I am posting this message on behalf of Abraham Kupersmith.

~~~~~

I want to the Mark Twain Forum for arranging to have my recent book,
_Twain and Freud on the Human Race_, reviewed by Dr. Martin Zehr.
However, there were a number of statements in Dr. Zehr's review to
which I think it is important to respond.

The introduction to _Twain and Freud_ identifies two primary foci for
the book. The first involves exploring certain parallels in Twain's and
Freud's personality constructs and the relationship of these to each
writer's respective concepts of individual and group psychology. The
reviewer clearly identifies this focus. However, I believe he does not
accurately describe the position on this issue that is presented in the
book.

The second focus involves an examination of the relationship between
Twain's theory of personality/human nature and his development of
fictional characters, analyses of historical figures and depictions of
group behavior in his fiction and nonfiction. This is stated on page 5
as "how Twain's system underlies his development of key characters and
depictions of society in such novels as _Adventures of Huckleberry
Finn_, Pudd'nhead Wilson_, and _A Connecticut Yankee at King Arthur's
Court_." This focus--an important thrust of the book--is consistent
with the Twain scholar Linda Wagner-Martin's assertion that "In fact,
one can read Mark Twain's fiction backward from the perspective of the
issues in _What is Man?_ and discern a consistency that the sage of
Hartford would have found unsurprising" (p. 7, quoted from
Wagner-Martin's "Afterword" in the Oxford 1996 edition of _What is
Man?_). However, this focus is largely unmentioned by the reviewer.

With respect to the book's exploration of the parallels in Twain's and
Freud's personality constructs, the book recognizes that each writer
posits both inborn personality constructs and personality constructs
derived from the social environment in which the individual is raised
and functions. The significant differences in their concepts of the
inborn personality constructs identified by the reviewer--Twain's
temperament in contrast to Freud's id and stages of psychosexual
development--are in fact acknowledged in the book (e.g. pp. 4, 11-14,
16-19). Nonetheless, despite these differences, both Twain and Freud
present dynamic models of personality development. As the reviewer and
my book both note, there are times when Twain's writing seems to focus
exclusively on the environmental influences on human behavior. However,
while the reviewer does make brief mention of Twain's concept of
temperament, he then seems to dismiss Twain's thinking about the impact
of inborn temperament on personality and behavior, as well as to
misunderstand my treatment of that issue in the book (e.g. pp. 13, 14,
18). He appears to be under the impression that by stating that "Twain
is not clear on whether temperament or training is primary in character
development" (p. 58) and seeking to clarify the relationship between
the two, I was hoping to establish the primacy of one or the other in
Twain's thought. In fact, I assert in the book that it is the dynamic
interplay between temperament and environment, including the relative
strength of a particular temperament and the degree of consistency
between that temperament and environmental expectations, that
determines individual personality for Twain.

In _Twain and Freud on the Human Race_, Freudian theory is used as a
backdrop against which Twain's psychological thought can be reflected.
Twain's work, like that of any other great writer, can be viewed from
multiple perspectives. I believe that mine is one of the perspectives
worthy of consideration.

Sincerely,
Abraham Kupersmith, Ph.D.