Gender Issues in Jungian and Post-Jungian Thought: Dr. Susan Rowland

This was a very interesting discussion that seemed to encapsulate everything we talk about, focusing on “… the idea of getting away from dualisms and we use this as a way to become critical (thinkers).” It included structural and post-structural viewpoints, anima/animus content from Aion and other Jung works, continuities between genders in cultures, and differences. Fascinating.

The Hillman vs. Jung debate was raised, piquing my interest. Controversially, Ms. Rowland pointed out that “… Hillman and Jung are closer than many people think”, quoting Jung, which I will not identify here but am examining this. I have been going back through The Dream and the Underworld, noting each instance of Hillman’s diversion from the Jungian fold. It’s just interesting and I think both have the right to their perspective. I remember that Jung said that others would take these ideas much further than he was allowing himself to, for the purposes of safely staying within his scientific milieu.

Others might not agree that he had, fully, as Ms. Rowland also noted the suspect motives of the author (Jung) in several passages, that he might have been having a joke or at least entertained more subtle distinctions than he would outright admit to.

Everyone in the room seemed to be able to keep a cool head while discussing these ideas, as there may have been Hillmanites as well as Jungians in attendance. I rather enjoyed it, benefitting from the viewpoints of both camps. Fans of archetypal psychology will enjoy part two, if they can listen for that long.

Thanks for posting the video, Bonnie.

You need to be a member of Depth Psychology Alliance to add comments!

Join Depth Psychology Alliance

Comments

Randy Westfall April 22, 2015 at 11:48am

This was a very interesting discussion that seemed to encapsulate everything we talk about, focusing on “… the idea of getting away from dualisms and we use this as a way to become critical (thinkers).” It included structural and post-structural viewpoints, anima/animus content from Aion and other Jung works, continuities between genders in cultures, and differences. Fascinating.

The Hillman vs. Jung debate was raised, piquing my interest. Controversially, Ms. Rowland pointed out that “… Hillman and Jung are closer than many people think”, quoting Jung, which I will not identify here but am examining this. I have been going back through The Dream and the Underworld, noting each instance of Hillman’s diversion from the Jungian fold. It’s just interesting and I think both have the right to their perspective. I remember that Jung said that others would take these ideas much further than he was allowing himself to, for the purposes of safely staying within his scientific milieu.

Others might not agree that he had, fully, as Ms. Rowland also noted the suspect motives of the author (Jung) in several passages, that he might have been having a joke or at least entertained more subtle distinctions than he would outright admit to.

Everyone in the room seemed to be able to keep a cool head while discussing these ideas, as there may have been Hillmanites as well as Jungians in attendance. I rather enjoyed it, benefitting from the viewpoints of both camps. Fans of archetypal psychology will enjoy part two, if they can listen for that long.

Thanks for posting the video, Bonnie.

This reply was deleted.