Analytic interpretation is fundamental to the process of psychoanalysis, Jungian analysis, and psychoanalytic psychotherapy. Interpretation is the medium by which the psychoanalytic art form is transmitted. What one chooses to say in analysis, why one chooses it, how one says it, when one says it; these are the building blocks of the interpretive process and the focus of Interpretation in Jungian Analysis: Art and Technique.
This volume is the first of its kind in the literature of analytical psychology. Until now, the process of interpretation has been addressed only briefly in general Jungian texts. Interpretation in Jungian Analysis provides an in-depth exploration of the process, including the history of analytic technique, the role of language in analytic therapy, the poetics and metaphor of interpretation, and the relationship between interpretation and the analytic attitude. In addition, the steps involved with the creation of clear, meaningful, and transformative interpretations are plainly outlined. Throughout the book, clinical examples and reader exercises are provided to deepen the learning experience. The influence of the Jungian perspective on the interpretative process is outlined, as are the use of analytic reverie and confrontation during the analytic process.
In addition to the historical, technical, and theoretic aspects of interpretation, this book also focuses on the artistic and creative elements that are often overlooked in the interpretive process. Ultimately, cultivating fluidity within the interpretive process is essential to engaging the depth and complexity of the psyche. Interpretation in Jungian Analysis will be of great interest to psychoanalysts and psychotherapists of all theoretical orientations and will be essential reading for students of analytical psychology.
Interpretation in Jungian Analysis: Art and Technique has been selected as a finalist for the best psychoanalytic book published in 2018 awarded by the American Board and Academy of Psychoanalysis.
How could so many intelligent people be so grievously wrong for such an extended period of time? How could they ignore so much overwhelming evidence that contradicted their most basic theories? These questions, too, deserve their own discipline: the sociology of error.
