Felix talking to a group of us ...1989 (conversation transmitted and reconstructed)
we were never 'jungian' how could one subscribe to a theory of analysis that claimed 'universality' with a n archetype that was and is exclusively European, whose memory is European. It was Fanon, that clarified this notion in Black Skin White Mask. Sartre also saw this clearly ....
In fact, Jung made mistakes again and again (his misreading Joyce's Ulysses for example, then misreading the idea of a 'universal' unconscious and his splitting of personality between the 'intuitive' and the analytic...introvert extrovert dualism___He did however understand that psychosis was more than Oedipal, and his grasp of the spiritual dimension in (alcoholic)addiction, and in other similar disorders, his capacity as an analyst his grasp of ideas as , was astounding his insight at the one one level, but in terms of his so called philosophizing and his ideas well, it's flabbgergasting isn't it?!
A real of schizophrenic contradictions!
Good old Jung!
But as for us, to reduce our ideas in Mille Plateaux to the unvieralizing of an archetypal static unconscious? Co me now, what do the English say, balderdash!