Newsletter 2010

18^th Congress of the International Association for Analytical Psychology (IAAP) in Montreal, August 22-27, 2010

The recent IAAP conference was a cornucopia of delights, a sampling of all sorts of ideas related to the Jungian world. Some of my personal highlights were seeing people I had not seen for a while, especially Henry Abramovitch, who had presented a lecture to us on Abraham the father and one on sibling relationships, as well as a meaningful dream seminar series. Seeing Michael Vannoy Adams again was also a delight. And what a surprise: Erica Lorentz, who offered us authentic movement active imagination series many years ago. Erica has now moved back to Vermont and we will have the chance to see her again next February. It was also a pleasure to see Pat Berry, James Hillman, Murray Stein, Maria Taveras, and many others. There were plenty of opportunities to socialize at cocktails and book launches but perhaps the most fun was the opening reception where the local analysts dressed in costumes representing their origins. Guy Corneau and Yvon Riviere were decked out in Old France brocade and feathered hats while Jan Bauer wore an early American outfit and Françoise Cloutier came dressed as a Native-Canadian.

Lest this essay seem like the social pages or fashion column, I will now comment on my highlights of the Congress. The most heartfelt and moving presentation was Guy’s discussion of his personal experience with cancer. He spoke about how he worked with his dreams as well as his active imagination with both his healthy and cancer cells. He listened to the cells, and to their autonomous voice to learn their message. He fought not only against death but for life. He said that “cancer is too big an opportunity to waste.”

Another moving session was the encounter with First Nation healers. In that circle of honoured speakers I was pleased to meet Stephen Jenkinson whose film “Griefwalker” I saw two years ago at the Montreal World Film Festiival. Jenkinson has devoted his life to help the critically ill die well. He spoke about our negligence of our ancestors and how our culture has few skills to deal with grief.

In one plenary John Hill, whose book was launched at the conference, spoke about the concept of home, sometimes in surprising contexts: e.g. home in the consulting room; citizenship as an aspect of home; Jung’s several homes; and Jung’s 1912 dream of home, with several levels relating to the varying depths of the psyche.

I loved Stan Marlan’s break-out session on “The Philosopher’s Stone as Chaosmos.” What a surprising meandering of ideas on the stone including Jung’s difficulty in reading Joyce’s Ulysses because of its chaotic structure. Jung was a modern man at the cusp of post-modernism. Marlan reminded us that life is both order and chaos and it is a mistake to literalize either side.

As the conference was entitled “Facing Multiplicity,” Margaret Klenk spoke on the topic of “facing.” She compared some things which need to be faced straight on, like Beowold facing Grendel’s mother, and those which don’t, like Perseus and the Gorgon. She reminded us that Jung stated that one must never look at things in too seeing a way.

Two sessions on the Red Book offered important information on this significant publication. Its editor, Sonu Shamdasani, reported on the massive task he undertook to produce the book for publication. He surprised me when he informed us that there are more documents that Jung had written that are unpublished than published.

The book offers us a completely new look at many of Jung’s writings. He suggested that in Jung ‘s other writings he toned down the description of his experiences during his encounter with the unconscious in an effort to be accepted by the scientific community. Shamdasani referred to encrypted intertexts which occur in several of Jung’s works that can be related back to his Red Book, so that we can now better understand Jung. In a panel the following day, Shamdasani reported that many people have written to him saying that the book has given them the courage to accept their inner images, that the book is like a “fortifying drink.” In answering a question regarding how real these inner figures are, Shamdasani responded that: “they are real because they affect us. They are presences and need to be acknowledged as such from which we take our reality, our existence. We are animated by them.”

An interesting session was the showing of a soon to be launched website devoted to fairy tales by Jungian analyst Sarah Gibson. What a fascinating romp, both playful and serious. For anyone exploring these tales this site will be a rich resource of images and information. Although it is not quite ready yet, I highly recommend it when it appears: www.abc.net.au/re-enactment.

On the last day of the conference, in a state of overstimulation and blissfully exhausted, it was a welcome and peaceful experience to attend Bou-Yong Rhi’s plenary comparing Lao Tsu’s Tao Te Ching to Jung’s ideas. The Tao is the union of opposites. Its nature is unfathomable, dark, yet comprising everything. It is beyond human perception. Rhi compared the Tao with Jung’s concept of the Self. He likened the statement in the Tao Te Ching that “the greatest carver does the least cutting” to Jung’s directive to the psychotherapist to adopt an accepting attitude toward the unconscious.

Other stimulating sessions included fascinating plenaries on cutting-edge work regarding trauma in the consulting room as well as new research on the effects of trauma on the brain. However all this would take up too much space. I would like to thank Tom Kelly for offering the volunteers this amazing opportunity. It will take quite a while to digest this amazing feast. I’m already fantasizing about saving up for a trip to Copenhagen in three years where the next congress will take place.

–Mary Harsany