Episode 74: A Luminous Parasite: Jung on Art, Part Two

Weird Studies

Phil Ford and J. F. Martel

Society & Culture, Arts, Philosophy

4.8 • 688 Ratings

🗓️ 27 May 2020

⏱️ 72 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

In this second part of their exploration of C. G. Jung's essay "On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to Poetry," JF and Phil try to discern the psychological and metaphysical implications of the great Swiss psychologist's theory of art. For one, this involves discussing what Jung meant by archetypes, and how these relate to the artists who bring them forth in artistic works. This in turn leads to a discussion of the emergent artwork as an "autonomous complex," that is, as a self-moving spirit that requires the artist merely as a conduit for its manifestation in human -- and cosmic -- history. REFERENCES Carl Gustav Jung, "On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to Poetry" Arthur Machen, "Hieroglyphics: A Note Upon Ecstasy" Rick Riordan, [Percy Jackson & the Olympians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Jackson%26_the_Olympians)_ series of novels Robert Altman (director), Nashville Homer, The Odyssey Jacques Offenbach, The Tales of Hoffmann E. T. A. Hoffmann, "The Sandman" David Lynch, American filmmaker (the Dionysian!) Stanley Kubrick, American filmmaker (the Apollonian!) Richard Wagner's idea of Gesamtkunstwerk William S. Burroughs, Naked Lunch Johannes Vermeer, Woman Holding a Balance, and JF's analysis thereof Lisa Ruddick, "When Nothing is Cool" Weird Studies episode 5: Reading Lisa Ruddick's "When Nothing is Cool" Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Spectrevision Radio
0:03.3	Welcome to Weird Studies, an arts and philosophy podcast with hosts Phil Ford and J.F. Martel.
0:23.3	For more episodes or to support the podcast, go to weirdst. I'm J.F. Martel. In our last episode, Phil and I began our exploration of the 1922 essay on the relation of analytical psychology to poetry by the Swiss psychologist Carl Jung.
1:03.5	A good portion of that conversation was spent distinguishing Jung's way of analyzing art from that of his mentor and eventual arch-nemesis, the equally great
1:12.5	Austrian psychologist Sigmund Freud. Jung agrees with Freud that art is the result of psychological
1:18.9	processes, of course. But for him, this doesn't make art reducible to psychology. By turning
1:25.4	the work of art into a symptom of its creator's personal pathologies,
1:30.2	Jung says, one loses the real essence of the artwork, that is to say, the impersonal symbol
1:36.3	that it conveys. Now, symbols are weird entities. They are not, according to Jung, fully interpretable,
1:44.0	even though they command us by their nature
1:45.9	to interpret them. Symbols express aspects of reality that we humans have yet to decipher
1:52.3	and may never decipher. It's in the symbol of the archetype enters our field of awareness.
1:58.9	And according to Jung, nowhere is the archetype more tangibly manifest that in the worlds of
2:05.2	myth, religion, and of course, art.
2:08.7	What follows is a vertical descent into this realm of the archetypes.
2:13.8	In this episode, we ask the questions, where do symbols and archetypes come from?
2:18.4	How do they manifest for the creative artist about to give them form?
2:22.5	And how does this affect the meaning of art?
2:25.9	Unfortunately, we didn't have time to delve into the rather urgent follow-up question.
2:31.0	How can I make sure the archetypes continue to thrive in the human, all too human confines
2:35.6	of present-day society? So I thought I'd answer that one right off the bat. The answer is,
2:40.9	by supporting Weird Studies on Patreon, of course. Weird Studies patrons are a lucky bunch. Every off week,
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Phil Ford and J. F. Martel, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Phil Ford and J. F. Martel and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.