Tip: To see papers related to the one you are viewing…
PEP-Web Tip of the Day
When there are articles or videos related to the one you are viewing, you will see a related papers icon next to the title, like this: For example:
Click on it and you will see a bibliographic list of papers that are related (including the current one). Related papers may be papers which are commentaries, responses to commentaries, erratum, and videos discussing the paper. Since they are not part of the original source material, they are added by PEP editorial staff, and may not be marked as such in every possible case.
For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.
Jalbert, R.G. (2014). Review Essay - Revue de Psychologie Analytique: Psychanalyse Jungienne: Cliniques et Theories†. J. Anal. Psychol., 59(4):588-593.
(2014). Journal of Analytical Psychology, 59(4):588-593
Book Review Essay
Review Essay - Revue de Psychologie Analytique: Psychanalyse Jungienne: Cliniques et Theories
Review by: Ronald G. Jalbert, Ph.D.
French speakers have frequently expressed linguistic isolation in the Jungian world since major instruments of research, not to mention Jung's Collected Works and GW, appear predominantly either in English or in German. To my knowledge, there is still no French equivalent of Jung's Collected Works though efforts have been in progress for some years. Indeed, the recent publication of the French version of The Red Book came two years after the English version, perhaps inevitably given that the brilliant study was initiated and undertaken by Sonu Shamdasani, an English speaker.
A new publication, the Revue de Psychologie Analytique (henceforth Revue), subtitled Psychanalyse jungienne: cliniques et théories seeks to fill the need for a French language journal that offers clinical and research articles on a par with, for instance, the well-respected Journal of Analytical Psychology. It might seem incongruous to see psychologie analytique and psychanalyse appear on the title page of a major review devoted to the study of Jungian thought. After all, does not psychanalyse refer to that ‘other’ analytic school, one representing followers of Freud, Jung's erstwhile mentor and collaborator from whom Jung distanced himself due to theoretical, clinical and personal differences?
One answer to this seeming incongruity is that ‘psychanalyse’ as a term has, since the advent of the ‘French Freud’, (i.e., Lacan), become more generalized: it refers to any praxis that works with the unconscious, with little regard to divergences in theory or clinical approach. Another, certainly more substantive reason for the juxtaposition of these two ‘brands’ on the cover of a Jungian journal is evidenced, for example, by one of Michael Fordham's books bearing the title, Freud, Jung, Klein: The Fenceless Field.
The expression ‘the fenceless field’ emphasizes commonality in focus of the endeavor between these analytic schools, a shared interest in the clinical experience and expressions of the psyche.
[This is a summary excerpt from the full text of the journal article. The full text of the document is available to journal subscribers on the publisher's website here.]