International Reception Studies
Edited By Rahilya Geybullayeva and Peter Orte
The book contains articles in English and in Russian language.
Chapter 6. Feminist writing versus gender representation
205 Chapter 6 Feminist writing versus gender representation The Stereotypes of Patriarchal Worldview and its Overcoming in Works of K. Jung and L. Irigaray Sevinc Baxish (UK) In this essay I will look at some issues of Jungian analytical psychology from the point of view of poststructuralist feminism, particularly, the works of Luce Iriga- ray, in connection with Jungian theory. I would like to emphasise that I will not try to “renovate” Jungian theory as post-structuralist, nor will I try to represent his work as an early version of French feminism. As an alternative, I will attempt to discover some parallels, allusions, and connections in their views, to revive and reinterpret some of Jung’s ideas as more receptive and (post)modern, than perhaps seem to be the case. Unfortunately, due to number of reasons, Jungian theory (with the possible exception of the notion of archetypes, which is rather disparately perceived by a vast range of theologians, anthropologists, philologists and literary theorists) still has not receivd its deserved position in the academic world. According to Andrew Samuels, there are three main causes for Jungian theory’s “banishment” from aca- demic life… First, the secret “committee,” which was set up by Freud and Jones in 1912 to defend the cause of “true” psychoanalysis, spent a good deal of time and energy disparaging Jung” (A.Samuels 1998: 1). Secondly, the anti-Semitic writings of Jung; and third, according to Samuels, his sexist and racist attitudes have increased hostility towards Jung’s theories. I would add to this...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.