Automatic writing occupies a distinctive and generative position in the depth-psychology corpus, functioning simultaneously as a clinical technique, an investigative instrument, and a theoretical index of the unconscious. The literature approaches it along three broad axes. First, as a psychophysiological phenomenon: Jung’s early experimental work with mediums and his engagement with Pierre Janet’s therapeutic use of the technique establish that motor activity can proceed independently of waking ego-direction, driven by split-off complexes or subliminal strata of the psyche. Second, as a method within the practice of active imagination: Jung, Chodorow, and Johnson position automatic writing — alongside visualization, plastic work, and bodily movement — as one of several gateways through which unconscious contents may be drawn into productive dialogue with consciousness, ultimately serving the transcendent function. Third, as a parapsychological and spiritualist datum: William James reports firsthand testimony of practitioners who experience automatic writing as contact with an external presence; the Red Book scholarship notes historical precedent in Swedenborg’s spirit-directed hand. A persistent tension runs throughout: whether the writing’s source is a dissociated complex, an autonomous archetypal figure, or something genuinely exterior to the subject. This tension is never fully resolved in the corpus; it is, rather, sustained as a productive aporia that marks the outer boundary between depth psychology and the philosophy of mind.