William McGuire: Introduction to C.G. Jung’s Dream Analysis Note of the Seminar given in 1928-1932
INTRODUCTION
Jung’s seminars, in which he expounded his psychological ideas and his analytical methods as well as his views on society, the individual, religion, history, and much more, have been known to only a few even among Jung’s followers.
The classes of auditors were limited, and the multigraphed transcripts, prepared by devoted seminar members, were not published but were circulated privately to a restricted list of subscribers.
The volumes of Seminar Notes (as they are properly called) in special Jungian libraries have customarily been withheld from any reader not having an analyst’s approval.
Jungian publications contain occasional references to the Notes but seldom quotations. Although the policy of restriction had Jung’s consent, he eventually agreed to the inclusion o the Seminar Notes among his published works.
The earliest “seminar” recorded in the General Bibliography of
Jung’s Writings (CW 19) was held in 1923, but there is evidence
that Jung was using the seminar method as early as 1912.
In that
year he accepted as an analysand an American woman, Fanny Bowditch,
who had been referred to him by James Jackson Putnam,
M.D., professor of neurology at Harvard and the first president of
the American Psychoanalytic Association ( 1911).
Jung had met Putnam
when, with Freud and Ferenczi, he came to the United States
in 1909 to lecture at Clark University.
Putnam invited the three
visitors to the camp in the Adirondacks that belonged to the Putnam
and Bowditch families, 2 and there Jung could have met Fanny
Bowditch (1874-1967).
During 1911, Fanny Bowditch fell ill with a nervous disorder of
some kind, and Dr. Putnam, acting both as family friend and as
physician, advised her to go to Jung, whom he still recognized as
a fellow psychoanalyst. Having arrived in Zurich in early 1912,
Fanny Bowditch began psychoanalysis with Jung, presumably at
his house in Kiisnacht. In May, she began to make entries in a
1 Based usually on the completion of a certain number of hours of Jungian analysis.
notebook, reporting on weekly lectures by Jung that she was attending
at the University.
The content of the course, which carried
the title “Einfiihrung in die Psychoanalyse” in the University program,
included the general principles of psychology, psychoanalysis
(with citations of Freud’s writings), the association experiment, cases
in Jung’s analytic practice, and mythological and religious material.
The notes, in English, go on through summer 1912 and resume
in summer 1913, in German (which Fanny had learned from her
German-born mother).
The title “Seminar” appears in the notebook
for the 1913 lectures. During summer 1913, Fanny also made
notes on lectures in the history of religion by Professor Jakob Hausheer-
apparently a course given in conjunction with Jung’s.
It is
not surprising that Fanny Bowditch, a well-educated woman, was
able to enroll in a summer course at the University; that her teacher
was also her analyst may seem an unconventional psychoanalytic
procedure, but Jung had already distanced himself from Freudian
orthodoxy.
At that stage of his career, he was using the seminar
format, admitting a student who was in analysis (and was not an
M.D. candidate), and co-opting a professor of religion.
In April 1914 Jung resigned his post as privatdocent at the University,
after nine years of lecturing;4 he was not to have another
formal teaching appointment until 1933.
In October 1916, however,
Fanny (now married to Johann Rudolf Katz, a Dutch psychiatrist
of] ungian orientc1.tions) cl~yotecla notepook. tQ still anotlie_r
– seminar conc:luctea-oy Jung.
Tiuring Hie war years, wfiile-Jung was
a medical officer in the Swiss army, in charge of a camp for interned
British officers in Canton Vaud, he evidently carried on his private
teaching when on furlough in Zurich.
After the war ended, Jung traveled again-to London for lectures
to professional societies in 1919 and again in late 1920; to
Algeria and Tunis in the spring of 1920; and, during the summer
of 1920, to England, out to the tip of Cornwall, for his first seminar
s The Fanny Bowditch Katz Collection, Francis A. Countway Library of Medicine,
Boston, contains this notebook and the other documents that are mentioned.
The
material was consulted through the courtesy of Dr. Richard J. Wolfe, librarian for
manuscripts and rare books at the Countway.
I am grateful also to Mr. Franz Jung
for information on his father’s University teaching.
abroad.
There is no record, but this seminar at Sennen Cove, near
Land’s End, was kept in memory by several of the dozen who
attended.
It was arranged by Constance Long, and its members
included M. Esther Harding and H. Godwin Baynes-the three of
them British physicians and early adherents of analytical psychology.
Jung’s subject was a book called Authentic Dreams of Peter Blobbs
and of Certain of His Relatives. The first recorded seminar convened
also in Cornwall, at Polzeath, during July 1923. Baynes and Harding
organized it; twenty-nine attended, including Emma Jung and
Toni Wolff.6 Longhand notes, set down by Dr. Harding and the
American physician Kristine Mann, carry the title “Human Relationships
in Relation to the Process of Individuation.”
Two years
later the BritishJungians organized still another seminar, at Swanage,
Dorset, and about one hundred were there-“far more than
Jung liked,” Barbara Hannah tells us, and surely far too many for
a seminar.
Again, Dr. Harding’s longhand notes survive, under the
title “Dreams and Symbolism,” in twelve lectures, from 25 July to
7 August, after which Jung visited the British Empire Exposition
at Wembley and resolved to undertake his well-known journey to
British East Africa.
Earlier in 1925, however, from 23 March to 6 July, Jung gave
the first of the series of Zurich seminars in English that were to go
on for fourteen years. Entitled simply “Analytical Psychology,” the
seminar, in sixteen lectures, was recorded by Cary F. de Angulo,
who soon afterward was to marry H. G. Baynes. Jung reviewed the
transcript, which was issued as a multigraphed typescript of 227
pages.
The contents were devoted to an account of the development
of analytical psychology, beginning with the year 1896, when Jung
was a university student, and dwelling at length on his relationship
with Freud. Several passages were incorporated by Aniela Jaffe in
Memories, Dreams, Reftections.
The 1925 Seminar contains some of
Jung’s most trenchant observations on his psychology.
In early November 1928, Jung embarked on the seminar on
Dream Analysis, to which the present volume is devoted.
In weekly
meetings, broken by seasonal recesses of a month or more, the
seminar met until late June 1930.
The members convened on
Wednesday mornings in the rooms of the Zurich Psychological
Club, in an ivy-covered, turreted mansion in the Gemeindestrasse
that Edith Rockefeller McCormick had purchased for the Club’s
use. Few administrative records of either the seminar or the Club
survive.
According to the recollections of surviving members, no
tuition fee was paid; there was only a small assessment for tea.
Jung’s permission to attend was a requisite, and the members were,
or had been, all in the course of analysis with Jung or one of the
few other analysts in Zurich.
Though no membership rolls exist,
the seminar transcript yields the names of some fifty persons who
contributed to discussion. Certainly there were other members who
remained silent, such as .Mary Foote.
To Mary Foote is due the principal credit for the recording of
Jung’s seminars from 1928 until 1939.
Born in New England in
1872, Mary Foote became a portrait painter of some reputation,
living variously in New York, Paris, and Peking. 10 Her friends numbered
Isadora Duncan, Henry James, Mabel Dodge (later Luhan),
Gertrude Stein, and the stage designer Robert Edmond Jones, of
New York, who, after his own analysis with Jung and Toni Wolff,
persuaded Mary to goto Zurich. She arrived in Janual’r~.1=.9~8 .anci
remained foithenext quarter-century.
Her analytical work with
Jung must have commenced soon after she took up residence at
the Hotel Sonne in Kiisnacht, and she probably attended the Dream
Analysis seminar from its first meeting, in November.
Quite a few people were involved in producing the notes of the
seminar. In the absence of Cary de Angulo, who had gone off with
her husband H. G. Baynes to live in Carmel, California, the notes
of the autumn 1928 session were taken down by Anne Chapin, a
teacher at Mount Holyoke College, in Massachusetts, and were
transcribed, multigraphed, and circulated to the members.
The
meetings during the first half of 1929 were recorded by another
American woman, Charlotte H. Deady. Mary Foote became involved
with recording the session that began in October 1929, and
letters from Jung to her in December11 show that she was editing
the transcript (compiled from various members’ notes) and sending
sections of it to Jung for review.
She carried on this role to the end
of the seminar the following June. The entire “first edition,” multigraphed
from typescript, was issued in five volumes of quarto
dimensions. In 1938, Mary Foote brought out a “new edition,” in
which the Chapin notes were augmented by “fuller shorthand notes
taken by Miss Ethel Taylor”; the Deady notes were re-edited by
Carol Baumann; the October-December 1929 notes in longhand
were the work of Mary Foote and others, with “much help” from
Cary Baynes and Mary Howells;
the January-March 1930 notes
were taken, also in longhand, by Mrs. Baynes, Mrs. Deady, Barbara
Hannah, Joseph Henderson, and Miss Foote; and the May-June
1930 section was, Mary Foote wrote, “edited from shorthand notes
taken by Mrs. Koppel and my own longhand notes.”
The drawings
throughout were the work of Mrs. Deady. Emily Koppel, an Englishwoman
married to a Swiss, became Mary Foote’s secretary in
1930 and continued to take down the transcripts, type the stencils,
arrange for the multigraphing, and conduct all the administrative
detail until the war brought an end to the seminar series.
At first Mary Foote financed the work from subscriptions, supplemented
from her own resources. Later in the 1930s, funds were
contributed by Alice Lewisohn Crowley and by Mary and Paul
Mellon. Jung was not expected to contribute, and he received free
copies of the Seminar Notes.
Throughout the war years Mary Foote remained in Zurich, and
it was only in the 1950s that she returned to New England. She
died, among friends in rural Connecticut, on January 28, 1968, in
her ninety-sixth year. 12 Her papers, including successive drafts of
the Seminar Notes, are now in Yale University Library.
In October 1930, a few months after the end of the Dream Analysis
seminar, Jung opened another English seminar, entitled “Interpretation
of Visions,” based on paintings by an American woman
patient depicting images she had experienced through the process
of “active imagination.”
This seminar, which is considered a useful
exposition of Jung’s techniques of “active imagination” and of am-
plification, continued until March 1934.
The transcript was edited
by Mary Foote in eleven volumes, plus one volume containing twentynine
plates.
A new edition, supported by a donation from the Mellons,
appeared in 1939-41.
During a recess in October 1932, Jung
joined with J. W. Hauer, professor of Indology at the University
of Tiibingen, to give a seminar in six sessions on “The Kundalini
Yoga,” subsequently issued by Mary Foote in a 216-page illustrated
version, followed a year later by a German version.
Two months after ending the Visions seminar, on 2 May 1934,
Jung began an English seminar with the title “Psychological Analysis
of Nietzsche’s Zarathustra.”
It went on until 15 February 1939, with
several long interruptions while Jung made lecture trips to the
United States in 1936 and 1937, traveled in India in winter 1937-
38, and returned ill with dysentery. Again, Mary Foote edited the
transcript, in ten multigraphed volumes. 13
Jung’s lectures in German at the Eidgenossische Technische
Hochschule (Federal Technical Institute) in Zurich are usually classified
with his seminars, but they follow the lecture style and were
addressed to a general public in a large academic auditorium.
For
Jung it was a return to his situation as a lecturer in the University
more than twenty years earlier.
The ETH lectures, on Friday afternoons,
began on 20 October 1934 with the general theme “Modern
Psychology” and continued, with the usual academic breaks, until
July 1935.
They were taken down in shorthand byJung’s secretary,_
Marie-Jeanne ~Scnmia,. and subsequently issued in English-translation
by Elizabeth Welsh and Barbara Hannah, in the same format
as the seminars.Jung continued to lecture sporadically at the ETH
until July 1941; his subjects included “Eastern Texts,” “Exercitia
Spiritualia of St. Ignatius of Loyola,” “Children’s Dreams,” “Old
1 11 With Jung’s permission, excerpts of the “Interpretation of Visions” seminar,
prepared by Jane A. Pratt, were published in ten installments in Spring (the annual
journal of the Analytical Psychology Club of New York), 1960-1969. \
hese, with
three concluding installments prepared by Patricia Berry and a postscript by Henry
A. Murray, were published ·as The Visions Seminars (Zurich: Spring Publications,
1976; 2 vols.)./ The four lectures comprising Jung’s “Psychological Commentary
on the Kundalini Yoga,” from the 1932 seminar, were published in Spring, 1975
and 1976. (During 1970-1977, Spring, still an organ of the Analytical Psychology
Club of New York, was published in Zurich; thereafter, under other auspices, it
has been published by Spring Publications, Inc., in Dallas, Texas.)
An excerpt from
the “Psychological Analysis of Nietzsche’s Zarathustra” was published in Spring 1972.
Literature on Dream Interpretation,” and “Alchemy.” Most of the
lectures were issued in translation by Barbara Hannah.
Each volume of seminars and ETH Lectures carried a caveat to
the effect that “they are strictly for private use and no part can be
copied or quoted for publication without Professor Jung’s written
permission.”
When the “Dream Analysis” seminar and the “Modern
Psychology” lectures were issued in new editions, under the joint
auspices of the Psychological Club and the C. G. Jung Institute,
the same warning was printed as a preface, in the name of the Club
and the Institute.
The sale of the volumes was strictly limited to
those qualified by analysis and professional approval.
Nevertheless,
copies found their way into general libraries and into the hands of
bookdealers.
When stock was exhausted and new editions were planned in
1954, the Institute proposed that the texts be revised by a professional
writer in order to smooth out what were thought to be flaws
of style and expression.
On the urgent advice of R.F.C. Hull and
others, Jung wrote to the Curatorium of the Institute: “I would
like to inform you that after mature consideration and the solicitation
of authoritative opinions, I have decided to let my Seminars
be published unaltered as before.
I have been asked in particular
to let nothing be altered in their style.” He suggested that each
publication be prefaced with this notice:
“I am fully aware of the
fact that the text of these seminars contains a certain number of
errors and other inadequacies which are in need of correction.
Unfortunately it has never been possible for me to undertake this
work myself. I would therefore request the reader to read these
reports with the necessary criticism and to use them with circumspection.
They give in general, thanks to Mary Foote’s descriptive
skill, a lively and faithful picture of the actual proceedings as they
were at the time.”
The notice was not printed, after all, in the new
editions, but Jung’s concern about errors in the transcripts was
evident.
The idea of publishing the seminars for a general public
was now in the wind. Michael Fordham, one of the editors of the
Collected Works, strongly urged publication. On 24 May 1956, Jung
wrote to Gerhard Adler, also an editor of the Collected Works:
“I
should like to refer to our talk of the 14th of May. I am in complete
agreement with the publication of my ‘Seminar Notes’ as an appendix
to the Collected Works, and I should like you and Dr. Fordham
to make the necessary cuts or corrections of actual mistakes.
The shorthand report has not always been quite accurate. As far
as the style is concerned it should, if at all possible, not be altered.”
Jung had become aware, one may infer, of the futility of restricting
his seminar texts; and he was obviously conscious of their value to
analysts in training and the larger body of serious students.
In a
letter of 19 August 1957 to the Bollingen Foundation, he formally
stated:
“I hereby confirm my agreement to the inclusion of the
writings designated in your letter (i.e., Seminar Notes and correspondence)
in the Collected Works.”
There the matter rested until after Jung’s death, in June 1961.
Meanwhile, the original plan to bring out the Seminar Notes as
well as the Letters as part of the Collected Works was modified. The
editing of the correspondence had been delegated, with Jung’s
approval (1957), to Dr. Adler as chief editor, together with Marianne
Niehus-Jung and Aniela Jaffe.1s As Jung had accepted the
translator of the Collected Works, R.F.C. Hull, as editor of the seminars,
the project was postponed until Hull’s time would be freethat
is, until the completion of the Collected Works was in view.
During the mid-196os, the Bollingen Foundation had Hull draw
up a provisional plan of publication, in consultation with Herbert
Read, the Jung family, Adler, Fordham, Cary Baynes,Jessie Fraser,
Joseph Henderson, Aniela JaffeJ Henry A. Murray, and Jane A.
Pratt.Tfie project, in-fiveoTsix volumes, would include the 19-2-5
Seminar, “Dream Analysis,” “Interpretation of Visions,” “Kundalini
Yoga,”
“Analysis of Nietzsche’s Zarathustra,” and provisionally
a selectionof the ETH Lectures. The Jung heirs agreed in principle.
Hull was able to begin editorial work only in the summer of 1972,
when he moved to New York City.
He was still concerned with
residual details of translating Jung’s part of The Freud/Jung Letters,
the selected letters written in German (about half), and CW 18:
The Symbolic Life. Nevertheless, in spite of a gradual decline in his
health and energy, Hull was able to edit and annotate nearly half
of the Dream Analysis seminar in a tentative fashion, relying on
research assistance from Lisa Ress and advice on matters of sub-
stance from Edward F. Edinger, M.D. In spring 1973, Hull returned
to his home in Mallorca, in a state of deteriorating health
that prevented professional work of any kind; he died in England
in December 197 4.
His working papers had been preserved by his
widow and were eventually sent to Princeton. In taking over the
editorial responsibility for the Dream Analysis seminar in 1980,
however, I made a fresh beginning.
My editorial principles have departed somewhat from Hull’s. I
have deleted and altered text as seldom as possible, giving editorial
notice of any significant change. Deletions are, for the most part,
confined to passages Jung repeated for the information of new
members of the seminar.
Silent textual alterations chiefly concern
punctuation, spelling, grammar, and clarity.
The insertion of a
good many full stops and semicolons in the transcribers’ rather
loose-jointed sentence structure does no violence to Jung’s style.
Much of the annotation drafted by Hull and Lisa Ress has been
preserved and has been considerably augmented. Interpretive notes
by Hull carry his initials.
A principal departure from Hull’s policy
is the retention of the names of the seminar members who made
comments.
Many of them are persons of interest, even of distinction,
in the Jungian world and beyond, and most of them are
deceased.
Of the four I know to be living in 1982-Miss Hannah,
Dr. Henderson, Dr. Kirsch, and Mrs. Gaskell-all have given permission
for their names to be used.
It is possible that, in the case
of about ten persons I could not locate or even identify, some may
be living; if so, I beg their indulgence.
Surely no remarks were
made that would cause anyone regret fifty years later.
It should be
remarked, also, that no case material was given in the seminar that
could be identified with an actual person.
I have made every effort to preserve “a lively and faithful picture
of the actual proceedings as they were at the time,” which Jung
had hoped for in 1954, and have reproduced the diagrams and
illustrations directly from the earlier editions of the seminars.
The Seminar Notes have a substantive importance in the Jungian
canon: that is evident, and they possess several other aspects of
significance.
The character of Jung’s speaking style-indeed, his
conversational style-is conveyed faithfully: such is the consensus
of those who knew him well, and especially those who sat in any
of the seminar meetings.
“The notes have the reality of a transcript
from tape, in a time when tape was undreamed of,” one seminar
member observed.
The recording skill of those who took the notes
is responsible-and that skill was all the more remarkable in the
early days, when notes were written in longhand and patched together.
Mary Foote’s editorial work concentrated on fidelity of record,
in style as well as in content.
Jung’s mastery of the English language, demonstrated in these
transcripts, need not be occasion for surprise.
He had studied English
in school and, during the early 1900s, had spent a summer in
London.
At the Burgholzli Clinic, when Jung was Bleuler’s assistant,
American and British doctors came to train and observe:
Ricksher, Peterson, Madie Campbell, Gibson, Burrow, among
others. 17 And English-speaking patients-arrestingly, Harold F.
McCormick and his wife, Edith Rockefeller McCormick, of Chicago-
became Jung’s responsibility quite early. From 1909 onward,
there were frequent visits to England and America, marked by
lectures, conferences, and analytical appointments conducted in
English.
By the 1920s, the circle of students and analysands around
Jung in Zurich was as much English- as German-speaking. (French
was in a minority.) Jung wrote and spoke in English almost as often
as in German or in Schweizer-Deutsch, his language at home.18
Finally, Jung’s seminar colloquies are rich in material that is not
to be found, or is only hinted at, in the published writings.
For
Jung they were germinative: he was often evolving ideas as he
talked. The seminar published in this volume gives the fullest accountof
Jung’s method of am nlificaticm i_!! the anaLy~is of a ga tienJ~_
–dreams-and the most detailed record of the treatment of a male
patient by Jung himself.
Altogether, the seminars give us a Jung
who was self-confidently relaxed, uncautious and undiplomatic,
disrespectful of institutions and exalted personages, often humorous,
even ribald, extravagantly learned in reference and allusion,
attuned always to the most subtle resonances of the case in hand,
and true always to himself and his vocation. ~Wiliam Mcguire, Dream Analysis Seminar, Page vii – xvi
https://carljungdepthpsychologysite.blog/
Carl Jung Depth Psychology on Instagram
dream dream dream dream dream dream dream
dream
#AnalyticalPsychology #DepthPsychology #CarlJung #TheUnconscious #JungianPsychology #Psyche #JungianConcepts #PsychologicalType #Archetypes #Individuation
