Orientation
“She suffers not because she has unconscious fantasies but because her father has them.” Jung’s line, from The Development of Personality, states the paradox at the root of child psychology as a depth-psychological problem: the child is treated as symptom rather than subject. Andrew Samuels, in Jung and the Post-Jungians, catalogues Jung’s own ambivalence on this point, quoting his insistence that children “have no psychology of their own” but are instead saturated by the parental atmosphere. Renos Papadopoulos systematizes the resulting model in The Handbook of Jungian Psychology: the child’s psyche as largely contained within the parental psyche, individuation arriving only through a second, later birth. Jung complicates this containment thesis elsewhere, arguing in Civilization in Transition that a child’s disproportionate fear, absent ordinary cause, should be read archetypally rather than biographically, and in The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious he separates the empirical child entirely from the mythic Child-symbol. James Hillman, in Mythic Figures, rejects the developmental scaffolding underneath all of this, arguing that what depth psychology calls regression is simply the psyche’s return to the child, wrongly pathologized as decline rather than recognized as a genuine imaginal movement.