Ok, so the Jungians have done themselves no favors by publishing biographies of Jung that are one-sidedly laudatory. However, the solution is not, in my opinion, to compose counter-biographies that are one-sidedly negative.
After being disappointed with Noll's sensationalist books on Jung, I was hoping that McLynn's biography would be more even-handed. It had, after all, drawn very favorable reviews.
On one hand, thanks to McLynn's efforts, I learned a lot more about Jung than I knew before. However,McLynn's overwhelmingly negative, even petty, evaluation of Jung quickly became both tedious and frustrating as I forced myself to finish it.
If one wishes to know, in exhaustive detail, everything Jung ever did that could expose him to criticism, this book is useful. However, if one wishes to have a complete view of Jung, both positive and negative, this book is extremely misleading.
One source of frustration was the obvious fact that McLynn did not understand Jung's writings, and did not wish to take the time to understand them. It is not enough to dismiss his works as "impenetrable" (a word which, along with "farrago," "besotted," and "emollient," McLynn uses with excruciating frequency.) Lesser minds than McLynn's, such as my own, have managed to "penetrate" Jung's works and found them illuminating.
Another source of frustration was McLynn's penchant for taking gratuitous swipes at almost anyone or anything he finds deficient, as an adjunct to skewering Jung. Why, for example, was it necessary for McLynn to suggest that Jung resembled Physicist Richard Feynmann in having a "taste for the low life." What has Feynmann to do with the issue? What is Feynmann's unstated connection with the "low life"? Why, for another example, does McLynn feel so confident that much of Zen Buddhism is "pure nonsense"?
McLynn's dismissive attitude towards Jung's admirers, particularly his women students, is particularly unconvincing and mean-spirited. McLynn seems to sort them into two categories: mistresses, and would-be mistresses who were notable primarily for their lack of physical attractiveness. As just one example, for McLynn to ridicule Marie-Louise Von Franz as the author of mere incomprehensible gibberish goes beyond the realm of fair comment.
In short, if the reader is seeking a sarcasm-laden, repetitive expose of a famous man, look no further than this volume. However, if you wish truly to know Jung, this book will be a disappointment. An unbiased biography of Carl Jung has yet to be written.