Hi, Karen,

I may have looked askance at archetypal theories in late seventies,
and I would again in the mid 00s.  But I strongly second your
endorsement of Hillman, for my money, much the most interesting
Jungian writer around.

Best, nnh

[log in to unmask]

Murray Schwartz wrote:

>>From:         Karen Funt
>>Subject:      Re:  Archetypes, Jung & James Hillman
>>
>>Hi Terry,
>>
>>My own route into Freud and psychoanalysis was via Jung - particularly his
>>archetypal theories.  A route, I might add, that was looked at askance back
>>in the late seventies in Buffalo by Norm. Have to admit, that Freud won me
>>over.. nonetheless...
>>
>>If you're interested in archetypes, I think the very best person to look at
>>is James Hillman.  He is perhaps the most powerful Jungian of the last 30
>>years.  I'd start with Re-Visioning Psychology.   He has many books that
>>focus on particular archetypes as well as how archetypes function in
>>culture:  Archetypal Psychology, Puer Papers, Loose Ends: Primary Papers in
>>Archetypal Psychology, The Myth of Analysis, The Dream and the
>>Underworld,  Pan & the Nightmare, Anima: An Anatomy of a Personified
>>Notion.  Hillman has gotten into trying to reach a broader audience in
>>recent years, but all of these earlier works are deeply original extensions
>>of that aspect of Jung dealing with archetypes.
>>
>>I'd definitely recommend Hillman over Neumann and other more orthodox
>>Jungians. As many of the others suggested, Jung's autobiography Memories,
>>Dreams & Reflections is wonderful and what really got me interested in Jung
>>in the first place.
>>
>>If you're truly wanting an intro to Jung, I'd recommend June Singer's
>>Boundaries of the Soul though it is many years since I read it. For history
>>and biography of Jung, I'd recommend John Kerr's A Most Dangerous
>>Method.  Deirdre Bair recently wrote a full scale biography of Jung,
>>regarding which there was a fascinating interchange on this list where she
>>was attacked by the Sonu Shamdasani and the Jung family.  Have to admit, I
>>haven't read it, but the interchange made me intrigued.
>>
>>Hope this helps,
>>
>>Karen Bryce Funt
>>
>>Vancouver, B.C.
>>
>>
>>
>>At 10:36 11/02/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>>
>>>-------- Original Message --------
>>>Subject:        Archetypes
>>>Date:   Fri, 11 Feb 2005 13:00:51 -0000
>>>From:   Terry Burridge <[log in to unmask]>
>>>To:     'Institute for Psychological Study of the Arts'
>>><[log in to unmask]>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I need to get to grips with Jung's archetypes. So, a couple of questions:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>1. Which of Jung's work gives me the most comprehensive view of his
>>>thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>2. Which commentaries are worth investing in on this topic? I've just
>>>ordered Ann Casement's book on Jung, which I hope will prove interesting.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>3. Who or what would the group see as contemporary expressions of an
>>>archetypal figure? I'm also intrigued to know if the delusions of
>>>schizophrenic patients could be seen as having an archetypal quality-
>>>although I know this is not primarily a clinical forum.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>And, begging your patience, does anyone know of a good analytic on-line
>>>library? As a nurse I'm aware of nursing libraries, but always struggle
>>>to find a good analytic resource.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yours
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Terry
>>
>>
>>
>
>