Philemon Foundation panel at the IAAP Congress, Kyoto


A Message from Judith Harris, President, Philemon Foundation

In these turbulent times, the Philemon Foundation Board is continuing with our commitment to enable the publication of more hitherto unpublished works by C. G. Jung.

We are writing to you now to share the reflections and descriptions of the Foundation’s work, as presented by our board members and scholars at the IAAP 2016 Congress in Kyoto, Japan.

On September 1st in Kyoto, the Philemon General Editor Professor Sonu Shamdasani, led a session on our efforts, and presented an up-to-date list of the Philemon Foundation’s completed volumes and works in progress, listed below. We trust you will find our reports of interest.

We wish to thank our affiliated organization, the IAAP for offering us the opportunity to describe the Philemon mission and achievements to the Jungian analytic community.

We also thank The Foundation of the Works of C. G. Jung (Stiftung der Werke von C. G. Jung) for making Jung’s texts available for our mandate to disseminate Jung’s important insights for his and our times.

We are grateful for the donations of our supporters, and we are honored that the Philemon volumes have been so well used in the Jungian communities for programs, seminars, training, and practice in the Jungian tradition. More information about our texts and various ways to support our endeavor is available on the Philemon Foundation website,

Herewith are five presentations, by John Beebe, Craig Stephenson, Michael Marsman, Caterina Vezzoli, and Beverley Zabriskie, which discuss the value of the Philemon publications for training candidates, analysts, scholars, and others interested in the theories of Jung.

With our best wishes,

The Philemon Foundation Board of Directors:

Judith Harris, President;

Michael Marsman, Treasurer;

Caterina Vezzoli, Secretary;

Beverley Zabriskie, Vice-President;

Professor Sonu Shamdasani, UCL, London, General Editor.




I, The Education of a Philemon Editor 

John Beebe

C.G. Institute, San Francisco –

I have often functioned as an editor within the Jungian and psychotherapeutic communities, so I did not come to co-edit a Philemon publication as a novice. That it turned out to be a genuine growth experience for me in the direction of mature scholarship and prudence was a pleasant surprise, like losing fifty pounds after dieting for more than a year! I was both daunted and fortunate to have as my co-editor, Ernst Falzeder, and as our mutual prima materia the more-than-once deemed unpublishable correspondence of C. G. Jung and Hans Schmid-Guisan about psychological types, which Ernst had translated into English.

Falzeder is one of the pre-eminent figures in the presentation of psychoanalytic correspondence. He has made an analytic specialty out of allowing the historical records of our field to speak for themselves, with a minimum of unnecessary editorial intrusion and a maximum of informational contextualization. The hardest lesson for me to learn, as an analyst so extraverted that he can’t stop being helpful, was not to do the reader’s work for her.

Ernst was both patient and firm with me, and our process allowed me to sleuth out and identify some of the players in the background of the correspondence, such as the teacher Jung described as unable to stop playing mother with her students. (I was allowed by Ernst to speculate on this in a note only after he had checked my work by reading the autobiography of the woman I suspected Jung was referring to.)

I was congratulated by Ernst for distinguishing, in another note, Schiller the philosopher who advanced pragmatism in the time of William James from Schiller the playwright who was Goethe’s closest friend.

And I was able to identify in the correspondence the very first type diagram to show four functions of consciousness, a contribution of Schmid, who didn’t have the word for intuition that Maria Moltzer would later supply and had to rely on the term “representation.” Ernst would not permit me to make too much of this word “representation.” Nor did he allow me to find, in Schmid’s devising the kind of diagram that Jung would start to draw to explain his typology only after 1925, one more example of Schmid’s extraordinarily anticipatory extraverted intuition. The evidence for that type determination was left on the cutting room floor of our introduction and saved for an article that you can find in the current issue of Jung Journal: Culture and Psyche under the title, “A Contemporary Speculation about the Typologies of the Jung-Schmid Correspondents.”

What I was able to give to Ernst and to Sonu was a passionate analytic detective’s interest in the transferential field between Schmid and Jung, and to focus how the roles they played, Jung the intransigent thinker, Schmid the reasonable feeler, were in fact masks worn by friends struggling with a way to get fully beyond a former analytic relationship that is mentioned, unmistakably, in the correspondence, but not acknowledged as one of its subjects. The value of my holding this insight was not to reduce what Jung and Schmid wrote about type, but to make how they did so comprehensible. If you didn’t know that Jung was playing, not just the introvert, but a difficult father to get away from and that Schmid was not just an extravert, but also a trickster, you might not have noticed how little the roles they had accepted as the basis for their dialogue explained what transpired in it.

That I could find a scholarly way to make that clear to the reader and leave the historical ambiguities alone enough to let this correspondence tell its own story testifies to the integrity of Philemon. As its namesake helped Jung to do, Philemon, a magician in the publishing world of today, enables present day editors to do justice to what we owe the Jungian dead. Those incomplete works and contributions of Jung and his interlocutors can now live on, to create new projects we can take up with a complementary imagination and honesty.

INDEX: Philemon, Scholarship, Editing.


II, Using a Philemon Series Book to Track Jung’s Writing Process: An Example

Craig E Stephenson

Jungian Psychoanalytic Association, New York  –

In 1945, at the end of the Second World War and after a long illness, C. G. Jung delivered a lecture in Zurich on the French Romantic poet Gérard de Nerval. The lecture focused on Nerval’s visionary memoir, Aurélia, which the suicidal poet wrote in an ambivalent attempt to emerge from madness. Jung’s previously unpublished lecture is both a cautionary psychological tale and a validation of Nerval’s visionary experience as a genuine encounter.

As a Philemon Scholar, I prepared the volume, C. G. Jung, On Psychological and Visionary Art: Notes from C. G. Jung’s Lecture on Gérard de Nerval’s Aurélia, with specific research principles in mind. Nerval’s memoir of his madness is structured on the central mythical pattern of the descent journey. This Philemon book is likewise organized for the reader in the form of a creative descent, from the editor’s introduction through Jung’s commentaries in two lectures and discussions, back to Nerval’s enigmatic text itself. To what end?

Most English readers are not familiar with Nerval’s Aurélia, which Jung calls a work of “extraordinary magnitude”. Philemon readers can examine both Jung’s lectures and Nerval’s text for themselves, flipping back and forth between Jung’s reading responses and Nerval’s words that evoked them. That is to say, readers can make their way from the 1945 lecture back to Nerval’s 1855 memoir and then work their way forward again, with Jung guiding them through Nerval’s creative visions of anima mundi and out of Nerval’s terrifying dream without a lysis of a winged figure crashing down into a dismal Paris courtyard.

Assembling this Philemon book was a labor of love and intellectual curiosity that began in 1996 when Ulrich Hoerni and the C. G. Jung Stiftung gave me permission to look at the manuscripts of the Jung lectures on Nerval in the ETH Bibliothek’s Special Collections. Later, when the Stiftung recommended my work to the consideration of the Philemon Foundation, and during the years of subsequent research, as more documents pertaining to the lectures accumulated, it became clear that this book could present for the first time Jung’s only reading of a Romantic text and also could magnify, like never before, the steps in Jung’s creative reading responses to a single text. The rationale for including all the different sections of the book had to be defended, especially Richard Sieburth’s award-winning translation into English of the Nerval text, which had to be negotiated with Penguin Classics. Permissions and fees also had to be negotiated for the illustrations that readers needed to see, including the fantastical sketches by Nerval, the Alfred Kubin illustrations that had accompanied the text Jung was reading, and the alchemical images that Jung presented as part of his 1945 lecture to the Psychological Club. Philemon’s General Editor Sonu Shamdasani supported all these struggles, assuring Princeton University Press publisher Fred Appel that the exceptional editorial strategy of balancing word and image was justified and academically appropriate. Princeton University Press production editor Debbie Tegarden and designer Jess Massabrook described the resulting illustrated volume as the closest thing to a ‘pop-up book’ that they had ever worked on at Princeton (personal communication, October 19, 2015).

The documents in the book are presented in reverse chronological order:

  • Jung’s handwritten abstract of his lecture – the only document about Nerval included by the editors in Jung’s Collected Works.
  • The revised lecture on Nerval, delivered at the Psychological Club, Zürich, on 9 June 1945, with notes providing historical and psychological contexts, and including the alchemical illustrations that Jung presented during the lecture.
  • In a letter dated 11 September 1956, to Marie-Louise von Franz (now in the ETH-Bibliothek collections), Aniela Jaffé acknowledges having found in a cabinet not only a copy of the 1945 lecture, apparently drawn up by Jung’s secretary, Marie-Jeanne Schmid, but also the minutes of the discussion that followed that lecture. These minutes of Jung responding to questions from von Franz, Linda Fierz, C. A. Meier, and others convey (even in English translation) Jung’s ironic conversational tone, as well as his use of earthy Swiss colloquialisms.
  • The notes of Jung’s lecture delivered on 21 March 1942 to the Swiss Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy (SGPP), showing Jung’s extensive revisions, many handwritten on the backs of the pages.
  • Five pages of Jung’s first handwritten notes in response to Aurélia.
  • The library of Jung’s home at Seestrasse 228, Küsnacht, holds three copies of Nerval’s Aurélia: most importantly, Aurélia oder de Traum und Das Leben, with the famous Austrian illustrator Alfred Kubin’s illustrations, the translation into German by his wife, Hedwig Kubin, published in 1910 by Georg Müller of Münich. The Philemon Series book presents the complete text of Nerval’s Aurélia (1855) in an English translation by Dr. Richard Sieburth, with explanatory notes to assist the reader, and with the Kubin illustrations and Jung’s marginalia indicated.

I have promised an example of the kind of insightful questions laying in wait for readers who sift through this layering of documents. Here it is. In his lecture, Jung distinguishes between a psychological reading of the artist’s life and a psychological reading of the art. The autobiographical context may be intriguing for the reader, but Jung wants to concentrate on the psychology of the art (see also CW15, par. 147). Of course, this position contradicts Freud’s important essay on Leonardo da Vinci and an entire school of critical interpretation that employs the works to interpret the life of the artist and vice versa.
That said, it’s interesting to chart the extent to which Jung’s lecture on Aurélia alternates between these two possible readings: the psychology of Nerval’s life and that of Nerval’s art. Oddly, Jung ends his lecture not with the psychology of the art but rather with the psychology of Nerval, “a personality that never understood how to prize open the narrow circle of the personal ‘I’ or to grant admission to the forbidden shadow of another order of things.”

Examining the reproduced facsimile of Jung’s copy of Aurélia with Kubin’s illustrations provides us with a possible hypothesis. Perhaps Jung fell under the powerful influence of Kubin’s last illustration for Aurélia, a picture of an event that is not in Nerval’s text — the author’s death by suicide. To what degree, then, did Jung’s edition of Aurélia with Kubin’s illustrations color his reading of Nerval’s text? Or was he inclined to reemphasize Nerval’s suffering and leave the audience to confront a dilemma?

INDEX: Gérard de Nerval, Aurélia, visionary, Kubin, Philemon


Jung, C. G. (1922/1931) On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to Poetry, in The Spirit in Man, Art and Literature, Collected Works 15. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1966, 65-83.

Jung C. G. (2015) On Psychological and Visionary Art: Notes from C. G. Jung’s Lecture on Gérard de Nerval’s Aurélia, (Craig E Stephenson, Ed.) Philemon Series/Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.



III, Reflections on Philemon while an Erstwhile Candidate

Michael Marsman

Jungian Psychoanalytic Association (JPA), New York  –

I first became aware of the Philemon Foundation in 2005 towards the end of my second year of analytic training when I received a fundraising letter in the mail along with a copy of Jung History. At that point, I had not known that there were any unpublished works of Jung other than the Red Book. As a candidate and being new to the inside of the Jungian world, I had the excitement of one discovering Jung for the first time, wondering what secrets and treasures lay hidden, and impatiently, when they would be revealed. Eleven years later, I am as excited now by the prospect of bringing these many works to publication as I was then. When I made my first donation to the foundation that spring, I accidentally hit the “donate” button twice, so that I inadvertently contributed double my intended amount. Looking back, it is no surprise that I am now the foundation’s treasurer. I like to think of this as a good example of entelechy.

The first work in the Philemon series that I was exposed to was Children’s Dreams, for as soon as it was published, JPA analyst Sylvester Wojtkowski taught a course on the volume. I found it to be the most comprehensive and detailed work of Jung’s on dreams and I learned much more from it than I had from his other works including the Seminar on Dream Analysis. His explanation of the dramatic structure of dreams and emphasis on the importance of children’s dreams in anticipating the “later destiny” (Jung, 2008, p. 1) of the individual contributed to the foundation of how I currently work with dream material. The spontaneity and naturalness of Jung as a man really came through in the work which helped me to relate to Jung in a more intimate way and to be more natural myself in the consulting room. The volume is one of my favorites and I think offers some of the best teaching on amplification in Jungian literature.

It was late in my training that the Red Book was published. In fact, I took my comprehensive exam as the volume was making its debut at the Rubin Museum in New York where I volunteered to be a docent for the exhibit. It was a rousing event and I was surprised both by the size of the turnout and its composition. Other than the many analysts travelling from near and far to view the exhibit, most of the people that I encountered were not therapists and many were quite young. I spoke with artists, business people, scientists, teachers, designers, etc. who were intrigued and moved by the exhibit, hungrily engaging in conversation about Jung and his theories. In fact, a man I spoke to on that first day decided to become a Jungian analyst shortly thereafter and enrolled in the JPA’s training program. The publication of the Red Book touched many peoples’ lives and brought Jung out of the closet, so to speak, making him and his works more known to the general public. I introduced a reading by a group of poets responding to the Red Book, for example. None had read it but were simply inspired by its existence. A woman at that event, a retired schoolteacher, was inspired to published a book of her family’s Jungian history, in part as a result of that event. And the museum’s Red Book dialogues opened up the world of Jung to audience members in often profound, vital and intimate ways.

As a candidate, I was struck and influenced by Jung’s courage, honesty and sensitivity in his encounter with the unconscious and by his ability to maintain a sense of the sacred while taking an objective stance. What astounded me then – and does still – is the way in which one can trace Jung’s later theories and observations directly to passages in the Red Book, allowing insight into the evolution of psychological thought. Sonu Shamdasani’s introduction and copious notes both broadened and deepened that knowledge.

My analytic training was deeply impacted by the work of the Philemon Foundation. As an analyst, I am fortunate and proud to be part of this organization that contributes to the history of psychological knowledge much in the way that the Bollingen Foundation did in the past. It is exciting that today’s candidates are fortunate to incorporate works such as Dream Interpretation, the Jung-Neumann Correspondence, Psychological Types and the Nerval Lecture into their training, each generation of analysts learning a somewhat different Jung.

INDEX: Philemon; Candidate; Red Book.


Jung, C.G. (2008). Children’s Dreams (P. 1). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.


IV, The Red Book and the Jungian Analyst

Caterina Vezzoli

CIPA – Centro Italiano Psicologia Analitica –

My experience is that of a Jungian Analyst reading and trying to enter the different layers of the Red Book. Anticipating what I’m hoping to transmit to you the study of the RB has profoundly changed my way of understanding and of being a Jungian Analyst.

The text and the editorial notes, more than the images, gave me access to the spirit of depth that is the subterranean river flowing and fertilizing Analytical Psychology.

To enter the comprehension of the RB wasn’t easy, the first approach was rather disappointing, difficult, alienating, I received echoes of representations and visualisations that I couldn’t grasp. I needed a guide and I was so lucky that I could participate to Sonu Shamdasani seminar on the RB where I could immerse in the complexity and richness of Jung immense culture. Shamdasani’s editorial notes and teaching helped me to stay in contact and immerse in the dark waters of forgotten spiritual complexes and archetypes that constitute the spirit of depth. The amplifications offered in the seminar especially the readings of the original material to which Jung referred made the difference but it wasn’t easy, the seminar was in English with complicated texts and issues to be analysed. The warm, kind and hospitable atmosphere did a lot.

It took years but at a certain point one Sunday I could hear the narration of what was apparently hidden in the text that in fact was in full view, as it is for all symbolic material. From the mist of associations, fantasies, dreams, a pattern coming from the conjugation of the text, the editorial notes, the teaching, started to emerge. It was like knitting a tapestry by using two threads one represented by the text and the other by the editorial notes that by poking the underlying cultural, environmental or personal associations let emerge in full view the meaning.

To exemplify this process I will tell of my experience In Liber Secundus, Cap IV The Anchorite.

“… in the desert [I] is following the footprints in the sand. A haggard man covered in a white linen mantle is sitting on a mat…Across his knees lies a book in yellow parchment, with beautiful black handwriting – a Greek gospel…”.[1]

In the note it is said that Jung identifies the anchorite as coming from the third century. In the next chapter he will be identified as Ammonius. There are three historical figures with this name. The notes giving a framework to the association described in the RB animated a vision or an amplification that revealed the implications of the themes that were being explored.

Jung was referring to Ammonius and Philo Judeas for good reasons. Ammonius and Philo where two philosophers leaving in Alexandria, not in the same period but were part of the philosophical milieu that was characteristic of the city under the Ptolemaic dynasty and still active in Roman Time. Greek not Latin was the language of this part of the word before the Arab conquest in the VII century. Gnosis also developed in this context. The first Christian heresies also developed here, Arius a deacon, pupil of Origen (well known to Jung) elaborated on the nature of God and put into discussion the human nature of Christ.

The Anchorite meditated in solitude, the desert was a place of choice to people that preferred loneliness to the world of philosophical debate. The first anchorites leaving on the Mount Sinai were recorded in the third century, while the monastery for holy men precursor of the actual Mount Sinai Monastery was built in the IV century thanks to a donation of empress Helena mother to Constantine I, at least this is what the tradition says.

Late III and early IV centuries, mentioned in the notes, was the period of the Christians’ persecutions on the part of the roman emperors. Historically the persecutions were mild in Italy and Gaulle violent in this area and many of the early martyrs were recorded here. Prosecutions will be ended at the beginning of the IV century exactly in 313 with the edict of Constantine I. From then on the new religion will conquer the roman world. All this came at a price as said in the text by Ammonius when discussing on John Gospel and the philosophy of Philo:

But words should not become Gods.[2]

Logos, the word, through the scholastic theology did dominate the light of the spirit as it is again specified by note 47 page 245 [3] of the reading edition. Later on in the red book in Scrutinies a note will return on the scholasticism at page 473 note 18 the reference is at BB5 [I] : “I am Scholastic? [Soul]:”…science is a new version of scholasticism. It need to be surmounted”.[4] And the Soul requires to [I] more solitude.

The notes are the work of the Philemon Scholars and the necessary support to discover the meaning and comprehend that Jung ethical research into the roots of Christianity was at the service of a truth that far from being absolute revealed its shortcomings and contradictions. The Anchorite was pointing at the underlying nature of a religion that becoming too dogmatic in favour of power had lost its light or spiritual power. The same can be applied to science.

In this case exploration of the cultural substrate was to follow Jung narrating voice that was elaborating about the product of imagination and the notes helped to detect the meaning letting emerge the light of the discourse.

Light that in my case had a personal significance as I could rediscover my interest in the fabulous stories of the women martyrs and mystics.

As an analyst what I have learned from this experience is the potential of working with paradoxes of creative narration that have roots in culture, in the unconscious, in life itself. The teaching implicit in the study of the Red Book opened the meaning of metaphors that stratified by cultural complexes remained hidden or unused. The fascination comes from Jung profound commitment to his inner truth.

To conclude, very intellectual volumes could be written on RB metaphors, important are not the historical facts but rather the history of ideas and how things went wrong, there is always “something rotten in Denmark”. Jung metaphors, overcoming the perversion of rhetoric, give us access to the archaic substratum of culture and is “impetus for epistemological revolution”[5].

INDEX: Philemon; Red Book; Gnosis; Scholars; Scholasticism.


Jung, C.G. (2009). The Red Book. A Readers’ Edition. Norton &Company.

Stafford, B. M. (1993). Body Criticism: imagining the Unseen in Enlightenment Art and Medicine. The MIT Press.

[1] Jung, C.G. (2009). The Red Book. A Readers’ Edition. Norton &Company. Page 242

[2] idem, p.245

[3] idem, p.245

[4] idem, p. 473

[5] Stafford, B. M. (1993). Body Criticism: imagining the Unseen in Enlightenment Art and Medicine. The MIT Press.


V, Language Gaps and Entanglements

Beverley Zabriskie

Jungian Psychoanalytic Association (JPA), New York –

The valuable core, content and purpose of the Philemon Foundation is excellent scholarship applied to the texts, seminars, and correspondences of C.G Jung in the challenging task of bringing his unpublished or incomplete works to the professional and lay public.

The attention of the Philemon historians, editors, researchers and translators layer and amplify our theory and indeed our practice. These scholars lend their lust for accuracy, their willingness to wrestle with translation, and their sculpting editing skills to provide and contextualize multi-faceted tracing of Jung’s thought in both his written and spoken words. They use their expertise and time, time we do not have, to enrich our grasp of Jung’s corpus, the sources and uses of his concepts, the meandering meanings of our fields’ words and ideas.

Many of us suffer the sad state of being uni-lingual, with only superficial access to the nuances of other formal and colloquial languages. Even native German speakers such as Martin Liebscher and Ernst Falzeder, and such translators as Sonu Shamdasani and John Peck, struggle with the valences of Jung’s terminology, but they are nearer and closer to their valences and meanings. (The German style of the Red Book, I have been told, has its special challenges.)

Through their intellectual breadth and linguistic depth, we learn how words and passages we assume are accurate have been twisted by translators, distorted or improperly cited by editors, confused by note-takers, each with their own filters of projections or prejudices. They spotlight how Jung’s contemporaries, his readers from later periods, including our own, insert implications which may not accurately render his complicated intents. They underscore the entanglements of terms and concepts extracted from the pioneering texts of our field.

Here today we have scholars who have brought us Philemon volumes. The General Editor, Sonu Shamdasani midwifed and revealed Jung’s The Red Book. His introduction to this epiphanal text is a profound and complete summary of the history and formation of the Jungian corpus, invaluable for teaching and learning.

The publication of the Red Book has introduced Jung to new generations and populations. The Red Book was translated into nine languages. The Red Book exhibitions moved from the Rubin Museum in New York, to the Hammer Museum in Los Angeles, and on to the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. for both an extended exhibit and a conference, currently available on the Library of Congress website. The flapping of Red Book banners on Capitol Hill was a sight I never thought to see.

The Red Book was then on display at the Rietberg Museum Zurich, the Guimet in Paris, the Bodmer Foundation in Geneva, and finally the portal exhibit of the 2013 Venice Biennale, where it drew large international audiences and the commentary of art critics and curators.

With Sonu, we have here two other Philemon scholars, John Beebe and Craig Stephenson. With the Austrian historian of psychoanalysis Ernst Falzeder, their presentations at a New York conference on the Philemon volume The Question of Psychological Types: The Correspondence of C. G. Jung and Hans Schmid-Guisan 1915-1916 are available on a youtube channel, and published in the Jung Journal: Culture & Psyche (Volume 10, Number 3, summer 1916).

Falzeder is now immersed in gathering and translating a full edition of Jung’s very rich ETH Lectures. To bring examples of his contribution into our discourse, I extract the following passages from his presentation “Sigmund Freud and C. G. Jung: Collaboration, Polarization and Postmodern Analysis”, at the 2010 San Francisco symposium, Freud and Jung, Freudians and Jungians. In this paper, he notes that while Freud and Jung’s

“..terms and concepts have become part of our everyday language, and entries in dictionaries, (they are) often in garbled or misunderstood form. Everybody talks about the unconscious or the subconscious, the collective unconscious, Freudian slips, archetypes, repression, the Oedipus complex, narcissism, libido, introverts and extroverts(sic), castrating mothers, anal-retentive people and potty training, the midlife crisis, identification and projection, id, ego and superego, the father imago, the death instinct, inferiority complexes, regression, and so on.” (2010)

Falzeder especially laments that “Jung’s etymologically correct expression “extraversion,” for instance, has turned into “extroversion,” which makes readers with a minimal knowledge of Latin shudder.” He asks: What would one think of terms such as extro-curricular, extro-dite, extro-marital, extro-ordinary, for instance? His footnote states: “All authoritative English dictionaries consulted, in print or online, give “extrovert(ed)” as the standard form (both for American and British English), while listing “extravert” only as a variant” (p. 3)

Falzeder notes that Jung differentiated extraversion and introversion from pathological states, such as hysteria and dementia praecox, noting that “they may also be normal”. He quotes Jung’s statement that these two “versions” also characterize theories including “analytical psychology”.

Observing that “psychoanalyst’ is often taken as a synonym for psychiatrist, psychotherapist, or ‘shrink’, he traces how the term “psycho-analysis” was evoked by Freud for his method of breaking down complex phenomena into their basic psychic component parts as an analogy to chemical analysis, Just as chemical analysis demonstrates that organic matter was composed of elements such as carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, etc., psycho-analysis would be able to make an analogous analysis of psychical phenomena. This does not jibe, Falzeder chides, with the Jungian approach to dreams as direct, undistorted emanations from the unconscious that need not be “analyzed,” for dreams are “a communication or message from the unconscious, the unitary soul of humanity”. Thus, he opines, the term “Jungian analyst” for a psychotherapist working in Jung’s tradition is a misnomer. (p.4)

Philemon scholars also trace crossover terms, framing our tradition in a cultural field and era of intense exchange among our first professional generations. Falzeder states that “inferiority complex … is not a Freudian term, but a garbled concoction of Adler’s concept of the “inferiority feeling” and Jung’s theory of emotional “complexes.”’ He also mentions that in 1910, amidst the Freud-Jung friendship, Freud honored Jung’s use of the term, giving the name “Oedipus complex” to a central psychoanalytic thesis. Falzeder also alludes to the use of the term “Imago”, first used by Jung in 1911, borrowed from the Swiss writer Carl Spitteler’s title for his 1906 novel and from the ancient religious idea of “imagines et lares.” In 1912 Freud named a new journal Imago, Journal for the Application of Psychoanalysis to the Humanities, while psychoanalysts today still evoke Imago to describe object representations. (p.5)

Another Philemon scholar, John Peck, worked with Sonu on the Red Book and now on the Black Books, Jung’s personal record of psychological transformation, to be published via Philemon in 1918. In a personal communication, John spoke of the intense impact of involvement in the internal dynamics and configurations of Jung’s psychic world. As a teacher of candidates, I have seen a noticeable difference in those who were exposed to the Red Book from the start of their training from the previous generations.

At one memorable moment in my Philemon board tenure, Sonu showed us Jung’s clinical records. As these cannot be published without invading his patients’ privacy, I want to describe them. On typed pages Jung compiled records of his patients’ dreams and their associations. In the margins, were Jung’s amplifications, reflections, including his notes as to whether the patient might have previous knowledge of the archetypal themes. To see Jung’s meticulous care with his patient’s material was inspiring for my daily practice.

Read and look for Philemon scholars’ depth insights and insider information in the Philemon volumes already published, and watch for the many soon and yet to come. They make our knowing and understanding more formidable and accurate, juicier and richer.

They widen and deepen our views by delving deep into Jung’s works so they may bring them to light.

INDEX: Philemon, Scholars, scholarship, terminology; concepts; history


Falzeder, E. “Freud and Jung, Freudians and Jungians”, from the symposium “Sigmund Freud and C. G. Jung: Collaboration, Polarization and Postmodern Analysis”, San Francisco, November 20, 2010

Jung Journal: Culture & Psyche, Volume 10, Number 3, pp. 14–30, Print ISSN 1934-2039, Online ISSN 1934-2047. 2016 C. G. Jung Institute of San Francisco. DOI: 10.1080/19342039.2016.1191110.

Ernest Falzeder: Types of Truth


VI, Published Philemon Series Volumes 


-Jung Contra Freud: Jung’s 1912 New York Lectures on Psychoanalysis

-The Red Book: Liber Novus

-On Psychological and Visionary Art: Notes from C. G. Jung’s –Lecture on Gérard de Nerval’s Aurélia

-Dream Interpretation Ancient and Modern: Notes From the Seminar Given in 1936-1940

-Introduction to Jungian Psychology: Notes of the Seminar Given By Jung on Analytical Psychology in 1925, revised edition

-The Question of Psychological Types: The Correspondence of C. G. Jung and Hans Schmid-Guisan 1915-1916

-Children’s Dreams: Notes from the Seminar Given in 1936-1940

-Analytical Psychology in Exile: The Correspondence of C. G. Jung and Erich Neumann

-The Jung-White Letters

-C. G. Jung and Adolf Keller. On Theology and Psychology: Correspondence and Conversations

Editors: John Beebe -Adrian Cunningham -Marianne Jehle -Ernst Falzeder-Suzanne Gieser -Ann Lammers -Martin Liebscher -John Peck -Sonu Shamdasani -Giovanni Sorge -Craig Stephenson

Translators: (English): Ernst Falzeder – Mark Kyburz -Heather McCartney -Gottwalt Pankow-John Peck- Sonu Shamdasani -Tony Woolfson

Coming soon….


– The History of Psychology: Lectures delivered at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, 1933-1934, vol. 1.

Edited by Ernst Falzeder

Foreword by Ulrich Hoerni

Translated by Ernst Falzeder, Mark Kyburz, John Pec

– Dream Symbols of the Individuation Process: Notes of the Seminar Given in Bailey Island, 1936, and New York, 1937

Edited by Suzanne Gieser

– The Black Books, 1913-1932

Edited by Sonu Shamdasani

Translated by Martin Liebscher, John Peck and Sonu Shamdasani








Jung in transition

Cultural, Historical, Clinical and Professional Impact of the Philemon Series.

Panel presentation followed by open reception at the IAAP International Congress, Kyoto, Thursday, September 1, 2016, 17:15 , Room C1, Kyoto International Conference Center. IAAP XX International Congress for Analytical Psychology, Kyoto, Japan.

We invite you to attend a panel discussion and to join us for a reception celebrating the significance of the Philemon Series. Panelists include Sonu Shamdasani (General Editor of the Philemon Foundation), John Beebe and Craig Stephenson (Philemon Scholars), and Michael Marsman, Caterina Vezzoli and Beverley Zabriskie (Philemon Directors).


The President’s End of Year Letter 2015


Dear Philemon Foundation Supporter,

The holiday season is upon us, and we at the Philemon Foundation want to thank you once again for your generous support in recent years.

We have had an active and creative year, with publications, conferences and public programs. It is our mission and our intention to bring out Jung’s unpublished works as a major contribution to the history of psychology and of psychotherapies. This is made possible only with your support.

This year has seen the appearance of two new volumes in the Philemon Series from Princeton University Press: Analytical Psychology in Exile: The Correspondence of C.G. Jung & Erich Neumann, edited by Martin Liebscher and translated by Heather McCartney, and On Psychological and Visionary Art: Notes from C.G. Jung’s Lecture on Gérard de Nerval’s “Aurelia”, edited by Craig Stephenson, translated by Gottwalt Pankow and Richard Sieburth. As previews, see the excerpts below from Martin Liebscher’s introduction to the former, and Craig Stephenson’s introduction to his volume.

With the Jungian Psychoanalytic Association in New York, we co-sponsored Psychological Types Then and Now: The Relevance and Application of Jung’s Theory, with additional support from the IAAP, featuring presentations by Philemon Foundation editors, John Beebe, Ernst Falzeder and Craig Stephenson. These proceedings are available for you to view, via:

Philemon Foundation editors have completed the editorial work on the several projects that are now either under review or submission:

The History of Psychology: Lectures delivered at the ETH Zürich by C. G. Jung, Volume 1: October 1933 – February 1934, edited by Ernst Falzeder, foreword by Ulrich Hoerni, translated by Mark Kyburz, John Peck and Ernst Falzeder.

The Practice of Active Imagination: Notes of The German Seminar of 1931 Given by C. G. Jung edited by Ernst Falzeder, translated by Ernst Falzeder (with the collaboration of Tony Woolfson).

Dream Symbols of the Individuation Process: Notes of the Seminar Given by C.G.Jung In Bailey Island, 1936, and New York, 1937, edited by Suzanne Gieser.
On Dream Interpretion, Yoga and Psychology. Notes of the Seminar Given by Dr. C. G. Jung in Berlin between 26 June and 1 July 1933, with a presentation by Heinrich Zimmer, Edited by Giovanni Sorge, Translated by Mark Kyburz and John Peck.

In addition, the English translation of the Jung-Keller correspondence, which appeared in German last year, has been completed: C. G. Jung and Adolf Keller: On Theology and Psychology: A Correspondence, edited by Marianne Jehle, translated by Heather McCartney and John Peck.

Meanwhile, work continues on the editing of Jung and the Indologists: Jung’s Correspondences with Wilhelm Hauer, Heinrich Zimmer and Mircea Eliade (edited by Giovanni Sorge), and the editing and translating of The Black Books: 1913-1932 (edited by Sonu Shamdasani, translated by Martin Liebscher, John Peck and Sonu Shamdasani), and further volumes of the ETH lectures (edited by Ernst Falzeder and Martin Liebscher).

The Philemon Foundation receives no royalties from the sale of the works by C. G. Jung that we nurture all the way to publication. To complete these important and meaningful projects currently underway, we depend on donations from you, our friends and colleagues. Volumes in the Philemon Series are now used throughout the world for teaching and training the next generation of Jungian analysts. They have contributed to the historical understanding of Jung’s work, the development of Jung history as an academic discipline, and the wider dissemination of Jung’s work into the culture at large, which is helping to bring a new generation to the reading of Jung.

We are a registered US non-profit organization, and all US taxpayers are eligible for a tax exemption under the rules of the 501(3)c.

Another simple way to contribute is to make your Amazon purchases of any item using the following link that can be copied into your browser and bookmarked:

Please continue to visit our website ( for more news about our projects and upcoming events in 2016. And please bookmark us and add our news to your websites. For those attending the forthcoming IAAP congress in Kyoto, several Philemon Foundation board members and editors will be participating in a panel on Jung in Transition: Cultural, Historical, Clinical and Professional Implications of the Philemon Series.

The Philemon Foundation wishes you a meaningful and restful holiday season and a good entrance into the New Year. We hope you enjoy the excerpts included here below.

With our best wishes,
Judith Harris, President, Philemon Foundation

Beverley Zabriskie, Vice President
Craig Stephenson, Secretary
Michael Marsman, Treasurer
Caterina Vezzoli, Director

Sonu Shamdasani, General Editor


Excerpt from Martin Liebscher’s introduction to Analytical Psychology in Exile: The Correspondence of C.G. Jung & Erich Neumann, pp. xi-lxi.

Late Recognition:

During his lifetime Neumann saw the translation of his works into several languages.  Along with Hull’s English translation, The Origins and History of Consciousness was rendered into Italian and Dutch, a Spanish translation appeared in 1956.  Translations of Depth Psychology and a New Ethic, the three volumes of Die Umkreisung der Mitte, Eros and Psyche, the three volumes and the Great Mother followed suit.

At the forefront of interest in things to do with Neumann were the Dutch.  This special relationship becomes apparent not only through the number of translations, but also through Neumann’s regular lectures in the Netherlands.  In 1952 he was invited to the Internationale School voor Wijsbegeerte in Amersfoort for the first time, which was followed by several other visits in the years to come.  Presentations in Amsterdam, Arnheim, Leiden and The Hague followed.

Neumann’s international recognition reached a new height in 1958 when he participated in the First Conference of the IAAP (AGAP) in Zürich and in the Fourth International Congress of Psychotherapy in Barcelona, both marking milestones in the history of modern psychology.  A year later he took part in a conference in Germany, something, which he had rejected until then.  In 1960 he returned to Germany one more time to lecture in Münich on the topic of ‘Consciousness, the Ritual, and Depth Psychology.’

At home he began to institutionalize the small group of Analytical Psychologists and to secure its future by founding the Israel Association of Analytical Psychology (1959).  His reputation was steadily growing.  He was even asked to become the head of the Psychological Institute of the University of Tel Aviv, an offer he gratefully declined.

Amongst all signs of international and national recognition, signs Neumann had waited for desperately over all those years, fell the sudden and unexpected medical diagnosis of his fatal cancer.  The last Eranos conference in the summer of 1960 was followed by a visit to London to see his brother and to seek specialist medical advice.  But his condition deteriorated rapidly and after the return to Tel Aviv Erich Neumann died on 3 November.

VII The legacy of Erich Neumann
Two monographs by Erich Neumann were published posthumously:  Crisis and Renewal (1961) and The Child (1963).  The latter was regarded as one of the first major studies on child psychology by an eminent Jungian scholar.  Neumann’s interest in the subject went back to the 1930’s as an (unpublished) essay from April 1939 entitled ‘Remarks on the Psychology of the Child and on Pedagogy’ proves.  In the 1950’s he held seminars for child psychologists at his home in Tel Aviv on a regular basis.  As mentioned before, Neumann also held a course on the subject at the institute in Zürich in 1959, which provoked a conflict with Jolanda Jacobi.  In the aftermath he expressed his disappointment about the lack of support from the Zürich school, warning, of the sceptical attitude towards the possible practical application of Analytical Psychology by the ‘regressive English school of Fordham’ which would endanger the entire project.  In his 1954 seminar he noticed a rapprochement between the Kleinian and Jungian school in England:

What is being reported from England is that the therapy of Klein and the Jungians is almost     one and the same.  Because Melanie Klein keeps on mythologising.  I wonder whether the child understands her interpretations – which are strongly mythologically based – from what she refers to as myth; that this is the basis of the child’s understanding and interpretation of symbols.  The question is whether the intellectual interpretation which she attributes to this is an essential component or not.

Fordham’s use of the Oedipal complex in The Life of Childhood is also criticized by Neumann in his letter to Jung of 1 October 1945.  There Neumann also emphasized the importance of child psychology, which Jung had neglected because of his interest in the individuation process of the second half of life.

The antagonism between Neumann and Fordham came to the surface when Neumann wanted to publish an article in Fordham’s Journal of Analytical Psychology.  Fordham rejected the article in the first instance on grounds of theoretical differences, to which Neumann responded, ‘I did not know you have a critical attitude towards my work and should be thankful to get known with your criticism.  Never did it occur to me that you might reject essays from me for such reasons.  This would mean that you do not feel as editor of a Journal for Analytical Psychology, but as a censor who has to judge about what Analytical Psychology has to be.  Subsequently Fordham sent Neumann his latest book and the two men agreed to have a further discussion.  Due to Neumann’s premature death there was no further debate to bridge those differences.  However, in 1981, Fordham published an article on ‘Neumann and Childhood’ in which he heavily criticised Neumann’s theory of childhood psychology: ‘I can enjoy the experience of his “poetry”, especially when he interprets myth and legend; that, however, no longer justifies using vague, contradictory metaphor with which to capture states of consciousness in infancy and childhood.  It was a device which used to pass muster, but today research has made that approach inappropriate.  Both Jungians and psychoanalysts have constructed theories of childhood.  Fordham’s article was a hatchet job in every sense of the word: besides accusing Neumann of being dogmatic and non-Jungian his main critique was targeted at Neumann’s lack of empirical data and use of out-of-date scientific theories such as the relation between phylogenesis and ontogenesis or Portmann’s extra-uterine first year.  Fordham’s conclusion, that after detailed scrutiny almost nothing of originality remained from Neumann’s child psychology, was a dire verdict.  In defence of Neumann it has to be said, that his theory of childhood was informed by years of weekly exchanges with child psychologists and that the project of the Neve Ze’elim Children’s Home, a long-term treatment centre in Israel, was based on the findings of his child psychology.

In his article Fordham refers, as unlikely as it may sound, to non other than Wolfgang Giegerich, who wrote a fundamental critique of Erich Neumann’s Analytical Psychology in 1975.  Both agree that Neumann was not Jungian at all, because he confused – in spite of Jung’s warning – the archetypal with the empirical child.  Whereas for Fordham The Child is weak precisely because of lack of empirical data, Giegerich, in contrast, criticizes Neumann’s research for the attempt to base his findings on empirical facts, thereby fudging amateurishly in the realm of biology.  Psychological truth should not be concerned with the empirical but with the imaginal.

As far as The Origins and History of Consciousness is concerned, Giegerich finds the opposite aspect worthy of critique.  Quoting a passage from the introduction to Neumann’s book, he concludes that ‘[s]uch utterances, although limited to the castration complex and other such ‘symbols’ may by implication suggest that in the last analysis, Neumann wants everything he says to be understood as “symbolic facts” which then could not be located in empirical (“personalistic”) history.  This is important as Giegerich can only build his verdict about the book as myth in itself, an archetypal fantasy, on this lack of empirical concreteness.  What Giegerich did not know is that this passage in Neumann about the symbolic character of the castration complex was only included because of Jung’s intervention, who had concerns about Neumann’s usage of the term.  This shows – and the correspondence between Neumann and Jung confirms this – that Neumann’s writing and thinking was often much more in tune and accordance with Jung than critics like Fordham or Giegerich would have liked it to be, in so far as their critique of Neumann would implicitly become one of Jung also.
© Martin Liebscher.


Excerpt from Craig Stephenson’s introduction to On Psychological and Visionary Art: Notes from C.G. Jung’s Lecture on Gérard de Nerval’s “Aurelia”.

The French Romantic poet Gérard de Nerval explored the irrational with lucidity and exquisite craft, and Carl Gustav Jung regarded those explorations as a work of “extraordinary magnitude.”  Like the German poet-philosophers Novalis and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Nerval rejected the rationalist universalism of the Enlightenment and privileged instead the individual subjective imagination as way of fathoming the divine to reconnect with what the romantics called the “life principle.” During the years of his greatest creativity, Nerval suffered from madness, for which he was institutionalized eight times, occasionally for extended periods.  Eventually, at the request of his physician, Dr. Émile Blanche, he wrote his visionary memoir Aurélia in an ambivalent attempt to emerge from these episodes of insanity.  In Aurélia, Nerval acknowledges the value of his medical treatment, and at the same time asserts that his doctor’s psychiatric strategies and scientific vocabulary relegate his visionary convictions to a mental illness from which he may be released only through atonement.  They published the first part of Aurélia in La Revue de Paris in January 1855.  The second part and then the entire book were printed posthumously in that same year.

Almost a century later, in 1942 Jung lectured on Aurélia for the Swiss Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy.  Afterward, he reread and revised his interpretation with extensive handwritten notes, and in the summer of 1945, at seventy years of age and after a long illness, he presented an expanded version of his lecture to the more intimate circle of the Psychological Club in Zürich.  World War II had only just ended.  In his lecture, Jung introduced listeners to the importance of Nerval’s text.  Contrasting an orthodox psychoanalytic interpretation with his own synthetic approach to the unconscious, Jung explained why Nerval was not able to make use of his visionary experiences in his own life.  At the same time, Jung emphasized the validity of Nerval’s visions, differentiating the psychology of a work of art from the psychology of the artist.  The lecture suggests how Jung’s own experiments with active imagination and the writings of The Red Book influenced his reading of Nerval’s Aurélia as a parallel text to his own Liber Novus.  Here, then, is a key to understanding Jung’s argument about the significance of symbolism in modern thought.

The editors of the Collected Works published only Jung’s one-paragraph abstract of the lecture in volume 18.  The documents presented in this Philemon Series book offer a unique window into the stages of Jung’s creative process as he responds to an essential romantic text.  They are arranged backwards: from the final, extensively revised 1945 lecture, through the schematic 1942 lecture, to five pages of handwritten notes and Jung’s marginalia in his copies of his copies of Aurélia — that is to say, back to Jung, with pen in hand, reading Nerval.
© Craig Stephenson.