A Depth Psychological Exploration of Ego and Shadow

This article is written by depth psychology based emotional health life coach Diana Deaver and is copyrighted. Please contact Diana if you wish to publish or use this article in your own writings. Diana offers online and in-person life coaching sessions to individuals desiring a deeper exploration of their psyche. See more of her articles here and youtube here.

Article Summary

This article explores the Jungian archetype of the shadow and the complex of the ego from a perspective of their function as aspects of the human psyche. Within are also observed the emotional and experiential manifestation of the ego and the shadow in everyday life and how their manifestation influences the process of self-development. Depending on how it is engaged with and related to the ego can be experienced as a grounding beacon of consciousness or a controlling dictator-like force. Similarly, the shadow can be encountered as a temporary respite from what is unbearable or the repressed evil force that demands to be acknowledged. Interactions with the ego and the shadow are a normal and emotionally vivid part of an individual’s psychic life. While observing their influence with complete detachment is not possible due to their very function in the psyche, the more their dynamics are understood, the more functional the entire psychic system can become.


The psyche, as described by Carl Jung, one of the founding fathers of depth psychology, is the human functioning system that encompasses the conscious mind with its thoughts and feelings and the unconscious mind with its instincts, archetypes, and dreams. The function of the human psyche as a whole is to bring into manifestation the totality of a person with their individuality and uniqueness. 

The term ego can sometimes have a bad connotation in the modern new-age language. Due to the important work of spiritual leaders such as Erckhart Tolle, the ego is often seen as the selfish, proud side of humanity that causes unhappiness, dissatisfaction, and discontent.

In depth psychology the ego is seen differently. The ego represents an individual’s ability to be anchored in a state of consciousness. As one of the organs of the psyche, some of the ego’s main functions is to give meaning to information “of a personal nature” (2014, loc. 993) that arises into awareness, to integrate this knowledge into consciousness and to offer direction and stability to daily life. The ego is responsible for creating a sense of safety or groundedness, for offering the necessary focus and drive and to make plans and execute them. All of the functions of the ego refer to the conscious aspect of the mind. Because the ego uses categories and labels to achieve its role, it can often become too rigid and too set in a particular way, neglecting and omitting other vital parts of the psychic system. The common phrase “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks” referring to someone who cannot be inspired to change reflects the way the ego can become inflexible and closed to newness. What is rejected by the ego goes into the realm of the shadow.

The shadow is an archetype of the psyche whose function is to temporarily obscure hard to process psychic content. An archetype is a repeating pattern that is tied in with a particular human instinct. It is common in all humans to tend to hide and repress what they think they don’t like. But every now and then it is helpful to have one’s old ways challenged in order to reevaluate and rediscover parts of oneself one deems as worthy of hiding. All archetypes have a positive side and a negative side, or better said a balanced aspect and an imbalanced aspect. The ego and the shadow contribute to keeping each other in balance. The shadow challenges the ego by bringing to the surface repressed unconscious material and the ego can learn to relate to the shadow in a new and healthier way. 

Even though both the ego and the shadow are parts of the psyche, there are some important differences between them. The ego is a complex and the shadow is an archetype. The ego focuses on what is conscious while the shadow contains what is mainly unconscious. The shadow can be both individual and collective, while the ego is only personal. Despite their differences, the ego and the shadow are strongly interconnected. The totality of the psyche known as The Self will use interactions between the two to achieve its goal of integration. The more is integrated of the personal shadow the better the entire psychic system will function.

The Ego

Jung defines the ego as “a complex of ideas which constitutes the centre of my field of consciousness and appears to possess a high degree of continuity and identity.” (Psychological Types, CW 6, para. 706). The ego is the receiver and sorter of psychic and somatic material (Jung, C.G. Aion p3). The ego collects past experience, draws conclusions about the present and makes decisions about the future. It is what allows knowledge to be integrated. Through the ego, consciousness is expanded. In this way, the ego can be vital for the ultimate goal of the psyche, which is to become aware of, acknowledge, accept and integrate all aspects of the psyche. 

The ego’s focus often centers on questions such as “who am I?” and “how do I fit into this world?”.  The answers to such questions may change frequently over a lifetime as life experiences happen and are processed. To create such answers the ego takes the information it receives through the body and mind and creates definitions, fundamental beliefs, and values. Then it takes these mental concepts and uses them to reveal and represent itself to the world as a unique personal identity.

In an attempt to categorize and structure everything it perceives, the ego will identify with anything that is personally known or experienced: failures, successes, experiences, feelings, etc. It is common when reading someone’s biography to come across a list of labels: “I’m a mother, a wife, a seeker, etc”. This reflects the ego’s way of identifying with past events no matter what aspect of life they come from and whether they are labeled as positive or negative. People will claim they are “an alcoholic” or “a cancer survivor”. The ego is what usually dictates what follows after “I am” and also after “what I do”. Its role in the psyche is also to aid in making choices and facing the consequences of those choices. The problem with most of the ego created identifications is that they only take into account what has been seen and understood or what is currently is under the light of awareness, and what is under control through action.

The ego is blind to what exists outside its awareness and its consciousness. Because of that, it can forget about the inner realm, about what is unknown or hidden. Life direction, even when seen as successful by external standards, if it is not aligned with inner sources it will be only serving one part of the whole. Such satisfaction will be short-lived. Partial functioning is not sustainable long term and usually gives rise to concerning psychological symptoms such as chronic dissatisfaction, loss of enthusiasm, depression or anxiety.

Jung reminds us of the dangers of only tending to the external life: “although a disciplined consciousness is necessary for the performance of civilized activities (we know what happens if a railway signalman lapses into daydreaming), it has the serious disadvantage that it is apt to block the reception of impulses and messages coming from the center.” (Jung, Man and his symbols loc 3218) Without taking into consideration the unconscious, the one-sided ego-driven activity will, in time, become either exaggerated and dictatorial or empty of vitality and meaning. Jung further explains: “it is in the nature of the conscious mind to concentrate on relatively few contents and to raise them to the highest pitch of clarity. A necessary result and precondition is the exclusion of other potential contents of consciousness. The exclusion is bound to bring about a certain one-sidedness of the conscious contents.” (2014, loc. 3077)

The ego that has become one-sided creates illusions of grandeur and control. It makes one imagine that they know most everything they need to know and that they can control and achieve mostly everything they set their mind to. It can make one so bold as to believe that they know themselves fully. Furthermore, the ego will put in place mental constructs and behaviors that will defend and fortify this belief. Then it will defend it and react aggressively anytime someone may appear as threatening to their own concept of themselves. In someone set in their ways with little openness to the mystery of the self and of life, sudden change of circumstances can cause shock, turmoil, and strong inner conflict. A personal crisis can emerge anytime the ego will perceive that something under its reign has been lost or removed without its previous permission. Indeed, one of the ego’s functions is to defend and restore control anytime it is threatened or lost but at times people become so identified with the ego and the external structures it builds they cannot imagine a life outside of it. In extreme cases, individuals have chosen to end their life as a result of a sudden change that is related to their self made identity. There are many recorded cases of famous chefs who were fired, or businessmen who lost everything. 

Another one of the manifestations of the ego’s structuring function is to make sense of what happens in life. The ego is the psychic structure behind needing to understand the why of life. Of course, knowing why a course of action is being pursued in life can be vital to the success of that endeavor but there are also aspects of life that cannot be fully understood from a human point of view. It’s not always possible to make sense of all of life’s events, especially not right away. The ego does not tolerate this very well. The ego needs to have a power and influence over what is and it will go to great lengths to achieve this, even if sometimes it has to manufacture the illusion of control. For example, many times when people suffer a major loss, they will have a psychological impulse to find someone or something to blame for that loss. And when that is not available they will make up a story that gives what happened some sort of sense. People need to know why this happened to them. “This happened because such and such.” And if the new story doesn’t make sense then they will imagine that they themselves have caused the unbearable event. Unconsciously taking the blame for a terrible loss, even if untrue, is for them more acceptable than to admit they cannot make sense of the tragedy. This is one of the great delusions of the ego- out of a need to feel in control it will imagine that it has more power than it actually has while the usual and real weakness and helplessness of the human condition is repressed, overlooked and forgotten. Their powerlessness is well hidden in the realm of the shadow. But not for long. The psyche has a built-in balancing mechanism that will activate in such situations and will force the ego to meet with what it has struggled so hard to discard, hide and obscure: the shadow. 

The Shadow

Because the ultimate goal of the psyche is to integrate all of its parts, the unchallenged illusion of power and control of the ego is usually temporary. The shadow will come to visit sooner or later. But what is the shadow and what is its function? The shadow is an archetype or pattern of the human psyche, which means that it is common to all people. The shadow encompasses everything that is unknown, unfamiliar or unwanted but also, at times, it includes qualities usually labeled as desirable or helpful. Some call this the bright shadow. There is no one without a shadow. There are no perfect humans or humans who know themselves fully. As an individual develops they encounter things that are overwhelming, intimidating or challenging. The main role of the shadow is to allow for temporary elimination or obscurity. The ego’s function is to tend to vital psychological and emotional needs by creating stability and forward movement. Anything outside of the purpose of the ego is cast into the shadow of unconsciousness. Left unchecked the ego will continue to deny important parts of the whole self indefinitely. Embracing certain aspects of the self while denying others causes inner splitting and self-deception. While the psyche may allow this temporarily, it will eventually force the ego to face its shadow. The psyche needs to integrate the shadow in order to achieve wholeness. Everything a person is must be owned and lived. Jung explains: “the shadow is a living part of the personality and therefore wants to live with it in some form. It cannot be argued out of existence or rationalized into harmlessness.” (2014, loc. 558) Jung further explains: “the shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality.” (Jung & Storr, 2013, p. 91)

While everybody has a shadow, not everyone is willing to acknowledge its existence. Repression causes regression, projection and compulsion. When someone rejects their shadow they are in fact rejecting themselves, even if only in part. Often times this self-rejection is not conscious but manifests as an active rejection of others. Indeed, for many, the first encounters with the shadow archetype happen by projecting it onto another. It may appear as simple as accusing one’s spouse of being the cause of their spilled coffee when they weren’t even in the same room. Or it can show as an emotionally charged and uncomfortable meeting with the mysterious figure of a neighbor that appears threatening, maybe even evil. Or it may be our best friend, who appears to us to be kinder and more loving than anybody else. Either way, a strong reaction arises from within. Sometimes to defend oneself seems unavoidable. Other times we wish we were more like that cool person we admire. In either type of situation, physical symptoms can show in the body. Robert Bly beautifully illustrates the times less than desirable qualities are projected: “our psyche in daily life tries to give us a hint of where our shadow lies by picking out people to hate in an irrational way.” (2009, p. 47) For many, a painful conflict ensues in such a situation. A war is waged against our unknown self and carried out outwardly in relationship with another. A lot of more suffering comes from the resistance to the shadow than from the discomfort of embracing it. When pain is resisted, it is only enhanced. 

It takes a lot of courage and vulnerability to face what is unknown and intimidating and willingly open to it. Jung reminds “the shadow is a tight passage, a narrow door, whose painful constriction no one is spared who goes down to the deep well. But one must learn to know oneself in order to know who one is.” (2014, loc. 570) To do so, one must be willing to do consistent and intentional inner work, to allow themselves to change their mind about life long values that were perhaps inherited. For example, someone who may have grown up in poor circumstances may have heard the message that money is dirty and that people who have money are filthy and manipulative. The ego will store that as a belief that unless challenged it will continue to survive for a long time. When someone believes that to be rich is bad, they will unconsciously hide from themselves (or put into shadow) their own financial intelligence and skill. Their ego belief does not allow them to be financially capable. They are not allowed to do well with money so they are not bad. In order to embrace this financially capable side of them, such a person would have to divorce their parents’ beliefs and create new beliefs that better reflect their own individuality.  The shadow does not contain only what is considered undesirable but any qualities, positive or not, that may be threatening to the current status quo. 

As one advances in their relationship with the shadow they may begin to relate differently with it. As confronting material from the unconscious is made conscious it brings with it helpful insights. These insights can prove valuable in time. The immediate emotional volatility and rejection is reduced. Trust in oneself begins to build, and the ego feels more willing and able to meet this shadowy material and use it for personal growth as opposed to personal conflict. The presence of a subtle curiosity may also appear, a curiosity about the material that comes up each time the shadow is encountered. While the steps towards embracing that material may be wobbly or shaky, they happen nonetheless. In the process, one discovers that approaching the shadow in a more open manner can vastly improve the overall function of the Self. Jung beautifully illustrates this: “The investigator may see in the mud-puddle a world full of wonders, but to the ordinary man it is something upon which he prefers to turn his back.” (2017, p. 45). The wonders Jung refers to are perhaps the breakthroughs, a-ha moments and new perspectives that are common side effects of embracing one’s shadow. The charge around conflict, both inner and outer, is reduced. More energy is made available. Other parts of the psyche function better too. There is a deeper sense of alignment between the inner and the outer. 

The Realization of the Shadow

The main goal of the psyche is the manifested totality of the individual. Not functioning as a whole makes each part less functional. Totality means nothing is neglected, excluded or discarded. This is achieved by balancing the conscious attitude with the unconscious influence. Jung believed that “all opposites seek to achieve a state of balance” (1983, p. 404). Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche supports this perspective: “there is a natural impulse in us toward balance just as there is a natural pull toward increased awareness and spiritual growth. Both can be perverted or denied, but the wisdom that can lead us toward balance is inherent in our being.” (2003, p. 24) When it comes to the parts of the psyche, Jung believed that everything is at first unconscious: “the energy underlying conscious psychic life is pre-existent to it and therefore at first unconscious.” (1983, p.404) A healthy relationship with the shadow begins when it is no longer engaged with as something that needs to be contained, rejected, or hidden. 

Jung defines an archetype in general as “essentially an unconscious content that is altered by becoming conscious and by being perceived. ”(2014, loc. 248) This is especially true for the shadow. Both the shadow and consciousness are impacted when what is repressed comes to the surface. Jung believed that the one-sidedness of the ego can be removed by “the realization of the shadow, the growing awareness of the inferior part of the personality.” (1960, p. 118) 

When what is denied is faced it sometimes exposes dysfunctional ways in which reality is being engaged with. To suddenly become aware of how one is the source of their own dysfunction doesn’t feel good. That is why many people resist the shadow. Facing the tendency to withdraw from what is unpleasant or unwanted is the first step in acknowledging the shadow. The next step is to learn to humbly accept the reality of the limitation, imperfection, and uncertainty inherent in the human condition in general but also that which is specific to the individual. While this is often uncomfortable, this new information can be crucial when used for transformation. Jung believed that “the encounter with the shadow is the “apprentice-piece” in the individual’s development” (2014, loc. 729) meaning that it is the entryway into further personal development. 

When the ego has integrated the shadow it will allow old categories to fall and new ones to be created, it will become flexible in attitude and spirit, new life will spring into the whole psyche. In time defensiveness and resistance are lessened while new vision and direction are born. There is a surge of aliveness and a sense of ease. Rejected parts of the psyche are restored to the whole. This more integrated way of being can be practiced daily by neglecting nothing, whether it is good or bad, weak or strong, ugly or ideal. Wholeness implies completeness and not perfection. Dr. Hoffman beautifully illustrates the therapeutic value of wholeness: “psychological wellness is the result of honoring all the disparate elements of the soul as they disclose themselves, however multifarious and divergent they wish to be.” (2014, p. 59)

Conclusion

In astrology, the ego is represented by the sun and the shadow is represented by the moon. Seeing them in this metaphoric way powerfully illustrates their individual importance. Would the day have the same brilliance without the darkness of the night? Would the night feel as peaceful without the contrast of the day? While the ego focuses on everything that is within one’s control, the shadow represents what is outside of this control. Together they form a crucial part of the psychic matrix and when related to with intention and awareness, they tend to balance each other out. As more and more elements of the psyche are made conscious and integrated, the entire system changes and becomes more functional. 

Understanding the way the ego and the shadow influence psychic life is complicated and at best only partial. The personal psyche cannot be seen from the outside by the person to whom it belongs, but only from within. Just like someone can never see their whole body at once because they are within the body they are trying to see, someone can only understand their psyche partially at any given moment. Nevertheless, exploring each part contributes tremendously to understanding the whole, even if conceptually. 

 

References

Bly, R. (2009). A Little Book on the Human Shadow. New York: HarperOne.

Hoffman, D. (2014). Becoming Beautiful: The Aesthetics of Individuation. Psychological Perspectives, 57(1), 50–64. doi: 10.1080/00332925.2014.874906

Jung, C. G. (1960). On the nature of the psyche. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Jung, C. G., Jaffé Aniela, Winston, R., & Winston, C. (1983). Memories, dreams and reflections. London: Flamingo.

Jung, C. G., & Hull, R. F. C. (1991). Aion: researches into the phenomenology of the self. London: Routledge.

Jung, C. G., Henderson, J. L., Franz, M.-L. von, Jaffé Aniela, & Jacobi, J. (2013). Man and his symbols. Bowdon, Cheshire, England: Stellar Classics.

Jung, C. G., & Storr, A. (2013). The essential Jung. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Jung, C. G., Adler, G., & Hull, R. F. C. (2014). Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 9 (Part 1). [Kindle DX version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com

Jung, C. G. (2014). Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 6: Psychological Types. Princeton University Press.

Jung, C. G. (2017). Modern man in search of a soul. New York: Martino Fine Books/Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich.

Wangyal, T., Dahlby, M., & Mthu-chen Stoṅ-rgyuṅ. (2003). Healing with form, energy and light: the five elements in Tibetan Shamanism, Tantra, and Dzogchen. New Delhi: New Age Books.

 

Archetypes and Myth in Emotional Health

Question by Dylan Hoffman, PhD:
How has mythology aided your personal interaction with archetypes? Stated differently, does the personification of archetypes, specifically in myth, provide access to the psyche in ways that you personally find beneficial? If so, discuss how you engage with myth—perhaps through ritual, active imagination, dance, prayer, art, drama, etc.—and how this deepens your experience of archetypes. 
 Diana Deaver: In my emotional health life coaching practice, I use mythical stories to normalize some of the experiences my clients struggle with. Using a recognizable well-known story like the hero’s journey, for example, I assist my clients to identify a certain stage in their life. This helps them see that what they are experiencing is not something due to a deficiency in them that needs to be fixed, but that it is, in fact, a natural human pattern. Myth really helps give our lives context. It puts in front of us a bigger picture, the narrative with a full story. It reminds us that there are different parts of the story, that every hero gets support or aid at some point, that where there are enemies, allies are also to be found. We feel less alone when we go through what others have also gone through in their own way. One of the most frequent image metaphors I use is that of a strong warrior guarding the door that leads to the king (my client). I use this to illustrate the concept of personal boundaries. Some people have weak warriors (boundaries) that sleep on the job and anyone can get in and out. Others have overactive warriors that won’t let anyone in.
I use this visual metaphor for myself as well. I have had many “discussions” with my inner guardian sometimes asking them to calm down and the other times asking them to be more vigilant. Perhaps this active imagination dialogue is the most concrete way I engage with mythical images. Sometimes, if I am scared I imagine my strong warrior standing beside me or walking in front of me.
Dylan Hoffman: Diana, You describe the value of myth beautifully. We never outgrow myth. Or if we do, we do so to our detriment–like a tree growing so tall, it doesn’t think it needs the soil. In any case, whenever we witness someone reconnecting with the psyche, there is always a return of myth–we regain a sense of adventure, of enchantment, or our archetypal role in the story of the world. As I described in the lecture, myth is the primordial language of archetypes, and we find ourselves living this language the closer we get to them. And as you describe, “It puts in front of us a bigger picture, the narrative with a full story.” The language of myth is wholistic, it covers all of life–childhood, rites of passage, rivalries, friends, enemies, romance, sex, loss, work, sickness, weakness, old age, wisdom. Myth no only gives us access to new areas of life, of the psyche, now and going forward. It helps us to recover our past, the portions of our lives that didn’t make any sense to us at the time with the frame of reference we carried. Wholeness doesn’t just cover what will happen, it encompasses what has happened–I can’t be whole without bringing my childhood with me. I remember when I got my childhood back, when I no longer tried to keep it in the past (this is where my warriors stood guard), when I had a way to tell it and tether it to the rest of my life. It’s almost like the warriors won’t let something through unless we have a myth to give them. Trauma is like that. It is kept away from the rest of our lives until it can be storied, narrated. Only then do the warriors let it through to integrate with the rest of our lives. That recovery is essential to wholeness. Since myth is timeless, it is able to retrieve what has already happened. And so we find ourselves finally being able to tell the story of our past too, our whole story. This has to go hand-in-hand with individuation, since individuation entails our ability to consciously realize the whole psyche. If the psyche makes its archetypal wholeness known through myth, we can’t realize that wholeness without becoming conscious of the way that myth is finding unique expression in our own lives and has–whether or not we knew it at the time.

A Critical Glance Into The Jungian Shadow

This article offers a critical view of Carl Jung’s description of the concept of the shadow as described in his essay on “The Shadow” found in Aion, CW9, II. References to the shadow found in selections of his other work will be used to compare and complete the descriptions found in Aion. Jung’s definition of the concept of the shadow will be examined both through a linguistic perspective as well as in a modern cultural context.  The article will argue that Jung’s metaphor of the shadow is both brilliant in the way it suggests its principles and incomplete inadequate in the way it tends to focus on what is considered negative by the ego consciousness. The shadow is, in general, a difficult concept to define and explain, specifically to individuals who are becoming familiar with the concept for the first time. Jung’s use of the visual metaphor of the shadow is ingenious because of the similarities between the phenomena of shadow and the features of the part of the psyche he describes. At the same time, the term shadow has connotations that make the conscious attitude more reluctant to orient towards the part of the psyche it denotes.
Carl Jung was the first psychotherapist to coin the term “shadow” and to write extensively about it. The shadow concept was mentioned frequently throughout his body of work. This article will examine in detail his descriptions of the shadow in “Aion” as well as shadow related excerpts from “Modern Man Search of Soul”. The aim of this article is to investigate critically the linguistic and modern nuances of the metaphor of the Jungian shadow. Jung used this metaphor to identify and describe unconscious psychic phenomena. His choice of language is both brilliant and incomplete as will be shown below. This argument will be substantiated by comparing different meanings of the word shadow as it is understood today with the nuances of the concept of the shadow as explained by Jung in his work. 
Jung shares his first encounter with personal shadow in a personal dream he shares in “Memories, dreams, and reflections”. 

I had my hands cupped around a tiny light which threatened to go out at any moment. Everything depended on my keeping this little light alive. Suddenly I had the feeling that something was coming up behind me. I looked back, and saw a gigantic black figure following me. But at the same moment I was conscious, in spite of my terror, that I must keep my little light going through night and wind, regardless of all dangers. When I awoke I realized at once that the figure was a “specter of the Brocken,” my own shadow on the swirling mists, brought into being by the little light I was carrying. I knew, too, that this little light was my consciousness, the only light I have. My own understanding is the sole treasure I possess, and the greatest. Though infinitely small and fragile in comparison with the powers of darkness, it is still a light, my only light. This dream was a great illumination for me. Now I knew that No. 1 was the bearer of the light, and that No. 2 followed him like a shadow. (p 111)

From reading Jung’s discovery of the unconscious it becomes evident that he associated light with consciousness and shadow with the unconscious. His memoirs briefly allude to the shadow several times more after this dream is shared, but no additional definitions or principles are mentioned in detail. He fleshes out the concept more Aion, under the section titled “The Shadow” as well as in several others of his works. The main argument Jung seems to be making is that the shadow is lack of awareness. The shadow happens in the absence of light, which he equates to consciousness. Therefore the shadow is the unknown (or unconscious) and all that it includes. 
While there are many advantages to using a visual metaphor to illustrate a psychic component, as will be shown below, using this image also offers challenges to the clarity and accessibility of the Jungian shadow. The term shadow itself can suggest something scary, intimidating, dark and suspicious. A modern dictionary definition of the shadow includes “a source of gloom or unhappiness” (Webster Merriam). The use of this term may imply negative traits only. For the first time reader, it can be very easy to conclude that the psychic shadow is exclusively composed of what is unwanted, shameful, rejected. By choosing this term Jung gave this concept a primarily spooky side and humans are afraid of shadowy things.  Using the word shadow may impact the reader’s willingness to be open to this concept. 
There is also the challenge that comes with using a mainly visual and image-oriented metaphor. This method of description may be easily accessible to those with vivid imaginations and simultaneously very difficult to grasp for people who are not visually or imaginally inclined. For the mathematically or musically inclined person, suggesting they incorporate their inner shadow may be as unintelligible as asking a poet how they would go about resolving an advanced mathematical equation.

a critical glance into the jungian shadow

There are other challenges still in the way Jung describes the nature of the psychic shadow. In the first paragraph of “The Shadow” in Aion (para 13-19), Jung identifies the shadow and archetype and as being one of more “accessible” psychic components of the collective unconscious. However, in the last paragraph, he claims that the shadow “represents first and foremost the personal unconscious”. A very attentive and patient reader will eventually deduct from this writing that the shadow can have both a personal and collective or archetypal nature. The shadow also includes the emotions that arise organically. When the shadow is not made conscious, these emotions are experienced without “moral judgment” in a more “primitive” manner. Jung argues that there are parts of the shadow that are easier to bring into consciousness than others. The parts of the shadow that are most difficult to integrate are usually unconsciously “projected” or assigned to others. The result of these unconscious projections is a non-realistic relationship with the outer world. According to Jung “the more projections are thrust in between the subject and the environment, the harder it is for the ego to see through its illusions.” (Essential Jung, p 92). On one hand, Jung describes the shadow as something very difficult to incorporate without “considerable moral effortonly to say, just a few paragraphs later that “with a little self criticism, one can see through the shadow” (Aion, p 91). He also says “the acceptance of the shadow-side of human nature verges on the impossible” (Modern Man in Search of Soul, p 44), being “the hardest of tasks, and one which is almost impossible to fulfill” (Essential Jung, p 195), which “requires much painstaking work extending over a long period” but which “with insight and good will” (Essential Jung, p 91) can be accepted and integrated into consciousness. This fluctuation from suggesting that the shadow can be brought into the light to warning about it being almost impossible to do adds to the confusion of the reader.
In “Modern Man in Search of Soul” Jung repeatedly stresses the difficulty in making the shadow conscious and the natural resistance that emerges in owning it. Despite the expected challenge of incorporating the shadow, Jung believes that this process is of vital importance to the process of becoming a whole and complete individual: “what is inferior or even worthless belongs to me as my shadow and gives me substance and mass. How can I be substantial if I fail to cast a shadow? I must have a dark side also if I am to be whole; and inasmuch as I become conscious of my shadow I also remember that I am a human being like any other.” (p 35) As we can see in this quote and in other works, Jung repeatedly alludes to the “inferiorities” of the shadow. However, it is not always clear why he believes the shadow to have inferior aspects. At times Jung suggests that everything that is not lit up by the light of consciousness, that is unknown, is the shadow. At other times, he claims that the shadow is particularly that which is feared, intimidating or undesired by the conscious ego. Without repeated reading, this idea can become unclear. Is the shadow the entirety of the unconscious, or is it just what is negative and repressed, or is it both the positive and negative and the repressed? What about what is unknown and neutral? Is there a difference between the shadow and the unconscious? Not everything unknown is repressed or evaded. It is simply unknown and not yet emerged into consciousness.

don't be afraid to sit with your shadow- a powerful light's got your back quote from emotional health coaching dot com

Despite the difficult aspects of the shadow metaphor, there are also beautiful advantages to using this image. Jung was trying to bring into awareness something that was mostly unseen or unconscious, something for which, in his time, a concise descriptive term or vocabulary had not yet been developed. The more one learns about the way Jung defined the psychic shadow the more adequate his metaphorical term for it appears to be. Examined through a linguistic context, for example, the term shadow and the concept of the shadow are incredibly alike. The Webster Merriam dictionary defines the term shadow as “partial darkness or obscurity”. The same is true for the psychic shadow: it is elusory in itself, potentially dark and unfamiliar but its darkness is only partial and can be seen through. Jung suggests that becoming aware of the psychic shadow “involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real.” (Essential Jung, p 91).  Alternatively, the shadow of an object moves as the light or the object which is casting it moves. So it is with the psychic shadow which changes its nature when brought into the light of awareness. Since the shadow is itself part of the psyche, both the light (conscious) and the shadow (unconscious) are impacted and transformed by their interaction.  The dictionary definition of the shadow also mentions the “reflected” nature of the shadow as it is generally understood, the shadow being “an imperfect and faint representation, an imitation of something”. This perfectly alludes to the projections Jung defines as one of the ways the unconscious psychic shadow shows up in daily life. 
Jung set about the very difficult task of exposing the human aspect that most humans naturally repress, ignore, neglect or resist. An additional critical observation that can be made about how Jung presented the shadow is that he seemed to present it in the context of opposites. There is an ever-present duality of light and shadow and of the conscious and unconscious in his work. Perhaps the Jungian shadow presented in a more neutral manner than evil is likely to make it more appealing, more encouraging to sit with. Jung already softens the concept of the shadow for us, much more so than Freud did. One is likely more willing to accept one has a shadow side than to admit they have evil inside. But is there even more room for that? So much of Jung’s work is based on holding the tension of opposites. But must there be opposites? Would the idea of complements, such as inn and yang, be more appealing to the conscious mind?  A more modern approach to the nature of life invites considerations for a spectrum as opposed to duality. In modernity, gender awareness is explored more as a spectrum than a binary concept and good and bad become much more relative when seen through a deeper understanding of ethical issues. 
Robert Bly brilliantly reflects the difficulty Jung himself encountered in fully explaining the contents of the shadow to his contemporaries in “A little book on the human shadow”. He also mentions the need for a more neutral and offers von Fronz’s more encompassing definition:
“Shadow” is one of Carl Jung’s most useful terms for a part of the human psyche. Its advantage is that it conveys a visual image—we might call the shadow “the dark, unlit, and repressed side of the ego complex,” the Jungian analyst Marie Louise von Franz says in Shadow and Evil in Fairy Tales. “But this is only partly true,” she adds, lest we get caught in the negative connotation of the image. She tells of an occasion when Jung, impatient as always with Jungians, dismissed a nit-picking discussion of the concept by protesting, “This is all nonsense! The shadow is simply the whole unconscious.” The definition Von Franz settles on is neutral and lucid: “… in the first stage of approach to the unconscious, the shadow is simply a ‘mythological’ name for all that within me of which I cannot directly know.”
Jung’s writing offered the world the first in-depth introduction into the concept of the psychic shadow. The Jungian shadow is hard to define because it has in itself an ever-changing, fluid nature. An encounter with the shadow is fundamentally transformational both to the conscious and unconscious aspects of the psyche. Jung himself seemed to struggle at times to adequately depict all the layers and complexities of the shadow.  Multiple readings and comprehensive research are needed to form a somewhat clear understanding of how he saw it. And indeed, the shadow is difficult to see, to understand and to describe to another, specifically because of its attributes. Jung warns about the many ways in which shadow work is evaded and insists on consciously and intentionally turning our face towards it. Jung’s use of a visual metaphor to describe the concept is both brilliant and at times unclear. As Susan Rowland puts it “to write about the psyche as a mystery entails both a failure of language and, for Jung, an artistic departure into the subtle realm of metaphors.” (p. 6) Jung’s writings on the shadow, though not always easy to understand, left worthy questions for his followers to uncover and decipher. Is the shadow good and bad? Or is it mainly bad? If it can change and transform itself as it interacts with consciousness then is its nature more likely neutral than dualistic? If at times the shadow can take over the conscious ego, then how can the two be successfully discerned between? Can we interact with the shadow without fearing it? These questions require further active exploration from today’s scholars and psychotherapists, specifically when taking into consideration their modern applications. In today’s world, the concept of the shadow is as relevant as ever, if not more. The shadow itself is a context that must be personally experienced to be fully understood. Ultimately,  no amount of Jungian studies can replace the inner shadow work. 

Resources:

Bly, R. (2009). A Little Book on the Human Shadow. HarperOne.

Jung, C. G., Jaffé Aniela, Winston, R., & Winston, C. (1983). Memories, dreams and reflections. Flamingo.

Jung, C. G., & Storr, A. (2013). The essential Jung. Princeton University Press.

Jung, C. G. (2017). Modern man in search of a soul. Martino Fine Books/Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich.

Rowland, S. (2010). C.G. Jung in the humanities: taking the souls path. New Orleans, La: Spring Journal Books.

(n.d.). Shadow. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shadow

Symbols, Archetypes, and Jungian Psychology in Great Expectations Movie (1998)

Jungian Psychology in Great Expectations Movie (1998)
This article explores the movie Great Expectations (1998) through the lens of depth psychology in general and of certain concepts of Jungian psychology in particular. The movie Great Expectations (1998) offers a modern time story similar to the one told in the well-known novel with the same name by Charles Dickens. This article focuses on the movie alone without discussing the similarity or deviation from Dickens’ novel. Set in the United States, the movie narrates the memories of Finnegan Bell and how each experience influences his development as an individual. The main Jungian themes identified in the movie are the protagonist’s journey of individuation, the encounter with different archetypal dynamics (the death mother, the anima, the inner child), the destructive influence of unaddressed complexes and a numinous encounter with the shadow. The movie’s strong use of strong visual elements such as the color green, the strategic use of water and the repeated image of the fish, provide a mirror of its symbolic contents.
Movie Synopsis

The movie Great Expectations was released in 1998, directed by Alfonso Cuaron, produced by Deborah Lee, and features Ethan Hawke, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Robert De Niro as lead actors. The movie follows the life of an orphan boy, Finnegan Bell, his affection for a woman from a different social class and his journey towards fame, success, and wealth. Young Finn likes to draw. His journey begins when he has a scary chance encounter with an escaped convict whom he helps out without telling anyone. The richest woman in the gulf, Ms. Dinsmoor, pays Finn’s caregivers to have him spend time with her young niece Estella. As time passes, Finn and Estella become teenagers and share a kiss. Their paths separate for seven years until an attorney shows up offering Finn the opportunity and money to go to New York and be the artist in a solo show. He goes to New York, begins to paint and sees Estella again, intensifying his chemistry with her. Finn’s show is a wild success but Estella leaves to marry. Finn is heartbroken. The same night, he is visited by the convict he helped escape as a boy -Lustig- who congratulates him on his success. He once again helps him escape “old associates” who are chasing him but Lustig gets stabbed and dies in Finn’s arms. With his last breath, he confesses that he is the man who secretly financed his trip to New York and the success of his show. Finn continues to pursue his art until one day he goes to visit Paradiso Perduto -the place he and Estella grew up- only to synchronistically run into her. She apologizes for the past and the movie ends on a hopeful and romantic note.

Main Depth Psychology Features

 While the movie follows a storyline inspired by the famous novel by Charles Dickens, it tells a modern and adapted story which at times affords itself the freedom to deviate from the original. Examining Finn’s life through a depth psychological perspective reveals several Jungian core concepts such as Finn’s ego and persona development, his libido surge in the face of anima projection around Estella, Ms. Dinsmooor’s death-mother complex around men, Lustig’s original shadow-like appearance and his sacrifice later in life. It’s also worth noting, the movie’s strong visually symbolic elements such as the color green, the strategic use of water, and the repeated symbol of the fish.

Looking at the movie as a whole it seems to reflect Finn’s journey towards a more whole and more balanced individual. The very first line of the movie is Finn’s narration:

“There either is or is not a way things are. (…) I’m not going to tell the story the way that it happened. I’m going to tell it the way I remember it.”

This opening hints at Finn’s awareness that his perception of physical reality is heavily influenced by his psychic reality. In the Transcendent Function, Jung describes artists as being gifted in accessing the unconscious. According to him, “the very advantage that such individuals enjoy consists precisely in the permeability of the partition separating the conscious and the unconscious.” (1969, par. 134) The movie ends with Finn returning to this childhood realm: “one day I went home” suggesting a return to the self, a more whole and integrated self. 

A Numinous Encounter with the Shadow

As he follows and draws the fish in the water in the opening scene, Finn comes across a man completely submerged in water (unconscious). This man scares him, questions him and threatens him. It is clear that Lustig is the representation of the shadow. He is presented on the news as an escaped convict, morally wrong and cast away by society. He is a death row fugitive. He is hidden or hiding and he also threatens Finn with death. Jung describes a meeting with the shadow self in a very similar fashion: “The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality.” (Jung & Storr, 2013, p. 91)      

Finn’s narration seems to describe his encounter with Lustig with an element of numinosity.

“Perhaps you’ve had an experience like that, in childhood, and told no one. Perhaps you’ve had that brush with a world so large that you seldom or never saw it again”.

While Finn retelling of the encounter exposes a numinous element, it is not revealed until the end of the movie that Lustig was equally if not more impacted by it. 

The Archetype of the Child

The movie begins with Finn’s child’s play. A free and happy Finn walks in shallow water, playing with his coloring pencils and his drawing notebook. He is surrounded by nature and teeming life- fish in the water, free-flying birds, representing powerful symbolism for the unconscious. He lives a simple and beautiful life and he likes to draw. He draws fish. Carl Jung describes the ease with which children are in touch with their unconscious through their child play in his book “Memories, Dreams, Reflections.”

Jung highlighted in his work several attributes of the archetype of the child that can be also seen in this movie. For example, Jung believed that “the child is potential future. Hence the occurrence of the child motif in the psychology of the individual signifies as a rule and anticipation of future developments.” (Jung & Kerényi, 1985) After Finn accepts Ragno’s offer to come to New York and have a paid art show, he revisits, accesses and expresses the inner child part of him. Finn shares:

“And I could still draw, nothing had lessened it, as much as had abused it, as much as I’d abandoned it. It was a gift and it was still mine, and everything else was less real.”

Finn, the child, is also presented as the savior and redeemer. The symbol of the fish is repeated throughout the movie. Finn draws the fish as a child. He catches the fish as a young man. He and Joe have a secret language around “how to smoke a swordfish”. The fish is depicted on the lid of his crayon box, on the cover of his notebook in New York as we well as on the cover of the notebook Lustig keeps. Also, upon arriving at Paradiso Perduto for the very first time, Finn uncovers a tile with his foot on the ground that reveals two fish in an ellipse. This is reminiscent of the story of Christ who feeds the multitude with the loaves and two fish provided by a boy. “The symbolism shows Christ and those who believe in him as fishes” (Jung, 2014, p. 186). Finn helps Lustig every time they meet. He not only keeps the secret of their encounter but he brings more than he is asked. He brings the right tool to remove the shackles. He also brings pills and booze to numb the pain and he brings food.

 Even though Dinsmoor represents him as “a scared little mouse scurrying her lawn”, Finn is courageous in showing up at night to help the shadowy figure of the man in the orange suit. Later, when Lustig visits him at his apartment in New York, Finn lets him in and eventually helps him escape the “old associates” who are chasing him, only to then hold him as he dies in his arms. The sacrifice he consciously makes for Finn ends up giving meaning and purpose to his life. Through his chance encounter with Finn, Lustig is somehow in time transformed from an escaped prisoner to a benefactor. 

Lustig whose childlike qualities are hidden to him seems to be projecting his bright inner child shadow onto Finn. He becomes obsessed with his drawings, talks of him with admiration and gratitude. Lustig keeps Finn’s drawing notebook and is so inspired by it that he chooses to dedicate his life to financially support Finn’s success as an artist. Sadly, his projection prevents him from discovering his own inner child. “Closer examination of the dark characteristics–that is, the inferiorities constituting the shadow–reveals that they have an emotional nature, a kind of autonomy, and accordingly an obsessive or, better, possessive quality.” P91

Ego Development

Throughout the movie, Finn alternates between periods of time when the conscious mind is in control and times when the unconscious is at play. This point to the compensatory function of the psyche and the interplay Jung describes in the Transcendent Function. For example, after Estella leaves abroad for the first time, following their first kiss, a broken-hearted Finn goes through a period of maturing. He stops drawing and painting and lives a simple and physical life.

“I put aside fantasy and the wealthy and the heavenly girl who did not want me. None of it would happen to me again. I had seen through it. I elected to grow up. ”

As he narrates this period of his life, Finn is shown on a boat, fishing and spearing a large fish as opposed to drawing and painting it. This reminds of the hero archetype who slays the animals. Jung talks about the symbolism of large marine animals that “in psychological terms, they would probably symbolize the original total unconsciousness, out of which the individual ego can rise and begin to develop toward maturity.” (Jung, Henderson, Franz, Jaffé, & Jacobi, 2013).  In Jungian terms, this period of his life can be called ego development. Finn becomes more confident, more self-empowered.

“Whose business was it what I did with my life? Who’d gotten my life in order? Me. I was in control. And everything I wanted, I had.” 

Finn’s Persona

After Finn arrives in New York it is becoming evident that he is missing the persona of the sophisticated artist. He goes to the restaurant where Estella invites him, but has to borrow a dinner jacket to be allowed in. The attendant has to follow up and remind him to return it. Finn seems to forget himself. When he is asked how he prices his work, he doesn’t have an answer. He admits he’s never sold a painting. When Ragno asks him if he needs anything else. He adjusts by requesting additional publicity. He arranges an interview with a reporter. During the interview, he fabricates parts of his story in order to make his life more dramatic and impressive. He is building a persona or a false ego for the first time. He has never had to do this before in his simple fisherman life with Joe. Now he is turning himself into the New York artist with a traumatic past:

“I was born again.”

The movie also seems to point to this symbolical fake re-birth through the visual representation of pregnant belly art expo during Finn’s first visit to the gallery he ends up painting for. This new mask does not hold up as he is clumsy during social encounters and loses his patience with Joe during his opening. 

Estella as the Anima 

Estella appears unexpectedly in Finn’s life. Their meetings often seem to have an archetypal aspect through their either magical, numinous quality or through a more sensuous feel.  The anima and the creative side of Finn’s inner child seem to be bound in the scene of their first encounter. Later in the movie, as Finn begins to draw again and attempts to access the part of him that he has neglected and abandoned, Estella also magically reappears. Finn is in an overgrown garden teeming with life, watching a ladybug, when he sees Estella for the first time. Throughout the movie, she wears different shades of green when meeting him which represent “in folklore a symbol of hope. (Jung, Henderson, Franz, Jaffé, & Jacobi, 2013)” They seem to repeatedly meet in the presence of water (a symbol of the unconscious). Right from the beginning, Finn is warned by Nora Dinsmoor about the potential helplessness and heartbreak he will experience as a result of his feelings for Estella, and her predictions come true. All of these elements can be associated this the anima. “The anima is more likely to be intoxicating and to take over us unwittingly. It’s hard to resist the lure of the anima (in the form of enticing desires and the promise of seemingly blissful happiness)” (Le Grice, 2016, p. 50)

Estella plays the archetypal role of the alluring, unattainable and ever desirable subject perfectly. She repeats this role throughout the movie in a pattern: discounts Finn, seduces him, disappears. “In one aspect, the anima represents the promise of the fulfillment of desire, an escape from the pain of ego-consciousness into the bliss of romantic union, which is a reenactment of the mother-infant relationship. Hence the hypnotic allure of the Femme Fatale anima figure.” (Le Grice, 2016, p. 53) She discounts Finn at first by calling him “the gardener” and by dramatically tossing his portrait of her. She then entices him to the water fountain and surprises him with a kiss. When they grow older she invites herself to his place, sensuously teases him and then leaves abruptly. In New York, she kisses him again at a water fountain, tells him she thought she saw a much “bigger” version of him and then uses him as a pawn in her ploy to get her boyfriend to marry her. She has been trained to break hearts and as Dinsmoor confesses later, and she repeatedly uses Finn as a practice subject. 

A strong archetypal charge emerges the moment she shows up in his hotel room. She symbolically wakes Finn up from slumber and tells him it’s time to paint her. There is a surge of libido (psychic energy) in Finn and he goes on a drawing frenzy. When she once again leaves him abruptly, he chases her barefoot and for the first time challenges her with a question:

“What is it like not to feel anything?”

Estella appears to be an internal conflict about Finn’s question herself. Her teary eyes in the cab show an emotional side for the very first time. She is in pain. 

Finn is often desperately looking for Estella. He seems to be in an archetypal possession, driven mad by Estella’s news of her engagement. At the conclusion of his show, Finn once again goes seeking her, inebriated, finally courageous enough to confess his feelings. He yells:

”Anything that might be special in me is you”

which points to his anima projection onto Estella. Jung teaches about projections that they “lead to an autoerotic or autistic condition in which one dreams a world whose reality remains forever unattainable. The resultant sentiment d’incomplétude and the still worse feeling of sterility are in their turn explained by projection as the malevolence of the environment, and by means of this vicious circle the isolation is intensified.” (Jung & Storr, 2013, p. 92)

Finally, Finn’s desire to be on the same social plane as Estella is a catalyst to his personal investment in his art and his success. In a way, his longing for Estella leads him to embrace his gift for painting and gives a deeper meaning to his life.“The anima possesses the potential to lead us into disaster or misadventure but also guide us (often through the carnage) to the discovery of a greater life meaning.”(Le Grice, 2016, p. 53)

Dinsmoor’s Death Mother Complex

Complexes have been defined as a subpersonality that takes us over. The Death Mother is “is the primary symbol and force of the wounded feminine principle” (Harris & Harris, 2014) and she is often associated with the myth of Medusa. Medusa lives in a cave and she turns to stone any man that lays eyes on her. Dinsmoor lives at Paradiso Perduto (Lost Paradise), a decaying mansion with statues of children in the garden. There are no adults other than Finn ever shown with Dinsmoor. She offers money in exchange for Finn’s time, knowing their precarious financial situation. She slips the money under the door the first time Finn visits her place, without ever being seen. She, herself, has been emotionally frozen for the past 30 years after being abandoned at the altar by her groom.

“Her room smelled of dead flowers and cat piss.”

When Finn asks her what she feeds her cat she replies: other cats. 

Her anger towards men is evident from the beginning when she orders young Finn to dance for her. She gets angry when he doesn’t know how to. “I’d like for you to dance. That’s why you’re here. To entertain me.”  From Dinsmoor’s first encounter with Finn, she is a mocking persecutor who seems to forget that he is just a boy. Her thinly veiled disdain for men reveals her habitual perspective and pattern of behavior. She mocks him when he apologizes for not knowing any dances. “You can’t or you won’t!?” She gets mad at a mere child whom she has paid to entertain her.  

Dinsmoor she sees herself as a victim of men, which she no longer sees as human but animal: 

“What kind of creature takes such a thing, such a gift, a trust? Who does this? A man does this, so men must pay.”

She calls Finn a “scared little mouse” and uses him as practice for Estella’s man-hurting training program. Dinsmoor raises Estella to see men as dangerous, not be trusted. She teaches Estella to create a cold and intangible persona and to manipulate and use men to her benefit.

“Estella will make men weep. She’ll break them. I taught her well. When she returns, she’ll cut through them like a hot knife through butter.”

In this way, she freezes Estella’s ability to have meaningful and loving relationships with men. “Death Mother costs women their chance to grow in a balanced way, to confront their inner and outer reality, and to have compassion for themselves that is born of the knowledge gained from their own torments and struggles.” (Harris & Harris, 2014, p118)

Depth psychology teaches that all complexes have an archetypal core as well as a hook. Dinsmore seems to know this as she mentions it several times. “The hook is in deep, isn’t it dear?”. Finn and Estella seem to get wrapped up in Dinsmoor’s death mother complex. She is the puppeteer who controls their interactions. The movie reflects this visually in a brilliant way through the evolving dance of Finn and Estella under the mad like instructions of the aging Dinsmoor who commands “smile, smile, smile. Fine, don’t smile.”  Dinsmoor and Finn repeat the pattern of the broken heart.

“You know what this is? This is my heart, and it’s broken. Can you feel it?”

Jung describes the tragic aspect of our unawareness of the repeated patterns in a complex. “It is often tragic to see how blatantly a man bungles his own life and the lives of others yet remains totally incapable of seeing how much the whole tragedy originates in himself, and how he continually feeds it and keeps it going.” (Jung & Storr, 2013, p. 92)  Dinsmoor eventually seems to become aware of her doing when she screams a panicked “what have I done?” after Finn takes her hand and puts it on his heart as she did in the very beginning. Through this powerful and deliberate gesture, he reveals to her that she succeeded in inflicting a similar wound in him that had been troubling her for years.

“Her sick obsessions were now mine.”

In conclusion, this article analyzes the movie Great Expectations through a Jungian psychological perspective. The main Jungian themes identified in the movie are the journey of individuation, the encounter with the shadow, the archetypal motifs of the inner child, the death mother, and the anima. Alfonso Cuaron’s film is a visually vibrant production that shows forethought and intentionality. The director brilliantly weaves symbolically rich elements that offer continuity and depth. These elements include the color green, the representation of fish and the presence of water.
References

Cuaron, A. (Director). (1998). Great expectations [Motion picture]. United States: Twentieth Century Fox.

Harris, M. M., & Harris, B. (2014). Into the Heart of the Feminine: Facing the death mother archetype to reclaim love, strength, and vitality. Asheville, NC: Daphne Publications.

Jung, C. G. (1968). The collected works of C.G. Jung: The Transcendent Function (Vol. 8) (H. Read & M. Fordham, Eds.; G. Adler & R. F. Hull, Trans.). London: Routledge & K. Paul.

Jung, C. G., & Kerényi, K. (1985). Science of Mythology: Essays on the myth of the divine child and the mysteries of Eleusis: The Psychology of the Child Archetype. London: Ark Paperbacks.

Jung, C. G., Henderson, J. L., Franz, M. V., Jaffé, A., & Jacobi, J. (2013). Man and his symbols: Fear of The Unconscious. Bowdon, Cheshire, England: Stellar Classics.

Jung, C. G., Jaffé, A., Winston, R., & Winston, C. (2013). Memories, Dreams, and Reflections. S.L.: Stellar Classics.

Jung, C. G., & Storr, A. (2013). The Essential Jung. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Jung, C. G. (2014). Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 9 (Part 2): Aion: Researches Into the Phenomenology of the Self. Princeton University Press.

Le Grice, K. (2016). Archetypal reflections: Insights and ideas from Jungian psychology. London: Muswell Hill Press.

Whitmont, E. C. (1969). The symbolic quest. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.