York obtained an attorney and prepared to enter the case as “friends of the court.” Then,
says Baker, Reich changed his mind: “I received another call from Reich stating that he had
decided to assume charge of the defense himself, and that the accumulators were, after all,
his responsibility. He requested that we drop our action, which we did.”^24
Before the injunction hearing, which was scheduled for March 19, Reich sought
legal advice from a Maine lawyer. The lawyer said that if he were to represent Reich in court,
he would try to have the complaint reduced so that the injunction applied only to the accu-
mulator and not, as it did by implication, to orgonomic literature as well. Reich made it clear
immediately that he had no intention of “bargaining” the accumulator for the literature. To
do so would be to acknowledge that the FDA was right, even partially.
Thus very early in the actual legal process we see attitudes highly characteristic of
Reich. One reaction was to withdraw from the whole matter. In 1935, when Annie was mak-
ing it difficult for Reich to see his children, he responded with a similar desire to withdraw.
Another tendency was to hit wildly at people closest to him. This, too, he showed after the
complaint, especially vis-à-vis Ilse, who was still working with him and trying to maintain
their relationship. His resolve not to bargain with the FDA or to try to win on technicalities
was also evident early on. This position was to make his relations with lawyers, for whom
bargaining and technicalities comprised the name of the game, extremely difficult.
Another decision—and a fateful one—was how precisely to meet the complaint,
and, in particular, whether to appear in court to oppose the injunction directly. Initially,
Reich was leaning toward a court appearance. Here he would have a chance to show the
faults in the logic, the methods, the biases of the FDA. Here was his chance to bring forth
his own evidence and the evidence of co-workers who had confirmed his findings. Since
both the traditionalists, who labeled his device a “fraud,” and the innovators could be blind-
ed by self-interest, where else but in a courtroom could a sound judgment be reached? Who
else could decide when the new is the future, when it is truly revolutionary science that over-
turns old paradigms, and when it is a fraud or a delusion?
These were some ofthe advantages to Reich’s appearing in court. Yet from his
viewpoint there was one principal reason for not appearing. It involved granting the right of
a judge or jury to decide matters of scientific fact. This prospect made Reich exceedingly
uncomfortable. However, he was prepared to consider it quiteseriously when another factor
arose.
Sometime between February 10 and February 24, a meeting took place attended by,
among others, Reich, Baker, Chester Raphael, and Michael Silvert. I must here “declare an
interest” and comment that I never liked Silvert’s fanatical, humorless temperament; he
echoed and amplified Reich’s belligerent dogmatism but with few of Reich’s redeeming
virtues. Still, his role in Reich’s last years was an important one and I shall try to describe
him objectively. Formerly a staff physician at the Menninger Clinic, Silvert had, according to
Greenfield, the reputation there of being a talented if somewhat erratic psychiatrist. In his
late thirties he left the clinic to undergo training with Reich, but for six years or until around
1954 Reich kept him out of his inner circle. Reich recognized Silvert’s destructive character-
390 Myron SharafFury On Earth