Freud and Jung and Their Secret Affairs

Re: # 31...............MY WRITING STYLE
Dear Mutaal, Thank you for reading my article and writing a detailed feedback. Interestingly you chose to focus on my writing style by highlighting the pitfalls in my creation and giving me a series of suggestions how i SHOULD write
...how to choose my title
,,,,how to organize my arguments
...how to divide my subject material
...how to be consistent etc etc
Your final comment was that it was 'uncooked material'
These are your impressions as a reader and every reader has a right to enjoy and appreciate or judge and criticize the creation based on his/her personal taste and literary standard. I have no doubts that your comments are sincere as you are a man of integrity. That is why i am responding in detail.

Now let me share the story of conception, labour pains and delivery of my creation.
It took me 9 months to deliver it.
For the first few months I read
....dozens of essays on Freud's life and psychoanalysis
....Jung's autobiography (you would love it as you liked Frankl's story)
...Sabrina's biography
all this was more than 1000 pages
Then I wrote my first draft of 50 pages
Then as a writer I decided to write is as a story rather than a typical essay. To make it interesting I decided to add suspense and focus on conflicts. Of all the conflicts in Freud's life i chose 3 basic conflicts in the form of 3 triangles

FREUD'S FIRST TRIANGLE....Dr Breur and his patient Anna O has a conflict as she falls in love with her doctor. Doctor runs away referring patient to Dr Freud. Freud helps her and psychoanalysis is born, Freud and Breur write an essay on Hysteria

FREUD'S SECOND TRIANGLE
Freud meets two women, two sisters. he marries one and has an a affair with the other. Such romantic conflict is never resolved and turns him into a neurotic and secretive person

FREUD'S THIRD TRIANGLE
Jung consults Freud about his patient Sabrina who later falls in love with Jung an when the affair ends she consults Freud to have therapy to get over Jung. After Jung and Freud break up she stays in touch with both living in Russia. Her letters are found after her death. Sabrina;s 800 pages biography is a page turner. I can send you the reference if you are interested.

I have six drafts of this creation to make it easy to understand. If I was writing in a psyciatric journal for other psychoanalysts I could have chosen to write in the following style

"The libidinal cathexis of Freud's ego was repressed and then sublimated in his writings on psychoanalysis. It was later on projected in his clandestine affair with his sister in law and remained unresolved in his friendship with Jung"

I choose to write that a grade 10 student can understand. It is the style I learnt from
Philosopher...Bertrand Russel
Psychologist..Eric Fromm
Fiction writer..Ernest hemingway
Urdy poet...Meer taqi Meer and Nasir Qazmi
Hindi poet..Kabir Das
English Poet...Walt Whitman
It is the style many mystic poets have used
It is the style we call in Urdu...sehl-e-mumtana
meer says
kaha main ne kitna hay gul ka sabaaat
kali ne ye sunkay tabassam kia
it is simple but profound...words are simple ideas are profound..
Some readers on chowk like hurricane and dana-e-raaz like it.
It is unfortunate that many readers on chowk are upset because i am a humanist. For me human beings are human beings first before they are Muslims and Hindus and Sikhs and jews and Christians or Atheists.
For me Science and Art and Psychology and Philosophy are universal and all for all humanity.
As writers we learn and grow and find our style and then find our readers.

you asked a question...why did i write this creation?...my simple answer is to share with my readers in 5 pages what i learnt in 1000 pages and hope that they would like to know more about Freud and Jung and Sabrina and be curious how human psychology evolved in 20th century.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading those books and was thrilled to write six drafts of my creation. Creative labour pains were worth having.
I feel bad that you are disappointed in my writing style.
sincerely
sohail

Re: # 35 Toofan Mail Express

"worry not my jang ju friend"

First, I'm not Jung; second, not a Jew!

But thanks for what you really mean, if you know what I mean!

Re: # 35 Toofan Mail
"But why such vitriol against a smiling man?"

You mean 'glassy metallic sulphate' or 'extreme bitterness'?

How can I give out the secret for free? I've seen many smiling men actually cry tears of separation, loneliness, regrets and the rest of it.

A picture may not sometimes be worth a thousand words.....

Re: # 31 Quinn
"what was the main reason for you to write this article?"

Just this one question was enough, not a whole review! Apparently you don't know JFK! Baba 'case' can only see 'incoherence' in others, not in himself.

Let us all pray for the victims on the couch now...

Re: # 29
PKSZ_shadbad

"must be final seal on all"

Beware, you're inviting the Navy (actually 'naee') Seals of Rabwah now to explain what 'seal' means!

Regards.

Tahir mian,

"Beware, Dr. JFK (Jang-Fraud Khalid) has admired your mysticism and wisdom which basically means he now wants you on the couch!"

worry not my jang ju friend, I've already told Dr. Sohail that he must wear a chastity belt, as his chosen profession seems to have these liabilities inherent in it.

But why such vitriol against a smiling man?

Re: # 27

"How shallow he sounds when he says, “I respect … this and that�

Its another way of saying, "I hate what you say, but I don't have the guts to disagree with you or take you on!"

"Tahir – you are the man!"

I always thought so myself!

"Though I may not agree with all you say"

Like what?

Regards,

PS: Kishwar-e-haseen shaad baad

Re: # 22
Harry Puttar,
Now that you've addressed me as 'yaar, everybody at CHOWK is invisible, so whenever I put my lips together out of love for mankind, they think its a kiss of death. The spiritually dead are so afraid....

Beware, Dr. JFK (Jang-Fraud Khalid) has admired your mysticism and wisdom which basically means he now wants you on the couch!

:)

I think Dr.Sohail's style is very accessible. And there are a lot of people that are not that hi-fi, you know? Simpletons like myself that cannot comprehend all them college words.

I personally prefer accessible than pretentious!

My vote's with Dr. Sohail.

My view on psychology notwithstanding :)

Dear Sohail, I enjoyed parts of your article. Good basic information written in a style of a school essay. May be it is intentional. May be that is your style as you say – simple, but in spite of everything Chowk readers mostly seems to be at a level a bit higher than high school students. But you may think otherwise.
The other issue I have is – and in most of your writing for me is – logical or compositional incoherence. First you drag on some basic stuff about Freud, then two third way you bring this issue of their not so licit relations. Then without giving any supporting information, you seem to be concluding that their relationship with other women was the fundamental reason for their different approach towards psychology. It is a very weak case to claim that they founded two schools of thoughts all because they were entangled in these relationships. That obviously is far fetched conclusion and article lacks the credibility on that part. (And frankly gives a bad taste to otherwise possibly good material)
Now may I ask that what was the main reason for you to write this article? If you wanted to show how personal dynamics between those two great minds might have played part in shaping their ideas, then the article should be organized around that thought only. Your title do suggests that it was probably your intention – though even with that intention your title smack of something else too. After this tile, it takes a long time for a reader to come across that issue of secret relations. If what you really wanted to show was the impact of personal relations on parting of their ways then why all that school type lecture about Freud’s ideas. You could very well show his ideas and Jung’s ideas but in relation to how those ideas might have been impacted by that relationship – if that was your intention. You could then show a balanced exposition of both minds in a dynamics of personality clash which would have made the article really interesting and worthy. But probably you did not have enough supporting material to do that.
In a sentence, it looks like an uncooked material, which could have been savory if it was properly cooked by an expert hand.
I hope you take my honest criticism in a positive way – it is my way of saying well wishes.
Mutaal Mooquin

Re: drsohail,
"what do you consider their fundamental difference in philosophy"

As you have noted in your own article, Jung had a more spiritual approach while Freud was more materialistic and reductionist.

Well said hurricane - yours is the extreme nugget - no need to say anymore.
oh, and did you read that I was not referring to drsohail as simpleton - he seems to be taking it as compliment. Your quip will be good for simpleton mureeds and patients of him to which I was referring.
And as I said, yours is the extreme nugget - must be final seal on all.

PKSZ,

yes the article does add to the human knowledge and understanding...as I have suggested to Dr. Sohail.

"Dr. Sohail,

It appears that people in your trade should wear chastity belts before coming to work :) :)"

Sorry folks, I was busy, could not respond earlier:
Hurricane: I agree, my post may have sounded too harsh. I might have reacted harshly seeing a pseudo-scholars de-faming genuine scholars for the sole purpose of personal fame and gains . What purpose is served by such articles? Does it increase any understanding of humanity’s knowledge or motivate anyone to seek genuine knowledge or inspire anyone with humanity's love. He brings such topics on various pretexts just for the sake of controversy because he want to use this old tested and trusted technique of gaining fame. Go and gain fame – no problem for me but don’t do gund (shit) everywhere – its awful around here in this corner of Chowk.
The ‘humanism’ – I am no philosopher but I can distinguish when someone is genuinely loving of others or just a narcissist.

Zeemax: You got it …

Dana-e-raaz: drsohail’s raaz daan … from where you got the idea that I want him to say anything – oh, and to clarify – I did not mean drsohail was simpleton – I was referring to his mureeds – I hope you are not one of those – have you read Jung? If you understand Jung then may be you will understand the archetype which is operating between you and drsohail. Read Jung for your own good … before it is too late - and talk to me when you have grown out of your mureedee state ... I cannot help you in this state …
Btw – why all are addressing me with Mr and saab etc …?

Tahir – you are the man! Though I may not agree with all you say … honestly I have not read all that is going between you and hurricane …

Khurram: How nicely and succinctly you have put the finger right on the spot. That is the problem – he is placing too much emphasis on personal issues. Any scholarly work should focus on knowledge side of the issues – not on personal issues. His response to your post is lame to say the least – and if he is so learned why he asks you the question. Does he consider you a student and he being a big master - you see the problem.
Yes, agreed personalities can clash for reasons other than logical but that can happen between any two people. Freud and Jung are not known for what type of affairs they had, not any other intellectual including Iqbal – they are known for their work for humanity.

All: Any genuine humanist will focus and educate people on their work – not on trifles and shitty stuff because his mental stomach had not really digested what they really were about . How shallow he sounds when he says, “I respect … this and that�
But why I am bothered … I am bothered by this budboo which just happened to have somehow come my way … of course there are many other budboos and even worse, but I was just passing by this corner of the Chowk … so I will go elsewhere ... but before I go I should read what drsohail has written in this latest kharafat ... is badboo kay source peh eik nazar daal he louN ;-)

Dr. Sohail,

It appears that people in your trade should wear chastity belts before coming to work :) :)

Re: # 24
dear hurricane....your charmingly mischieviously insightful letter reminded me of ghalib's sheyr
main nay majnoon pay larakpan main asad
sang uthaya tha ke sar yaad aya
bertrand russell once said...it took me fifty years to write simple...i believe we can use words to reveal ourselves or conceal ourselves...some writers like to impress i like to share my thoughts and readers like you make it worthwhile who know not only what i am saying but also what i am trying to say....sincerely sohail