[86] Amer. J. Psychiat. 128:4, October 1971 454 old women down the well, then throw a gre- nade in the well. That’s the kind of crap I mean. He further explained that while in Viet Nam, “you see something like that-you don’t think about it too much,” but that since his return he had found his thoughts returning to this and other episodes of carnage and that he had had occa- sional nightmares on similar themes. Comment I have not ascertained why similar experi- ences provoke so much more guilt in one man than in another. I am unwilling to at- tempt to draw any large lessons from my ON ANGER observations. But I think it safe to say that in Viet Nam a number of fairly ordinary young men have been psychologically ready to engage in slaughter and that moreover this readiness is by no means incomprehensible. REFERENCES 1. Bloch HS: Army clinical psychiatry in the combat zone: 1967-1968. Amer J Psychiat 126:289-298, 1969 2. Bey DR: Division psychiatry in Viet Nam. Amer J Psychiat 127:228-232, 1970 3. Goldsmith W, Cretekos C: Unhappy odysseys: psy- chiatric hospitalizations among Vietnam returnees. Arch Gen Psychiat 20:78-83, 1969 On Anger BY ALBERT ROTIIE\BERG, M.D. The general assumption that anger is a man- ifestation of aggression has influenced all theories about both aggression and anger. The author believes, however, that there are clear distinctions between anger and hostili- ty. a clear derivative of aggression, and that there are important distinctions between anger and: rage, hate, and violence. Pri- marily, anger has strong communication aspects for human beings and therefore has great constructive potential despite the fact that anger and anxiety are highly related. I T IS ENORMOUSLY strange that so littleat- tention has been paid in psychiatric and psychological literature to the phenomenon of anger. Problems of violence, destructive- ness, and hate are so much with us in the current scene, and there seems to be a crying need for clarification and understanding of such processes and any process related to them. Furthermore, as clinicians we devote Read at the 124th annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, Washington, D.C., May 3-7, 1971. Dr. Rothenberg is Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar St., New Haven, Conn. 06510. This study was supported by Public Health Service Research Scientist Development Award MH-23-621 from the National Institute of Mental Health. a considerable portion of our thinking and practice to unearthing, clarifying, and trac- ing the permutations of anger in our patients. In depression we look for evidence of anger behind the saddened aspect; in hysteria we experience angry seductiveness; in homosex- uality and sexual disorders we see angry dependency; in marital problems we unearth distorted patterns of communication, particu- larly involving anger. We interpret the pres- ence of anger, we confront anger, we draw anger, we tranquilize anger, and we help the working through of anger. Yet not a single modern psychiatric or psychological volume deals with this topic, and an extensive search of periodical litera- ture reveals only a sprinkling of experimen- tal articles and fewer theoretical ones. Almost invariably, anger has not been con- sidered an independent topic worthy of direct investigation but has been subsumed under a general category such as aggression, emo- tion, or affect. Such categorization has not only deprived anger of its rightful impor- tance in the understanding of human behav- ior, but it has also led to a morass of confused definitions, misconceptions, and simplistic theories. Little consideration has been given to the reasons for lumping anger together with aggression, for example, and systematic distinctions are seldom made between anger