الفهرس Only 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 128 |  |  |
| | | from | 128 | | |
Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is twofold: first, to show that ever since its inception, jungian literary criticism has been utterly adrift from jungian psychology, focusing as it does only on the archetypes; second, the thesis is an attempt to place jungian psychology in a wider and consequently more practical perspective from the point of view of literary criticism. The genesis of the thesis was a rationale based on reasonable probability. It did not seem likely that during his long and intensive career as a psychologist, jung found nothing to worry his patients other than the archetypes. This supposition seemed much augmented by two others. The collected works of C. G. Jung, (1875 - 1961) apart from his other books, run up to twenty volumes. This invited the tantalizing question, could all these volumes be about the archetypes and nothing else?{u2018} again, jung worked during and after the turbulent period that some historians and statesmen have called. The thirty years war{u2018} (1914 - 1945). Already after the first world war (1914 - 1918), sigmund freud (1856 - 1939) in beyond the pleasure principle (1922) stated that armageddon had lit up new horizons for psychology that could not be discerned in the peaceful days before August, 1914. Indeed, such terms as traumatic neuroses’ and neurasthenia