Panel: Problems of Symbolization in Children and Adolescents

These three papers by Gustav Bovensiepen, Linda Carter and Marica Rytovaara give us a contemporary view, from the standpoint of analytical psychology, of the role of symbolization in Jungian analysis with children and adolescents. Jung's original speculations on the meaning of the symbol, symbolization and the transcendent function form the foundation of the papers upon which a scaffolding consisting of Fordham's post-Jungian developmental model, contemporary psychoanalytic theories, and contemporary infant research, is carefully and thoughtfully constructed. For Jung the symbol is a living thing pregnant with meanings. The capacity to utilize symbols for psychological growth, what would be termed symbolization processes, are the result of a symbolic attitude whereby the individual is able to engage in an active and reflective dialogue with images, sensations, thoughts, and intuitions which, given a secure analytic framework, promotes integration and individuation. The links between the conscious and the unconscious, between the rational and the irrational, the imaginary and the real are mediated through what Jung termed the transcendent function. The transcendent function is at the very core of analysis. It is its essence. In childhood and adolescence when symbolization processes mediated by the transcendent function are optimally operational individuation and integration processes are able to proceed, but when they are not able to function, the child or adolescent can become mired in developmental impasses often dominated by what Fordham calls defences of the self, and what Tustin terms autistic states of mind. These are mental states in which children and adolescents can become tormented by identity disorders, eating disorders, self-destructive behaviours, and other addictive and auto-sensuous rituals which impede the capacity to utilize symbols and create meanings. The concreteness of