Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, JRR TOLKIEN, Myths and Stories

[Speaker to Animals]

Another choice quote from J.R.R. Tolkien:

As for any inner meaning or ‘message,’ it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical…. I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. — J.R.R. Tolkien (Foreword to the second edition of The Lord of the Rings.)

[DrYouth]

Artists create.

Anyone who intentionally tries to be meaningful and invoke archetypes with their art usually sucks. (Except George Lucas sometimes.)

Most exceptional artists have no idea of the deep archetypal symbols they are tapping into.

Obviously the mythological narratives of ancient peoples weren't intentionally invoking Jungian archetypes.

So because Tolkien says he doesn't see his work as representing anything special, doesn't mean that it doesn't.

[TheReal_ND]

Obviously Jung wasn't intentionally invoking the mythological narratives of ancient peoples archetypes.

[Speaker to Animals]

Jung was probably just trying to work out the fact that he was gay. Once that was actualized, he could give up the nonsense explanations for his gay behavior. DrY might be similar.

[DrYouth]

Jung was grabbing pussy left, right and centre.

[Speaker to Animals]

Jung was grabbing pussy left, right and centre.

LOL, that would be hilarious. Was he smashing the female patients?

[DrYouth]

In a letter to Freud dated January 30, 1910, Jung wrote: "The prerequisite for a good marriage, it seems to me, is the license to be unfaithful" (McGuire, 1974, p. 289).

Reportedly many affairs with his "training analysands".

Sabina Spielrein and Toni Wolf.... both went on to be accomplished Jungians.

Part of the training, it seems, occurred in Jung's personal chambers.

[Speaker to Animals]

In a letter to Freud dated January 30, 1910, Jung wrote: "The prerequisite for a good marriage, it seems to me, is the license to be unfaithful" (McGuire, 1974, p. 289).

Obviously not a good person upon which to found a school of psychology..

Please don't compare a degenerate like that with Tolkien. Tolkien was a great man.

[DrYouth]

Jung was a terrible writer.

His ideas were great, his writing was shiet.

Tolkien's writing was great. As far as his ideas, I haven't heard of any of them.

[Speaker to Animals]

Jung was a terrible writer.

His ideas were great, his writing was shiet.

Tolkien's writing was great. As far as his ideas, I haven't heard of any of them.

His ideas were very parochial, mostly limited to literary analysis, medieval texts, and Catholic theology. If you like medieval things and are a Catholic, you'd probably like Tolkien.

I would be more interested in seeing what the atheistic intellectual descendants of people like Jung would make of their own works in those earlier Jungian contexts. Apply Jung to The Stranger, for example. That's more applicable.