Jacques Szaluta: Witness to History, Psychohistorian, and Psychoanalyst

Jacques Szaluta emigrated as a young boy from Europe to the United States in 1946. After high school in New York City and serving in the Army, he graduated from New York University in 1959 and in 1969 was awarded a doctorate in European history by Columbia University. In 1994, Dr. Szaluta earned a Certificate in Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy from The New York Center for Psychoanalytic Training. Dr. Szaluta is currently a licensed psychoanalyst in New York State. In 1965 he began teaching history at the Merchant Marine Academy and retired in 2001 as a full professor. The college recognized him for distinguished teaching in 1994 and as an emeritus professor he continues to be actively involved in its activities. He is a Research Associate of the Psychohistory Forum and for many years has served as moderator of its meetings. His

Page 279

book Pétain For and Against: A Survey of the Historical Debate was published in 1973, followed by La Psychohistoire in France in 1987. He co-edited Psychoanalysis and the Humanities in 1996, and published Psychohistory: Theory and Practice in 1999. This last book won the Gradiva Award from the National Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis. Dr. Szaluta has published many articles and presented at numerous professional conferences throughout his distinguished career. He (JS) was interviewed in 2018 by Ken Fuchsman (KAF) and Paul H. Elovitz (PHE).

KAF: Each of us have experiences that have led us toward psychohistory. You, though, had special circumstances as a youngster. Would you tell us about your early childhood?

JS: I was born in Paris, France, on August 22, 1933, to Polish-Jewish parents, who met and were married in France. Unfortunately, World War II broke out in September 1939 when I was six years old and in June of 1940 German forces had captured much of northern France, including Paris. By 1941, there were mass arrests of Jewish men including my father, who did not survive the war. In my case, my mother anticipated what was to come, as even before the mass arrests occurred, all Jews, children included, were required to wear a Jewish star pinned to their garment, to mark them. Eventually, I lived a secret life. Through a friendly neighbor who lived in an apartment next to us, I went into hiding in the village of Dollon, not far from Normandy.

KAF: How long did you stay in Dollon?

JS: I lived there for about four months with Monsieur and Madame Richefeu. One day a man from the French underground with a photograph of me came to the Richefeu house to take me to a safer location in Limoges, in Vichy, France. This was a dramatic, dangerous trip. At one point when we had no choice but to walk on railroad tracks, a policeman situated on top of a hill suddenly demanded to know where we were going. My “passeur,” or “passer” as he was designated, responded and the policeman allowed us to continue. Everything was risky. We got very little sleep, and eating was rare, until a train took us to Limoges. As we were walking to the address where my mother was living, I saw her in the distance walking toward us. When I began to run toward her, my feet could not carry me—I was too exhausted. I never had such an experience. But we were reunited. My mother and I bade goodbye to our passer and thanked him profusely.  After living in Limoges for

Page 280

about two weeks, my mother and I moved to a village nearby, Saint Sulpice Les Feuilles.

KAF: Did this remain a safe haven for long?

JS: In November 1942, I saw a group of German soldiers coming up the street. I ran back into the house and told my mother.  My mother, who now had false papers, and I were now headed to Grenoble, held by Italian forces. Grenoble was teeming with refugees and for all of them the conversations now turned to getting out of Grenoble. A frequently mentioned destination was Switzerland. In the fall of 1943, my mother decided to attempt to smuggle me into Switzerland. She took this risk to save my life. I was ten years old.

One early morning, my mother and I went to the Grenoble railroad station, where I was to board a train, and there I met the members of my group. When we pulled away, I was warned, by my mother, not to wave goodbye, nor could she wave to me. Indeed, the situation was dangerous.

When we arrived at our destination near Switzerland, we left the train and walked for an hour to a small barn to hide in near the Swiss border.  Later in the evening, when it was very dark outside, a man suddenly came into the barn and introduced himself as George. He told us that he was going to take us to an opening in the barbed wire separating France and Switzerland, and that after we crossed over, to keep walking until we were met by a Swiss guard. We left and finally we arrived at the border where the barbed wire was torn, and George cheerfully said goodbye to us. I recall that in this group I was the last person to cross into Switzerland, and I tore my overcoat. We walked for perhaps five minutes when suddenly a guard shouted “Halt!” I had never heard such a loud sigh of relief as I did from our group.  A Swiss guard approached us, very pleasantly, smiling, and he had a pipe in his mouth. We then went to a small guard house, where our names were taken. Moments later, a small bus arrived which took us to a police station in Geneva.

KAF: What happened then?

JS: After two months in camps I was selected, apparently because of my age, to go live with a Swiss family in Canton Bern. This became another very meaningful sojourn for me. The family I now lived with was comfortable. The head of the household was Mr. Hans Berger, and in his shop, called the Kaserei, he produced Swiss

Page 281

and other cheeses. In this family, there were three children.  The day after my arrival, although I did not speak German, I went to school. It was just a two-room school, one room for the lower grades, and the other for the upper grades. The two teachers were married to each other, Frau Ruef and her husband, Herr Ruef. Frau Ruef was an exceptionally kind, caring, and pleasant person, and I enjoyed being in her class. Fortunately, Frau Ruef made me feel comfortable in her class and I learned German quickly. After I went to the upper grades, with Herr Ruef, there was one event that was to have a decisive effect on me later in life. I was very conscious of how it made me feel at the time, but I did not realize its effect on my choice of a career until several years later.

KAF: What was that experience?

JS: One day, perhaps two months after I became Herr Ruef’s student, he asked the class to write an essay. Perhaps two days later, Herr Ruef told us that he was now going to read the best papers to all the students. To my great surprise, the paper I had written was the second one that he read. I was shocked. I had never had such an experience. I felt ecstatic, for now I had not been just writing for the teacher, as in the past, just doing an assignment, but I was writing for an entire class—the students all listened in rapt attention! I had an audience! This became a momentous event for me. Such an experience became a decisive event and this became a regular occurrence, that Herr Ruef would read my essays to the class. Also, I was writing in German. Not only that, but after I had been his student for one year, twice Herr Ruef spoke with me privately, to ask me if he could learn about my story, my past, to write about me, and to publish a story about me. I agreed, as I certainly respected him. Unfortunately, his intention could not come to fruition because after living in Switzerland for over two years, I suddenly left for the United States.

KAF: When did you come to America?

JS: I arrived in New York in 1946. I first boarded with relatives, then had other living situations, and eagerly learned to speak English. I was eventually drafted into the U.S. Army, and in 1953 I was sent to be stationed in Germany. At my first opportunity, I went on furlough for one week to visit the Berger family and Herr and Frau Ruef. I was invited to have lunch with my former teachers—an outstanding event. One of the first things Herr Ruef said was that I was the best writer in the class, a recognition I certainly

Page 282

appreciated. Ultimately, while I was stationed in Germany, I had an epiphany. Later, while I served in the military police in Germany, junior high school students would come to practice their English with American soldiers. One day, during one of my walks, I saw the children dismissed from school that afternoon, and as they left school, they were shouting cheerfully. I was impressed by their exuberance. Suddenly, I had an eureka moment: after I left the Army, I would study to become a high school teacher. Later on, due to what had happened to me, I thought I would become an historian.

KAF: After you were out of the Army, did you follow through on this decision?

JS: Yes. I graduated from New York University in 1959, where I majored in history and education. I later attended graduate school at Columbia University in the 1960s and the subject of psychohistory was in the air, which meant that frequently in our conversations, among graduate students, we recognized that this was a novel, more encompassing approach to the study of history. By the time I received my PhD in 1969, I felt that I was going to delve into this interdisciplinary approach to the study of history.

KAF: What led you to be drawn to psychohistory?

JS: I took the required master’s degree seminar in modern French history, and it was with Professor Rudolph Binion, who made a most favorable impression on me. Professor Binion was an eminent historian, who impressed me as erudite and charismatic; a role model. I recall how he advised us to select a subject of great interest to us, since we would be working on it for a long time. Ultimately, I decided to write on Marshal Philippe Pétain (1856-1951). As the course progressed, after making numerous additions and some revisions, Professor Binion approved my master’s degree essay, and the culmination of this initial effort with him was that it led to eventually writing my doctoral dissertation on Pétain. As a child, I lived in Vichy, France, whose government was headed by Pétain. I will allow myself a pertinent association.  When I was about nine years old, living in Saint Sulpice Les Feuilles, one day my mother was speaking with several women when one woman declared authoritatively and emphatically that all the problems France was having now were the fault of Pétain! Wow! Her pronouncement made an impression on me. I believed her!

KAF: After you earned your history doctorate, did you pursue your

Page 283

interest in psychoanalysis and psychohistory, and if so, how?

JS: By this time, it was the ‘70s, and I learned that psychohistory was growing, so I applied to and was accepted at the New York Center for Psychoanalytic Training, which was founded and directed by Dr. Reuben Fine.

PHE: How did your psychoanalytic/psychotherapeutic experience alter your vision of the world?

JS: In attending the New York Center for Psychoanalytic Training, my “vision” changed extraordinarily. In attending this institute, a personal psychoanalysis was mandatory. Most importantly, a personal psychoanalysis gives one insights and perspectives that those who have not had this experience cannot comprehend. It helps to resolve, or contributes to attenuating, personal problems. I recall my first patient, a young man in his mid-20s, who, when he had his third session with me, said that he had had a dream. By my attitude toward him and what he said, it was clear to him that in the treatment this was a significant event. I already knew that he had issues with women and that he liked to imbibe alcohol, but he was not an alcoholic. The dream he had was that he was with a woman who was naked. Then he went on to say that she was lying down and he noticed that she had teeth protruding from her vagina. Well, I gasped to myself. I thought to myself, there is an unconscious, that it is real, and it made me feel a high esteem for the field of psychoanalysis and for Sigmund Freud! Coincidentally, at some time thereafter of this patient having this dream, I went to see the film Jaws (1975), directed by Steven Spielberg. This film was so popular that people waited in long lines to see it; a new word was coined for it, and this word was “blockbuster.” I went to see it, and I was astounded at the connection I made, or saw and connected in this film, and then interpreting it. Yes, I was stunned by what I saw in this film and its connection to my patient’s dream.

KAF: Did you complete your psychoanalytic education and did you practice?

JS: With regard to my training to be a psychoanalyst, I studied there from 1977 to 1984, took a brief discontinuation in 1984 and resumed in 1987 until I completed it in 1994. I received my Certificate in Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy in 1994 and my Certificate in Psychoanalysis in 2004, and when the law on the practice of psychoanalysis changed it led me to be licensed as a psychoanalyst in the State of New York in 2001. I have been a practicing psychoan-

Page 284

alyst for over 40 years. What has struck me especially as being most consequential is that psychoanalysis is, for all that I have noted above, liberating. It just makes you feel better about yourself and more insightful.

PHE: Were there other activities that helped you develop your outlook and career?

JS: I also joined the International Psychohistorical Association (IPA) and was active in this group to the extent that Professor David Beisel asked me to write an article for The Journal of Psychohistory, of which he was the editor, in the 1979/80 issue, which I enthusiastically entitled, “On to the Third Annual International Psychohistorical Association Convention.” At this time, I also had been reading Sigmund Freud’s works, especially Freud’s essay, “Some Reflections on Schoolboy Psychology” (1914). Freud writes that some students were helped by the instructors they had, but others felt impeded by them, meaning that some felt ambivalent about them. He also says, “At bottom we felt great affection for them if they gave us any ground for it.” Freud accords teachers an enormous importance. I should like to point out that in a teacher/student relationship there should be a degree of idealization of the instructor, as there should be in a psychoanalytic therapeutic relationship. If it does not exist, it will hinder learning, or change, as is the case in a psychoanalytic therapeutic relationship.

PHE: After you became immersed in psychohistory, you ended up writing a psychohistory textbook in French in 1987. What led you to this project?

JS: By 1980, Professor Binion’s reputation had spread to Europe and he was invited to teach at the Collége de France, the most prestigious university in France. He was to teach psychohistory. At this time, we also began to correspond with each other, and in one of his letters he told me that he used my work on Pétain, my psychohistorical articles, in his course. I felt flattered. Not only that, but he had published a book in French, la psychohistoire. Furthermore, the publishing company Presses Universitaire de France asked him to write a book on this subject for a most distinguished and highly popular series in the French-speaking world that is available in libraries, bookstores, and even department stores. In his correspondence, Binion asked me if I would be willing to write such a book in French and I replied that I would when I was free of other commitments in a year. I accepted, and then he wrote to the

Page 285

publisher recommending that I write the book. The following year I went to Paris, met the publisher and presented my proposal, including a table of contents, which was accepted. I must say that I never anticipated or imagined when I was in graduate school of going to Paris and conducting such a line of business—and all in French! I worked on writing this book for about two years and presented it to the publisher. It took the publisher two years to publish it, which displeased Professor Binion. The first edition of the book was in 1987, consisting of 16,000 copies, followed by another edition in approximately 1991.

KAF: You were a writer on psychohistory, a professor, and a member of two psychohistory associations. Were there other ways you sought to promote psychohistory?

JS: In 1988, I organized a panel at the American Historical Association, which was to meet in Cincinnati, Ohio. It was accepted. The title of this panel was “Psychohistory and Psychohistorians: The First Fifty Years.” As was noted in the program, this was a “Joint Session with the Group for the Use of Psychology in History.” The chair was Charles B. Strozier of John Jay College, City University of New York. Louise E. Hofmann, from Penn State, presented the paper, “Rudolph Binion: A Critical Appraisal of His Work.” Richard L. Schoenwald, from Carnegie Mellon University, presented “Norman O. Brown and the Legacy of Freud.” David J. Fisher, from the University of California, Los Angeles, presented “The Historiography of Frank E. Manuel: Toward an Integration of Psychoanalytic and Intellectual History.” My paper was “Erik H. Erikson and the Development of Psychohistory.” Geoffrey Cocks of Albion College gave the “Comment.” Subsequently, I wrote to the president of the American Historical Association and the editor of the American Historical Review protesting their steps against psychohistory.

PHE: Of which of your work are you most proud?

JS: I would like to say that I am “proud” of all the books I have written, of all my articles that I have published, and of my book reviews. I also enjoyed giving papers at professional conferences. My first publication was a small book, Pétain: For and Against: A Survey of the Historical Debate (1973), which presents and compares the historical controversy over Pétain. I was pleased that colleagues in the IPA told me that they were assigning my Psychohistory: Theory and Practice book to their classes. I co-edited a book

Page 286

with Professor Laurie Adams, PhD, Psychoanalysis and the Humanities, also subtitled as Monographs of the Society for Psychoanalytic Training, published in 1996. With regard to my book, Psychohistory: Theory and Practice, the first edition was published in 1999. In your history of psychohistory, you wrote that my book is “the only textbook of the field.” Additionally, I have also received scholarly awards. I received the Gradiva Award for “Best Book in the field of psychohistory in 2002.” This is when a second edition was published and when I submitted my book for consideration; it was presented by the National Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis for Psychohistory: Theory and Practice. Also, I was “Honored for scholarly distinction by the International Psychohistorical Association” at the 39^th annual conference on June 1, 2016, at New York University.

PHE: Why did you decide to write on Sigmund Freud?

JS: After I completed my graduate studies, I decided to read Freud, and I selected his leading work, The Interpretation of Dreams (1900), a most innovative and progressive study of the mind. As I was completing my first paper on Freud, I had another eureka moment. I became unexpectedly motivated to write a book on all of Freud’s ego ideals. This resulted in my writing several additional articles, over a period of several years, while I was simultaneously working on other subjects, giving papers at a variety of international scholarly historical societies, studying at the New York Center for Psychoanalytic Training (which led me to acquire a small practice), and teaching at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. This resulted in my writing and publishing “Sigmund Freud’s Biblical Ego Ideals” in the Psychohistory Review (Summer 1994). Then, in 1996, my article titled “Sigmund Freud’s Philosophical Ego Ideals” was published. In December 2004, I wrote an article titled “Sigmund Freud’s Medical Ego Ideals.” This paper was followed by “Sigmund Freud’s Heroes and the Concept of Ego Ideals,” in Clio’s Psyche (March 2010). My last paper was “Sigmund Freud’s Literary Ego Ideals” in the Journal of Psychohistory (Spring 2014). With regard to my work on Freud’s ego ideals, I plan to resume working on him next year, in 2019, to write two to three more chapters, and have all these essays published in a book.

PHE: You have written extensively on film. What does the study of film contribute to psychohistory?

JS: Films reflect the larger issues, problems, and fears in a country

Page 287

or society. I already touched on this issue or question when I discussed the film Jaws. The fears and problems my patient had were also unconsciously reflective of what was being felt by the American public. I will discuss one more film, based on my 2015 article, which is “Steven Spielberg’s Munich, a Film for Our Time: A Psychohistorical Perspective.” The title is because the fear of terrorism is now an accepted fact of our lives, and we have constant reminders of this threat. For example, almost all who travel by air have to go through lengthy and tedious checks at the airports. Security checks have become a ubiquitous feature of our existence; hence Spielberg has tapped into our existential realities. As Munich (2005) opens, Arab terrorists stealthily attack and capture innocent Israeli athletes while they are sleeping, and soon murder them. The film portrays this act as harrowing, gruesome, horrific, and barbaric. The story takes place during the 1972 Olympics, an international athletic event devoted to fostering peace among nations. This carefully planned terrorist act led to the murder of 11 Israeli athletes. The film raises the question: how do you respond to such a deed? All films, essentially, reflect their national culture, and those that become popular tap into an audience’s unconscious, or group fantasies. Films deal with people’s fears, anxieties, hopes, and wishes, or reflect what may be called the zeitgeist. Munich taps into the concerns, fears, and apprehensions of people in the United States and throughout the Western world. To date, the most destructive terrorist attack occurred on September 11, 2001, perpetrated by Arab Muslim extremists. Pertinently, shortly after the attack on 9/11, the French newspaper, Le Monde, carried an editorial titled “Nous sommes tous des Americains” (“We are all Americans”). Due to limitations of space for this interview, I cannot go into further details here, but will do so in my published article. As the film comes to an end and as the camera panoramically pans the Manhattan skyline, there is a curious and enigmatic sighting of the World Trade Center. What does this mean? What does Spielberg suggest? In the 1970s, the World Trade Center was standing, but with the September 11, 2001 attack, this monumental symbol of American wealth and technology was destroyed. Again, at least to an American audience, this can arouse feelings of anger and the seeking of retribution. Does this not also raise the question of how to respond to such a horrific act? Since 9/11, there have been numerous terroristic acts, which are misogynistic and reactionary. Spielberg has attempted to transcend and universalize basic questions of human existence: how do you curb aggression and how do you pro-

Page 288

mote justice?

PHE: Please define psychohistory.

JS: In my book, Psychohistory: Theory and Practice, I define psychohistory as the application of psychology in its broadest sense, or psychoanalysis in a specific sense to the study of the past, to history. The benefit and the promise of the application of psychoanalysis to the study of history is that it enriches our understanding of the dynamics of the past, adding new dimensions to our perspective of historical processes. In comparison, the method heretofore employed by historians was based on a subjective personal judgment known as “common sense.” Traditionally, then, historians, in conjunction with their stress on what they thought were objective, verifiable, and documentary data, have depended on their intuition for understanding and interpreting individuals, collective behavior, and events. In other words, factors of causation were considered to be political, military, social, or economic. But the introduction of psychohistory has changed this personal and traditional approach by providing a more systematized method of studying the past. Furthermore, psychohistory deals with issues, subjects, and topics hitherto neglected, if not avoided. Basically, psychohistory is concerned with the question of motivation in human behavior, whether of the individual or of the group. As psychohistory has revolutionized the study of history, it has been very controversial and meets with much opposition. However, with Freud’s discoveries in the early 20^th century, a whole new way of probing man and his past was founded. However, what has not changed, despite the availability of the new tools, is that the historical product, or narrative, still depends ultimately on the ability, training, sources, and openness of the individual historian. Fundamentally, the psychohistorian seeks to understand why something happened not just what happened.

PHE: As faculty, what are your accomplishments?

JS: I have been a professor for over 50 years and have long promoted psychohistory. I was able to include in the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy’s Catalogue a psychohistory course entitled “Leadership in Modern Times: A Biographical and Psychohistorical Approach.” In time, this became a required course. In teaching, I used the “directed discussion method” in all my courses. This approach has its basis in Progressive Education, popularly known as the Socratic method. The administration selected me to

Page 289

provide peer mentoring in all departments at Kings Point and seminars in teaching to all faculty. I have received numerous awards for teaching from the administration and students. In 1999, I was unique in receiving the Bronze Medal for teaching from the U.S. Maritime Administration in Washington, D.C.

PHE: Please list the five people who you think have made the greatest contribution to psychohistory in order of their contribution.

JS: Sigmund Freud was the founder of psychoanalysis and the first psychohistorian.  Dr. Reuben Fine made outstanding contributions to psychohistory and Professor Peter Loewenberg is the premier psychohistorian whose corpus of publications has been prodigious, consisting of several books and numerous outstanding articles and reviews. Erik H. Erikson is also the preeminent psychohistorian of our time who, as a pioneer and leader in the application of psychoanalysis to society, may be considered the founding father of popular psychohistory. Dr. Laurie Adams of John Jay College was not only a prominent art historian, but also wrote important works in psychohistory, including Psychoanalysis and the Humanities (1996).

PHE: Do you plan to write an autobiography?

JS: It is not likely. This interview is autobiographical. It has contributed to making me think about my past, the present, and the future. Thank you.

Page 290