ing training with him. This last argument was somewhat stretched to include the writer
Sigurd Hoel, whose therapy undoubtedly contributed to his editing Reich’s Journalbut who
was not in fact being trained as a therapist.
Another related point was made by Wilhelm Hoffmann, the replicator in 1935 of
the bio-electrical experiments but now one of Reich’s bitterest opponents. Hoffmann wrote,
correctly, that “Mr. Reich” had not taken any examinations in Norway to practice medicine,
a requirement made of emigres. Reich had by-passed this regulation on the grounds that he
was not practicing medicine but engaging solely in teaching and research^26.
By February 1938, Reich’s visa had expired and the authorities were confronted
with his request for an extension. The opposition, led by Scharffenberg and Kreyberg,
argued vehemently against any extension. As Kreyberg put it:
If it is a question of handing Dr. Reich over to the Gestapo, then I will
fight that, but if one could get rid of him in a decent manner, that would be the
best. More than one million miserable refugees are knocking at our door and there
is reason for us to show mercy. It seems sad to me, however, that a man of Dr.
Reich’s nature is admitted. ... Dr. Reich’s visa is a blow to those of us who would
like to see a more open door policy to refugees. It is people like him who have part-
ly created the refugee problem ... by their irresponsibility^27.Reich’s supporters received equal space in the Norwegian press. Their defense and
their appeal for an extension of his visa varied depending upon the individual, ranging from
Nic Hoel’s and Ola Raknes’s spirited rejoinders to all the criticisms to Schjelderup’s more
qualified position. Most dubious now about Reich’s experimental work, Schjelderup
nonetheless believed the visa should be extended because of Reich’s past and present con-
tributions to psychotherapy:
There can hardly be any doubt that Reich has provided such rewarding
methodological contributions, and, with them, such significant new clinical experi-
ences that his work must be regarded as pioneering. ... I recommend a visa and
work permit for Reich in Norway because of his merits in the field of character
analysis It is all wrong that the “bion” affair ... has become a central matter in the
visa question.... Dr. Reich’s strength lies in his intuition which has made it possible
for him to make a number of important empirical discoveries and to provide direc-
tionsofthe greatest significance to other researchers^28.Sigurd Hoel provided a satirical defense. He viewed the criticism of Reich’s exper-
imental work as a side issue,but also saw the public’s position: “We, the big public ... think
it real fun when scientists attack one another and divest each other of honor and dignity.
Moreover, this Reich seems to be a highly dubious person, and it is a good thing that we
have people like ScharfFenberg ... who can put down this slim customer.”
218 Myron SharafFury On Earth