I
We may now return to C’s account of her dissociated life—to the point
where she was about to describe the development of another personality,
A, and at which I digressed.
Bear in mind that it is the B personality that now received the shock
and that the revelation of the deception, therefore, was to a
personality whose point of view was not that of duty or affection but of
mere joy and pleasure.
After a period of a few weeks I received a second[292] shock, which
was caused by the discovery of deception in matters[293] which my
“obsession” had taken in charge. The revelation came in a flash, _a
strong emotion_ swept over me, and the state B, _with all its traits,
physical characteristics, and points of view disappeared, and I
changed to another state which we have since called A_. In this state
my physical condition was much as it was before the first shock,[294]
that is, I was neurasthenic. From a state of vigorous health I
instantly changed to one of illness and languor; I could hardly sit
up, had constant headache, insomnia, loss of appetite, etc. My mental
characteristics were also different. As before, however, there was no
amnesia either for the state when I was B or for my life before the
first shock.
Now, though as A I was filled with most disproportionate horror at
what had occurred during the weeks of my life as B, I was ruled by the
same obsession, but with this difference: what I, as B, had done with
a sense of _pleasure_, I, as A, did with a sense of almost horror at
my own actions, feeling that I was compelled to do so by what seemed
at the time a sense of _duty_. I felt that I must carry out certain
obligations, and I doubt now, as I afterward expressed myself to you,
if I could have resisted had I tried. [I. e., she was again governed
as formerly by the B complex.] I would not refuse the demand for help
which was made upon me because, as B, I had promised my aid, but in
complying I was obliged to do things which seemed to me, as A,
shocking and unheard of. I felt that my conduct was open to severe
criticism but I had promised and must fulfil though the skies fell. It
seems to me now, in the light of our present knowledge of B, that I,
while in this A phase, was in a sort of somnambulistic stage governed
by what I have learned were co-conscious ideas belonging to B; and
that the impulses of the B complex were too strong to be resisted; but
in my memory my ideas as B were at this time so curiously intermingled
with my ideas as A that it is useless to try to analyze my mind more
accurately. In mood, points of view and ideals I was A, but I _did_
the things B would have done, though from a different incentive.
To fully appreciate the situation and in that light the meaning of A’s
point of view in the preceding passage and in that which follows, we
must remember that, when the original personality B. C. A., as the
neurasthenic and a disintegrated self that we may call the _A mood_, was
suddenly changed by the preceding “shock” to the B personality, for a
few minutes the subject was angry, frightened and felt insulted. There
can be no doubt that if the change had not occurred she would have
resented any further continuance of friendly or philanthropic relations
with the object of her resentment. When she came under my observation
later, as A, she was overwhelmed with (unjustified) humiliation and
blazed with wrath at the mere thought of the episode. Her governing
feeling was vengeful emotion. Even later as the normal C she could not
forgive or forget.
Now imagine the scene: a person dominated by such feeling suddenly,
without apparent rhyme or reason, completely changing in her feelings
and point of view, regarding the episode as a lark, enjoying it and
smiling and happy. And then in this frolicsome mood continuing to play
for a month with the object of her previous wrath. Such a scene on the
stage would be a most dramatic one. Imagine what must have been the
bewilderment of the victim.
Then, after some weeks of this play, the B personality changes back to
the disintegrated self, A. As A she remembers what she has done as B in
complete contradiction to her previous feelings and views of the
episode, herself and the object. She is overcome with horror on
remembering her behavior (as B) and yet she finds herself ruled by a
fixed idea of the B complex and going on doing, but from a different
motive, the very things which had horrified her.[295]
Keeping this situation in mind we can understand A’s feelings and
viewpoint bearing in mind that all was morbidly exaggerated.
For a few days I remained A and then owing, I think, to a lessening of
nervous tension, I changed again to B [personality] and remained in
that state for two or three weeks during which time I was physically
well and happy again. At the end of this time, as a result of another
realization of the actual situation, A reappeared and was the only
personality for some weeks. These changes were due to successive
emotional shocks.
The following passage which continues A’s viewpoint accurately describes
her state of mind when she came under my observation.
When you first saw me I was A at my worst. I had no amnesia for the
events of the preceding months when, as B, I had been filled with the
joy of living. There was no thought on my part of any “change of
personality”—I had never heard of such a thing—but I was like one
slowly awakening from a dream. I was equally aghast at what I (B) had
done for _pleasure_, and at what I (A), had done from a sense of duty;
one seemed as unbelievable as the other.[296]
One of the most shocking things to me, as A, was the fact that I had
_enjoyed myself_ as B. Had I committed the most dreadful crimes I
could not have felt greater anguish, regret, and remorse. I had been
dominated by the fixed ideas and obsessions of B; I had felt that I
must respond to any call for help made by this person [the
drug-addict] even though it was against my inclination and judgment to
do so; there seemed no choice for me in the matter—I _had_ to;[297] I
could see no point of view but my own. To do what seemed my plain duty
I was willing to sacrifice myself in every way, but could not see that
I (A) was now causing as much anxiety to my family as I had previously
done as B; that I was sacrificing them also, and that my idea of duty
was entirely mistaken. A, it would seem, was the emotional and
idealistic part of my nature magnified a thousand times. My emotions
and ideals as A were not different in kind from those of my normal
self, but were so exaggerated as to be morbid.
As A I was full of metaphysical doubts and fears, full of scruples. I
did not attend church because I felt that I could no longer honestly
say the Creed and the prayers. The service had lost all meaning to me
and so it seemed hypocritical to take part in it. I felt that I had
utterly failed in the performance of every duty, and tortured myself
with the remembrance of every act of omission and commission. I
accused myself of selfishness, neglect, in fact, of nearly all the
crimes in the calendar including, in an indirect way, that of
murder.[298] My conversation was always of the most serious
character,—religion (I believed in nothing), life after death (of
which I found no hope), and I dwelt much upon the fact that no one
should be judged by their deeds alone, that no one could tell what
hidden motive had prompted any given act. This was because I had (as
B) done so many things which (as A) I wholly disapproved of and felt
might be misunderstood. I did not understand them myself but knew that
my motive had been good. I was frightened, bewildered, shocked,
agonized—concentrated anguish and remorse. During these weeks I
suffered more than it ought to be possible for any one ever to suffer
for anything, and always, over and over in my mind went the same old
thoughts,—“_Why_ did I do as I did? _How_ could I have done it? Why
did it seem right? What would my friends think if they knew? I was
mad! _I was not myself._” Finally I decided to end it all—I could not
live under such a weight of humiliation and self-reproach. I am sure,
Dr. Prince, that you must remember how impossible it was to reason
with me as A, for it was at this time and in this state that I was
sent to you and you first saw me.
Summing up this statement a new personality had come to the fore—a
personality that was the antithesis of B. The traits which characterized
A had been left entirely out of B while those which had characterized B
were left entirely out of A. Both sets of traits were to be found in C
though less accentuated and less freely manifested. The gaiety, love and
pleasure and joy of life, the absence of all thought of responsibility
and care belonging to B had given place to seriousness, a sense of
responsibility and duty, a feeling of apprehension, to doubts and fears
and self-reproaches. Depression and sorrow had taken the place of
exaltation and joy. The neurasthenic state had replaced buoyant health.
Now it should be noted that these latter were the traits of the subject
C during the preceding four-year period of stress and strain, and the
succeeding neurasthenic period, and represented a side of her character
which was developed, systematized and intensified by the circumstances
of her life. In accordance with these traits, habits of thought had been
established and by constant repetition complexes had been built. It is
of importance to note that it was against these very A traits that the
“B complex” at that time had rebelled—that very complex which was to
become the chief component of the “B personality,” and which was the
other side of the original self. It was during the neurasthenic state
that the A traits had become abnormally developed and belonged to the
neurasthenic condition. When the personality changed to B these A traits
became dissociated but still remained conserved as unconscious
systematized neurograms; now the A traits were awakened once more, there
was a conflict and the B traits, the lighter side of her character, were
repressed, dissociated and subsided into the unconscious. A was,
therefore, a dissociated personality. She was the original C, if you
please, but now so shattered and shorn as to be but an abstract and
wreck of her former self. The normal C possessing both sets of traits
had been, and now, resynthesized to health, is able to compare, to
weigh, to modify, to balance the judgments obtained from the point of
view of the B system with those of the A system and thus keep a fairly
equitable poise of mind. The one counteracted the other fairly well. The
A and B phases being respectively deprived of the characteristics of the
other, each exhibited its own traits in a highly intensified degree, and
manifested excessive reactions to the environment. The dissociated state
A was plainly a reversion to the stress-and-strain and neurasthenic
period. The awakening of A was the awakening of a system of thoughts
which had lain dormant during the B state. Now the repressed B state was
dormant.
It is of great significance for an understanding of neurasthenic
disturbances that the awakening of the A system brought back all the
neurasthenic symptoms that had as physical reactions accompanied this
system at the time when it was dominant in C. The A system of thoughts,
emotions, instincts, innate dispositions, etc., and the physical
symptoms necessarily went together, for the latter are the expression or
reaction of a dissociated personality that is deprived of its sthenic
and exalting emotions. The moment the sthenic emotions were brought back
(in C or A) the physical symptoms disappeared. The disappearance of the
neurasthenia even in A when certain emotions were temporarily restored
by suggestion was remarkable.