You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
This is a most readable and informative discussion of Jung's basic theories. It is also a survey of the various trends and factions that have developed, over the last few decades, within analytical psychology as well as within the psychoanalytic movement. It is a brave and challenging task to have undertaken, and it will no doubt provoke a good deal of criticism, anger, resentment and special pleading, but also much appreciation, approval and gratitude.
Andrew Samuels seems to be a congenital bridge-builder, which I welcome and value, particularly as I myself seem to be blessed—or cursed—with the same proclivity. His proclivity to discover and to build bridges is, moreover, underpinned by a scholarly approach despite the apparent ease and fluency of his style. He draws on a vast literature and produces fairly consistently useful cross-references throughout. He has also vindicated his decision to base his 'quest for knowledge on conflict rather than on consensus' (p. 22), and so he makes his book a 'conflict-orientated study' (p. 22). This has probably helped to make it dynamic and thought-provoking.
His first chapter, 'Schools of analytical psychology' sets out the aim and purpose of the book, which he describes as: 'charting the course of Jungian family life with its healthy difference' (p. 3). But the post-Jungians, unlike the Freudians, have not yet 'formed into officially recognised schools' (p. 1). He, rightly I think, regards this as an obstacle for 'outsiders' to understand what Jung and his followers are all about. In fact, it is an obstacle also to potentially fruitful discussion and conflict within the school of analytical psychology.
In order to structure the present-day ongoing debates of the post-Jungians, Samuels has