Search

An Open Letter signed by an international and diverse group of Jungian analysts, clinicians and academics on the topic of Jung and 'Africans' was published in the British Journal of Psychotherapy in November, 2018. It is presented together with Notes written by Andrew Samuels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In November 2018, the British Journal of Psychotherapy published an Open Letter on the topic of Jung and the "Africans". The Open Letter (not a petition) was signed by 35 Jungian clinicians and academics from diverse and international backgrounds. The signatories take responsibility for attending to the many difficulties arising from Jung's writings on "race". Rather than proceeding to castigate Jung, the signatories delineate actions which might be taken with regard to the "decolonisation" of Jungian psychology. The Open Letter is reprinted here in full. Notes explaining the context and providing examples of Jung's attitude are provided by the author, one of the signatories of the Open Letter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is written in the context of a debate within the Jungian clinical and academic communities on whether or not some kind of public statement is required concerning Jung’s writings about ‘Africans’, persons of colour and indigenous people. The author eschews argument in favour of such a public statement, opting instead for a ‘forensic’ discussion of the reasons why it is not a good plan to issue such a statement. By so doing, he creates a level playing field in which the ‘pros’ and ‘cons’ of a public statement may attract equal attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is written in the context of a debate within the Jungian clinical and academic communities on whether or not some kind of public statement is required concerning Jung’s writings about ‘Africans’, persons of colour and indigenous people. The author eschews argument in favour of such a public statement, opting instead for a ‘forensic’ discussion of the reasons why it is not a good plan to issue such a statement. By so doing, he creates a level playing field in which the ‘pros’ and ‘cons’ of a public statement may attract equal attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Utilizing Jung's idea of theory as a 'personal confession', the author charts his own development as a theorist, establishing links between his personal history and his ideas. Such links include his relationship with both parents, his sexuality, his cultural heritage, and his fascination with Tricksters and with Hermes. There follows a substantial critical interrogation of what the author discerns as the two main lines of clinical theorizing in contemporary analytical psychotherapy: interpretation of transference-countertransference, and the relational approach. His conclusion is that neither is superior to the other and neither is in fact adequate as a basis for clinical work. The focus then shifts to explore a range of political and social aspects of the clinical project of analytical psychology: economic inequality, diversity within the professional field, and Jung's controversial ideas about Jews and Africans. The author calls for an apology from the 'Jungian community' for remarks about Africans analogous to the apology already issued for remarks about Jews. The paper is dedicated to the author's friend Fred Plaut (1913-2009). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author comments on Jungian psychologist Toshio Kawai's response to his Society of Analytical Psychology (SAP) lecture. Topics discussed include the significance of cultural context when Western approaches to and systems of psychology spread outside their homelands, the writings by Carl Jung about Africans, and the reasons why there are so few Jungian analysts of African ancestry.