Customer Reviews

Senex and Puer (James Hillman Uniform Edition, Vol. 3)

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

 

 

James Hillman is a brilliant author of profound originality. His development of the psychology of Carl Jung is faithful to the deepest, most important insights of Jung's own work and yet transforms it in a way that embodies Hillman's own creative genius and is perfectly reflected in the style of his thinking and writing. It is good to have these important essays and articles on the archetypes of the puer aeternus and the senex together in one place. This volume is essential reading for anyone seriously interested in the depth psychology of masculine development & its diverse pathways. These contributions seem to me remarkable--full of dazzling new insights into these themes and patterns of experience that has radically altered our understanding of them--in a rich, evocative, yet fragmentary, and unfinished way that is entirely in harmony with his subject matter. If I am right in seeing the puer archetype as crucial for an understanding of Jesus of Nazareth, the groundbreaking reflections of Hillman on this theme have implications for our understanding of the Christian religion, its history, and its impact on the whole of Western culture.

Unlike the previous reviewer (whose Shadow is evident) who tends to overgeneralization and ad hominum attacks, this book provides a rich introduction to two of the fundamental archetypes of human nature--the puer--the Child and the senex--the Wise Old Man. Hillman is not always easy going (he presumes his reader is intelligent and has some mythological background), but he adeptly demonstrates the importance of these figures in the human psyche. Ignore the pathetic assaults of the one-star review and decide for yourself.

senex and puer is an amazing book if you like hillman. it talks about the eternal child in a way that was very important to me at this time in my life.
in response to mr. ipp's comments about how hillman is satan (or maybe he used the word guru) and the jungians are a "cult", i would like to say that maybe you should look behind the big intellectual words you used and see how much hatred is within. i don't think your rationality or mind structures saved you from feeling that hatred; it only increased it. i agree that archetypal psychology isn't for everyone but either is the wonderful rational science you speak of that will save all of us from "disorders". the world is chaos, my friend, good and evil, light and dark are one - some of us actually want to face our "darkness" because it produces more love and acceptance of this mysterious universe. maybe for yourself you should stick to reading cognitive-behavioral psychology books and you'll feel more comfortable. but please don't judge a book by it's cover. the book of jungian psychology may have the cover of evil, but for some of us who can look deeply enough we see that the contents actually produce more love and goodness. the book of modern rational western psychology may have the cover of good with positive messages, new drugs to cure merely physical disorders, and hope - but look deeply within its contents and you can find a more insidious evil of numbed souls and repressed fear. and when you're a devil's advocate like myself and realize that both of the books can be looked at vice versa, that's when you realize that good/evil is not in the objects but in yourself. when you look at it in yourself, you gain power over it and naturally want to spread more good and love because it gives back more. but some choose to see the good/evil only outside of themselves and therefore are subject to having to live with hatred that is not in their control. archetypal psychology is not evil, mr. ipp, the evil is within you. rationality will never save you from judgement and judgement will always provide more pain for you.

Came in perfect condition and in a very timely manner. Would def buy from again.

Clearly, anyone who disagrees with or challenges Hillman's ideas is unintelligent and pathetic. Hillmanian psychology is Jungian Psychology, it is the psychology of the imagination and the psychology of the soul. Someday I hope to see "Hillmanian Institutes for Analytical Psychology" all over the world. Why do I feel Hillman is so important, because he is like me, and I am like him. I identify with him completely and directly as a person, and I am certain he thinks and feels and respects the pivotal role of "IMAGINATION" and "FANTASY" as much as I do. The best thing that could ever happen to me is for Hillman to chose me from the crowd to be his protégé and predecessor, because no one is more obedient and loyal to him or his ideas more seriously and profoundly than I am. Read this book, and all of his books if you want any hope of understanding yourself, your imagination and soul. The Jungians are not a cult... anyone who thinks that is unintelligent and pathetic, and is just projecting their disavowed shadows onto the group. No cool.

Hillman constructs, rather, exploits relative, subjective and imaginal logic systems and explores inherent contradictions that lead the psyche into dark alleys, dead-ends, where Hillman, in the grand-guru tradition, cleverly re-situates and justifies these logical impasses as evidence hinting to essences of the "intangible", the "mysterious" mechanisms behind "soul work".

I suspect Hillman creates his vain sophistry to perform a function, to act as a baroque vehicle to conceal the "truth" the he is neither a scientist nor theoretician capable, nor interested, in generating logical systems that would provide patients with real and functioning imaginal infrastructures that could possibly lead one to substantive leaps in human consciousness for the betterment of mankind... in fact, his constructions do the opposite, they lead ones psyche into dark pools of muddled sand and water and abandon matters there. I suspect Hillman's real goal behind his so-called scholarship, sadly, is to create entertainment masquerading as psychology and philosophy in order to build and maintain a legacy for himself. Work, after work, he keeps building an impression that he is a charismatic pioneer and intellectual force within the modern post-Jungian psychoanalytic community at large. I agree, his work does deliver entertainment value, and it's engaging and deeply imaginative, but what bugs me is that he is trying to pass himself off as a guru, philosopher and "imaginal" psychotherapist. Like Jung, Hillman seems very interested in building a franchise for himself, but I thought the meaningful goal of behind striving to be a pioneer of psychology was to reveal new insights and models towards understanding and treating painful disorders in the human psyche for the betterment and mankind. Hillman actually prescribes pain as a useful tool in catalyzing growth in his patients. His comfort level with pain and injury should be noticed and revealed for what it is. This reader thinks some of Hillman's ideas glorifying psychological pain and injury border on psychotic and megalomaniac.

Like many Guru's though-out the ages, Hillman distances himself, rather diminishes the contributions of materialist, modern, scientific, and rational logic, I suspect because, a, he is not capable of communicating in, nor producing true imaginative contributions that might effectively transform physical matter and energy into new innovations and inventions for the betterment of mankind, and b, introducing rational logic and scientific modeling techniques would expose the base substance of his ideas as being, yes, very imaginative, engaging and entertaining, but not durable or constructive with regard to actually constructing models of understanding towards treating patients with very real psychological neuroses and disorders. It's my bias to believe that psychotherapists are being seen and paid to perform treatment functions to help patients recover from injuries, that psychotherapy is not meant to be entertainment for entertainment's sake, at $175/hour.

Instead of using his gifts to create substantive models towards understanding the human psyche, Hillman applies his energy towards reviving imaginal constructs from obsolete hegemonic belief systems and mythological traditions that have long sense faded away from contemporary consciousness for, in my view, very positive and pragmatic reasons... if your average person's consciousness was still deeply contained, heavily steeped and influenced, whereby confined by these obsolete mythological constructions and traditions, these fettering mythogems would not unlock our imagination, but instead keep us stunted as a species returning again and again to the same old well, with the same old tired stories and pantheon of characters.

Groundbreaking innovations in science and technology have offered your average person with new models towards integrating their personal phenomelogical experiences. People today can now be born left handed and no longer think it's a stigma. I personally was seeing a Jungian analyst for a while, and he made a comment about my left-handedness, and my having two different colored eyes, my left eye, being representative of the unconscious. Yeah, that stuff is imaginal, and can even be entertaining, but it's not psychological therapy and treatment.

I am relieved that this group of Jungian psychoanalysts are recognized as a fringe cult group - and I suspect, if any of these folks had a real concrete problems and life crises, like cancer, or a heart failure, that they would, I hope, telephone an actual Doctor or Surgeon to treat their disorders, not seek the imaginative help of a fellow Jungian analyst, with a certificate in tarot card reading, and a side PhD in English literature or Ancient Roman History.

Also worth mentioning, there is some very darkly imaginal, and disturbing logic and belief systems in this book that support and advocate therapy and analysis as taking place within-in closed vessels whereby analysts should engage in the deliberate emotional injury and wounding of their patients, as a means to create so-called "wounds" that increase individual consciousness. Again, I think this is destructive advice, and not something, I imagine your average Jungian trained analyst, with side degrees in theater and music, are even remotely qualified and prepared for, psychologically, and emotionally... there are very real and concrete consequences for consciously and deliberately harming patients with very real and concrete psychological disorders. From my perspective, the real logic behind Hillmans particular belief system towards the glorified wounding of patients is megalomaniac, and stems from his need to gratify his power drive. I challenge Hillman to consider how it would feel to have a tumor on one of his vital organs and to seek a doctor's advice on how to treat and survive treatment and continue living, only to learn that your surgeon is fascinated by pain and wounding, and believes that pain is good and helpful towards increasing ones personal consciousness. Again, Hillman's ideas regarding pain and injury as being helpful are entertaining at best, but I can't see how these ideas are practically helpful towards the treatment of actual clients with very real, psychological disorders. In my view, treatment is about helping patients identify psychological problems, improve and heal from injuries, I am not convinced that it's okay to re-situated psychotherapy as a veiled form of entertainment, and that the transference relationship between patient and analyst should not be exploited by the analyst for personal financial gain, nor the gratification of their power drives via the deliberate injury and wounding of their patients as a means of increasing their patients so-called levels of consciousness.