Firstly I will briefly define and examine the persona and shadow as C G Jung outlined them.
In relation to the persona Jung remarked as follows.
"Although ego consciousness is at first identical with the persona - that
compromise role in which we parade before the community - yet the
unconscious self can never be repressed to the point of extinction. Its influence
is chiefly manifest in the special nature of the contrasting and compensating
contents of the unconscious..... and these......contain the seeds of individual
development."
CW vol 7 p 156 para 247
It is clear from Jung's discussion of the persona that he considered it necessary not to do away with the persona completely, but to place it in conscious relation to the `compensating contents of the unconscious', which here we may consider for the most part to be shadow qualities. In this processes the persona under the aegis of a detached and objective ego consciousness, cognizant of its own shadow issues, is able to develop a truly individual stance rather than adopting a socially specified role.
The ego awareness that goes around in our daily lives and is the seat of our subjective identities, is built up through our life experiences. This is the ego which Jung describes as `at first identical with the persona, and what Edward Whitmont refers to as:
"the ego conditioned by the collective consciousness and persona of the time"
and about which he remarks:
"The ego that came into being during the patriarchal epoch was conditioned by
the collective superego and persona of that time. Our identity, our personal
choices, decisions, and value judgements , are all determined - certainly
ininitially and, to a large extent, throughout our lives - by the ways we
endeavour to be seen."
Edward Whitmont, "Recent Influences on the Practice of Jungian
Analysis". quoted in Murray Stein (Ed.) "Jungian Analysis" p337.
Moving on to look at the shadow we see that Jung said:
"The shadow person everything that the subject refuses to acknowledge about
himself and yet is always thrusting itself upon him directly or indirectly - for
instance inferior traits of character and other incompatible tendencies."
CW vol 9i pp 284-5 para 513
"..it has been believed...that the human shadow was the source of all evil...(but)
...it can be ascertained on closer investigation that..(it).. does not consist only of
morally reprehensible tendencies , but also displays a number of good qualities,
such as normal instincts, appropriate reactions, realistic insights, creative
impulses, etc."
CW vol 9ii pp266-7 para 423
Edward Whitmont remarks about the shadow as follows in the aforementioned article:
"Genuinely individual values are more often than not carried by the shadow".
Here we would do well to look at an example of positive quality as an `incompatible tendency', as there is as Jung suggests a tendency to characterise the shadow as essentially negative. The example which springs to mind is of a man who took himself and life inordinately seriously and could not laugh at life and least of all at himself. For this man a particular associate seemed always to provoke a reaction of annoyance and irritation. For months the serious man could not fathom why his colleague so annoyed and irritated him. Then one day when the second man responded with lightness and humour to a comment of the serious man the penny suddenly dropped. The second man was able to joke and make light of life and situations that the first could only ever see through his cloud of seriousness. The serious man's sense of humour was so repressed that he could never see the light side of things. His sense of humour was (a part of) his shadow, and not admissable to his persona identified ego's view of himself as the self importantly serious person with the appropriately meaningful attitude to life.
As personas develop, through which the ego develops a sense of subjective identity, the world outside becomes a sort of circular hall of mirrors at the centre of which the ego stands seeing itself reflected. The ego usually increasingly adopts personas that render the reflections comfortable to itself and pleasing to others. And as in our example above the shadow is conveniently projected onto others who do not fit into such a view of life.
What I have outlined above is largely an unconscious process through which we adapt to the collective values of our social reality, even for the apparent rebel or eccentric. So, how do we or are we impelled to break free of this unconscious identification with our personas, for it is only through this process that we can enter the next phase of ego development?
Something must break through the unconscious identity of ego and persona and shatter the unified view of itself that the ego has thus established. What the ego identified with the persona has established or tried to establish is an illusion that it is an indivisible whole, united in itself, and that all negative qualities lie outside it. The shadow is projected and all remains well. But Jung suggests that this is in fact an illusion and cannot be forever maintained. He says:
"Both theoretically and practically, polarity is inherent in all living things. Set
against this overpowering force is the fragile unity of the ego...."
Memories Dreams Reflections.....p346
What this shadow projection offers the ego is an inner sense of `peace of mind' in which the outer conflict becomes acceptable because at least one knows that the real source of all the trouble lies out there. At every level of human interaction, be it person to person, state to state, or nation to nation we seek this sense of inner peace which the unchallenged persona offers. In the process it is always necessary to project whatever shadow qualities we cannot admit outside the unity of the required self image. Jung reflecting on the way such projections work in the outer world of political life in Switzerland remarked that:
"We still labour under the unwholesome delusion that we should be at peace
within ourselves."......and that....."It is surely better to know that your worst
enemy is right there within your own heart."
CW vol 8 pp 224-5 para 455-6.
What we are seeing here is that the very fact of ego identification with the persona creates an insipient conflict between the self image which the persona represents in this less developed stage and the unconscious contents of the shadow complex. If this situation of insipient inner conflict is not to be seen as a pathologically doomed situation we need to ask whether, and if so how, this conflict serves the individuation process in its movement towards the true individuality and wholeness of the person. If we are to remain unconsciously attached to the persona images which make us comfortable within our social milieu the shadow must remain projected.
It is in this light that Jung is reputed to have said that shedding the persona is the first step in the individuation process. It is important not to read this as meaning that the persona is in or of itself the problem. Rather it is more appropriate to see it as referring to our need to update our image/mask/persona. If we are growing and changing the persona itself must be able to accommodate these developments. Shedding the persona is like the shedding of a snake's skin. If the snake is to grow its must shed the old skin but it is also left vulnerable and open to attack when this process occurs. When the, or a, persona is shed one is left vulnerable, needing to `hole up' and recover one's strength and ability to shield one's self, as the snake is after shedding a skin. Maybe during these times one is also more susceptible to suggestion and shadow projection; one feels unprotected and at the mercy of outside forces which may lead to lapsing back into old and comfortable patterns if one becomes too uncomfortable.
To begin examining how the conflict in the interplay of persona and shadow in fact serves the individuation process I once again quote Jung:
"The psychological rule says that when an inner situation is not made
conscious, it happens outside as fate. That is to say, when the individual
remains undivided and does not become conscious of his inner contradiction
,
the world must perforce act out the conflict and be torn into opposite halves."
CW vol 9 II p71 para 126
The ego identified with personas must have the integrity of its self image challenged. It must meet with an opposition within capable of creating self doubt which demands a re-evaluation of its notion of `who it is'. And this can only occur if one is capable of accepting the state of inner conflict which shadow projection keeps conveniently outside oneself and identified with `the other'. That is to say one has to be divided within. In this process the self image of unity within must be challenged and any persona identities which support such a view will necessarily be brought under scrutiny.
The personas we must shed are more often than not going to be ones conditioned as Whitmont suggests by collective values. Such conditioning will always involve a degree of repression of what Jung has called good qualities such as normal instincts, appropriate reactions, realistic insights and creative impulses. To recover such lost values inevitably involves conflict, both inner and outer. Such a process does not as we often imagine involve only some enormous and gut wrenching phenomenon which turns our lives upside down. In spite of the tendency to see this struggle with the shadow in terms of larger than life events of earth shattering import, it is more often to be seen in the minutiae of our existence. It is often in areas that we associate with practical everyday matters of our social or personal duties or obligations. In such situations we are taught to seek the right response, believing then we are free to act with a minimum of conflict and consequences. In identity with the persona we are free to act without moral or ethical dilemma. In this regard Jung observed:
"By no means every conflict of duties, and perhaps not even a single one, is
ever really `solved', though it may be argued over, weighed, and counter-
weighed till doomsday. Sooner or later the decision is simply there......Practical
life cannot `be suspended in an everlasting contradiction. The opposites do not
simply vanish.....They constantly threaten the unity of the personality, and
entangle life again and again in their dichotomies"
Memories Dreams Reflections.....pp345/6
Conflict is the agencey via which we break free of ego identity with the persona, or shed it. An example may here demonstrate what I mean, and it is deliberately a very minor every day event that is used.
Lets say that I go into the butcher's to buy my weekly meat. At the end of our transaction I hand over $30 in payment and as I walk out of the shop counting my change I see that I have been given $2 too much. Here I am confronted by a conflict and a decision. Knowing I have been overchanged $2 I can either go back and return the money or I can keep it. How will I react? My persona is that of an ordinary honest person, I am not a thief or a robber and would not expect to be seen or treated as one. And yet the thief who is thus inevitably my shadow will pop up now and suggest that I keep the $2. How am I to deal with this conflict of interests? If I am really an honest person won't I just go back in and tell the butcher that I was over changed and return the money? Yes....but.....it's only $2 says the shadow thief, and in any case its just a bit of good luck....somewhere along the line someone else will be underchanged and so it all evens out in the end. The shadow has an immediate store of rationalis- ations suitable cover up the inner conflict which arises and to tip the scales in favour of keeping the money. And the persona is equally adamant in its knowledge of what is right which would also free me of the potential conflict. If I choose either one over the other I am freed of the conflict and able to go happily on my way.
Either choice is in fact likely to be made in a way which represses the conflict and leaves the persona intact. If the `good person' persona wins out and covers up the very real fact that one was in fact tempted to steal the $2 their is a pyrrhic victory for self righteousness which maintains the persona's view that it is indeed a good and moral citizen. If the `shadow thief' wins out the persona accepts its rationalisations in order not to admit that it is really a thief and that theft really amounts to more than the `good luck' of $2 coming one's way in the swings and round-abouts of daily commerce. If the ego is not strong enough and capable of sufficient objectivity and detachment to stand outside either charade the game goes on, and in Jung's terms, "the world must perforce act out the conflict, and be torn into opposite halves."
If we would only truly accept that this conflict between the thief and the good person exists within us then there might be hope for change in the world outside. Jung in the "Undiscovered Self" commented that:
"(the individual)..must know relentlessly how much good he can do and what
crimes he is capable of, and must be aware of regarding one as real and the
other as illusion."
C G Jung....Memories Dreams Reflections p330.
What this means in terms of the above example is that if I am even tempted to take the $2 I am capable of theft, and that to call it anything else is simply a self deception. In fact I am far less compromised if I take the $2 because I can't be bothered taking it back, than if I either pretend to myself that I was never tempted, or, accept the rationalisation that it is not really stealing to take it. The way in which to take the money back is healthy is if I can admit the tension between the `shadow thief' and the `good person persona'. Then, whilst acknowledging the temptation decide to take back the $2 not out of self righteousness but as an act of sacrifice in which the conflict is internalised. If either the `can't be bothered' or the `act of sacrifice' approaches become habitual and without tension then one is most likely repressing the conflict again and in need of a new jolt from the unconscious.
"Drive the conflict underground and you deaden yourself, and your protest
against your own deadness will manifest itself in neurosis..."
H.A. Williams in `Tensions'
It is the act of conscious choice from within the state of conflict which is paramount in moving forward. One cannot hide in equivocation and avoidance of choosing forever, for as Jung pointed out; "Sooner or later the decision is simply there......Practical life cannot be suspended in an everlasting contradiction." One must act and accept the consequences, and for the ongoing process of individuation this is more important than any idealised conceptions of rightness or wrongness. Sooner or later the wheel will turn and one will once again be confronted with just such a choice and able to decide once more, taking into account the experience and consequences of one's previous decision.
Such a response coming as it does out of acceptance of the tension between opposites moves one towards a true individuality. This is an attitude which knows and accepts the other within, even at times falling into its grip, and has no need of self righteousness. It is only possible for the individual who accepts being divided within and knows the tension or conflict held thus to be the creative potential for a more flexible and more complete personality.
With the shadow as a conscious counterpoint to the persona decisions and the struggle to accept their consequences become a process of integration and produce integrity, rather than self righteousness on the one hand, or corruption (it's shadow) on the other.
It seems that we must individually and collectively take up the burden of allowing and bringing to consciousness a state of inner conflict through which the necessity of such outer divisions and conflict will be lessened. If we are able to bear being divided within it seems there is hope for change in the outer life of both individuals and the collective.
Its all too easy to see someone else's shadow at work, and the bigger and more public a situation the easier we find it to identify and be horrified at. We have no great trouble seeing the shadow boxing of politicians for example, point scoring and always having to justify their own side's actions regardless of the obviousness at times of the flaws they are trying to cover up. If we see these things why is it that we do not demand more of our representatives? We complain bitterly enough about our politicians and yet nothing ever really seems to change. Since our complaints put the lie to any suggestion that we are accepting of these behaviours out some magnaminous state of superiority, why are we collectively unable to demand something different? If we think they're cheating, lying and feathering their own nests why do we let them get away with it? It would seem to be precisely because we can only demand of our political representatives what we have first truly demanded of ourselves. To the extent that we have really engaged in the process of becoming divided within and endured the tension and conflict of the interplay of persona and shadow, we may then be able to do as Lauren van der Post proposes when he says;
"the psychology of individuation has nothing whatever to do with politics at all
because it deals with ultimate values. But yet it has shattering politcial
implications......more important than any other quality in our politicians, we must
demand psychological illumination, psychological awareness because otherwise
we get people sparring with their own shadows.....Jung often said to me, `The
human being who starts by withdrawing his own shadow from his neighbour is
doing work of immense, immediate political and social importance.'"
Lauren van der Post, in "Matter of Heart".
In order to do this work one has of course to be able to endure the conflict of such shadow dynamics inwardly. That is the essential difficulty of withdrawing one's shadow from one's neighbour. It is what lies behind Christ's admonition; "Why do you bother with the mote in your brother's eye when you cannot see the plank in your own....?" Here in of course is just such a compensatory inversion as the unconscious so often produces. What we see in others is magnified by the lense of our own denial so that it becomes sufficiently outrageous to us as to render our own flaws mere motes that we can then comfortably ignore or rationalise away as irrelevant. But to withdraw one's own shadow is a day to day affair for the shadow is not merely those major failings over which politicians end up with egg on their faces, personas of honest, hardworking peoples' representatives in tatters, and sacked from cabinet or shadow cabinet (the nomenclature is ironical). Those larger than life events are in fact accretions of a multitude of smaller, apparently insignificant, occurences each of which presented an opportunity to face the shadow. The magnitude of one's eventual fall is no more than the sum of all the missed or denied opportunities to address the shadow in its everyday context, such as the $2 extra change over which one must allow a conflicted state to arise.
To the extent that the persona is founded upon processes of denial it must eventually be shed/shattered in order to make way for any real growth in the personality. This is as true of the collective persona of national identity as it is of the individual self image. If the persona is to realise its potential to be that through which one's more authentic nature sounds (persona = to sound through), it must be grounded in an embrace and dialogue with the shadow as inner other.
© Rodney Ravenswood 1995
