Archetypes are ancient or archaic hnages that derive from the collective unconscious. They are similar to complexes hi that they are emotionally toned collections of associated hnages. But whereas complexes are individualized components of the personal unconscious, archetypes are generalized and derive from the contents of the collective unconscious.
Archetypes should also be distinguished from instincts. Jung (1948/1960a) defined an instinct as an unconscious physical hnpulse toward action and saw the archetype as the psychic counterpart to an instinct. In comparing archetypes to instincts, Jung (1975) wrote:
As animals of the same kind show the same instinctual phenomena all over the world, man also shows the same archetypal forms no matter where he lives. As animals have no need to be taught their instinctive activities, so man also possesses his primordial psychic patterns and repeats them spontaneously, independently of any kind of teaching. Inasmuch as man is conscious and capable of introspection, it is quite possible that he can perceive his instinctual patterns in the fonn of archetypal representations, (p. 152)
In summary, both archetypes and instincts are unconsciously determined, and both can help shape personality.
Archetypes have a biological basis but orighiate through the repeated experiences of humans' early ancestors. The potential for countless numbers of archetypes exists within each person, and when a personal experience corresponds to the latent prhnordial hnage, the archetype becomes activated.
The archetype itself cannot be directly represented, but when activated, it expresses itself through several modes, primarily dreams, fantasies, and delusions.
During his midlife encounter with his unconscious, Jung had many archetypal dreams and fantasies. He frequently initiated fantasies by imagining that he was descending mto a deep cosmic abyss. He could make little sense of his visions and dreams at that time, but later, when he began to understand that dream hnages and fantasy figures were actually archetypes, these experiences took on a completely new meaning (Jung, 1961).
Dreams are the main source of archetypal material, and certain dreams offer what Jung considered proof for the existence of the archetype. These dreams produce motifs that could not have been known to the dreamer through personal experience. The motifs often comcide with those known to ancient people or to natives of contemporary aborigmal tribes.
Jung believed that hallucinations of psychotic patients also offered evidence for universal archetypes (Bair, 2003). While workmg as a psychiatric assistant at Burgholtzli, Jung observed a paranoid schizophrenic patient looking through a window at the sim. The patient begged the young psychiatrist to also observe.
He said I must look at the sun with eyes half shut, and then I could see the sun's phallus. If I moved my head from side to side the sun-phallus would move too, and that was the origin of the wind. (Jung, 1931/1960b, p. 150)
Four years later Jung came across a book by the German philologist Albrecht Di-eterich that had been published hi 1903, several years after the patient was committed. The book, written hi Greek, dealt with a liturgy derived from the so-called Paris magic papyrus, which described an ancient rite of the worshippers of Mithras, the Persian god of light. In this liturgy, the initiate was asked to look at the sun until he could see a tube hanging from it. The tube, swinging toward the east and west, was the origin of the wind. Dieterich's account of the sun-phallus of the Mithraic cult was nearly identical to the hallucination of the mental patient who, almost certainly, had no personal knowledge of the ancient initiation rite. Jung (193 l/1960b) offered many shnilar examples as proof of the existence of archetypes and the collective unconscious.
As noted hi Chapter 2, Freud also believed that people collectively inherit predispositions to action. His concept of phylogenetic endowment, however, differs somewhat from Jungs formulation. One difference was that Freud looked first to the personal unconscious and resorted to the phylogenetic endowment only when individual explanations failed—as he sometimes did when explaining the Oedipus complex (Freud, 1933/1964). hi contrast, Jung placed primary emphasis on the collective unconscious and used personal experiences to round out the total personality.
The major distinction between the two, however, was Jung's differentiation of the collective unconscious into autonomous forces called archetypes, each with a life and a personality of its own. Although a great number of archetypes exist as vague hnages, only a few have evolved to the pohit where they can be conceptualized. The most notable of these include the persona, shadow, anima, animus, great mother, wise old man, hero, and self.
The side of personality that people show to the world is designated as the persona. The term is well chosen because it refers to the mask worn by actors hi the early theater. Jung's concept of the persona may have orighiated from experiences with his
Chapter 4 Jung: Analytical Psychology 107
No. 1 personality, which had to make accommodations to the outside world. Each of us, Jung believed should project a particular role, one that society dictates to each of us. A physician is expected to adopt a characteristic "bedside manner," a politician must show a face to society that can win the confidence and votes of the people; an actor exhibits the style of life demanded by the public (Jung, 1950/1959).
Although the persona is a necessary side of our personality, we should not confuse our public face with our complete self. If we identify too closely with our persona, we remain unconscious of our individuality and are blocked from attaining self-realization. True, we must acknowledge society, but if we over identify with our persona, we lose touch with our hmer self and remain dependent on society's expectations of us. To become psychologically healthy, Jung believed we must strike a balance between the demands of society and what we truly are. To be oblivious of one's persona is to underestimate the importance of society, but to be unaware of one's deep individuality is to become society's puppet (Jung, 1950/1959).
During Jung's near break with reality from 1913 to 1917, he struggled hard to remain in touch with his persona. He knew that he must maintain a normal life, and his work and family provided that contact. He was frequently forced to tell himself, "I have a medical diploma from a Swiss university, I must help my patients, I have a wife and five children, I live at 228 Seestrasse in Kiisnacht" (Jung, 1961, p. 189). Such self-talk kept Jung's feet rooted to the ground and reassured him that he really existed.
The shadow, the archetype of darkness and repression, represents those qualities we do not wish to acknowledge but attempt to hide from ourselves and others. The shadow consists of morally objectionable tendencies as well as a number of constructive and creative qualities that we, nevertheless, are reluctant to face (Jung, 1951/1959a).
Jung contended that, to be whole, we must continually strive to know our shadow and that this quest is our first test of courage. It is easier to project the dark side of our personality onto others, to see in them the ugliness and evil that we refuse to see hi ourselves. To come to grips with the darkness within ourselves is to achieve the "realization of the shadow." Unfortunately, most of us never realize our shadow but identify only with the bright side of our personality. People who never realize their shadow may, nevertheless, come under its power and lead tragic lives, constantly running hito "bad luck" and reaphig harvests of defeat and discouragement for themselves (Jung, 1954/1959a).
In Memories, Dreams, Reflections, Jung (1961) reported a dream that took place at the time of his break from Freud. In this dream his shadow, a brown-skinned savage, killed the hero, a man named Siegfried who represented the German people. Jung interpreted the dream to mean that he no longer needed Sig Freud (Siegfried); thus, his shadow performed the constructive task of eradicathig his former hero.
Like Freud Jung believed that all humans are psychologically bisexual and possess both a masculine and a feminine side. The feminine side of men originates hi the collective unconscious as an archetype and remains extremely resistant to
108 Part II Psychodynamic Theories consciousness. Few men become well acquainted with their anima because this task requires great courage and is even more difficult than becoming acquainted with then shadow. To master the projections of the anima, men must overcome intellectual barriers, delve into the far recesses of their unconscious, and realize the feminine side of then personality.
As we reported hi the opening vignette hi this chapter, Jung first encountered his own anima during his journey through his unconscious psyche soon after his break with Freud. The process of gaining acquaintance with his anima was Jungs second test of courage. Like all men, Jung could recognize his anima only after learning to feel comfortable with his shadow (Jung, 1954/1959a, 1954/1959b).
In Memories, Dreams, Reflections, Jung vividly described this experience. Intrigued by this "woman from within," Jung (1961) concluded that she must be the "soul," in the primitive sense, and I began to speculate on the reasons why the name "anima" was given to the soul. Why was it thought of as feminine? Later I came to see that this inner feminine figure plays a typical, or archetypal, role in the unconscious of a man, and I called her the "anima." The corresponding figure in the unconscious of woman I called the "animus." (p. 186)
Jung believed that the anima originated from early mens experiences with women—mothers, sisters, and lovers—that combined to form a generalized picture of woman. In thne, this global concept became embedded hi the collective unconscious of all men as the anima archetype. Since prehistoric days, every man has come hito the world with a predetermined concept of woman that shapes and molds all his relationships with individual women. A man is especially inclined to project his anima onto his wife or lover and to see her not as she really is but as his personal and collective unconscious have determined her. This anima can be the source of much misunderstanding hi male-female relationships, but it may also be responsible for the alluring mystique woman has in the psyche of men (Hayman, 2001; Hillman, 1985).
A man may dream about a woman with no definite image and no particular identity. The woman represents no one from his personal experience, but enters his dream from the depths of his collective unconscious. The anima need not appear in dreams as a woman, but can be represented by a feeling or mood (Jung, 1945/1953). Thus, the anima influences the feeling side hi man and is the explanation for certain irrational moods and feelings. During these moods a man ahnost never admits that his feminine side is casting her spell; instead he either ignores the irrationality of the feelings or tries to explain them hi a very rational masculine maimer. In either event he denies that an autonomous archetype, the anima, is responsible for his mood.
The anima s deceptive qualities were elucidated by Jung (1961) hi Ins description of the "woman from within" who spoke to him during Ins journey into the unconscious and while he was contemplating whether his work was science.
What the anima said seemed to me full of a deep cunning. If I had taken these fantasies of the unconscious as art, they would have carried no more conviction than visual perceptions, as if I were watching a movie. I would have felt no moral obligation toward them. The anima might then have easily seduced me into believing that I was a misunderstood artist, and that my so-called artistic nature gave me the right to neglect reality. If I had followed her voice, she would in all probability have said to me one day, "Do you imagine the nonsense you're engaged in is really art? Not a bit." Thus the insinuations of the anima, the mouthpiece of the unconscious, can utterly destroy a man. (p. 187)
Chapter 4 Jung: Analytical Psychology 109
Was this article helpful?