What do you think?
Rate this book
Conversations with Carl Jung & Reactions from Ernest Jones
The dialog in this volume is the actual transcript of the author's filmed interviews with Dr Carl Gustav Jung in Zurich, Switzerland, just before his death in 1962. It presents the most exciting & lucid presentation of Jung's fundamental concepts yet recorded. Jung, reacting spontaneously to an orderly sequence of questions, commented on Freud, Adler & their theories; & on topics such as The Unconscious, the Role of Sex, Introvert-Extrovert Theory & Motivation; Psychological Testing, Psychotherapy & Mental Telepathy. In an added section, Prof. Evans presents a transcript of his filmed interview with Dr Ernest Jones—noted psychoanalyst—who remained to his death perhaps the most loyal follower of Freud, & who became his major biographer. Jones offers some interesting sidelights on Freud, psychoanalysis, as well as his own thoughts on various subjects.
- GenresPsychology
173 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1964
4 people are currently reading
116 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
September 18, 2011
As I was reading the first interview I had mixed feelings about what I was reading. At first I was a little disappointed in it because it seemed somewhat insubstantial. But given the amount of Jung I have read — which isn't everything but certainly more than a survey anthology — I realized that that is a rather shallow observation. So I decided to step back and enjoy the book for what is, which for me took the form of observing the psychological nature or bias of the American interviewer, Richard I. Evans.
It struck me that Evans was revealing himself by the type of questions he asked as well as the insistence with which he asked some or avoided others. With that realization the interviews became amusing and very interesting because I could see that Evans was coming at Jung from America's oddly prurient Freudian-sexual fixation while trying not to appear that way. And it was also interesting and amusing to see Jung strive to shake Evans of that bias of understanding. That Evans was indeed this way biased is made evident by his need to include in his book the Freudian rebuttal of Jung with an interview with Earnest Jones.
But it was perhaps most apparent in the chapter 'Jung's Appraisal of Freudian Psychosexual Development.' While reading it I was reminded of one of the most interesting (to me) interviews Oprah did. Kate Winslet was her guest. She was there to talk about and, of course, promote the excellent (but highly underrated) movie Holy Smoke . In the course of the movie Ruth (Winslet), who was being de-programmed from a religious conversion she's undergone in India, had a nervous break down when the tenets of her faith did not stand up against the deprogrammer's argument and rhetoric.
Ruth burns the clothes she came with from India, and walks naked in the Australian desert, tears pouring down her face. Pretty obvious metaphorical and psychological expression of being stripped (emotionally and psychologically) before experiencing a rebirth into, hopefully, her true self. It is extremely well acted, and includes Ruth urinating as she walks.
Without my exaggerating too much, Oprah fixated on Winslet's nakedness, not the character's, with question after question about that. Winslet responded to the first and second queries with resigned patience — it was this character's experience — kind of answer. Yes, the issue of cults and brainwashing were eventually discussed, but not before Oprah had revealed an aspect of her American teenage-like fixation on sex and sexuality. It became increasingly evident that Winslet was frustrated by that fixation and, if memory serves me right, says something like it's only breasts for God's sake.
And if it is possible to suggest that Oprah's blatant fascination with a woman who was willing to be publicly naked has a certain American feel about it, Jung refers to the 'psyche' of America many times in these interview as if such a thing is tangibly even obviously evident. For example, Jung is asked about the relationship between psychological disturbances and illness, and of the use of drugs to treat mental illness, and comments on America's medical behaviour. [To see an extended citation (and pictures), go to egajd.blogspot.com.]
In my being a non-American, but one whose proximity to America means I am bombarded by images of America's zeitgeist and ideology twenty-four hours a day, I found his comments to align with my own less informed impressions.
But in the end, beyond my being bemused by American sexual repression pretending otherwise, the chastisement that Jung gives to America's psychiatric practice of using drugs (which is later echoed by Jones from the Freudian perspective), this book gave me a interesting 'aha' moment. When talking about his idea of psychological types, he elaborates on the intuitive. At one point (I wasn't able to find it tonight) he comments that the intuitive type are often, perhaps even normally, found in business men. He argues that for business to be successful the people running it need to know what is going to happen in the future, to know what isn't already known or deducible. For some reason this surprised me, because it is so obvious, but today, forty years since the interview, is so obviously not generally the case. I looked at my surprise, and after some thought came to the realization that the current practice of MBA-ing every important job means that education is weeding out the intuitive and replacing them with hacks who can regurgitate text books and lectures on exam day. And that explains a lot about today's business practices: the elite are unable to see beyond spreadsheets and flowcharts because the intuitives have been largely weeded out of the big corporate due to current education practices. The exceptions largely being those like Steve Jobs or Richard Branson, who went their own way.
It struck me that Evans was revealing himself by the type of questions he asked as well as the insistence with which he asked some or avoided others. With that realization the interviews became amusing and very interesting because I could see that Evans was coming at Jung from America's oddly prurient Freudian-sexual fixation while trying not to appear that way. And it was also interesting and amusing to see Jung strive to shake Evans of that bias of understanding. That Evans was indeed this way biased is made evident by his need to include in his book the Freudian rebuttal of Jung with an interview with Earnest Jones.
But it was perhaps most apparent in the chapter 'Jung's Appraisal of Freudian Psychosexual Development.' While reading it I was reminded of one of the most interesting (to me) interviews Oprah did. Kate Winslet was her guest. She was there to talk about and, of course, promote the excellent (but highly underrated) movie Holy Smoke . In the course of the movie Ruth (Winslet), who was being de-programmed from a religious conversion she's undergone in India, had a nervous break down when the tenets of her faith did not stand up against the deprogrammer's argument and rhetoric.
Ruth burns the clothes she came with from India, and walks naked in the Australian desert, tears pouring down her face. Pretty obvious metaphorical and psychological expression of being stripped (emotionally and psychologically) before experiencing a rebirth into, hopefully, her true self. It is extremely well acted, and includes Ruth urinating as she walks.
Without my exaggerating too much, Oprah fixated on Winslet's nakedness, not the character's, with question after question about that. Winslet responded to the first and second queries with resigned patience — it was this character's experience — kind of answer. Yes, the issue of cults and brainwashing were eventually discussed, but not before Oprah had revealed an aspect of her American teenage-like fixation on sex and sexuality. It became increasingly evident that Winslet was frustrated by that fixation and, if memory serves me right, says something like it's only breasts for God's sake.
And if it is possible to suggest that Oprah's blatant fascination with a woman who was willing to be publicly naked has a certain American feel about it, Jung refers to the 'psyche' of America many times in these interview as if such a thing is tangibly even obviously evident. For example, Jung is asked about the relationship between psychological disturbances and illness, and of the use of drugs to treat mental illness, and comments on America's medical behaviour. [To see an extended citation (and pictures), go to egajd.blogspot.com.]
In my being a non-American, but one whose proximity to America means I am bombarded by images of America's zeitgeist and ideology twenty-four hours a day, I found his comments to align with my own less informed impressions.
But in the end, beyond my being bemused by American sexual repression pretending otherwise, the chastisement that Jung gives to America's psychiatric practice of using drugs (which is later echoed by Jones from the Freudian perspective), this book gave me a interesting 'aha' moment. When talking about his idea of psychological types, he elaborates on the intuitive. At one point (I wasn't able to find it tonight) he comments that the intuitive type are often, perhaps even normally, found in business men. He argues that for business to be successful the people running it need to know what is going to happen in the future, to know what isn't already known or deducible. For some reason this surprised me, because it is so obvious, but today, forty years since the interview, is so obviously not generally the case. I looked at my surprise, and after some thought came to the realization that the current practice of MBA-ing every important job means that education is weeding out the intuitive and replacing them with hacks who can regurgitate text books and lectures on exam day. And that explains a lot about today's business practices: the elite are unable to see beyond spreadsheets and flowcharts because the intuitives have been largely weeded out of the big corporate due to current education practices. The exceptions largely being those like Steve Jobs or Richard Branson, who went their own way.
January 6, 2021
It was an insightful read about the man, his work, and his spirituality.
The part about the mosaic that never was, is both haunting and interesting.
The part about the mosaic that never was, is both haunting and interesting.
October 11, 2022
Lo he leído dos veces. Me encanta, te acerca a Jung, a sus ideas, a su humor, de una manera asequible, como si te sentaras en una esquina a escuchar.
September 25, 2015
Although I first read C.G. Jung in grade school because he'd written a book about unidentified flying objects, I wasn't really aware of him as a personality until the beginning of college when an older friend who'd been visiting me at Grinnell left a copy of Volume 9.i of the Collected Works behind. Much in admiration of this friend, I attempted to read Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious and was impressed by two things. First, I didn't understand all of his references, but was awed by the extent of them. This man seemed comfortable discussing all of human history! Second, some things Jung wrote spoke to the experiences I had had on various psychotropic drugs.
This began an effort that spanned almost a decade during which time I learned to sight read ancient Greek, read all of Jung's published (and some of his unpublished) writings and read much of what he had read and, having done this, wrote a thesis on his philosophical assumptions and antecedents. In other words, I'd pretty much mastered the material--although never achieving his skill in foreign and ancient languages. It was, in the end, a disappointment, but it did demystify much of what passed for learning for me.
I read Evan's transcripts of his interviews with Jung and Jones when still at the early stages of this effort, when still disposed to believe that there was a salvific philosopher's stone to be found. Consequently, I liked it. The book, having been done was Jung was very old, is a very easy read, although I'd not recommend it as an introduction. For that, check out his Tavistock Lectures (Analytical Psychology: Theory and Practice).
This began an effort that spanned almost a decade during which time I learned to sight read ancient Greek, read all of Jung's published (and some of his unpublished) writings and read much of what he had read and, having done this, wrote a thesis on his philosophical assumptions and antecedents. In other words, I'd pretty much mastered the material--although never achieving his skill in foreign and ancient languages. It was, in the end, a disappointment, but it did demystify much of what passed for learning for me.
I read Evan's transcripts of his interviews with Jung and Jones when still at the early stages of this effort, when still disposed to believe that there was a salvific philosopher's stone to be found. Consequently, I liked it. The book, having been done was Jung was very old, is a very easy read, although I'd not recommend it as an introduction. For that, check out his Tavistock Lectures (Analytical Psychology: Theory and Practice).
October 5, 2013
This was my first encounter with any "serious" non-fictional literature of this kind and it opened up for me various alleys of though and learning that I'd like to pursue in the future.
His criticism of Freud gave me serious prejudices toward his writings which I'm having trouble setting aside as I'm now reading Freud's takes on some of the subjects touched on in this book.
All-in-all an interesting and easy read without too much, if any, overly technical lingo involved.
His criticism of Freud gave me serious prejudices toward his writings which I'm having trouble setting aside as I'm now reading Freud's takes on some of the subjects touched on in this book.
All-in-all an interesting and easy read without too much, if any, overly technical lingo involved.
October 21, 2009
I'm not sure I'm sold on the interview format that the academics who made this book were so excited about, but it was a fairly entertaining summary of Jung's career in his own words.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews