Customer Reviews

Children's Dreams: Notes from the Seminar Given in 1936-1940 (Jung Seminars)

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This book shows Jung at work using his methods of dream interpretation. Jung liked the seminar method and had ongoing seminars during the academic year from the early 1920's until 1940. The children's dream seminar has long been available only to close students of analytical psychology and was given between 1936 and 1940. In this seminar he takes dreams of adults who recall their dreams from childhood. So, do not expect to see dreams from children. He shows his magnificently wide range of knowledge of different subjects as he amplifies the meaning of the dreams put forth by seminar participants. The translations from German are by Ernst Falzaeder, a well known psychoanalytic historian, and are excellent. The book is the second to be published by the Philemon Foundation which is undertaking to publish all the unpublished works of C.G. Jung. HIghly recommended for anyone interested in the study of dreams and analytical psychology.

This book is a unique perspective on the dreams of children, although it must be noted that they are the dreams that adults had as they recall them from their childhood. What is unique about this book is that the introductory lectures about dreams by Carl Jung may be the single best presentation of the classical Analytical Psychology perspective of dreams. Secondly, the book is a powerful presentation of the unique contribution made by Jung. One unique contribution is the illustration of how the forces of the psyche already at play in the young child and how they contribute to the unfolding development of an individual's identity. A drawback is the case presentation method (a plus for others), which can make the material somewhat choppy because of the varied presentations. Overall, however, it is solid and unique contribution to the field of Analyical Psychology and all perspectives work from that group of psychologies under the umbrella of depth psychology.

Children's Dreams: Notes from the Seminar Given in 1936-1940 by C.G. Jung stands as an important document for anyone interested in children's dreams. The book gathers many voices, those of the seminar participants, and that of Jung, in his role as teacher.

One appeal of the book is its didactic format. The participants in the seminar present children's dreams that Jung assigned to them at the beginning of the semester, which they amplify and for which they suggest meanings. Jung listens to their presentations. In his comments following the presentations Jung often returns at first to the simple facts of the dream, and then further amplifies the dream using relevant archetypal symbols. With a remarkable breadth of knowledge at his fingertips, Jung navigates through the world of myths and symbols with great ease, unearthing their hidden meanings along the way.

In response to a reductive interpretation of a dream, Jung may expand it so as to account for the many dimensions of a dream; when working with a dream with no clear ending, he may look for the potential for development enfolded in it; and when cumbersome amplifications lead away from a dream, again and again Jung brings the focus back to the original text of the dream.

The seminar spans four winters. We can trace a development through the series, which reaches its fullest expression with the third session (1938-1939). Readers will find gems here and there in Jung's spontaneous comments throughout the notes.

Humbled by dreams, Jung confides: "We will never understand this secret of life and this cosmos, it is much too complicated, and the same is true for dreams. They fall like nuts from the tree of life and yet they are so hard to crack," (p.332).

Without Jung's research and intense desire to know the realm of the psyche, greek word for soul, we would never have the ability to see cognate the workings in our modern world. Jung's descriptions of the archetypes allows us to formulate the proper questions which were posed by all great civilizations of the past. Most greeks never read Plato, nor were concerned about the dialogues. Same in our culture, most universities and the established psychology institutions do not accept Jung and even go so far as to discredit *the mystic alchemist*, as writing *dubious spiritualism*.
Those few of us who do embrace the spirit of man as part of the one true spirit of God, we find Jung to be a God send in these times of trouble and darkness (Gas now $4.20/gal!!!).
With america being about 60% atheist and the learning institutions about 90%+ atheist, Jung has not so far been given a fair hearing, nor ever will. Jung emphasizes throughout all his writings, *without depth (spiritual) experience, my concepts are just ink on paper) As we know atheists have no spiritual experience thus are officially excluded from all of Jung's intuitive insights.
Having said that, this new 2008 book of his 1936-1940 seminar has shown a side to Jung which i have not seen as yet in my 20 yrs of Jungian study.
Though Jung shows a profound insight into the general laws of the psyche when it comes to specific detailing certain dream symbols in the draems of the children, I have reservations and even will go so far as to say I have strong disagreements on many of Jung's assumptions of the dreams meanings.
Jung as we know was head strong and once he was locked into a discursive mode like old Socrates, there was little anyone could say edgewise when Jung had the floor.
Jung himself though would wanted us , his heirs to not just swallow everything he said , but in fact to question everything he said. Jung intensely desired his closest students to raise new insights built upon his researches.
Trust me, this new found perspective within me, has even surprised myself. For 2 decades Jung has been for me a icon and a master, at times unapproachablly deep so as not to be questioned. Jung always towered over my mind where I felt very small next to him. I think it was my recent peak at Philo of Alexandria that brought my mind closer to Jung's level.
Now I do find myself at odds with some of his dream allegories. .
Keep in mind Jung was writing in 1936, when as yet there were hardly any solid references which Jung could draw from. In the past 80 years we have access to a wider range of info, at least for those like myself who know how to use that info.
Jung in his old age,once commented to Von Franz , he would have re-written all his books, except Answer To Job. Now I can understand why he made that statement, after reading a few of his comments in this dream seminar. Now I can see that Jung was human after all. Though obviously still god-like, bright shinning, to my level of consciousness.
In spite of my at odds with Jung here, looking over the signifiance of collected works for blind modern man , we know that God does not leave mankind in total darkness, but can speak to whomever will listen. Jung listened and fulfilled the role of prophet. A timely function that the church neither would nor possibly could fulfill. She is engrossed too much with dogmas and doctrines to be able to see and reflect the light of the soul's journey. The *sexual instinct* (I prefer to define as the romantic instinct for love . sex is something animals like dogs perform, humans have the POTENTIAL to make love) continues to be misundestood by the church. Jung finally brings Freuds great error into perspective. Which is that sex among humans should ideally be a ways to acheive spirituality, that is birth of love in the soul.
Paul Best
June 28,2008
* I am more than sure, of all my reviews which have mostly votes of *no*, this one will never geta yes, but only accumulate countless *No* votes.
Was Jung's ideas ever welcomed? I expect no less.
EDIT:
Having read up to page 100, I went and skimmed through the other 400 pages.
Now its clear why prinston came out very late with this book. Its not Jung at his best, in fact rather dubious and rambling. There's questionable dream material to begin with. Take the dream on page 135 froma 4 to 5 yr old boy and he gives one figure in the dream as having a *lazy smile*. can you imagine a 4 yr old boy describing a dream image as *A MAN WITH A LAZY SMILE*
Many other places as well. Jung even says things that where next sentence he backs off and re-arranges the idea.
I began having questions on some of Von Franz's material as of last week, after I completed the collection of all her books. She says things which I find to be contradictory and confusing.
I am beginning to re-evalute all of Jung. Something which I would never have imagined in my lifetime. Jung was a *god* for me.
Amazing how the mind when fed on ancient mysticism as presented by Philo can open ones eyes and shed light on Jung.
Jung indeed offers much insight into man's illness. Yet months before Jung passed away he told Von Franz, *I have hit a ceiling, I can go no futher*
I know why he became *stumped* and hita *dead end*
Jung continually emphasized that his work was no more than a beginning and that others after him would have to take up that path which leads to truth and knowledge of the soul's illness.
So far no one has taken up Jung's torch and am afraid to say, no one will. Most Jungian material is at best rehashing of Jung's ideas. And frankly, most of JungianISM books are rubbish. The material misleads and distorts Jung's position. A disaster Jung predicted would happen after he passed away.
That includes the Jung training center and the analysts in California. A institution which has nothing to do with Jung's true spirit. The spirit of gnosis as opposed to to the current Jungians as displaying *word juggling/manipulations* = *head information* . *Dry bones* No flesh, no breath of spirit.
BOOK NOT RECOMMENDED
June 29,2008