For those who have read Jung, where should I start with him?

[SilkRoad]

I think I read a bit of Jung in a psychology class in school, but that's about it. I've been interested in his ideas on a sort of aesthetic basis for a long time though (what I mean by that is I am fascinated by archetypes and so forth but on a scientific/philosophical basis haven't looked into his ideas in depth.)

If anyone has read some Jung, can you recommend a book or a "selected writings" that I should start with? Either/both on the basis of its connection to typology, or just whatever is particularly interesting and accessible, in general.

 

[Athenian200]

I think I read a bit of Jung in a psychology class in school, but that's about it. I've been interested in his ideas on a sort of aesthetic basis for a long time though (what I mean by that is I am fascinated by archetypes and so forth but on a scientific/philosophical basis haven't looked into his ideas in depth.)

If anyone has read some Jung, can you recommend a book or a "selected writings" that I should start with? Either/both on the basis of its connection to typology, or just whatever is particularly interesting and accessible, in general.

I recommend starting with this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Psychological-Types-Collected-Works-Vol-6/dp/0691018138

That's everything you need to get started with him. It also contains the first conception of a theory you may be familiar with...

I will warn you that his writing can be long and complex at times, though, so you will need to focus and persist in order to understand him.

 

[JocktheMotie]

A large portion of Psychological Types is devoted towards analyzing the presence of extraverted and introverted thought throughout an assortment of history's thinkers and artists, philosophies, etc. If you're purely looking for his typological analysis of what the attitudes and the functions are, you can skip to those first, and if you're curious about how they manifest you can read through the beginning.

 

[Jaguar]

Hi SR,

I've read everything Jung has ever written. So, I bet you think I'm going to tell you which of his translated books is best to buy, right? Wrong. Jung is not easily digested and not a pleasure to read. Not to mention, over his career he had a habit of contradicting himself.

I have a "starter" book idea for you:

Personality Types: Jung's Model of Typology by Daryl Sharp

What Sharp has done is bring Jung's main ideas together from his collected works and presents it in a way that is easy for anyone to understand. If your goal is to truly learn, ironically, I will steer you away from reading Jung's tome: Psychological Types. Many will find it as "enjoyable" as having root canal work done on their teeth. The dry style, alone, can easily cause people to lose interest and when that happens, the goal of learning will be aborted.

This is why I suggest reading Daryl Sharp's book, which cuts to the chase, and I know you will stick with it. It's about 120 pages.

 

[highlander]

Hi SR,

I've read everything Jung has ever written. So, I bet you think I'm going to tell you which of his translated books is best to buy, right? Wrong. Jung is not easily digested and not a pleasure to read. Not to mention, over his career he had a habit of contradicting himself.

I have a "starter" book idea for you:

Personality Types: Jung's Model of Typology by Daryl Sharp

What Sharp has done is bring Jung's main ideas together from his collected works and presents it in a way that is easy for anyone to understand. If your goal is to truly learn, ironically, I will steer you away from reading Jung's tome: Psychological Types. Many will find it as "enjoyable" as having root canal work done on their teeth. The dry style, alone, can easily cause people to lose interest and when that happens, the goal of learning will be aborted.

This is why I suggest reading Daryl Sharp's book, which cuts to the chase, and I know you will stick with it. It's about 120 pages.

I also suggest going with something else. Jung is too hard to read.

I've been reading "Lectures on Jung's Typology" off and on over the past couple of months. It's got some especially good stuff on the feeling function. It's written by Marie-Louise Von Franz and James Hillman.

 

[Athenian200]

Jung is too hard to read.

I disagree. I can read his writing quite well, if I'm willing to put in the time.

Don't be afraid of Jung. I think if you have enough Ni and Ti, you can make sense of his writing easily.

 

[highlander]

I disagree. I can read his writing quite well, if I'm willing to put in the time.

Don't be afraid of Jung. I think if you have enough Ni and Ti, you can make sense of his writing easily.

I find him to be excessively wordy. There is awesome stuff there to be sure. He just talks around the barn and I want him to get to the point. Everybody likes different things though.

 

[Jaguar]

I also suggest going with something else. Jung is too hard to read.

I've been reading "Lectures on Jung's Typology" off and on over the past couple of months. It's got some especially good stuff on the feeling function. It's written by Marie-Louise Von Franz and James Hillman.

If the goal is to learn, why not make it easy for others, right? Right.
I also like that book and my fav Hillman comment is:

In a differentiated feeling-type, the two sides of his function work harmoniously.

Woops . . . . Fe-Fi-Fo-Fum!
But for those who prefer to sling mud at each other, I'm sure they'll ignore Hillman.

 

[rav3n]

Silkroad, here's a taste of Jung's translated writings. If this translation is accurate, he does meander but it's consumable.

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm

 

[SilkRoad]

Hey, thanks everyone for the varied suggestions. The starter suggestions sound good, but on the other hand I am tempted to give the man himself a go. I feel like I've become intellectually lazy. When I was 19 I was reading stuff like Robert Graves's The White Goddess for fun. (I know, brag brag brag.) Not so much of that sort of thing these days!

I've taken a peek at the link (thanks Jenaphor) and yeah, it does look dense. But I may give it a go.

What about the collective unconscious/archetype stuff? In some way that has always fascinated me. It probably goes back to my Sting/Police obsession and Synchronicity...

 

[SilkRoad]

I bought the Essential Jung: Selected Writings, selected by Anthony Storr, last night. So, not really what any of you suggested. But it has a fairly comprehensive introduction which gives an overview of his life and ideas, and then essential bits from various of his works. I think it will be good for a starter anyway, to browse through, and see if I want to go any further. Of course it's a bit bitty but I wanted an overview more so than anything else, even more than anything dealing specifically indepth with the personality types.

I browsed through that a bit last night, including some of the stuff about synchronicity - then was on the underground to work this morning, listening to Led Zeppelin on my MP3 player (haven't listened to them a lot for a while, though a little more again recently), and realised that the guy next to me was reading the famous book about Zeppelin, Hammer of the Gods. Ah, synchronicity. I love it.

 

[Jaguar]

What about the collective unconscious/archetype stuff? In some way that has always fascinated me. It probably goes back to my Sting/Police obsession and Synchronicity...

Listening to Murder By Numbers off the Synchronicity CD, as we speak.

 

[Forever_Jung]

What you wanna do is get that interview Jung did when he was really old.

Conversations with Carl Jung and Reactions from Ernest Jones. Book by Richard I. Evans

Ernest Jones is very sharp and forces Jung to clarify and explain a lot of things in simpler terms. There is only a short chapter on the functions, but in terms of the basics it's very helpful, IMO.

 

[Blackwater]

this: http://www.amazon.com/Man-Symbols-C...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1298548914&sr=1-1

 

[Lark]

I actually would begin with one of the books about him and his theories rather than any writing by him himself, I'm particularly recommend Anthony Storr and Anthony Stevens, there was a combination of the two in a single book once I think. They may have written introductions to Freud too. Storr I dont think is a Jungian so he's a little more objective, Stevens is a bit more of a fan boy but still less esoteric than some.

It gives a good overview because there are bits and pieces of seperate core theories for Jung, his archetypes theory, his personality typology, his three layered dream theory (personal, cultural/historical, collective/archetypal unconscious), the complexes integration in a mandala like conceptualisation of the psyche (as opposed to Freud's tripartite psyche of id, ego, superego) which crop up in all his writing and make it difficult.

I read a book in the routledge classics from between the wars which included his essay Woden, it was total nonsense when I read it first, I read it later after reading the intros and modern man in search of his soul and dreams, it made more sense then.

 

[guesswho]

I read a few of his books a long time ago, it was quite confusing. However "Psychological types" is easier to understand. I recommend it.