A century ago the rift between Freud & Jung was finally formalised when the Zurich Psychoanalytic Association voted to leave the International Psychoanalytic Association and founded the Association for Analytical Psychology in July 1914. Fifty years later, Michael Fordham — drawing on his experience of child analysis and his extensive contacts with psychoanalysts, especially Winnicott — introduced the concept of de-integration to bridge between psychoanalytic developmental concerns and the Jungian emphasis on archetype and image.
At our last conference in Boston in April 2013, Warren Colman maintained that the relational perspective ‘offers a bridge that brings together differing orientations within the Jungian world’ and pointed out that some American Jungians have linked up ‘with the relational and intersubjective perspectives for similar reasons that the London Jungians turned to the British psychoanalysts decades earlier. While all these analysts are likely to identify themselves as “developmental Jungians” there are sometimes considerable differences beneath the surface’.
In the light of contemporary clinical practice what are our current views about these cross-fertilising influences? Do we still feel a tension between 'synthetic' and 'reductive' analysis? And how are we influenced by the particular milieux — geographical and cultural — in which we practise analytical psychology?