Stories: Life in Books
284 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 Newer→ Last
-
Thanks Allen (wherever you are) .....
.
that would be dead
But seriously, aren't books wondrous things? That we can share in other's worlds. You have to love that. A lot. -
I had the good fortune to get an after school job working in the local library when I was at high school, so I read everything I could get my hands on.
The one book that changed how I viewed books was Demian by Hermann Hesse when I was 16. I'd just begun to explore Jungian psychology and Gnosticism, and was going through my own teenage growing pains, so reading about another "special" youth (and don't we all think we're special at that stage?) also struggling with the works of Jung (and ultimately rejecting them as not going far enough in their mystical elements) was magical.
In many ways, that was the first time I had been confronted with the idea that I could approach Jung critically, and take or leave the elements that didn't seem to make sense to me. It also opened me up to this idea of the "Western Mystery Tradition" (i.e. the occultism of the Golden Dawn and Crowley) as being a path of self-discovery and adventure.
I've quite dramatically drifted away from all that over the years; I'm now a heartless atheist and materialist, and think that Jung is pretty silly. I went back to try and read it again a few years ago and ended up being sullenly disappointed. It all seems so trite and mannered, with such overtones of the Übermensch, that I can't even imagine what it must have been like to be that 16 year old who loved it so dearly. But yes, at the time I was reading it, I was in a dialogue with an author who understood where I was coming from like no other.
-
merc,
A Jungian might say that for a period of time Jung carried the Father, Wise Mother or Wise Old Man archetype (I dunno) for you, and quite reasonably you grew up and found you're own way.
Jungians call it individuation, BTW, Jung said..."I'm glad I'm Jung and not a (insert expletive here) Jungian", hehe. His book Seven Sermons Of The Dead is pretty out there mysticism, but you may have moved on... -
I've quite dramatically drifted away from all that over the years; I'm now a heartless atheist and materialist, and think that Jung is pretty silly. I went back to try and read it again a few years ago and ended up being sullenly disappointed. It all seems so trite and mannered, with such overtones of the Übermensch, that I can't even imagine what it must have been like to be that 16 year old who loved it so dearly. But yes, at the time I was reading it, I was in a dialogue with an author who understood where I was coming from like no other.
It probably didn't help that you'd fallen out of touch with the elliptical, sometimes difficult, prose style too.
I read a lot of Jung for a while (although even at the time I was picking and choosing the parts I bought into) and I can't imagine picking it up again either. But the grounding in the ideas of myth and archetype hasn't gone to waste. It's still a help in modelling the world.
-
merc,
If only for the theory of introversion and extroversion, and to totally peeve Behaviourists and their pidgeons.
-
I wouldn't write Jung off too quickly. He certainly goes well into the wacky (like a lot of folks whose "intuition" is dominant- he spent time building stone walls to compensate) but a lot of his thinking is insightful and resonates. (50:50?)
Just saw Pan's Labyrinth, which very much got me and it taps on many of those archetypal doors. I've got a lot out of Jungian thought (without reading a lot of Jung, I'd have to confess)- but then I've got a lot out of the little behaviourism I've managed to understand too! :-) -
yeah Jung on archetypes is really interesting, and i think his identification and characterization of archetypes has informed a lot of great artists (not least of which our own miraculous Len Lye), designers and propagandists.
i think Jung's broader ontology is bit bit too complex to pass judgement on in under 10,000 words though. at the very least he's light years' ahead of Freud. -
merc,
I used to think that too, however on closer reading (and an essay for psyche 101) Mr Freud really had it going on too, and the little tricks that Jung used to play on the poor Mr Freud were trully evil (causing poor Freud to pass out twice).
My second book is dedicated to Carl Jung, (gratuitous self plug) and is available from... -
ooh ooh, what tricks? do tell.
available from... ...?
-
But then I've got a lot out of the little behaviourism I've managed to understand too! :-)
I'd say "a little behaviourism is a dangerous thing", but I'm not sure if I'd know what I meant ...
-
one behaviourist meets another in the street and says:
"you're fine, how am I?" -
Very sharp Mr Riddley. I like it a lot.
-
what's good about behaviourism though, is its intolerance of unfalsifiable theory, which gives it a ton more credibility than most of the alternatives. and it also acknowledges the intimate connection between the organism and its environment (__in extremis__ that the organism is the environment, which coupled with the assertion that 'mind' is at best an irrelevant metaphenomenon, makes it all very zen - for those that like such things), which in turn has rather important political implications.
the rise of cognitivism on the other hand (the theories of which are invariably unfalsifiable), was very convenient for those wishing to reassert the rightwing myths of 'rugged individualism' and total self-determination, and all the social and political eshewals of responsibility that that entails.
-
merc,
Freud thought that Jung was going to go all Oedipal on his ass and kill him, Jung kind of played up to that to the point that Freud actually fainted after Jung said... Also, Jung knew Freud was playing round with his sister in law, so when Jung analysed one of Freud's dreams he kind of skewed the analysis to suggest that, very naughty. There's a book, there always is, Freud and Jung Letters, I think. I have the definitive Jung biography. There is also a documentary at Videon called, Path of Heart though no Freud there I don't think but a funny little vignette about a row boat and how Jung could be really snarky if not seen to be Captain. Jung could play, he was married to one of the wealthiest woman in Europe and his patronesses, of whom there were many, included Mme Rothschilde, Freud was not so lucky.
Available from Real Groovy, Whitcoulls and me (I hold all the rights to all my work though published by others, hehhheh, I learned that from Keef and Mick, The Glimmer Twins Corporation). -
Behaviourism has its insights... the stuff about intermittant positive reinforcement producing a behaviour that's very hard to extinguish (I'm mangling the terms for sure) just so simply sums up gambling- and can help explain a lot of other risk-taking behaviours.
-
thanks m, will dig about. it looks very interesting. they are naughty tricks.
but funny.rob, you're right there - they're called Variable Ratio schedules and were massively researched and exploited precisely for the gambling biz. the interesting thing about the schedules is how inexorable their control over the subject's behaviour is, and their predictive power is frightening (see for example the Generalized Matching Law, there are much better refs but i'm in a hurry).
it's easy and fashionable to deride behaviourism but the schedules alone are gold.
-
merc,
Two titles, Imago and lMercurius(of course). Now I am bare.
As for behaviourism, yes I worked in advertising, yes I have had that chip removed and I promised...__not to use the powers for evil.__ -
merc,
Oh and, because you asked and Imago is the better one.
-
merc,
Link broken is http://www.authors.org.nz/ under Bookshop, shameless I am.
-
that's not shameless. from the brief descriptions they both look like great books insofar as they seem thoughtful and intimate. i guess now they'll need a readin'. i have some admiration for people brave enough to publish.
-
merc,
Well it's a Ghost Train ride for sure, every cliche that could happen, happened, but it was brilliant fun and I met some fantastic people, some of whom are now dead. Merc was published in 2001, I completely over identified with the archetype (Mercurius, the trickster, the coyote, the daemon). I have written 3 more books since and one huge long poem because I thought I should (115 pages me precious), but life and events conspired to send me away from publishing ever again.
Still, I look at those older books and I say, yeah, good enough. -
well that's some serious achievement. a mountain worth climbing. and if you can have fun too then i think that's called 'collect the set and win'.
-
merc,
Everyone's a winner! Ralphie. Now I've run out of words...
-
sometimes it's nice to run out of words.
ralphie says it all. -
and in the end the words come back.
i'm not sure if that's a blessing or a curse.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.