. New York: Ath-
eneum, 1988.
McCaffrey, Phillip. Freud and Dora: The Artful Dream. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Uni-
versity Press, 1985.
Moi, Toril. “Representations of Patriarchy: Sexuality and Epistemology in Freud’s Dora.”
Feminist Review 9, no. 1 (1981): 60–74.
Morrissey, Kim. Dora: A Case of Hysteria. London: Nick Hern, 1995.
Muslin, Hyman, and Merton Gill. “Transference in the Dora Case.” Journal of the Ameri-
can Psychoanalytic Association 26, no. 2 (1978): 311–29.
Offenberger, Illana Fritz. The Jews of Nazi Vienna, 1938–1945. London: Palgrave Macmil-
lan, 2017.
Ouweneel, Arij. Freudian Fadeout: The Failings of Psychoanalysis in Film Criticism. Jef-
ferson, NC: McFarland, 2012.
Pass Freidenreich, Harriet. “Jewish Women Physicians in Central Europe in the Early
Twentieth Century.” Contemporary Jewry 17 (1996): 79–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02965407. Accessed August 2020.
Pfaff, Timothy. “Kurt Herbert Adler and the San Francisco Opera: The Life and Career of
Kurt Herbert Adler.” Interview with Kurt Herbert Adler. The Bancroft Library, 1985.
https://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/rohoia/ucb/text/adlersfcaopera01adlerich.pdf.
Rabaté, Jean-Michel. “Dora’s Gift, or, Lacan’s Homage to Dora.” In Freud and Dora: 100
Years Later. Psychoanalytic Inquiry 25, no. 1 (2005): 84–93.
Rabinbach, Anson. The Crisis of Austrian Socialism: From Red Vienna to Civil War, 1927–
1934. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984.
Ramas, Maria. “Freud’s Dora, Dora’s Hysteria: The Negation of a Woman’s Rebellion.”
Feminist Studies 5, no. 3 (Autumn 1980): 472–510.
Rees, Laurence. The Holocaust: A New History. New York: Penguin Viking, 2017.
Rieff, Philip. Introduction to Dora: An Analysis of a Case of Hysteria, by Sigmund Freud.
New York: Collier/Macmillan, 1963.
Roazen, Paul. Meeting Freud’s Family. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1993.
Rogow, Arnold. “A Further Note to Freud’s ‘Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hyste-
ria.’” Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 26 (1978): 311–330.
Romano, Cesare. “The Dream of the Burning House.” In Freud and the Dora Case: A
Promise Betrayed by Cesare Romano. ­Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge, 2015.
Roudinesco, Élisabeth, and Michael Plon. Dictionnaire de la Psychanalyse. Paris: Fayard,
2011.

216
 Bibliography

Rudnytsky, Peter L. Foreword to Freud and the Dora Case: A Promise Betrayed, by Cesare
Romano, xi–xvi. ­Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge, 2015.
Sabbatini, Renato M.E. “The History of Shock Therapy in Psychiatry.” http://www.
cerebromente.org.br/n04/historia/shock_i.htm. Accessed August 2020.
Sachs, David M. “Reflections on Freud’s Dora Case After 48 Years.” In Freud and Dora:
100 Years Later. Psychoanalytic Inquiry 25, no. 1 (2005): 45–53.
Sealey, Anne. “The Strange Case of the Freudian Case History: The Role of Long Case
Histories in the Development of Psychoanalysis.” History of the Human Sciences 24, no.
1 (2011): 36–50.
Shapiro, Michael. The Jewish 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Jews of All Time. New
York: Citadel, 1994.
Sig, Ali K., Mustafa Guney, Aylin Uskudar Guclu, and Erkan Ozmen. “Medicinal Leech
Therapy: An Overall Perspective.” Integrative Medicine Research 6, no. 4 (2017):
337–43.
Stevens, Richard. Sigmund Freud: Examining the Essence of His Contribution. London:
Red Globe, 2008.
Thompson, Donald Eugene. Indiana Authors and Their Books, 1917–1966. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1974. http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/inauthors/view?docId=
encyclopedia/VAA5365-02.xml;chunk.id=ina-v2-entry-0011;toc.depth=1;toc.id=ina-
v2-entry-0011;brand=ia-books;doc.view=0;query=&text1=ollah&field1=text&hit.
rank. Accessed June 2020.
Thompson, M. Guy. The Truth About Freud’s Technique: The Encounter with the Real.
New York: New York University Press, 1994.
Thorell, Marge. “A Psychoanalytic Study of Narrativity: An Analysis of Academic Dis-
course in College English.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Pennsyl-
vania, 1987.
_____. “The Teenager and the Analyst: Dora and Freud.” Schuylkill Valley Journal 50
(Spring 2020): 158–65.
Tolmach Lakoff, Robin, and James C. Coyne. Father Knows Best: The Use and Abuse of
Power in Freud’s Case of Dora. New York: Teachers College Press, 1993.
Toril, Moi. “Representations of Patriarchy: Sexuality and Epistemology in Freud’s Dora.”
Feminist Review 9 (1981): 60–74.
Tutter, Adele. “Sex, Subtext, ­Ur-text: Freud, Dora and the Suggestive Text.” Abstract,
International Journal of Psychoanalysis 101, no. 3 (2020): 523–48. DOI: 10.1080/
00207578.2020.1726712.
Webster, Richard. “Freud, Charcot and Hysteria: Lost in the Labyrinth.” http://www.
richardwebster.net/freudandcharcot.html. Accessed June 2020.
Weinzierl, Erika. “The Jewish Middle Class in Vienna in the Late Nineteenth and Early
Twentieth Centuries.” Working paper. University of Minnesota, Center for Austrian
Studies. http://hdl.handle.net/11299/60664. Retrieved from the University of Minne-
sota Digital Conservancy, 2003.
Yuknavitch, Lidia. Dora: A Headcase. Portland, OR: Hawthorne, 2012.
Zadoff, Mirjam. Next Year in Marienbad: The Lost Worlds of Jewish Spa Culture. Trans-
lated by William Templer. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014.

217
 Index

Numbers in bold italics indicate pages with illustrations

Adler, Ernst ​126, 128, 129, 135, 140, 148, Gerber); Peppina Zellenka, bridge part-
149, 156-157, 162-163, 195, 197, 198 ner of 161, 162; relationship with 64-65,
Adler, Katharina ​16, 56, 58, 108, 177, 182, 70, 71, 83-84, 91, 177 (see also Zellenka,
200, 204 Peppina); religious conversion 7, 132, 133,
Adler, Kurt Herbert ​16, 132, 134-134, 135- 154, 166, 168, 200; sexuality 95-96; son
136, 137-138, 139, 140-141, 144, 145, 15, 133, 137, 141, 151, 155, 156, 158, 160,
148-149, 150, 151, 155-156, 162-163, 175, 180-181 (see also Adler, Kurt Her-
170-171, 173, 175, 177-178, 180-181, 182- bert); suicidality 7, 66, 88, 91, 92, 94; Zel-
183, 197, 198; married life 168-170, 179, lenka children 14, 68, 70, 72, 73, 84-85,
182; see also Miller, Nancy Goodhue; 91, 121, 125
Moellner, Gertrude (Trudl); Warfel, Dian- Bauer, Katharina (Käthe) Gerber ​10, 14,
tha 141, 160, 167, 168, 173, 179-180, 182 42-43, 44, 47-48, 54, 56, 57, 58-59,
Alsergrund ​43-44, 45, 129-130, 131 197; ailments 10, 58, 59, 139; cleanliness
Anna O. ​5, 6, 9, 10, 16, 25, 26, 27, 33-34, (“housewife psychosis”) 7, 10, 14, 42, 54,
98, 98, 183, 186, 195, 196, 201; see also 58-59, 100, 120, 144, 158, 163, 203; mari-
Breuer, Josef; Freud, Sigmund; Pappen- tal estrangement 59, 69-70
heim, Bertha Bauer, Otto ​14, 45, 46, 55, 57-58, 60, 121,
Anschluss ​173, 174, 176, 198 140-141, 142, 143-146, 149, 163, 164,
anti–Semitism ​6, 7, 13, 40, 52-53, 56, 62, 167-168, 173, 175-176, 198; marriage 145,
82, 88, 114, 133, 144, 173, 181, 200 176; socialism 14, 143-144, 145, 147, 151,
154-155
Bauer, Ida ​9, 10, 13, 14, 16-17, 28, 30, 44, Bauer, Philipp ​14, 45, 47, 135, 137-138, 139,
45, 45, 46, 135, 188, 196, 198; ailments 197; Hans Zellenka 62, 68-69, 70, 89 (see
6, 7, 10, 46, 47, 48, 54, 55, 57, 58, 65-66, also Zellenka, Hans); health issues 14, 47,
73, 74, 75-76, 83, 85, 87, 88, 122, 139- 54-55, 56, 58, 69-70, 139, 148-149; inter-
140, 156-158, 159, 163, 177, 180-181, 184; actions with Freud 14-15, 70, 89, 93, 94,
aunt 7, 47, 65, 85, 120 (see also Bauer, 122, 196, Peppina Zellenka, affair with 70,
Malvine); bridge (card game) 141, 161-162; 83, 84, 85, 89, 116, 121, 144, 199 (see also
brother 45, 46, 55, 56-57, 58, 121, 129, Zellenka, Peppina); venereal disease 10,
149, 155 (see also Bauer, Otto); dreams 80, 14, 41, 44, 45, 55, 58, 69, 70, 196, 203
101-102, 104, 105, 107, 109-110, 200; early Bauer Friedmann, Malvine ​36, 65, 85, 120,
life 44-45, 55; education 13, 33, 60-61, 197, 202, 205
82, 83, 87-88, 121; father 55, 56, 57, 88, Bernays, Martha ​23, 98, 99-100, 100, 195,
95, 139 (see also Bauer, Philipp); fleeing 196, 201
Austria 170-171, 173-175, 177; governess Bernays, Minna ​97-98, 98, 201
60, 82, 83; Hans Zellenka, seduction by 7, Biedermann family ​53, 63-64, 205; bank
14, 70-71, 73-75, 85, 91, 97, 106, 121, 122 64, 66, 68-69, 141
(see also Zellenka, Hans); health treat- Breuer, Josef ​9, 10, 12, 24, 25-27, 33-34,
ments 10, 20, 55, 75, 76, 77; husband 126, 92, 94, 195, 196, 200, 201 (see also Anna
128-129, 131, 132, 136, 156-157, 158, 159, O.); Freud, Sigmund
163 (see also Adler, Ernst); life in Amer- Bohemia ​13, 14, 36-37, 38, 43, 44, 135, 149,
ica 179, 180-181; mother 56, 58, 59, 88, 93, 202
95, 158 (see also Bauer, Katharina [Käthe]

219
 Index

Charcot, Jean-Martin ​23-24, 24, 32-33, 78, Bernays, Martha); women, relationships

79, 196, 201 with 29, 32, 42, 89, 124, 186-187, 201
countertransference ​3, 4, 10, 109, 116, 123-
124, 146, 184, 185, 188, 190, 191, 207 Herr, K. ​7, 14, 71, 74, 89, 95, 96, 102, 204;
see also Zellenka, Hans
Deutsch, Felix ​157-159, 198 Hitler, Adolf ​12, 17, 137, 163, 164, 165, 165,
Deutsch, Helene ​157 167, 172-173, 174, 198
Dollfuss, Engelbert ​167, 168 Hohenems ​53, 63
hysteria (conversion disorder) ​9, 21, 24, 27,
Emperor Joseph II ​37-38 78, 93, 94, 96, 102, 107-108, 111, 143, 185-
Empress Elizabeth of Austria (Sissi) ​50, 186, 190, 191, 196, 200
51-52, 52, 64
Jung, Carl ​30, 123, 149, 184, 202
Fliess, Wilhelm ​21, 27, 30, 185, 201-202
Franzensbad ​51, 56, 57, 59, 76 Königswarter Foundation ​68, 204
Frau K. ​7, 14, 53, 66, 89, 102, 106, 107-108,
204; see also Zellenka, Peppina Leopoldstadt ​21-22, 39-40, 40, 203
Freud, Amalia Malka Nathansohn ​11, 21,
31-32, 113, 114 Magner, Martin ​177-178, 212
Freud, Anna ​2, 13, 32, 34-35, 166, 198, 201 Merano (Meran, South Tyrol) ​47-48,
Freud, Jakob ​11, 30, 31, 112 49-55, 56, 69, 69, 150, 204, 205
Freud, Sigmund ​2, 11, 77, 79, 100, 112, Miller, Nancy Goodhue ​182
113, 115, 153, 187-188, 195; case study, Moellnitz, Gertrude (Trudl) ​168-169
Anna O. 26, 27, 33, 34, 196; case study,
Dora 2-3, 4, 15, 16, 58, 62, 65, 88, 93, 96, Nazi invasion, Austria ​53, 164-165, 165,
101, 103, 104, 110, 111, 116-117, 123, 124, 168, 170, 172-173, 174, 174, 176-177,
132-133, 184-185, 186, 188-189, 190, 191, 198
192-193, 197, 199, 201, 203, 208, 209; Nuremberg Laws ​168, 173, 175, 198
daughter see Freud, Anna; death 187, 198;
dreams, interpretation of 101-108, 116, Pappenheim, Bertha ​24, 25, 25, 26-27,
129, 199-200; dream work 15, 21, 28, 80, 33-34, 98, 186, 195, 196, 201; see also
92, 93, 96, 100-101, 112, 113, 114-115, Anna O.; Breuer, Josef; Freud, Sigmund,
190; early life 21-23, 22, 30-32; father 30, case study, Anna O.
112, 113-114 see also Freud, Jakob; fleeing Pappenheim, Sigmund ​98, 201
Vienna 166, 198; hypnosis 21, 25, 26, 27, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital ​23-24, 78, 79
200; Ida Bauer, analysis/treatment of 15, Preminger, Otto ​167
35, 58, 65, 76, 79, 85, 94, 95, 96, 102, 108, psychoanalysis ​1, 21, 28, 78, 92, 93, 109, 117,
111, 116-117, 122, 129, 143, 197, 199; Ida 183, 185, 186, 188, 190, 196
Bauer, countertransference; ​see ​coun-
tertransference; Ida Bauer, dreams, inter- Reichenberg ​85, 86, 87, 197
pretation of 101, 102, 103, 104-108; Ida Reinhardt, Max ​141, 160
Bauer, termination of therapy 15, 103, Ritten von Sonnenthal, Adolf ​126-128,
108, 109-110, 111, 115, 117, 120, 122, 123; 127, 135
Ida Bauer, transference see transference;
Josef Breuer, collaboration with 9, 24, 26, Schleicher, Cölestin ​25
27, 32-33, 34, 92, 94, 196, 200 (see also Schleicher, Mathilde ​25-26, 196, 201
Breuer, Josef ); mother 31, 32, 112, 114 (see
also Freud, Amalia Malka Nathansohn); “talking cure” ​see ​Freud, Sigmund, talk
museum 2, 77, 131, 201; Nazi invasion therapy (“talking cure”)
166; Peppina Zellenka see Zellenka, Pep- transference ​3, 4, 10, 21, 93, 96, 103, 109,
pina; professional life 89, 114, 142, 149- 116, 117, 159, 184, 188, 190
150, 187, 197; publications 9, 16, 27, 92,
123, 146, 196, 197; self-analysis 28, 112- Vienna ​39-40, 40, 78, 137, 165, 172; anti–
114, 115; sister-in-law 32, 97, 98, 99, 100, Semitism 12, 15, 22, 40, 82, 88, 114, 133,
111, 207-208 (see also Bernays, Minna); 137, 138, 154, 165, 170, 173, 174, 175, 176-
talk therapy (“talking cure”) 10, 21, 24, 177, 181; bridge (card game) 15, 141, 161-
25, 26, 27, 76 (see also psychoanalysis); 162; culture 39, 43, 87, 88, 128, 130, 131,
wife 23, 32, 99-100, 201, 207 (see also 134-135, 172; decline 150, 154, 162, 164,

220
 Index

165, 170; growth, Jewish population 12, Zellenka, Peppina ​63-65, 66, 68, 70, 85,
38, 39, 43-44 181-182; see also Bauer, Philipp, Peppina
Von Schuschnigg, Kurt ​164, 168, 172-173 Zellenka; Biedermann family
Zellenkas ​6, 7, 53, 62-63, 67-68, 139,
Walter, Margarethe ​186-187 141, 199, 200; Bauer family relations 61,
Warfel, Diantha ​169, 179, 182 62, 67, 68, 71-72, 84, 86, 204; children
Woolf, Leonard ​187 67-68, 84-85, 121, 181; marriage 62-63,
Woolf, Virginia ​187 66, 67-68, 70, 85, 196

Zellenka, Hans ​66-69, 205; see also Bauer,

Ida, Hans Zellenka, seduction by

221