The New Atlantis has a detailed article on the man and his ideas. It is a great "short" introduction to Jung – and I say "short" because a guy whose thought is as far-ranging and far-reaching as Jung requires a LOT of explanation, background material, and sheer volume of knowledge to even begin to crack that code…
By my short (and not "short") readings of him, and more extensive readings about him, I take it that he was a brilliant and ridiculously well-read man. Unlike Freud, Jung is difficult to pin down. His followers seem to relish in the ambiguities of his thought.
Jungians, in my experience, are more comfortable with the liminal spaces and crepuscular spaces for though, than, for example Freudians (and don’t get me started on Behaviorists – those bright neon-lit halls of sterility).
But who is Jung really? Is he the ultimate scientist, going where his research takes him, regardless of what others think? (Jung himself liked to push that idea as he related on his haunted autobiography). Is he more akin to other poetic geniuses like Goethe? Or is he just a flake? Or perhaps "all of the above"?
Anyways – good reading.
QUOTE: "Jung may have had a hard time affirming his own faith, but Christ was always with him: a photograph of the Shroud of Turin hung on the wall behind his desk. The theological debate about the authenticity of the Shroud goes on today: the awe of the true believer, who knows that his Redeemer left the image of His face on this burial garment, clashes with the skepticism of the disenchanted modern. Jung customarily kept the photograph of the Shroud covered with a cloth; perhaps he venerated the image in private, perhaps not. He also displayed a bust of Voltaire in his study, always in plain view. Skepticism and soulfulness both had their place in Jung’s nature, and in his clinical practice. Medical function overlapped with sacerdotal duty. Psychiatry in Jung’s hands aspired to its original meaning: the cure of souls."