To return to the behavior of the B and A personalities; the B system,
from the fact that it had become for a month, during the third period,
segregated as an independent and autonomous system, had become
crystallized and easily dissociated as _a whole_ from the remainder of
the personalities. The same happened with the A system after it had
become emancipated as a result of the fourth shock. The two systems
readily changed with one another and I had innumerable opportunities of
observing the changes taking place before my eyes and of studying them.
C makes the following statement of these alternations:
Shortly after I came to you I began to alternate more frequently
between those two states, and it is well to emphasize that one marked
change in the state of A developed. In this state I now had _complete
amnesia_ for my whole life as B; for everything I thought and
did.[300] In other respects, however, these states were identical with
what they had been. The presence of amnesia made no difference in the
fact of change of personality. As I see it I was just as much an
altered personality before the amnesia developed as afterward. As B, I
had no amnesia.
The amnesia made life very difficult; indeed, except for the help you
gave me I think it would have been impossible and that I should have
gone truly mad. How can I describe or give any clear idea of what it
is to wake suddenly, as it were, and not to know the day of the week,
the time of the day, or why one is in any given position? I would come
to myself as A, perhaps on the street, with no idea of where I had
been or where I was going; fortunate if I found myself alone, for if I
was carrying on a conversation I knew nothing of what it had been;
fortunate indeed, in that case, if I did not contradict something I
had said for, as B, my attitude toward all things was quite the
opposite of that taken by A. Often it happened that I came to myself
at some social gathering—a dinner, perhaps—to find I had been taking
wine (a thing I, as A, felt bound not to do)[301] and what was to me
most shocking and horrifying, smoking a cigarette; never in my life
had I done such a thing and my humiliation was deep and keen.
The bearing of amnesia on the principle of multiple personality,
perhaps, needs a few words. From the facts as they developed in this
case it must be obvious that the presence or absence of amnesia in no
way affects the reality of altered or secondary personality. B was quite
as much a personality before the development of amnesia as afterwards.
Before this appeared the patient as A in no way differed in
characteristics (other than amnesia) from what she was afterwards, and
the same is true of B. The amnesia simply made the contrast between the
phases more obtrusive; that was all. If, therefore, following the
amnesia each phase can be rightly interpreted—and of this there can be
no doubt—as a dissociated personality, the same must be true of it
antecedent to loss of memory. Each phase had lost and gained certain
traits and peculiarities, and what one had lost the other, to a large
extent, had retained.
An analysis of the previous life history shows that each represented a
constellation of mental complexes created out of the formative matter of
the past conserved in the unconscious. On the other hand it is obvious
that from another point of view each, before amnesia occurred, was
rightly entitled to be considered as a highly developed “mood” with
strong conative tendencies. In principle the amnesia does not affect the
point of view. One frequently sees in lesser degree such moods in
so-called normal people of a certain temperament. They are in fact
really temporary alterations of personality, though it is not customary
to speak of them as such. After amnesia develops the conditions in other
respects are in no way changed. If such alterations of personality are
combined with a neurasthenic condition it is customary to regard the
phase as one of neurasthenia or hysteria, and, in fact, the state A was
for a long time so regarded until the other state, B, was discovered.
It is not within the scope of this study to describe in detail the
behavior of the two personalities A and B. Enough has been said to show
that they differed in character so widely as to appear to be two
entirely distinct persons, with contradictory traits, desires, feelings,
points of view, habits, manners, temperaments, and attitudes towards
their environment and towards each other. Alternating as they did, the
situations in which A, at least, was placed were often dramatic and
comparable to that of the case of Miss Beauchamp[302] with which some of
you may be familiar.
A good general idea of the two personalities and their behavior has been
given by the subject herself in the two articles from which I have
freely quoted. For further details I would refer you to those
accounts[303] which merit careful study.
Nor can I take up that phase of the problem of dissociation which
involves _co-conscious_ systems of thought. It is too large a subject
and must be reserved for a later occasion. I will merely say that when A
became _unaware_ of the _B complex_ and became amnesic for her
alternating life as B, the latter, B, continued during the A phase; or,
in other words, the co-conscious life was a continuation of the B
alternating life after the change took place to A (or C), but the latter
was unaware of it.
This seems very difficult to comprehend for those who are not familiar
with the phenomenon. Yet, as I see it, the mechanism and principle are
very simple and the phenomenon is only an exaggeration of the normal.
Otherwise and without a normal mechanism it could not occur. B has also
given in her account a very valuable description based on introspection
of the co-conscious life. This merits careful study.