Jung’s Archetypes

As a young child my fascination for the mystical was evident to those around me. In my father’s eyes it was my devotion to his/our Christian faith. In my mother’s eyes - when they were open - it was my imaginative questions and fairy friends. In my teenage years I questioned Christian theology by pointing out the contradictions – learning that apparently, there are stupid questions. My thirst for knowledge and love for my father quenched the restlessness and confusion of my mind. I followed his path; he died when I was 16, and with him so did my relationship with his god. 

I remember reading a passage that stuck with me: “The sins of the father are visited upon the son.” In my case it was the mother and daughter. I followed in my mother’s sinful footsteps and became a connoisseur of mind-altering substances. This was a much faster way to the divine. My casual experimentation was kicked up a notch after my mother died when I was 20 and my daughter was born. However this time, the dark night of the soul descended upon me and I plummeted into a deep and scary darkness.

Carl Jung would refer to this “dark night of the soul” as an archetypal experience constellated through the death of my mother. Jung has been credited with the discovery of archetypes, although in fairness, Plato before him expressed a similar concept in “pure ideas.” Jung believed archetypes to be the language of the unconscious. Archetypes as described by Andrew Fuller in Psychology and Religion are, “the contents of the symbol-producing collective unconscious – a psychic imprint.” Fuller describes them as preexisting and conditioning experiences, locating them in the mind and giving them an autonomous power. As instincts are known to regulate activity, archetypes regulate perception. As such, archetypes evoke a pattern of thoughts, feelings and behaviors that are both unique to the individual and consistent and common to all.

To understand the nuances of archetypes it’s important to understand the murky world of the unconscious. Jung proposed a psychic substratum that existed beneath the level of the personal unconscious (one extra level below consciousness). Elaborating on Freud’s theory of the unconscious and instinctual repressions, Jung included a vast an unknown landscape that housed all of ancestral history. The collective unconscious is the unknown. Fuller describes it as, “humanity’s unwritten history from time immemorial.” Because the unconscious is unknown, it is also inaccessible through the mind. Archetypes become the means by which we understand the patterns of human experience; although archetypes too, defy the discriminating eye. 

Jung believed that although we could not see archetypes, much like we can’t see instinct, we can experience their effects in consciousness. Jung reasoned that a balance between the two realms was essential for well-being. He also said that archetypes seek consciousness through symbols. Symbols are emotionally charged images that are ubiquitous and mythological in nature. Symbols are the intermediary between the conscious and unconscious. We know we are experiencing an archetype when we react emotionally to a symbol; as is the case with my depression after the death of my mother.

Jung would say that this experience activated an archetype as a means of developing what was already there. In other words, the experience of death is a collective one, everybody experiences some form of death or loss. As such, there is a predisposition to react to the experiences of death through a set of behaviors, feelings, and thoughts. Through the confrontation with this archetype (death), I will develop perceptions that are: a) collective in expression, like grief, sadness and depression, and b) individual in expression, like strength, curiosity about myself, and the escape from pain. My personal reaction to death is what Jung refers to as a complex. A complex is a personified archetype that is stored in the personal unconscious thereby creating a foundation on which the personality is developed.  Fuller quotes Jung as saying that complexes are the royal road to the unconscious; perhaps because we have easier access to complexes (emotionally charged reactions) then archetypes from the collective unconscious.

A slight distinction between the collective unconscious and an archetype is that the collective unconscious is thought to be composed of inherited ideas while archetypes are the inherited mode of function. Whether we are aware of it or not, we are always interacting with the world through the lens of an archetype.

Archetypes are the fabric of human experience. Jung identified several key archetypes that he considered to be primary in human development. Some of them include: the mother/father, the ego/shadow/persona, and the anima/animus. He also identified a central archetypal character referred to as the Self. The Self, also referred to as the two-million-year-old man (Stevens 82) he said was the totality of consciousness and unconsciousness (Fuller 76). He positioned it in the center of the unconscious, like the conductor of a cacophonous orchestra whose task is to create harmony. Jung, like many other ancient philosophers believed life to be a dynamic interplay of opposites illustrated in the tension between conscious and unconscious; good and evil; light and dark. The goal he believed was for each person to become what they were meant to be from the beginning. 

Individuation, as Jung termed it, is the vital task in life by which we become conscious of our Self, sought through the integration of unconscious contents into consciousness. This reconciliation of opposites can be achieved through the awareness and embodiment of the archetypes. Jung alleged that it was human nature to project unconscious tendencies, characteristics and potentials onto the environment as a way of recognizing them in ourselves. The problem however, is when we refuse to see that what we attribute to others is not also a part of ourselves. The collective unconscious doesn’t discriminate. It is in fact, the genesis of all tendencies. When we are able to overcome the conditioning of society, unmask the persona, free ourselves from the limitations of the ego and comfortably sit with the tension of opposites, we are able to individuate. An achievement Jung admits is impossible in one life, and yet not the point.

Jung maintains that archetypes have a numinous quality. According to Fuller, he defines religion as a careful consideration of the symbols and images generated by the unconscious. He suggests that these symbols introduce the divine into consciousness, turning human life into a meaningful spiritual adventure. To me, this is the panacea of human suffering – my suffering.

I was introduced to Jung through my exploration of metaphysics. A few years after my mother died I discovered the tarot. Tarot is commonly known as a divination; however, it is also much more than that. Tarot cards as I understand them are a collection of symbolic images representing human experiences – the archetypes. As I began learning about the cards through books, I came upon several of Jung’s teachings, namely the archetypes and the unconscious. What I began to learn far superseded my ability to comprehend and yet through the contemplation of the rich imagery and symbolism in the cards, I began to understand my own nature, angst, and complexes. I felt like I was downloaded with the esoteric knowledge I’d always been in search of. With the help of mind altering substances and a lot of reflection, I began to understand.

Over the years I’ve been reading cards for others as a professional tarot reader. My vocation/dharma is to help others find meaning in their myth, to read their archetypes and become who they are. To me, psychology and religion equate to a living spirituality. Although I don’t consider myself a Jungian, I do appreciate his contribution.