|
" Jung, art and psychotherapy re-conceptualized by the symbol that joins us to the wildness of the universe "
Susan Rowland
| Document Type
|
:
|
AL
|
| Record Number
|
:
|
1069140
|
| Doc. No
|
:
|
LA112769
|
| Call No
|
:
|
10.1080/19409052.2014.905487
|
| Language of Document
|
:
|
English
|
| Main Entry
|
:
|
Susan Rowland
|
| Title & Author
|
:
|
Jung, art and psychotherapy re-conceptualized by the symbol that joins us to the wildness of the universe [Article]\ Susan Rowland
|
| Publication Statement
|
:
|
Leiden: Brill
|
| Title of Periodical
|
:
|
International Journal of Jungian Studies
|
| Date
|
:
|
2015
|
| Volume/ Issue Number
|
:
|
7/2
|
| Page No
|
:
|
81–93
|
| Abstract
|
:
|
Despite the impact of the publication of Jung's own (literally) monumental work of rendering images in The Red Book (2009), the relation of art, artists, art psychotherapy and Jungian studies is puzzling and complex. As Tjeu van den Berk's excellent Jung on Art (2012) demonstrates, Jung by no means posited a comfortable continuum between his psychology and aesthetics. Even artists impressed by his notions of the inherently creative unconscious imagination do not share the priorities of Jungian-oriented art psychotherapists. In exploring this problem of Jungian psychology and the aesthetic domain, I take issue with some of van den Berk's conclusions, proposing instead that in his core concept of the ‘symbol’ Jung constructs a theory of the imagination that overcomes disciplinary, mythic and individual boundaries: rather, it is an idea of radical re-visioning of psyche as expressed in time and space. By dismantling the notion of psyche as bound to an individual person, I suggest the symbol transforms the dialogue of Jung, Jungians and art. Despite the impact of the publication of Jung's own (literally) monumental work of rendering images in The Red Book (2009), the relation of art, artists, art psychotherapy and Jungian studies is puzzling and complex. As Tjeu van den Berk's excellent Jung on Art (2012) demonstrates, Jung by no means posited a comfortable continuum between his psychology and aesthetics. Even artists impressed by his notions of the inherently creative unconscious imagination do not share the priorities of Jungian-oriented art psychotherapists. In exploring this problem of Jungian psychology and the aesthetic domain, I take issue with some of van den Berk's conclusions, proposing instead that in his core concept of the ‘symbol’ Jung constructs a theory of the imagination that overcomes disciplinary, mythic and individual boundaries: rather, it is an idea of radical re-visioning of psyche as expressed in time and space. By dismantling the notion of psyche as bound to an individual person, I suggest the symbol transforms the dialogue of Jung, Jungians and art.
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
aesthetics;
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
art;
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
C.G. Jung;
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
ecocriticism
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
psychotherapy;
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
symbol;
|
| Location & Call number
|
:
|
10.1080/19409052.2014.905487
|
| |