C. G. Jung's Psychology: Additions and Extensions

(Given originally as the first C. G. Jung Memorial Lecture in London on 1 March , and published as edited by the author from his manuscript.)

When I was asked to give the lecture on which this article is based I wondered what it would be like to address four different groups of Jungian analysts. Four is the magic number so dear to Jung: would there be some emanation of his influence to suggest the possibility of these groups becoming an ordered whole? For we are all different, and not only by belonging to a certain group. We are destined to be different from each other because we all have had analysis with one or two individual analysts whose particular personalities and theoretical beliefs made us feel understood and whom we rewarded with the gratitude of allowing ourselves to be influenced. It is not quite so simple, because the counterpole of accepting such influence gratefully is the normal reaction of resistance to the analyst who grants us identity. We want not only to change ourselves, but also our analysts as dominant authorities. We do not, as Freud would have it, need to kill the father or, as Klein may have thought, kill the mother, but, according to Silberer, merely wish to remove and improve him or her so that we can find our own methods and authority. Throughout this process, the personality and theoretical convictions of our original analyst programme much of our approach to analysis and eventually awaken us to our individual style.

In no other branch of science that I know is this peculiar union of the personal and the theoretical to be found. Of course, this personalising of theory can lead to suffocating dogmatism, but at its best it creates a wonderful enthusiasm for the work. It even makes love a part of the scientific adventure, because we really love the analyst who gives us the opportunity to embark upon it. The positive transference has to be resolved, however, and then what do we do with