The Furies: Suicide, Violence, and the World Inside

Introducing people of all ages to mythology... in pre-college educational curricula, youth orgs, the media, etc. Share your knowledge, stories, unit and lesson plans, techniques, and more.

Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Cindy thank you so much for the material. It was most helpful. Clemsy thanks to you and David also for taking the time to help us out. ( Most helpful as well. )

I said:
To clarify " The Furies " reference; I was speaking strictly towards a very loose metaphorical connection to what Robert Walters had mentioned in an earlier posted video on another thread; and which I used in my topic outline. But as you rightly have clarified that usage is incorrect from a clinical position. My apologies for I certainly was not intending to play " fast and loose " with the medical defintion or understanding. As you have insightfully surmised I am sifting and sorting through much of this material as reflected through my own personal individuated journey of understanding.
And:
Here it is the video from the topic outline description; ( I probably should have been clearer about it when I made the reference. ):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVzwuufhe_I

( I think also that this was given from more of a mythological perspective than from a clinical; analytical; or psychological sense. But certainly you would know more than I on this. )
Cindy B. wrote:James,

Even I had time to just watch that one-minute video. :P And what I took away from it is mainly the notions of complexes and shadow. For starters, go here and here and here--scroll down halfway and here. Also, remember, for the most part Campbell's psychological point of view, both collective and personal, was Jungian, and myths arise from the collective unconscious, i.e., myths are a product of the psyche.



Clemsy,

Can you offer in a nutshell what Campbell said about the furies? Thanks!


:)

Here is the part in Clemsy's reply by Saffron Rossi that seems to address in a mythical sense the definition of " The Erinyes or Furies " as ( agents ); if you will; of psychological impulses or ( " Complexes " as Cindy has pointed out ). As to reconciling the mythical to the archetypal reference Robert Walters was using there may or may not be ( wiggle ) room here:


Clemsy said:
The Erinyes are ancient deities in the Greek tradition who “are the avengers of offences against blood-relations on the mother’s and father’s side, of all offences against moral, and finally even natural law.” They represent “a human relation intensely felt…the outraged soul of the dead man crying for vengeance.”


From Levy's article of suggesting possibly substituting the word possession for complex I do not feel quailfied to comment on this. However from Bett's point of view he seems to be saying; ( if I am understanding him correctly ); the failure of the psyche or subconscious to reconcile or " Adapt " these complexes leads to a sort of " meltdown " from within which is the shortcurcuit or lightswitch that is in part responsible for the reality disconnect which leads to " the act ". ( I am still digesting the material here so please forgive a layman's very clumsy interpretation )


. Am I getting the jest of this? :?


( In the end to summerize here ): " Would there be any further thoughts that should be considered along this line? "
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Cindy B.
Working Associate
Posts: 4719
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Cindy B. »

James,

Yes, indeed you're getting there. :) Do consider the following, though.

The furies are a particular archetype (psychic instinct) of the collective unconscious, and activates specific perceptions, emotions, ideas and behaviors related to vengeance and often destructive retribution to obtain justice. (For example, consider the 911 hijackers's attack against the US or the Columbine shooters.) The eventual establishment of the rule of law, e.g., Athena usurps the vengeful power of the Furies but does not deny the validity of their call for justice, was a means to temper the primal urge for destructive retribution within society.

Looking at the video clip again, I can understand why you thought that Walters was referring to all destructive unconscious forces as "the furies," but this is not so, and I'm sure that Walters didn't mean to leave that impression...in my opinion, anyway. The concepts that do cover all unconscious forces and contents are the archetypal shadow and the personal shadow in both their destructive and constructive (creative) aspects, merely alternate labels for "unconsciousness."

Now more about complexes. Archetypes never reach consciousness since they're instinctual factors, but their influences do present themselves in the personal unconscious. The contents of the personal unconscious are complexes (of related psychic material) constellated with an archetypal image at their core, and the glue, so to speak, is emotion. It's the archetype that's the vitalizing impulse here which is expressed as a component of a given complex, and the first clue at the conscious (ego) level that a complex has been activated is a strong emotion, whether pleasant or unpleasnt, good or bad. Complexes in and of themselves are not negative since they're merely organizational structures of unconscious content, but when the associated emotion is particulary powerful, it can get in the way of the ego's will and/or ability to behave or think in an adaptive way. Indeed at such times one can feel "possessed" by something greater than him/herself, whether a "destructive demon or Devil" or a "benevolent angel or God." The language one uses is really besides the point since such human experiences are universal regardless of culture, time, and place.

This helps, I hope. And now I'm offer to gather information that I promised Al several days ago.

Ciao!


P.S. Please go here and review these Jungian Models of the Psyche. (Updated link now included.) Campbell worked from this perspective as well.
Last edited by Cindy B. on Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:55 pm, edited 2 times in total.
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Thank you Cindy; you are most kind in helping to clear this up. ( It is precisely what I was looking for. 8) )

An example to me might be for instance when Bill Moyers asked Joe in the ( POW ) what happens when someone denies " The Call " to which Joe replies: " He might risk a " Schizophrenic Crack-up " by not listening to the demands of his own " Heart-life ". This to me would seem to be the type of situation where the internal conflicts and complex activation you mentioned might occur; ( of course depending upon the particulars of any given mental state or condition ). It would also seem that there might many variations of this understanding that could be applied across a wide canvas of human experience. Repressed biography is the term I seem to remember hearing; but I can't place the source. ( Is this the right track here? ) :idea:
Last edited by JamesN. on Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:17 pm, edited 3 times in total.
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Cindy B.
Working Associate
Posts: 4719
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Cindy B. »

Precisely! :)
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Hey everyone.

It's been awhile since anything has been posted on this thread but this article has just appeared concerning the first interview " Adam Lanza's father " has given about his son and the" Newtown " disaster and provides some interesting information, plus a few clues and insights. And although there may be few answers concerning any solutions to it's cause; it evokes thought provoking questions and deep compassion for the mindset of a father who bears tremendous suffering and how a society still struggles with this type of horrific psychological dilemma.


http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2014 ... ct_solomon


It's relevance for the future I think points towards this ever increasing need for psychological help within a dysfunctional society that yet even now still refuses to acknowledge it's importance in any real substantial way. Whether from the demonizing of the NRA, social stigmatizing, or ignorant misinformation; the efforts to understand it's causes and the treatments required are IMHO going to become of greater concern as we move forward as a global human society. Severe cases aside; I think Joseph Campbell"s and Carl Jung's insights might provide some clues concerning many of these interconnected psychological issues and would be well worth any time spent in their exploration. ( Although Cindy would probably be more of an authority on this than I am. )
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Cindy B.
Working Associate
Posts: 4719
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Cindy B. »

Very interesting, James, thanks for sharing this. And victims all, in my opinion. So sad... :(
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Cindy; I went back to look through your link on " Jungian Models of the Psyche " and found this link no longer worked; ( possibly a site domain issue ). At any rate I Googled it and these two links both had the same title. As I have been going over these two articles I am having difficulty distinguishing which one you listed; both seem excellent. If you have a moment could you give them a quick once-over for any clarity that might be needed?

http://www.thesap.org.uk/jung-s-model-of-the-psyche


http://jung.org/jungs%20model%20of%20th ... e_gad.html


To better describe what I am asking; ( if I understand correctly ); on page 155 in: ( " Reflections On The Art Of Living - A Joseph Campbell Companion " ); The symbol of the " Star of David " as an example of the psyche is used to describe two triangles that are opposed yet symmetrically positioned in interplay between each other as upward and downward forces competing with each other for dominance. Yet it is within this framework that this image can be seen as portals of consciousness that are opened which may provide the individual a means to visualize the transition from which some of the internal conflicts that may reside within the subconscious may be reconciled.

This material seems to relate directly not only to the Jungian process of " Individuation " but also to the " conflict resolution dilemmas " that reside within much of societies misunderstanding of it's own social behaviors and psychology. For me ( Individuation ) seems to be the main focus here; but I would think in a larger societal sense some of these insights might also be relative concerning some of the themes in this thread.


Is this correct and would this be a corresponding metaphor from which to view or understanding some of the content these linked articles are illustrating :?:
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Cindy B.
Working Associate
Posts: 4719
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Cindy B. »

Drat! That Schueler website was excellent and offered about six different Jungian models. I'll see if I can find some of those images elsewhere online. I'll get back to you soon, James, about this and the rest of your post.

Ciao!
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung

Cindy B.
Working Associate
Posts: 4719
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Cindy B. »

Ciao!

I have access to images of all the models now, James, and tomorrow (fingers crossed) I'll post them in the Jung thread. It's information that we should have around, so I'll go through my JCF Photobucket, and we'll not lose them again. Probably. (Consider the source.) :P

***

Next, psychologically speaking, the Star of David is not a "model" of the psyche, per se, James, but one symbolization of the Jungian psyche in its wholeness (and among countless, human psychospiritual representations of wholeness). Also, the symbolic meaning of numbers is important; here, for example, 1,2,3,6. Numbers as symbols represent both quantities and qualities as well as other things, such as organization (shape) and relationship and sex/gender. Jung: "The Yahwists symbol of the star of David is a complexio oppositorum...a mandala built on three, an unconscious acknowledgement of the Trinity." (Something to add to your Jungian studies list, James, more on types of symbols and archetypes. :)) The Jewish religion, of course, offers another variation of this symbol's meaning given an interpretive context of its own as do other religions. Jung eventually surmised that number itself was the archetype of order and likely primordial within the psychophysical unus mundus. Anyway, for an example of this sort analysis and interpretation, a long one, down the road this academic article would be worth a read: http://www.quodlibet.net/articles/brabazon-jung.shtml
Last edited by Cindy B. on Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:43 am, edited 2 times in total.
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Thank you Cindy; the article was " awesome ". ( If I may suggest it would be a nice addition to the " Jung - In The Weeds " thread as well. ) I especially liked the sweep of " religion " that was covered along with the " symbolism ".

One thing I might mention concerning " symbols " that I came across last night that I thought was very illuminating. I was immersed in a conversation that Joseph Campbell had with Michael Toms in the: " Wisdom of Joseph Campbell " series covered both on CD and in the book: " An Open Life " where Joseph is talking about the influence of Jung on his own ideas and the quote goes as follows:

Joseph Campbell:
" You know, for some people, ( Jungian ) is a nasty word, and it has been flung at me by certain reviewers as though to say, ( Don't bother with Joe Campbell; he's a Jungian ). I'm not a Jungian! As far as interpreting myths, Jung gives me the best clues I've got. But I'm much more interested in diffusion and relationships historically than Jung was, so that the Jungians think of me as a kind of questionable person. I don't use those formula words very often in my interpretation of myths, but Jung gives me the background from which to let the myth talk to me.

If I do have a guru of that sort it would be ( Zimmer ) - the one who really gave me the courage to interpret myths out of what I knew of their common symbols. There's always a risk there, but it's a risk of your own personal adventure instead of just gluing yourself to what someone else has found. "
:idea:



( That was insightful I thought. At any rate; thank you again for all your help with this. And I will look forward to the Jungian " models " post when you are able to get to it. ) 8)
Last edited by JamesN. on Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Cindy B.
Working Associate
Posts: 4719
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Cindy B. »

Thanks for sharing that info., James, a keeper. 8)
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung

Cindy B.
Working Associate
Posts: 4719
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Cindy B. »

About the Jungian Models of the Psyche, James.

Assembling the lot of them for posting is taking longer than I'd thought, and I have other computer work going on, too. I need to tend to that for a while, so the model images will show up in a day or so. :)
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Thank you for the effort and update Cindy. In the meantime the two article links that I posted earlier are giving me plenty to digest and assimilate. ( Kind of like the example or metaphor of a peanutbutter and jelly sandwhich combination I've heard used; separate they are good; but together much better. :wink: ) ( Incidentally; I was never quite sure if these were part of the group you were assembling or not since these were what showed up on " Google " under the same exact title; and so since I had already read them I just went ahead with this layman's accessment. I hope that does not pose a problem. )

( Ann Hopwood seems to approach this in a clinical way; whereas Irene Gad seems to add a more mythical dimension to it as well. )

" Hopwood " seems to clarify some of the concepts and terminology by identifying the separate components or mechanisms and then showing the inter-relationships; whereas " Gad " seems to add the mythical representations that Jung understood and to point out the manifestations within which they appear. Both together seem to offer two aspects of this same source and it's interplay which makes it a little more accessible for a layman like myself to get a handle on.

These articles are much too large to go over in their entirety but here are a few quotes in an attempt to illustrate what I'm getting at. ( Is this in sync with what you have been pointing towards? )



Hopwood:
Individuation

Jung called the search for wholeness within the human psyche, the process of individuation. It may be described as a process of circumambulation around the Self as the centre of personality. The person aims to become conscious of him or herself as a unique human being, but at the same time, no more nor less than any other human being.

For Jung, conflict is not only inherent in human psychology, but is necessary for growth. In order to become more conscious, one must be able to bear conflict. There are many internal opposites, as well as those experienced in the outside world. If the tension between the opposites can be borne, then out of this clash something new and creative can grow. In Jung’s view, this ‘something’ is a symbol which will contribute to a new direction which does justice to both sides of a conflict and which is a product of the unconscious rather than of rational thought.

For Jung the symbol is something which cannot be fully explained or understood but has the quality of both conscious and unconscious worlds. The symbol may be the agent of transformation which brings about the development which was so important an aspect of his thinking, and which leads towards individuation as the goal towards which humans strive

Gad:
Among all of Jung's contributions, I believe there is nothing more important than the capacity to
access the imaginal, because there is no other way that we can compensate the real conflicts that we
have to fight through in cvery-day life. If we were to try to solve them only on the concrete plane,
we would have no source in which to really put our roots and to draw up energy that is beyond our
level. That access to that kind of layer is the imginal. It's in fairy tales, it's in myths that one's
psyche can get energized at a time when one really doesn't know where that energy might be coming
from because our personal sources have gone fallow. So the contribution of everything that can
open the door to the imaginal is an immense contribution, not only because the imaginal is rich in
and by itself, but because it is the vehicle to the transcendent, and the transcendent is one of the
major aspects of healing. How can one help someone who is profoundly depressed, having the
feeling that he or she has done everything they could, that at the material level, there is no resource
that they haven't tapped into without result? If they have absolutely no hope and no door open to
the transcendent and they remain only at the concrete level of reality, they will miss out on that
which, for Jung, was a natural alternative level of reality, which is the spiritual aspect of our soul.

The moment you realize that this is not all there is, that there is another dimension of which
you are a part, then you are never going to be alone, you are never going to be lonely, and you are
always going to feel that you are a part of something that is bigger than you are, greater than you are,
that is never going to go away because it has been there from the beginning of time.

How does the transcendent function get activated? By enduring the conflict of opposites.
instead of rationally opting for one or the other of the terms of the conflict, you just stay with it and
stay with it and sweat through it, and all of a sudden, out of the blue, you don't know how, but you
wake up and you are no longer there. Somehow, your perspective has changed, as if something has
come and has taken you out of the valley and put you on the peak of the mountain, and you see the
conflict down in the valley but you're not there any more.
( and )


Gad:
This does not mean avoidance of whatever it is that the conflict requires, but it gives us the strength to endure it and to reach an
understanding of what tin conflict was really all about.

Jung made possible a new experience of reality through the rehabilitation of the mythical and
archetypal dimension of the psyche, leading to the realisation that images are themselves
embodiments of meaning. 1 he unitary vision of mythical imagination is today dichotomized into
the individual and the world. To recapture this vision, an art is needed, the artless art of watching
images in the psyche's mirror. This art, in the end, involves the relativization and decalcification
of the Apollonian and Heroic ego; an art of being fully attentive and at the same time fully relaxed,
ready to listen to the voice of the Self. Imagination is the intermediary realm between conscious and
unconscious (inner and outer.). It embodies the first images and constitutes the common matrix of
myth and language. Thus it is that characteristically human talent - the divine power in humankind
that works toward self-transcendence and reconciliation of spirit and world.

( I'm just swimming in all of this material right now so I hope you will forgive any incorrect assumptions or misunderstandings I am picking up along the way. )



Cheers :)
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Cindy B.
Working Associate
Posts: 4719
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Cindy B. »

JamesN. wrote:Cindy; I went back to look through your link on " Jungian Models of the Psyche " and found this link no longer worked; ( possibly a site domain issue ).
James, please go here: http://www.jcf.org/new/forum/viewtopic. ... 0551#90551

:)
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Wow! 8) Cindy this is fabulous! I especially like the " photobucket " aspect! :idea:

Thank you so much! :)
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Locked