April 20, 1974

Dear Dr. Velikovsky,

Trusting that you are safely home again and in the mood to receive some clarifications on subjects we have touched in our conversation, I would like to remind you about the following:

Johann Karl Friedrich Zöllner, the author of Über die Natur der Cometen (1882), who also wrote about the Venus-Tail in his Wissenschaftliche Abhandlungen 2/2, p. 884, is mentioned in your “Über die Energetik der Psyche” (1931), Fussnote S. 27. When you accepted the reference (Wiss. Abh.) from me, you looked quite startled, as soon as I mentioned that Zöllner had also occupied himself with telepathy (and with the Judenfrage). Zöllner was a deep thinker who, in my opinion, rightly called his book about the comets “Beiträge zur Geschichte und Theorie der Erkenntnis” . It might be quite significant that he is never remembered in any of the corroborative contributions to “Immanuel Velikovsky Reconsidered” . He said amongst other things: “... indem nach den früheren Betrachtungen (?) sowohl durch die eigene (my spacing) Temperatur dieses Planeten (i. e. Venus), als auch durch Insolation Dämpfe an seiner Oberfläche entwickelt werden, welche sich bei Abwesenheit einer merklichen Atmosphäre aus permanenten Gasen in Form von Siedeprozessen aus dem Innern der Flüssigkeiten entwickeln, und dann durch analoge elektrische Processe wie die Cometen leuchtend werden müssen” (ibid. S. 651). In Pensée (Winter 1974) you deal with an emission spectrum (only from hot substances) “only the light that glows through the clouds” (p. 33) after you had stated previously (p. 32): “Of electrical discharges in the short and stormy history of Venus,... there was no dearth.”

Is Dr. Bill Mullen, whom you mention in your letter of October 5, 1972, the same as William Mullen, author of “A Reading of the Pyramid Texts” (Pensée Winter 1973)? While I cannot subscribe to Mullen’s interpretations of Egyptian Mythology, his answer to the question about any influence of an archaic traumatic background to present day’s agitations - which you addressed to me - is far more intelligible, than I could have ever formulated it. “... a patient frees himself from past events when he comes to see that they are not as continually threatening as his unconscious had imagined” (ibid., p. 11). He is less optimistic in respect of active therapy: “Somewhere there is still a small voice of sanity insisting that man cannot be saved, only helped” (ibid.). He is, as far as I am aware, the first to speak about a Velikovskian therapy. This consists of the immunization of the noxious archetypes of the past.

To spread an idea against immense resistance is a problem which cannot be solved alone by a good editor and a favorable publishing house. It depends upon the necessary residual sanity for the comprehension of undeniable evidence and upon the readiness of mankind to be helped.

With all the best wishes and kind regards,
also to Mrs. Velikovsky, sincerely yours.

PS What is the position about the planned essay dealing with traumatic amnesia? On June 25, 1964 you wrote: “... should the volume The Great Fear materialize itself I may come with some proposition...”