Shopping Cart

No products in the cart.

Reply To: Campbell on Writing


Reading some of the comments above, I have the following thoughts. They are simply thoughts and reactions, but nothing I say is ever intended to be set in stone.

Freud, Jung, and Campbell each and all had their special areas not covered by the others, or not covered as much as others.

It seems to me that ever since the post-Dadaism movements, movements in art reflecting the societies in which they live, so much discourse of new “experts” on the internet as Shaheda refers to are more about deconstruction of what went before them, or deconstruction theory. It is the same thing as when a person puts another person up on a pedestal, idolizing them, but at first or certain signs of disappointment that the person/god is not always perfect, later smashes the idol. This deconstruction has been done to Campbell, to Freud, and to Jung, one and all. People do this because this is what the new “experts” are about and learning, it seems, but also because they do not see or know where to further construct and build so the create a new “building” by tearing down the old building. I find it sad that this happens, that we cannot take the great minds for what they are into the following centuries save for those who will see this deconstruction for what it is. I am not saying that all types and ways of deconstruction are bad or negative; just, in this case, that I too find it sad when people do this to Campbell, et. al.

And I respect Campbell, Freud, and Jung each for their special and unique contributions to the world of myth and psychology, as well as their shared interests. Each of them went father in their own primary fields than the others. I felt a need here to speak up for Jung, who I love equally with Campbell.

This is perhaps only a partial response, as I only covered one sub-topic here to which I am interested in responding.