Archetypes for the rest of us — Catskill Cottage Seed

: Image via Wikipedia

Jeb asked me about archetypes and my twitter answer took two tweets. Not a good sign.

Archetype: primordial structural elements of the psyche, ” a dynamism which makes itself felt in the numinosity…/

…and fascinating power of the archetypal image.” Jung, CW8, par 414. (how’s that for a start?)

I wasn’t surprised when he followed up with a request to get that in layman’s terms. So, here we go.

Jung felt that the unconscious was not just personal, the baggage of our forgotten memories, but that it was also collective. Through his explorations of the human psyche certain products of the unconscious kept recurring as patterns of images. Much like the “stock” figures in fairy tales and the characters in mythic systems from around the world, these images could not be reduced to personal experiences or memories.

So what are they? Jung felt these figures, (and note they are not just human or living. The geometric pattern of a mandala is also an archetypal image) gave expression to the ego or consciousness of the energy patterns that lie in the collective unconscious. These patterns are inherited. One way we experience them is in dream images. Jung makes it clear that archetypes lie beyond the ego’s awareness but that their effects are experienced as archetypal images.

“Archetypes are systems of readiness for action, and at the same time images and emotions. They are inherited with the brain structure – indeed they are its psychic aspect. They represent, on the one hand, a very strong instinctive conservatism, while at the other hand they are the most effective means conceivable of instinctive adaptation. They are thus, essentially, the chthonic portion of the psyche…that portion of the psyche that is attached to nature.” Carl Jung, CW9i, par 136

He goes on to say that they are not inherited ideas, but inherited possibilities of ideas. That’s a little bit of a brain twister. Lets look at the image of the mandala above. What if you dreamed this image? What is this pattern giving expression to? All of Jung’s work is an investigation of just these questions.

It’s interesting to see where the images will take you. For instance, why might an opossum appear in a dream. It turns out the opossum is quite the trickster figure in Central American myth. All my observations of these marsupials start to give shape to the image: from playing dead, to hiding the young in a pouch, to raiding the trash cans. And the trickster or joker is clearly an archetypal image.

So if they ever do away with the Joker in the next Batman, I suggest they introduce a new figure, the Possum. What do you think Jeb?

Matt Searles

Wow, what a thread we have going on over here..

Err, let me take a swing at a little of this.

Jung said something to the effect that.. the collective unconscious and archetypes are.. expressions of biology on consciousness.. but a little more complex then that.. so we are talking about.. well like instincts with personality, maybe?

Biology then.. is like.. well genetic history.. like how in the womb we go through these changes that seem like a history lesson in human evolution..

In terms of.. the scale of a life time.. who we are today.. what we are doing.. that kinda builds the foundations to support who we are tomorrow.. like rings in a tree.. the patterns of it.. and so the history of human evolution.. is imprinted in the same way in our biology.. or something sorta like that.

In terms of self preservation.. and Jung was onto this.. often when we talk Darwin we are talking a kind of popular idea of evolution.. which is perhaps different then it actually is.. and perhaps even our best ideas of such things.. are little different then they actually are.. but..

Humans are social creatures.. our individual survival is very often linked to the survival of the group.. so there's a survival value to a lot of things we might not normally think of as having survival value.. and then there's the goal of passing genes on and all that..

So I think that's a helpful way of thinking of some of that.

Back to archetypes.. there's also a number of things that are constants in the human experience... mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, sisters, brothers.. etc.

To some extent we are talking about a kind of projection.. like.. we have this complex of associations surrounding Possums.. and you know.. particularly if you're living in sorta ancient hunter gatherer times.. a close study of the creatures in the echo system you share.. make some sense.. and then onto the Possum we project this part of our instinct system.. onto that.. well thing we are studying that has a pattern that.. lets say in the relationships that make up that pattern.. are kinda the same.

So the arising mythological system is a language that speaks both inwardly and outwardly.. and is about how we relate to our own nature and the world.. And particularly in these earlier hunter gatherer systems.. the Possum is holy.. nature is.. etc

There's also this sense that we all share the same biology.. to very high degree.. and who we are as individuals.. and for that matter as a group, is an actualization of a portion of that biology.. and there's this sense that in a mysterious sorta way.. we are one.. in that.. that actualization is sorta like.. more superficial to our totality. And its been said that when we risk our lives to save the other.. it is a realization that the other and us are one.. that we NEED to do this..

On a certain level all this stuff is amazingly complex.. I mean how we render all these issues, and questions, and whatever.. into a rational sorta verifiable form that makes sense to our modern sensibility.. but its actually a good deal simpler in a mythological system.. and Jung is sorta the builder of the bridge between these worlds

Or that's my take on it anyway.. hope that casts more light then shadow

ccseed

It's a high fly ball to deep left field and it's...out of here...Great comment as always Matt.

I'm totally with you on how experience builds through the ages. To it, I'd just like to add the hair raising encounters with the archetypal energy, an experience Jung had plenty of times, as another axis where the numinous intersects the social plane.

sid parham

I've always thought of archtypes as the "signifers" in the language of the unconcious. They are poly-valent touching both the persdonal and the mythic. Jung seems to interested in the semantics of these signifiers--how many ways can the anima be expressed? What are the trickster figures and do they mean? I don't know Jung well enough to see where he talks about sequence and grammar of myth and the archtypes place in that structure, but I am sure that a full understanding needs to include a sense of order and sequence.

<abbr>sid parham´s last blog post..Mind Candy</abbr>

ccseed

Hi Sid,
In the broadest of strokes Jung paints the an order with shadow, anima/animus, self...I like the word signifier, nd myself often have used the word glyph to realize that the images represent the ineffable thing. Also, in relationship to dream analysis, both for the individual dream and the dream series, Jung makes it clear that the dramatic structure, the stories context, conflict and resolve is the the way to proceed.

Henie

"...that the psyche is not limited or dependent on being tethered to our brain stems…"

If so, would this not be psychosis?

<abbr>Henie´s last blog post..Imagine Finding These Easter Eggs!</abbr>

ccseed

Not quite...psychosis is when the ego is inundated by the unconscious...swamped as they say...all very much tied together at that point.

Henie

Arrghh! I lost my original post! ok...here's a re-capture

Yes I believe matter is energy. Would you say then that thought is another kind/form of energy separate from the psyche?

What do you think of astral thoughts? What is their purpose?

On another note, are you familiar with Helena Blavatsky's magnum opus? I am curious what your "thoughts" (pun intended) are on it if you have.

<abbr>Henie´s last blog post..Imagine Finding These Easter Eggs!</abbr>

ccseed

Hi Henie,
I think that thoughts, sensations, feeling and intuitions are all part of the psyche. So, no not a separate form of energy...but the psyche is operative when thought is not being produced. Although I know of Blavatsky's work, I have not read it. I have experienced transpersonal encounters, which always point to the possibility that the psyche is not limited or dependent on being tethered to our brain stems...

Henie

Richard and Jeb...

I knew you two were in deep discussion of something...I caught glimpses of the intriguing tweets but was too inundated with thoughts of my own.

I have my own questions, Richard...when we look or use the Mandala as our focal point in meditation, are we not in fact going through the process of reunification of Self? Aren't the concentric patterns representative of the universe in thoughts of past and present? Original thought came from god-source then? Is thought a living matter, changing in shape and size collectively? Are all thoughts collective? Is there a possibility of thought individual and original into itself? In other words, when a thought formulates into my consciousness, it is not original? Is there such a thing as pure thought?

Yeah, I could go on and on with this brain twister, alright! :~)

Thanks you two for sparking my thoughts!

<abbr>Henie´s last blog post..Feeling Done With Social Media</abbr>

ccseed

Hey Henie,
Your comment, saturated with so many questions is a beautiful stand alone which I'm honored to host in this space.

As for the Mandala as a conscious representation to aid reunification: certainly. What's interesting is that the mandala arises in all cultures back into prehistoric times, and it's patterning provides an image of totality, wholeness and unity.

It's amazing to be on the lookout for aspects of the mandala in our dream, like curved passageways or rods that seem to be circling a center point. It's as though the mandala is an image of the psyche from space (outside time would be more accurate), and in our experience of life in time we are traveling through one corner of the total pattern.

As cetain times, and Jung point to big developmental shifts and times of crisis as two examples, it is not unusual to dream of complete mandala images as the portrait of the Self, the full blossoming that is one's potential. That said, the many archetypal figures that we encounter in our dreams can be equated as aspects of the Self, messengers even...

Finnally, I'd challenge you to consider the psyche as more than thought...try the energy that life, and thought, is.

ccseed

Control is the domain of the ego and consciousness...it's the ego's bread and butter, the way it sorts and orders so as to build a level of confidence in the face of reality.

The archetypal patterns go ALL the way back...

Jung's "advance" is turning the ego to relate to a new center in the psyche, the archetypal Self, which can also be called the "god image," the totality which is one way of interpreting the mandala above.

Encountering the "god image" has been know to turn peoples hair white...or so the story goes...

Jeb Dickerson

Hmmm. So can they be traced back a generation or two? Or are we talking eons? Either way, this idea of Archetypes is both comforting and frightening. Comforting for the explanation of things we find mysterious. Frightening for the lack of control. Or so it seems at first blush.

<abbr>Jeb Dickerson´s last blog post..Roots and Reach - a model for us all.</abbr>

Jeb Dickerson

Well, this is going to take a few read-throughs to digest, but a couple questions.
1. OK, so you're saying that archetypes are more than just a shared ideas...they're something we all intuitively know, or recognize, if unconsciously, through genetic inheritance?
2. Would it be accurate to compare it to animal instinct? A baby antelope knows instinctively to be fearful of a lion...even though they've never encountered one before.
3. If any of the above is close to accurate, then are archetypes rooted in self preservation? Are they 'road signs', so to speak, providing relatively trusted (if perhaps misunderstood) directions down an unfamiliar route?

As I said, I'm going to need a few goes at this. Thanks for writing this Richard, I feel there's value here for me. You've introduced me to something I've never considered before and I feel certain there's a reason, a purpose. I appreciate you helping me explore it further.

<abbr>Jeb Dickerson´s last blog post..Roots and Reach - a model for us all.</abbr>

ccseed

Hey Jeb,
You're on to something with your antelope analogy. At certain points Jung calls the the archetypal images instinctual images, pointing that they are like different ends of the same spectrum. It does seem that these energies are keenly aware of self preservation and yet the hero archetype seems to kick in to prompt the sacrifice of a soldier to save the platoon.

We get that we inherit these bodies, our hands for instance, how useful they are. When it comes to the archetypes we are exploring the inheritance of the psyche, much of it no more personal, in the sense that we are responsible for it in some way, than the design of our hands.