ABSTRACT
According to the Freudian commentator Han Verhoeff, to win while gambling was for Constant the equivalent of winning the love he had always needed but seldom received.4 Verhoeff’s theory appears plausible if we accept that it was the euphoria of occasional success that brought Constant back again and again to the gaming table. There is, however, a further possibility which I would like to propose and one which brings together elements from each of these hypotheses. This is that Constant gambled for the pleasure of gambling: that winning was only a secondary motivation; that Constant played because he needed to live in a state of perpetual crisis, because he enjoyed taking great risks with his life. Verhoeff’s suggestion that to win at cards was for Constant like a winning of love can then be taken a stage further. For obtaining a woman’s love was never, in Constant’s life, the end of the game. The gambler in him could never withdraw from play entirely and was immediately driven on by the anticipated thrill of the next game, forgetful of his winnings from the previous one.
