Clint, and the readers that commented, this is interesting to think about. I have never thought of having a shadow within my own self. I know there are opposing good and bad thoughts and what causes those. I am simplifying it probably way too much in my non-credentialed ideas on what you speak of and the replies here. But love reading it all and hearing the back and forth. I always wonder how we tap into "whatever" for the ideas, the creativeness, to come out in our paintings and writing. Probably none of that made any sense, but felt like I should try.
As an artist, working counseling psychologist and former English professor, I have always found it interesting how both the artistic realm and the literary realm take psychological theories and kind of develop their own spin on it. Currently, earning my MFA in painting at SCAD, learning that “the shadow”, a part of Jungian theory, is a thing was kind of a surprise to me as a counseling psychologist. It’s the same in the literary world. In the counseling and psychology realm, Jung, like Freud, are not really thought of well…and in fact so old school. While the mind is a vast place, truly not fully unmapped, it’s is possible that the shadow has a place. In my work as a counseling psychologist, due to my formal training and experience, the shadow has no place, but the conscious (thinking mind) and unconscious (emotional mind) mind do. Sometimes, when I put on my counseling psychologist hat and read headlines like “Transmuting the Shadow”, I laugh and cringe at the same time. Then, I take off that hat and put on my artist hat and say, “All good”. Translating back and forth between the realms of art, literature and psychology can be difficult. I just wish the the art world and the literary world would catch up… Jung wasn’t all that, and neither was Freud. So many psychological theories and theorists have come after them that seem so much more on point as to what is going on with our vast minds.
I’ve discovered in art, it doesn’t matter if it’s real or not. If a belief helps one’s art, use it. If not discard it. For example, I’ve started “believing” the world is magical and it has helped me overcome depression and anxiety. Is it REALLY magic? I don’t know. Probably not. But the “belief” helps my art.
And ironically, that’s based firmly in the theory of the subconscious (emotional)/conscious (thinking) mind theory. That’s so helpful and amazing you let your mind do that.
I am an artist, I hold a teaching credential in English, and I have a master's in Transpersonal Psychology, a field which Jung is said to have founded. I wrote my master's thesis on the shadow, so I read this article with more than marginal interest. I think there's a lot a validity in acknowledging and honoring the shadow component of the psyche. The shadow shows up in a lot of mythology and literature (Darth Vader in Star Wars, Lord Voldemort in Harry Potter) so I hold an opposite belief, that the shadow is a valuable component of the psyche and deserves attention.
I think you’re speaking of archetypes when talking about mythology in literature.
To clarify, there’s nothing wrong with discussing or believing in the shadow self. I just wish the art works and literary worlds went further and didn’t stop there in the area if theory. It feels limiting.
Also, as you illustrated in your response, there are many different areas in psychology and counseling theory. You have a degree in transpersonal psychology- that’s one of many in the field of psychology. I have doctorates in counseling psychology and international psychology - using very vastly different theories from each other. One is limited to Western psychology (the counseling psychology degree) and the other in indigenous and non Western psychology, which allows for more expansive thought and consideration.
My point in the original post, which clearly I didn’t make well, is just that it’s interesting how in different realms, counseling/psychology, art and literary, that these same theories, such as Jung with the shadow self, take on different viewpoints, almost different definitions too. And it feels kind of limiting. When I do my thesis for my MFA in painting at SCAD, if I go with the psychological realm (which I will), I’m limited to using Jung, because that’s where the artworld’s theories stop. And when I know there’s more beyond that, it’s frustrating.
So, I don’t disagree with what you’ve said at all. Just trying to create a bit of discourse and pointing out the interesting fact that each area: psychology/counseling, art and literature all have different takes on the same concepts in psychology. And that’s also fascinating to me.
My theories don't stop with Jung. "The Shadow" was just how I approached this particular article. The issue is trying to put into words something that is, in a way, beyond words, and internal and thus, subjective, so all articles, analysis, whatever along this vein in somewhat incomplete. It's like trying to explain the bliss one can achieve when reaching "no mind" in meditation in words - it's impossible to put in words. It's like trying to describe love in words, but love is beyond words. So any writing, whether it's a layman like me, or a trained psychologist or whomever, is always an attempt, an incomplete model of the complex reality that lives inside a human being's psyche. I think you explained it well, and I very much appreciate your comments. My previous answer was shorter than I usually would leave due to being on my phone at the time (and late for an appointment). And I agree, it is fascinating to see different profession's "takes" on the same ideas, and even different people's understanding. I expressed it as the shadow today, I may express it as a divine muse tomorrow, and another idea forming in my mind is the tension in man created from our animal past and our spiritual future (which might also be considered "shadow" and "devine muse"). I'll probably circle around these ideas in different ways, though, I'm gearing up at the moment to finish up some fiction! Thanks for your comments!
I appreciate your comment, Amy. I find the whole idea of exploring shadow in my art fascinating. And the thing with Jung is that he wasn't the best writer and I think, to your point, that there's a lot of ambiguity written in, or left unsaid, in his teachings. To his credit though, he was exploring an entirely new dimension in psychology, that of spirituality, and I guess we here are left to carry things forward.
On another note, I think it's cool that you are working on your MFA--good luck with it!
Clint, and the readers that commented, this is interesting to think about. I have never thought of having a shadow within my own self. I know there are opposing good and bad thoughts and what causes those. I am simplifying it probably way too much in my non-credentialed ideas on what you speak of and the replies here. But love reading it all and hearing the back and forth. I always wonder how we tap into "whatever" for the ideas, the creativeness, to come out in our paintings and writing. Probably none of that made any sense, but felt like I should try.
I think you would love this free ebook by Matt Cardin - he goes much deeper into ways to work with your "shadow":
https://mattcardin.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/A-Course-in-Demonic-Creativity.pdf
He also writes a newsletter on Substack here: https://www.livingdark.net/
I saw that and thought about it but had to leave for the morning. I appreciate your recommendation.
As an artist, working counseling psychologist and former English professor, I have always found it interesting how both the artistic realm and the literary realm take psychological theories and kind of develop their own spin on it. Currently, earning my MFA in painting at SCAD, learning that “the shadow”, a part of Jungian theory, is a thing was kind of a surprise to me as a counseling psychologist. It’s the same in the literary world. In the counseling and psychology realm, Jung, like Freud, are not really thought of well…and in fact so old school. While the mind is a vast place, truly not fully unmapped, it’s is possible that the shadow has a place. In my work as a counseling psychologist, due to my formal training and experience, the shadow has no place, but the conscious (thinking mind) and unconscious (emotional mind) mind do. Sometimes, when I put on my counseling psychologist hat and read headlines like “Transmuting the Shadow”, I laugh and cringe at the same time. Then, I take off that hat and put on my artist hat and say, “All good”. Translating back and forth between the realms of art, literature and psychology can be difficult. I just wish the the art world and the literary world would catch up… Jung wasn’t all that, and neither was Freud. So many psychological theories and theorists have come after them that seem so much more on point as to what is going on with our vast minds.
Thanks for reading and considering.
Best,
Dr. Amy Phillips, EdD, LCPC, LMHC and artist
I’ve discovered in art, it doesn’t matter if it’s real or not. If a belief helps one’s art, use it. If not discard it. For example, I’ve started “believing” the world is magical and it has helped me overcome depression and anxiety. Is it REALLY magic? I don’t know. Probably not. But the “belief” helps my art.
And ironically, that’s based firmly in the theory of the subconscious (emotional)/conscious (thinking) mind theory. That’s so helpful and amazing you let your mind do that.
At the very least it makes life a lot more interesting to view it in this light.
I am an artist, I hold a teaching credential in English, and I have a master's in Transpersonal Psychology, a field which Jung is said to have founded. I wrote my master's thesis on the shadow, so I read this article with more than marginal interest. I think there's a lot a validity in acknowledging and honoring the shadow component of the psyche. The shadow shows up in a lot of mythology and literature (Darth Vader in Star Wars, Lord Voldemort in Harry Potter) so I hold an opposite belief, that the shadow is a valuable component of the psyche and deserves attention.
I think you’re speaking of archetypes when talking about mythology in literature.
To clarify, there’s nothing wrong with discussing or believing in the shadow self. I just wish the art works and literary worlds went further and didn’t stop there in the area if theory. It feels limiting.
Also, as you illustrated in your response, there are many different areas in psychology and counseling theory. You have a degree in transpersonal psychology- that’s one of many in the field of psychology. I have doctorates in counseling psychology and international psychology - using very vastly different theories from each other. One is limited to Western psychology (the counseling psychology degree) and the other in indigenous and non Western psychology, which allows for more expansive thought and consideration.
My point in the original post, which clearly I didn’t make well, is just that it’s interesting how in different realms, counseling/psychology, art and literary, that these same theories, such as Jung with the shadow self, take on different viewpoints, almost different definitions too. And it feels kind of limiting. When I do my thesis for my MFA in painting at SCAD, if I go with the psychological realm (which I will), I’m limited to using Jung, because that’s where the artworld’s theories stop. And when I know there’s more beyond that, it’s frustrating.
So, I don’t disagree with what you’ve said at all. Just trying to create a bit of discourse and pointing out the interesting fact that each area: psychology/counseling, art and literature all have different takes on the same concepts in psychology. And that’s also fascinating to me.
My theories don't stop with Jung. "The Shadow" was just how I approached this particular article. The issue is trying to put into words something that is, in a way, beyond words, and internal and thus, subjective, so all articles, analysis, whatever along this vein in somewhat incomplete. It's like trying to explain the bliss one can achieve when reaching "no mind" in meditation in words - it's impossible to put in words. It's like trying to describe love in words, but love is beyond words. So any writing, whether it's a layman like me, or a trained psychologist or whomever, is always an attempt, an incomplete model of the complex reality that lives inside a human being's psyche. I think you explained it well, and I very much appreciate your comments. My previous answer was shorter than I usually would leave due to being on my phone at the time (and late for an appointment). And I agree, it is fascinating to see different profession's "takes" on the same ideas, and even different people's understanding. I expressed it as the shadow today, I may express it as a divine muse tomorrow, and another idea forming in my mind is the tension in man created from our animal past and our spiritual future (which might also be considered "shadow" and "devine muse"). I'll probably circle around these ideas in different ways, though, I'm gearing up at the moment to finish up some fiction! Thanks for your comments!
Thank you for your further dialogue
I appreciate your comment, Amy. I find the whole idea of exploring shadow in my art fascinating. And the thing with Jung is that he wasn't the best writer and I think, to your point, that there's a lot of ambiguity written in, or left unsaid, in his teachings. To his credit though, he was exploring an entirely new dimension in psychology, that of spirituality, and I guess we here are left to carry things forward.
On another note, I think it's cool that you are working on your MFA--good luck with it!
I think you would love this free ebook by Matt Cardin - he goes much deeper into ways to work with your "shadow":
https://mattcardin.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/A-Course-in-Demonic-Creativity.pdf
He also writes a newsletter on Substack here: https://www.livingdark.net/
So good to hear your perspective! Thank you for dialoguing with me in a bit of discourse!
And thanks regarding the MFA - definitely a good challenge for me.
*mapped, not unmapped