Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To open articles without exiting the current webpage…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To open articles without exiting your current search or webpage, press Ctrl + Left Mouse Button while hovering over the desired link. It will open in a new Tab in your internet browser.

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Barzilai, S. (2004). Mind The Gap: Some Midrashic Propositions for Moses and Monotheism. Psychoanal. Rev., 91(6):831-852.

(2004). Psychoanalytic Review, 91(6):831-852

Mind The Gap: Some Midrashic Propositions for Moses and Monotheism

Shuli Barzilai

I

Moses and Monotheism (Freud, 1939) has been frequently described as a fragmented work, a kind of textual patchwork. The book itself was literally delivered, if not conceived, in pieces. Briefly to recapitulate the convoluted sequence of events that led to the final published version: In 1934 Freud attempted to write a “historical novel” about Moses (inspired by his reading of Thomas Mann's Joseph novels) that he found himself unable to complete. He then wrote two essays on the origins of Moses that appeared in 1937 in successive issues of volume 23 of Imago. Last, the three-part work titled Moses and Monotheism (Der Mann Moses und die Monotheistische Religion: Drei Abhandlungen), which begins with the previously published essays, appeared in 1939 after Freud's escape from Vienna to London (Jones, 1957, pp. 192-194; Strachey, 1939). Freud (1939) himself was the first to acknowledge the piecemeal character of his book. “I miss the consciousness of unity and intimacy,” he wrote in the second of his prefaces (“June 1938 [London]”) to Part Three, “that should exist between the author and his work.” However, as he hastened to add, his belief in the content had not faltered over the years: “This does not mean that I lack conviction in the correctness of my conclusions. That conviction I acquired a quarter of a century ago, when I wrote my book on Totem and Taboo” (pp. 70-71).1

Yet

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2021, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.