{Jung's 'Memories, Dreams & [sic] Reflections' [continued (6)]}[12th June 1988]

[Redbook5:148][19880612:1735]{Jung's 'Memories, Dreams & [sic] Reflections' [continued (6)]}[12^th June 1988]

19880612.1725

Having finished Jung's memoirs* – First, the Self is distinguished from the Ego, which seems to mean roughly what I understand by the Self.** However, somewhere towards the end there was a reference to the Self as something to be abnegated (I forget the words) – and then nothing else.

Second, I am uncertain exactly what meaning or content the Archetypes are allowed: the explanations do not make this clear to me.

Jung comes across as a great man, a genius (in Sir Isaiah Berlin's definition)*** – but also, surprisingly, a man of some slyness: witnss his dealings with Freud (per Jung's own account); and the photographs of him. This fits his rejection of his anima's suggestion that his mandalas were art, as a trick. I think he missed a crucial point there, about Art. Archetypes do not tell lies, in my experience, although we may receive their communication crookedly.

The Animus and Anima clearly correspond to +M~ and +K (G~); although my relation to xS types also fits the idea of the Anima.****

*['Memories, Dreams, Reflections '(See last five previous entries.)]

**[ref [Redbook5:146][19880610:2300]{Jung's 'Memories, Dreams & [sic] Reflections' [continued]}[10^th June 1988]]

***ref above [] [This has not been found in these Journals, nor has the quotation by Internet search; but memory indicates that Berlin defined genius along the lines of the ability to have a profoundly original perception and then to convey it to others in terms which they could understand.]

****{(but then, R~[(xS)] came from G~ {(+K)][)]}

[See [Redbook4:219-224][19871213:2005]{Walking with the Fair-haired Girl}[13th December 1987]ff, & many others.]

[PostedBlogger21for24052018]