38/CHRONICLESnpsychoanalytic theory in detail. Woodnreviews the classic theoretical criticismsnof Freudian theory by Sir Karl Poppernand Sir Peter Medawar. Even supportersnof Freudian theory such as AdolfnGriinbaum (the eminent philosopher ofnscience) and Arnold Cooper (past presidentnof the American PsychoanalyticnAssociation) admit that its theoretic underpinningsnare weak. A number ofnempirical studies have likewise shownnpsychoanalytic therapy to be ineffectivenand even harmful. One early critic,nHans Eysenck, analyzed 19 reports onnthe effects of psychotherapy and discoverednthat the patients who had no psychiatricntherapy improved the most,nthose with “eclectic” (non-Freudian)ntherapy improved less, and the patientsnwith Freudian therapy did the worst.nWood concludes bluntly that the therapeuticnclaims of psychotherapists nonlonger have scientific or moral credibilitynand that practitioners are shamelesslyn”taking money from the gullible.”nWood’s criticisms ring true, especiallynif you have ever known someone whonhas been “in analysis” for years. Woodnis caustic on this point:n[Psychoanalysis] may benrubbish, but it is dangerous andndemeaning rubbish, tending tonrob us of our natural belief thatnwe are in control of our mentalnand physical behavior, fosteringnthe illusion of our lack of •nresponsibility, of our passivity.nAs the tentacles of thisnpernicious doctrine reach out tonembrace the arts, polities andneducation, nothing remainsnuntouched by the poison of itsndeterminism as it degradesncreativity, debases ambition andnreduces the value of humannaspiration.nMore philosophically. Wood criticizesnthe whole concept of neurosis. Henputs forward the view, so obvious that itnhas escaped the masters of arcane psychiatry,nthat aside from clear cases ofnpsychotic illness, much of what passesnfor “mental illness” is in fact not illnessnat all. So called “neuroses” and “personalityndisorders” are just pseudoscientificnterms for behavior that is selfdestructive,nself-centered, imprudent,,neccentric, noble, or evil. Thieves andnmurderers must not be stigmatized asn”evil men” but treated as mentally illn”sociopaths.”nWhen Wood turns from his trenchantncritique of psychotherapy to propoundingnhis own method of “moralntherapy,” things are less satisfactory.nThe goal of the moral therapist (friendnor priest) is to help the other person gainnself-respect. The doctor/patient relationshipngives way to friendship betweennequals, and “therapy” can takenplace at the ball park or bar as well as innan office or hospital. The moral therapistnhelps his troubled friend grow innself-respect in three ways: (1) recognizingnand living up to his own valuensystem; (2) confronting problemsnsquarely; (3) exercising.nThe problem lies in getting past thenfirst step, which sounds suspiciouslynlike the “values clarification” strategynnow touted by too many professors ofneducation. Wood goes so far as to tell usnthat if a mentally troubled man’s ownnideals lead him to acts that societynwould regard as “terrorist,” then then”individual’s mental health” shouldntake priority over “the standards andnrules of society.” Sending one letternbomb ma’ indeed provide as muchncatharsis as several hours on the couch,nbut does Wood really want to replacenFreud with Sorel?nPerhaps the problem is simply thatnWood has spent so much time demolishingnFreudianism that he hasn’tnworked out his own iews enough.nCurrently at work on a new book.nWood may yet help us escape both thenersatz professionalism of the psychoanalystnand the chummy relativism of then”moral therapist.”nGary Jason is a doctoral student inncomputer science at the University ofnCalifornia—Irvine.nSorcery in thenKremlinnby Michael WardernThe Set-Up by Vladimir VolkofF,nNew York: Arbor House; $16.95.nSome novels tell a story that causes usnto see reality in a new way. Othernnovels are manufactured around a message.nThe Set-Up is of this second type.nVolkoff wants to teach us that thenSoviets plan long term, that they arenclever at masking their intentions, andnthat they have committed their resourcesnto disrupting and misleadingnWestern media and book publishing.nThese ideas are important, but VolkofFnpaints the masters of Soviet disinformationnas if they were mystics andnwizards whose powers transcendnMarxism-Leninism. In his story, theynplan individual missions 30 years innadvance and teach their disciples bynnnparable and analogy. In fact, the architectsnof Soviet disinformation are mostiyncareer bureaucrats who are shackled bynideology and the will to power and whonuse their agents for self-advancement.nAs party hacks, they teach by rotenmemorization and drill, and they follownroutinized operating proceduresnrather than subtle aphorisms.nThe Set-Up may give us suggestiveninsights into the complex feelings of annolder generation of Russian emigres andntheir children, who now look at thenSoviet Union with a mixture of awe andnfear. But those who wish to learn morenabout disinformation would do better tonread John Barron or Roy Godson.nMichael Warder is executive vicenpresident of The Rockford Institute.nRememberingnRoswithanby Caroline MorgannThe Dramas ofHrotsvit ofGandersbeim,ntranslated by Katharina M.nWilson, Saskatoon: MatrologianLatina/Peregrina Publishing.nDo you remember Hrotsvit (Roswitha)nof Gandersheim, mentioned in the surveynof world literature that you took asnan undergraduate? “The first femalenGerman poet, the first dramatist ofnGermany, the first person in Germanynto employ the Faust theme, etc.”—butnwho cared? Because Hrotsvit, the canonessnof the Imperial Abbey of Gandersheim,nwrote her legends, plays, andnepics in Latin, they were for many yearsna lost treasure for everyone exceptnscholars.nIn a labor of love, Katharina Wilsonnhas now translated Hrotsvit’s Latin dramasninto rhymed, rhythmic Englishnprose. Wilson has included a very readablenintroduction that summarizes thenaction and setting of each play. She alsondescribes the excitement of the Germannhumanists who discovered the originalnmanuscripts of Hrotsvit’s works andnpublished them in 1501.nWilson’s training in philology andnrhetoric is a gossamer-thin academicnrobe through which Hrotsvit’s artfulnwriting sparkles. Hrotsvit wrote her dramasnin answer to the pagan plays ofnTerence so that “the mind might benstirred to reflection, the heart to love,nand the reader to moral improvement.”nEven modern readers will be moved bynsuch elemental stories as “The Conversionnof the Harlot Thais.”n