What do you think?
Rate this book
Il codice dell'anima
«Per decifrare il codice dell'anima e capire il carattere, la vocazione, il destino, nel suo best seller Hillman si ispira al mito platonico di Er: l'anima di ciascuno di noi sceglie un "compagno segreto" (daimon lo chiamavano i greci, genius i latini, angelo custode i cristiani). Sarà lui a guidarci nel cammino terreno. Eminenti modelli sfilano sotto l'occhio stregonesco di Hillman ... Il suo set è affollatissimo. Judy Garland, Joséphine Baker, Woody Allen, Quentin Tarantino, Hannah Arendt, Manuel Manolete, Henry Kissinger, Richard Nixon, Truman Capote, Gandhi, Yehudi Menuhin, Elias Canetti e tanti altri, con le loro storie d'infanzia e maturità abilmente sezionate dal bisturi analitico, testimoniano apoteosi e disastri. Ma nell'età della psicopatia il ruolo del protagonista spetta a Hitler: il suo demone gli ha cucito addosso la divisa di un prototipo, il criminale dei tempi moderni. Forse di tutti i tempi». Enzo Golino
409 pages, Paperback
First published August 13, 1996
1100 people are currently reading
10211 people want to read
About the author
James Hillman
175 books573 followersJames Hillman (1926-2011) was an American psychologist. He served in the US Navy Hospital Corps from 1944 to 1946, after which he attended the Sorbonne in Paris, studying English Literature, and Trinity College, Dublin, graduating with a degree in mental and moral science in 1950.
In 1959, he received his PhD from the University of Zurich, as well as his analyst's diploma from the C.G. Jung Institute and founded a movement toward archetypal psychology, was then appointed as Director of Studies at the institute, a position he held until 1969.
In 1970, Hillman became editor of Spring Publications, a publishing company devoted to advancing Archetypal Psychology as well as publishing books on mythology, philosophy and art. His magnum opus, Re-visioning Psychology, was written in 1975 and nominated for the Pulitzer Prize. Hillman then helped co-found the Dallas Institute for Humanities and Culture in 1978.
Retired into private practice, writing and traveling to lecture, until his death at his home in Connecticut on October 27, 2011 from bone cancer.
In 1959, he received his PhD from the University of Zurich, as well as his analyst's diploma from the C.G. Jung Institute and founded a movement toward archetypal psychology, was then appointed as Director of Studies at the institute, a position he held until 1969.
In 1970, Hillman became editor of Spring Publications, a publishing company devoted to advancing Archetypal Psychology as well as publishing books on mythology, philosophy and art. His magnum opus, Re-visioning Psychology, was written in 1975 and nominated for the Pulitzer Prize. Hillman then helped co-found the Dallas Institute for Humanities and Culture in 1978.
Retired into private practice, writing and traveling to lecture, until his death at his home in Connecticut on October 27, 2011 from bone cancer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 327 reviews
January 18, 2012
I was going to contact Dr. James Hillman and thank him for his wonderful book, and found that he died this past summer. I wish I would have read this book 20 years ago. It echoes many sentiments I have felt about my psychotherapy clients, the ones who were labeled "crazy" when they were simply following their soul's calling. Hillman draws on Jungian archetypal therapy to explain what he calls the acorn theory. We all have an acorn that demands to become an oak, regardless of convention. When that acorn does not fit societal norms or parental expectations, we are given a psychiatric label, called obstinate or resistant, or medicated to bring us back into line.
Hillman shares many fascinating stories about famous people who refused to be put in a box. Violinist Yehudi Menuhin wanted a violin for his fourth birthday, and was given a toy violin. Menuhin states, "I burst into sobs, threw it on the ground and would have nothing more to do with it." Hillman explains, "The daimon (acorn, soul's calling) does not want to be treated as a child; it is not a child." Indeed, it is our inner wisdom, the drive to wholeness, which is routinely dismissed in our society.
I remember a case I had in which the identified patient began literally screaming, and the family wanted her hospitalized. She was simply screaming to be heard, and the family did not want to hear what she had to say. In fact, she was calling out the family dysfunction, so it was easier for the family to label her crazy than to listen to what she was saying.
In my own case, several therapists called me dysfunctional, when I was simply following my soul's calling. I knew deep down that I did not fit the categories they were putting me in, but also knew they did not have a clue about the depth of the drive I felt. I tried to supress this drive for 20 years and it would not let me go. Reading this book made me realize I'm not obsessed, fixated, codependent, or any other of the psychiatric labels traditional psychiatry would pin on me. Now that I have stopped judging myself, I feel whole. I honor my soul's quest rather than running from it.
We all have something we dream of doing, but few of us follow our dreams. Hillman's book reminds us that we will never be happy until we pay attention to our inner urgings. One of my favorite quotes is "Don't die with your dreams inside you." I believe it's from Wayne Dyer.
Hillman shares many fascinating stories about famous people who refused to be put in a box. Violinist Yehudi Menuhin wanted a violin for his fourth birthday, and was given a toy violin. Menuhin states, "I burst into sobs, threw it on the ground and would have nothing more to do with it." Hillman explains, "The daimon (acorn, soul's calling) does not want to be treated as a child; it is not a child." Indeed, it is our inner wisdom, the drive to wholeness, which is routinely dismissed in our society.
I remember a case I had in which the identified patient began literally screaming, and the family wanted her hospitalized. She was simply screaming to be heard, and the family did not want to hear what she had to say. In fact, she was calling out the family dysfunction, so it was easier for the family to label her crazy than to listen to what she was saying.
In my own case, several therapists called me dysfunctional, when I was simply following my soul's calling. I knew deep down that I did not fit the categories they were putting me in, but also knew they did not have a clue about the depth of the drive I felt. I tried to supress this drive for 20 years and it would not let me go. Reading this book made me realize I'm not obsessed, fixated, codependent, or any other of the psychiatric labels traditional psychiatry would pin on me. Now that I have stopped judging myself, I feel whole. I honor my soul's quest rather than running from it.
We all have something we dream of doing, but few of us follow our dreams. Hillman's book reminds us that we will never be happy until we pay attention to our inner urgings. One of my favorite quotes is "Don't die with your dreams inside you." I believe it's from Wayne Dyer.
August 3, 2019
This is the book that I love giving away to my friends because I believe everybody should read it (I gave so many and still dont have my own copy). Contary to Western culture that believe we are product of genes/family or Eastern culture that says we are pre-destined by Karma, Hillman somehow combines them into one and thinks we are born with certain purpose and will achieve what we are meant to do in life one way or another - every individual holds a potential inside himself just like acorn holds a pattern for a Oak, invisible in itself - but the most important thing is to listen your inner voice (in other times people used to call it "Guardian Angel", Hillman simply calls it "inner voice"). Reading this book I was thrilled because for the first time I found in one place everything I always knew but didn't know how to put in words.
For example, Hillman talks about clever kids who never fit in schools because they don't blossom in big groups. Or about why is it that parents/family never recognize potential in a kid because they are too occupied with everyday life (its usually some distant relatives or kind neighbors or teacher who see who we really are). He also talks about importance of getting away from family and spreading the wings somewhere else...too many things to mention here but I can only recommend this book with all my heart to everyone and its definitely one of the books that changed my life.
For example, Hillman talks about clever kids who never fit in schools because they don't blossom in big groups. Or about why is it that parents/family never recognize potential in a kid because they are too occupied with everyday life (its usually some distant relatives or kind neighbors or teacher who see who we really are). He also talks about importance of getting away from family and spreading the wings somewhere else...too many things to mention here but I can only recommend this book with all my heart to everyone and its definitely one of the books that changed my life.
June 6, 2013
This was my second time reading the book (the first was probably when it first came out, some 15 years ago). As always, Hillman (whom I knew quite well) is contrarian and pungently critical of conventional psychotherapy and psychology. Hillman is in search of something more archaic and anarchic—a deeper, mythopoetic, and uncanny sense of calling and character that propels and compels us into and along our life's journey. Hillman's wide reading—especially from ancient Greek and Roman sources and the various literatures of the world—makes THE SOUL'S CODE infinitely suggestive and sinewy even if the theory isn't quite convincing. In fact, the coda on methodology at the end of the book is essential to the reading of the book: it acts as a kind of apologia to some of the far-fetchedness of his theorizing. That this segment is a coda at all hints at a slight lack of confidence on the part of the book's author (or perhaps the editor) about the theory's relevance or universality. Hillman's interpretation of the biographies of the famous and infamous, while entertaining, only reinforces a certain randomness to his theory. Why these biographies and not others? In the end, THE SOUL'S CODE is best read for its motifs and expressions of aesthetic and imaginal mysteries—and as a corrective to reductionist psychology—rather than any kind of in-depth examination of character.
October 23, 2014
James Hillman's The Soul's Code was the first book I read while actively disliking. In fact I disliked most of the book. His work was sloppy and disorganized and his attitude pretentious. The narrative assumed the doubtless truth of his "Acorn theory" which, is a convoluted presentation of fate guiding us into a particular destiny. He set out an entire chapter which claims to explain how this is not the same as fate and wandered off in the middle of his arguments, failing to distinguish at a basic level how an "acorn" was not simply something someone was destined to do (what he calls fatalism).
In fact there were innumerable times while I was reading this that I thought of trivial counterexamples to situations which he claims are only explainable by the acorn theory. This was a hard read to get through because of that mental noise constantly created by fighting his rude oversimplifications of scientific principles.
I did find some redeeming qualities about this book, his occasional breakthrough poetic statements were utterly beautiful and I found his respect for the mysteries of life and the universe not only fascinating but admirable. However,to put it simply the acorn theory is the most convoluted and byzantine example of post hoc ergo propter hoc I have ever seen.
I would not recommend this book to anyone.
Cheers,
John NB Pienta.
In fact there were innumerable times while I was reading this that I thought of trivial counterexamples to situations which he claims are only explainable by the acorn theory. This was a hard read to get through because of that mental noise constantly created by fighting his rude oversimplifications of scientific principles.
I did find some redeeming qualities about this book, his occasional breakthrough poetic statements were utterly beautiful and I found his respect for the mysteries of life and the universe not only fascinating but admirable. However,to put it simply the acorn theory is the most convoluted and byzantine example of post hoc ergo propter hoc I have ever seen.
I would not recommend this book to anyone.
Cheers,
John NB Pienta.
August 4, 2009
I've tried valiantly to get into this book, but just haven't. I don't know if I ever will. Fascinated as I am about psychology, I can't help but want Hillman to get to the point already. His thesis about a daimon guiding our lives and leading us to our best destiny works well in hindsight and for explaining the lives of famous people (Josephine Baker, Judy Garland, Henry Ford) but as far as I've read, Hillman gives little insight into how lesser mortals can listen better to their own daimon and heed their inner voices. Perhaps in order to get a better sense of Jungian theory, I should read Jung.
February 11, 2011
I give this sloppily written book two stars instead of one because I think Hillman's central idea is important. Many a physician and pharmacist would be wise to at least entertain this notion that there is more life than our luck-of-the-draw genes and environment. Perhaps we are who we are for some kind of reason, and we might even have souls or callings or daimons. Unfortunately, reading Hillman's book won't make said healthcare professionals perceive these ideas as any less wishy-washy. He overstates his argument, often implying that genes and environment have no relevance at all to the field of psychotherapy, and he offers only anecdotal evidence randomly drawn from the lives of celebrities. A short philosophical essay that doesn't masquerade as scientific would be a more suitable home for this idea.
June 26, 2022
There is something in analytic psychology that is fundamentally congenial to my way of thinking. I discovered it when reading Jung's (quasi-)autobiography, which includes his reflections on 'life after death' (or the 'hereafter'). Jung starts with the observation that nowadays the mythic side of man is given short shrift. He can no longer create fables. “As a result, a great deal escapes him; for it is important and salutory to speak also of incomprehensible things. (…) We are strictly limited by our innate structure and therefore bound by our whole being and thinking to this world of ours. Mythic man, to be sure, demands a ‘going beyond all that,’ but scientific man cannot permit this. To the intellect, all mythologising is futile speculation. To the emotions, however, it is a healing and valid activity; it gives a existence a glamour which we would not like to do without."
In this book, Hillman takes a similar line of thought, but then applied to our present lives in the here and now. In the final paragraph of 'The Soul's Code' he writes: " ... this theory is meant to inspire and revolutionize, and also to excite a fresh erotic attachment to its subject: your subjective and personal autobiography, the way you imagine your life, because how you imagine life strongly impinges upon the raising of children, the attitudes toward the symptoms and disturbances of adolescents, your individuality in a democracy, the strangeness of old age and the duties of dying—in fact, upon the professions of education, psychotherapy, the writing of biography, and the life of the citizen."
We inquire not per se to find the truth, but to charge our existence with meaning and energy, to awaken the creative power of Eros, to expand our power to resonate and communicate with the world. It seems to me this is a reflection of a pre-scientific, magical way of thinking that has led an undercover existence since empirical science assumed its monopoly position as the legitimate way to acquire knowledge.
In her monumental book on 16th century hermetic thought Frances Yates describes a captivating episode that reveals the clash between the two worldviews in an emblematic way. In the 1580s the magus Giordano Bruno found himself debating Copernicus' heliocentric model of the solar system with scholars at Oxford. Both parties in the debate supported the Polish astronomer's findings but based on a radically different way of thinking. For the scholars the famous concentric circle diagram with the Sun at its center was a reflection of mathematical relationships. For Bruno it was a chiffre, a symbol that expressed the magical philosophy of universal animation. The Earth's movement was simply a manifestation of life's divine energy.
Who's to say that Bruno was wrong and only the Oxford scholars had the truth on their side? Maybe their visions did not exclude one another? Maybe there is a place for empiricism and magic to work side by side and complement each other? Analytic psychologists as Jung and Hillman are not the only ones who are thinking along those lines. Anthropologist Tim Ingold has devoted his life to the development and articulation of a way of thinking that could be called 'sympathetic', in the sense that it "both answers to the call of the subject and is in turn answerable to it." It seeks resonance rather than truth, hints at and hunts for dynamic 'Correspondences' between our ideas and the animate and inanimate world around us.
Or take a philosopher such as Michel Serres, who sees a return to science's mythic origins as an imminent and necessary phase of cultural rejuvenation: "By means of these element-dominating laws, this old physicist began to tear nature away from the ancient myths; by a strange return, today we’re plunging our successes back into the anxieties and terrors from which that ancient physics was born. Yes, our new history of science and technology is plunging, today, as though in a loop, into the fundamental human myths from which Empedocles’s first laws came. A major progression and a regression on the nether side of the origins. Consequently, the contemporary time requires that we try to return to that unity in which the principles of hate and love are at the same time human, living, inert and global. We will never attain a deontology of our knowledge and actions without thinking the subjective, the objective, the collective, and the cognitive all together simultaneously." (from Biogea)
Ingold says: "This means, if you will, not taking literal truths metaphorically, but taking metaphorical truths literally. The theorist can be a poet." This is what Hillman does and is when he approaches our sense of self. Sure, both nature and nurture play a role in our personal makeup. But is that all? And are these even the more decisive influences in shaping our fate? Enter 'the acorn theory'. As the fruit of an oak tree an acorn lends itself naturally to an organicist metaphor of self development unfolding in time. But that kind of metaphorical elaboration of a literal truth is precisely what Hillman is not interested in. Instead, the acorn is imagined as an archetypal idea: "The acorn is also a mythical symbol; it is a shape; and it is a word with ancestries, tangents and implications, and suggestive power. By amplifying “acorn” in these different directions, (...), we will be carried beyond the naturalistic strictures of its standard meaning. And by turning the sense of “acorn” and expanding its potential we shall be demonstrating how to turn the biology of the human beyond its organic setting."
The acorn theory says that we are embodiments of an essence that has chosen us as its vehicle to express itself. This is our sense of calling, or our daimon as the Greeks understood it. We can't see it and we can't measure it. But reading up on the lives of exceptional people yields abundant (albeit anecdotal) evidence of this call and how it manifests itself through our biographies. Paying heed to our daimon poeticises our lives. Indeed, by paying only attention to the power of genes, parental influence and social mores as shapers of our destinies we unintentionally dull our lives and deny them any sort of romance, any fictional flair. As a result we become less curious, creative, courageous and reflexive about our lives. Less tolerant also about deviations from a consensus, consumerist norm. So why wouldn't we take this hypothesis playfully serious and start to inquire ourselves about what tries to express itself through our unique presence in this world? Because it's not verifiably 'true'? Good luck with your truth then. I'm siding with Hillman and those other thinkers who are trying to re-enchant our world, and charge us with a feeling of destiny, responsibility and beauty.
In this book, Hillman takes a similar line of thought, but then applied to our present lives in the here and now. In the final paragraph of 'The Soul's Code' he writes: " ... this theory is meant to inspire and revolutionize, and also to excite a fresh erotic attachment to its subject: your subjective and personal autobiography, the way you imagine your life, because how you imagine life strongly impinges upon the raising of children, the attitudes toward the symptoms and disturbances of adolescents, your individuality in a democracy, the strangeness of old age and the duties of dying—in fact, upon the professions of education, psychotherapy, the writing of biography, and the life of the citizen."
We inquire not per se to find the truth, but to charge our existence with meaning and energy, to awaken the creative power of Eros, to expand our power to resonate and communicate with the world. It seems to me this is a reflection of a pre-scientific, magical way of thinking that has led an undercover existence since empirical science assumed its monopoly position as the legitimate way to acquire knowledge.
In her monumental book on 16th century hermetic thought Frances Yates describes a captivating episode that reveals the clash between the two worldviews in an emblematic way. In the 1580s the magus Giordano Bruno found himself debating Copernicus' heliocentric model of the solar system with scholars at Oxford. Both parties in the debate supported the Polish astronomer's findings but based on a radically different way of thinking. For the scholars the famous concentric circle diagram with the Sun at its center was a reflection of mathematical relationships. For Bruno it was a chiffre, a symbol that expressed the magical philosophy of universal animation. The Earth's movement was simply a manifestation of life's divine energy.
Who's to say that Bruno was wrong and only the Oxford scholars had the truth on their side? Maybe their visions did not exclude one another? Maybe there is a place for empiricism and magic to work side by side and complement each other? Analytic psychologists as Jung and Hillman are not the only ones who are thinking along those lines. Anthropologist Tim Ingold has devoted his life to the development and articulation of a way of thinking that could be called 'sympathetic', in the sense that it "both answers to the call of the subject and is in turn answerable to it." It seeks resonance rather than truth, hints at and hunts for dynamic 'Correspondences' between our ideas and the animate and inanimate world around us.
Or take a philosopher such as Michel Serres, who sees a return to science's mythic origins as an imminent and necessary phase of cultural rejuvenation: "By means of these element-dominating laws, this old physicist began to tear nature away from the ancient myths; by a strange return, today we’re plunging our successes back into the anxieties and terrors from which that ancient physics was born. Yes, our new history of science and technology is plunging, today, as though in a loop, into the fundamental human myths from which Empedocles’s first laws came. A major progression and a regression on the nether side of the origins. Consequently, the contemporary time requires that we try to return to that unity in which the principles of hate and love are at the same time human, living, inert and global. We will never attain a deontology of our knowledge and actions without thinking the subjective, the objective, the collective, and the cognitive all together simultaneously." (from Biogea)
Ingold says: "This means, if you will, not taking literal truths metaphorically, but taking metaphorical truths literally. The theorist can be a poet." This is what Hillman does and is when he approaches our sense of self. Sure, both nature and nurture play a role in our personal makeup. But is that all? And are these even the more decisive influences in shaping our fate? Enter 'the acorn theory'. As the fruit of an oak tree an acorn lends itself naturally to an organicist metaphor of self development unfolding in time. But that kind of metaphorical elaboration of a literal truth is precisely what Hillman is not interested in. Instead, the acorn is imagined as an archetypal idea: "The acorn is also a mythical symbol; it is a shape; and it is a word with ancestries, tangents and implications, and suggestive power. By amplifying “acorn” in these different directions, (...), we will be carried beyond the naturalistic strictures of its standard meaning. And by turning the sense of “acorn” and expanding its potential we shall be demonstrating how to turn the biology of the human beyond its organic setting."
The acorn theory says that we are embodiments of an essence that has chosen us as its vehicle to express itself. This is our sense of calling, or our daimon as the Greeks understood it. We can't see it and we can't measure it. But reading up on the lives of exceptional people yields abundant (albeit anecdotal) evidence of this call and how it manifests itself through our biographies. Paying heed to our daimon poeticises our lives. Indeed, by paying only attention to the power of genes, parental influence and social mores as shapers of our destinies we unintentionally dull our lives and deny them any sort of romance, any fictional flair. As a result we become less curious, creative, courageous and reflexive about our lives. Less tolerant also about deviations from a consensus, consumerist norm. So why wouldn't we take this hypothesis playfully serious and start to inquire ourselves about what tries to express itself through our unique presence in this world? Because it's not verifiably 'true'? Good luck with your truth then. I'm siding with Hillman and those other thinkers who are trying to re-enchant our world, and charge us with a feeling of destiny, responsibility and beauty.
March 13, 2020
Uno strizzacervelli che spara a zero contro gli strizzacervelli, anteponendo Platone al Prozac (o al Ritalin) è decisamente suggestivo.
Tutta la pars destruens del libro, del resto, è affascinante, specialmente là dove si proclama che noi non siamo affatto vittime dei genitori (o della Madre, o dell'assenza del Padre) ma delle teorie che questa idea puntellano (superstizioni parentali).
E' tuttavia la pars construens che dà da pensare.
Se sei una ghianda non potrai che diventare una quercia, un giorno. Per quanto tu tenti di deviare il corso degli eventi o di forzare la tua natura, il tuo destino è di diventare una quercia. Niente altro che una quercia. E' il tuo daimon (o ghianda, o destino, genio, angelo custode...).
Hillman descrive il daimon come la creatura divina che ci guida nel compimento di quel disegno che la nostra anima si è "scelta prima di nascere" e di cui ci dimentichiamo al momento in cui veniamo al mondo. Ma la vocazione, la chiamata, resta. E il daimon ci spinge a realizzarla.
Che dire, se davvero la mia anima si è scelta il disegno della mia vita, be'... quel giorno doveva aver bevuto (e anche parecchio). Mica per caso son diventata astemia.
Tutta la pars destruens del libro, del resto, è affascinante, specialmente là dove si proclama che noi non siamo affatto vittime dei genitori (o della Madre, o dell'assenza del Padre) ma delle teorie che questa idea puntellano (superstizioni parentali).
E' tuttavia la pars construens che dà da pensare.
Se sei una ghianda non potrai che diventare una quercia, un giorno. Per quanto tu tenti di deviare il corso degli eventi o di forzare la tua natura, il tuo destino è di diventare una quercia. Niente altro che una quercia. E' il tuo daimon (o ghianda, o destino, genio, angelo custode...).
Hillman descrive il daimon come la creatura divina che ci guida nel compimento di quel disegno che la nostra anima si è "scelta prima di nascere" e di cui ci dimentichiamo al momento in cui veniamo al mondo. Ma la vocazione, la chiamata, resta. E il daimon ci spinge a realizzarla.
Che dire, se davvero la mia anima si è scelta il disegno della mia vita, be'... quel giorno doveva aver bevuto (e anche parecchio). Mica per caso son diventata astemia.
March 16, 2024
This is astonishing.
Hillman is a wonder.
Off the charts BRILLIANT.
Hillman explores human nature and individual destiny.
Um…
Fuck yeah!
The book introduces his (unfortunately titled) "acorn theory," which (in a nutshell) posits that all of us have a unique destiny that shapes our life's path.
Hillman revives the mythic notion that every individual is born daemon or genius (i.e. a vital/creative spirit) that guides our lives and empowers extraordinary acts (when we let it).
Hillman argues that this aspect of the human psyche can’t be accounted for in materialistic terms (at least not yet), but can be intuited, particularly when examining life in reverse, as evidenced in the lives/biographies of extraordinary people.
If this triggers your bullshit detector.
Yes.
But hold on to that.
Hillman is COMPLETELY out front with the fact that this is a MYTHIC perspective, and not a literal truth claim.
This surprisingly refreshing distinction completely rescues the text from becoming a cringy exercise in belief suspension, and enables the reader to relax and encounter the ideas from a phenomenological/functional perspective.
Hillman further posits that viewing ourselves, each other, and (most importantly) our children from this perspective engenders a certain kind of vitality that a strict scientific materialistic, mechanistic world view denies.
Hillman goes deep into mythology, psychology, philosophy, literature and art to support his theory.
This is his daemon/genius.
As mentioned.
He’s fuckin’ brilliant.
He’s ASTONISHINGLY ERUDITE AF.
in the BEST POSSIBLE WAY.
It’s FANTASTIC.
Best of all.
The book gets DARK.
He devotes the last chapter or two to “bad seeds” i.e. SERIOUSLY EVIL FUCKERS. And it’s as FUN/INTERESTING as his examples drawn from the biography’s of nice people.
And DAMN.
He goes there.
And it gets weird.
Anyway.
Much more to say.
But for now.
Great FUCKING BOOK!
5/5 STARS.
Hillman is a wonder.
Off the charts BRILLIANT.
Hillman explores human nature and individual destiny.
Um…
Fuck yeah!
The book introduces his (unfortunately titled) "acorn theory," which (in a nutshell) posits that all of us have a unique destiny that shapes our life's path.
Hillman revives the mythic notion that every individual is born daemon or genius (i.e. a vital/creative spirit) that guides our lives and empowers extraordinary acts (when we let it).
Hillman argues that this aspect of the human psyche can’t be accounted for in materialistic terms (at least not yet), but can be intuited, particularly when examining life in reverse, as evidenced in the lives/biographies of extraordinary people.
If this triggers your bullshit detector.
Yes.
But hold on to that.
Hillman is COMPLETELY out front with the fact that this is a MYTHIC perspective, and not a literal truth claim.
This surprisingly refreshing distinction completely rescues the text from becoming a cringy exercise in belief suspension, and enables the reader to relax and encounter the ideas from a phenomenological/functional perspective.
Hillman further posits that viewing ourselves, each other, and (most importantly) our children from this perspective engenders a certain kind of vitality that a strict scientific materialistic, mechanistic world view denies.
Hillman goes deep into mythology, psychology, philosophy, literature and art to support his theory.
This is his daemon/genius.
As mentioned.
He’s fuckin’ brilliant.
He’s ASTONISHINGLY ERUDITE AF.
in the BEST POSSIBLE WAY.
It’s FANTASTIC.
Best of all.
The book gets DARK.
He devotes the last chapter or two to “bad seeds” i.e. SERIOUSLY EVIL FUCKERS. And it’s as FUN/INTERESTING as his examples drawn from the biography’s of nice people.
And DAMN.
He goes there.
And it gets weird.
Anyway.
Much more to say.
But for now.
Great FUCKING BOOK!
5/5 STARS.
November 8, 2020
Il saggio vorrebbe convincere il lettore che carattere e aspirazioni non si formino nel corso della vita, ma siano inscritte in noi fin dal momento del concepimento; che la famiglia e il momento storico in cui ci troviamo a vivere sono frutto di una scelta fatta dalla nostra anima prima di incarnarsi e che l'ambiente familiare e l'influenza del mondo esterno non hanno il potere di determinare il nostro essere.
E quali sono le prove portate a supporto? Zero, con un contorno di nessuna. Unica "evidenza" alle affermazioni farneticanti dell'autore sono le vite di una manciata di celebrità, prese ad esempio universale. Per la serie, certo che Thomas Wolfe doveva diventare scrittore, i suoi si sono innamorati in una libreria! Certo che Judy Garland doveva fare l'attrice, da bambina amava mettere in scena degli spettacolini!
Francamente imbarazzante (o sarò troppo cinica io). Se dovessi riassumere questo libro in una frase: Post hoc ergo propter hoc o, per dirla più banalmente, del senno di poi son piene le fosse.
Unico aspetto positivo della lettura: mi sono resa conto che l'affascinante filosofo per cui mi ero presa una cotta non ha poi questo gusto infallibile nelle letture, se ha trovato illuminante un saggio che saggio, ahimè, non è.
E quali sono le prove portate a supporto? Zero, con un contorno di nessuna. Unica "evidenza" alle affermazioni farneticanti dell'autore sono le vite di una manciata di celebrità, prese ad esempio universale. Per la serie, certo che Thomas Wolfe doveva diventare scrittore, i suoi si sono innamorati in una libreria! Certo che Judy Garland doveva fare l'attrice, da bambina amava mettere in scena degli spettacolini!
Francamente imbarazzante (o sarò troppo cinica io). Se dovessi riassumere questo libro in una frase: Post hoc ergo propter hoc o, per dirla più banalmente, del senno di poi son piene le fosse.
Unico aspetto positivo della lettura: mi sono resa conto che l'affascinante filosofo per cui mi ero presa una cotta non ha poi questo gusto infallibile nelle letture, se ha trovato illuminante un saggio che saggio, ahimè, non è.
November 29, 2014
A friend of ours...
dear Unique Individuals,
... was taking a psychology class at Sonoma State University in which one of Hillman's books was required reading. When the day for discussion of the book arrived one of the students jumped up, ripped pages from his book, threw the book to the floor and stomped on it in frustration, hysterically crying out, "No one should be allowed to write like this". Needless to say, that made us somewhat hesitant when we began reading this book, however, what we found instead was one of the best written, best argued books we've ever encountered. It is a truly brilliant book, and if you are interested in understanding the development of character and the significance of the personal myth, we know of no better place to begin.
kyela,
the silver elves
Goodreads author of Living the Personal Myth: Making the Magic of Faerie Real in One's Own Life
dear Unique Individuals,
... was taking a psychology class at Sonoma State University in which one of Hillman's books was required reading. When the day for discussion of the book arrived one of the students jumped up, ripped pages from his book, threw the book to the floor and stomped on it in frustration, hysterically crying out, "No one should be allowed to write like this". Needless to say, that made us somewhat hesitant when we began reading this book, however, what we found instead was one of the best written, best argued books we've ever encountered. It is a truly brilliant book, and if you are interested in understanding the development of character and the significance of the personal myth, we know of no better place to begin.
kyela,
the silver elves
Goodreads author of Living the Personal Myth: Making the Magic of Faerie Real in One's Own Life
January 30, 2021
“Ethos anthropoi daimon”
Ci sono arrivata per errore, a questo libro.
Cercavo qualcosa che mi offrisse uno sguardo diverso sui miti, ho fatto un po’ di ricerche bibliografiche e mi sono imbattuta in Hillman, per me un perfetto sconosciuto, non essendo né appassionata né mera conoscitrice delle scuole psicoanalitiche.
Forse l’opera che soddisferà la mia ricerca iniziale sarà un’altra, forse sempre di Hillman, vedremo, ma di certo l’idea di una rilettura del mito di Er - che Platone sceglie per concludere la Repubblica - mi ha interessato.
Leggendo alcune presentazioni del volume si potrebbe pensare che si tratti di una carrellata di biografie di vip o giù di lì, ma non è così.
L’autore, la cui solida formazione è testimoniata dalla vasta bibliografia, porta il lettore per mano in un’opera particolare, in cui la parte biografica è meramente complementare ad una trattazione estremamente fruibile, che si propone di offrire una strada alternativa alla psicologia tradizionale per la risoluzione delle istanze personali.
Hillman ci dice che l’uomo del XX secolo (il libro è del 1996) sbaglia, pensando di poter risolvere ogni dilemma personale attraverso l’ossessivo esame – clinico e psicologico – della mente del singolo.
Andando oltre la metafora del mito di Er (quella "favola" che, come dice lo stesso Platone, “se le crederemo, forse ci salverà”) Hillman ci esorta – nel percorso alla ricerca del nostro nucleo, che la si voglia chiamare ghianda o che sia il paradigma dimenticato bevendo le acque del Lete - a non seguire una strada di testarda introspezione.
“Il daimon rappresenta i tratti comportamentali profondi che frenano gli eccessi, impediscono l’arroganza inflattiva e ci inducono a rimanere fedeli ai paradigmi della nostra immagine (genio). Tali paradigmi si manifestano nel modo in cui ci comportiamo; di conseguenza, per trovare il nostro genio, dobbiamo guardare nello specchio della nostra vita. L’immagine visibile rende manifesta la verità interiore, sicché, nel giudicare gli altri, quello che vediamo è ciò che ci verrà restituito. Diventa perciò estremamente importante vedere generosamente, o ci ritroveremo con ben poca cosa; vedere acutamente, in modo da distinguere i vari tratti, anziché una massa generalizzata; e vedere profondamente, dentro le ombre scure, o rimarremo ingannati.”
Si giunge quindi ad una diversa risoluzione del conflitto con sé stessi:
“La nuova storiografia guarda agli stili relazionali, ai piccoli quotidiani gesti di coraggio che modificano i valori di una cultura, alle prove morali, agli ideali espressi, mostrando le sottigliezze dell’individualità a prescindere da ciò che accade intorno al trono dell’imperatore. Per trovare il carattere, bisogna studiare le lettere dal fronte scritte dal soldato alla vigilia della battaglia e la vita delle famiglie a casa, non meno che i piani strategici stilati nella tenda del generale.
Questa rinnovata concezione della storiografia e della biografìa mira a far emergere dal disordine degli eventi le anime individuali. La teoria sottostante è la medesima che faccio mia in queste pagine: il carattere conforma la vita, non importa quanto oscuramente sia vissuta e quanto poca luce riceva dalle stelle.
La vocazione diventa una vocazione alla vita, anziché essere immaginata in conflitto con la vita. Una vocazione all’onestà invece che al successo, al prendersi cura dell’altro e con l‘altro, al servire e lottare per amore della vita."
Mi ha fatto pensare al bellissimo romanzo di Andre Dubus, in cui si parlava proprio di vocazione e talento, accettazione e compassione.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
La spiegazione che viene quindi offerta del frammento di Eraclito “Ethos anthropoi daimon”, è interessante:
"Se proviamo a spogliare l’ethos dall’etica, scopriamo che porta piuttosto il significato di «abito», «abitudine». Forse Eraclito stava dicendo che ‘ethos è il comportamento abituale. Come conduci la tua vita: tale sei e tale sarai. È un autoinganno aggrapparsi a un sé privato, nascosto e più vero, a prescindere da come siamo in pratica, e purtroppo la psicoterapia promuove questa grande illusione e ci guadagna sopra. Invece, ecco il realismo di Eraclito: tu sei il modo come sei. «Il modo come»: è questa la locuzione cruciale, che lega la vita, così come viene abitualmente «eseguita», con la chiamata della tua immagine."
Si tratta di una chiamata alla responsabilità, alla coerenza, all’incontro con sé stessi per incontrare gli altri e viceversa, anche in un’ottica collettiva elevata all’ennesima potenza.
“La ghianda preme per andare oltre il bordo; la sua passione principale è la realizzazione. La vocazione pretende la libertà assoluta di perseguire la sua felicità, una libertà «viva all’arrivo», e tale libertà non può essere garantita dalla società. (Se le possibilità di libertà sono stabilite dalla società, allora la società ha potere supremo e la libertà diventa soggetta all’autorità della società). Così come l’uguaglianza democratica non può trovare altro fondamento logico se non l’unicità della vocazione di ciascun individuo, alla stessa stregua la libertà si fonda sulla piena indipendenza della vocazione.
Quando gli estensori della Dichiarazione di Indipendenza scrissero che tutti nascono uguali, si accorsero che quella proposizione ne comportava necessariamente una gemella: Tutti nascono liberi. È il fatto della vocazione che ci rende uguali ed è l’atto della vocazione che esige che si sia liberi. Il principio garante di entrambe è l’invisibile genio individuale.
Smettiamo per un attimo di leggere Platone come uno sporco fascista dagli ideali irrealistici e di immaginare la democrazia come una massa confusa di vittime vocianti opinioni. E allora forse vedremo che platonismo e
democrazia non devono necessariamente respingersi come i poli opposti di un magnete, ma sono costruiti sulla stessa cosa, hanno la medesima carica: l’importanza dell’anima individuale. Lo Stato platonico esiste per quell’anima, non per se stesso né per alcun gruppo particolare al suo interno. Anzi, l’analogia che percorre tutta la Repubblica è il parallelismo tra gli strati dell’anima e i diversi livelli dello Stato. Ciò che facciamo nello Stato, lo facciamo all’anima e ciò che facciamo nell’anima lo facciamo per lo Stato – se l’idea platonica è portata alle sue ultime conseguenze e non è abortita prima che le sue articolazioni siano formate completamente.”
Ci sono arrivata per errore, a questo libro.
Cercavo qualcosa che mi offrisse uno sguardo diverso sui miti, ho fatto un po’ di ricerche bibliografiche e mi sono imbattuta in Hillman, per me un perfetto sconosciuto, non essendo né appassionata né mera conoscitrice delle scuole psicoanalitiche.
Forse l’opera che soddisferà la mia ricerca iniziale sarà un’altra, forse sempre di Hillman, vedremo, ma di certo l’idea di una rilettura del mito di Er - che Platone sceglie per concludere la Repubblica - mi ha interessato.
Leggendo alcune presentazioni del volume si potrebbe pensare che si tratti di una carrellata di biografie di vip o giù di lì, ma non è così.
L’autore, la cui solida formazione è testimoniata dalla vasta bibliografia, porta il lettore per mano in un’opera particolare, in cui la parte biografica è meramente complementare ad una trattazione estremamente fruibile, che si propone di offrire una strada alternativa alla psicologia tradizionale per la risoluzione delle istanze personali.
Hillman ci dice che l’uomo del XX secolo (il libro è del 1996) sbaglia, pensando di poter risolvere ogni dilemma personale attraverso l’ossessivo esame – clinico e psicologico – della mente del singolo.
Andando oltre la metafora del mito di Er (quella "favola" che, come dice lo stesso Platone, “se le crederemo, forse ci salverà”) Hillman ci esorta – nel percorso alla ricerca del nostro nucleo, che la si voglia chiamare ghianda o che sia il paradigma dimenticato bevendo le acque del Lete - a non seguire una strada di testarda introspezione.
“Il daimon rappresenta i tratti comportamentali profondi che frenano gli eccessi, impediscono l’arroganza inflattiva e ci inducono a rimanere fedeli ai paradigmi della nostra immagine (genio). Tali paradigmi si manifestano nel modo in cui ci comportiamo; di conseguenza, per trovare il nostro genio, dobbiamo guardare nello specchio della nostra vita. L’immagine visibile rende manifesta la verità interiore, sicché, nel giudicare gli altri, quello che vediamo è ciò che ci verrà restituito. Diventa perciò estremamente importante vedere generosamente, o ci ritroveremo con ben poca cosa; vedere acutamente, in modo da distinguere i vari tratti, anziché una massa generalizzata; e vedere profondamente, dentro le ombre scure, o rimarremo ingannati.”
Si giunge quindi ad una diversa risoluzione del conflitto con sé stessi:
“La nuova storiografia guarda agli stili relazionali, ai piccoli quotidiani gesti di coraggio che modificano i valori di una cultura, alle prove morali, agli ideali espressi, mostrando le sottigliezze dell’individualità a prescindere da ciò che accade intorno al trono dell’imperatore. Per trovare il carattere, bisogna studiare le lettere dal fronte scritte dal soldato alla vigilia della battaglia e la vita delle famiglie a casa, non meno che i piani strategici stilati nella tenda del generale.
Questa rinnovata concezione della storiografia e della biografìa mira a far emergere dal disordine degli eventi le anime individuali. La teoria sottostante è la medesima che faccio mia in queste pagine: il carattere conforma la vita, non importa quanto oscuramente sia vissuta e quanto poca luce riceva dalle stelle.
La vocazione diventa una vocazione alla vita, anziché essere immaginata in conflitto con la vita. Una vocazione all’onestà invece che al successo, al prendersi cura dell’altro e con l‘altro, al servire e lottare per amore della vita."
Mi ha fatto pensare al bellissimo romanzo di Andre Dubus, in cui si parlava proprio di vocazione e talento, accettazione e compassione.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
La spiegazione che viene quindi offerta del frammento di Eraclito “Ethos anthropoi daimon”, è interessante:
"Se proviamo a spogliare l’ethos dall’etica, scopriamo che porta piuttosto il significato di «abito», «abitudine». Forse Eraclito stava dicendo che ‘ethos è il comportamento abituale. Come conduci la tua vita: tale sei e tale sarai. È un autoinganno aggrapparsi a un sé privato, nascosto e più vero, a prescindere da come siamo in pratica, e purtroppo la psicoterapia promuove questa grande illusione e ci guadagna sopra. Invece, ecco il realismo di Eraclito: tu sei il modo come sei. «Il modo come»: è questa la locuzione cruciale, che lega la vita, così come viene abitualmente «eseguita», con la chiamata della tua immagine."
Si tratta di una chiamata alla responsabilità, alla coerenza, all’incontro con sé stessi per incontrare gli altri e viceversa, anche in un’ottica collettiva elevata all’ennesima potenza.
“La ghianda preme per andare oltre il bordo; la sua passione principale è la realizzazione. La vocazione pretende la libertà assoluta di perseguire la sua felicità, una libertà «viva all’arrivo», e tale libertà non può essere garantita dalla società. (Se le possibilità di libertà sono stabilite dalla società, allora la società ha potere supremo e la libertà diventa soggetta all’autorità della società). Così come l’uguaglianza democratica non può trovare altro fondamento logico se non l’unicità della vocazione di ciascun individuo, alla stessa stregua la libertà si fonda sulla piena indipendenza della vocazione.
Quando gli estensori della Dichiarazione di Indipendenza scrissero che tutti nascono uguali, si accorsero che quella proposizione ne comportava necessariamente una gemella: Tutti nascono liberi. È il fatto della vocazione che ci rende uguali ed è l’atto della vocazione che esige che si sia liberi. Il principio garante di entrambe è l’invisibile genio individuale.
Smettiamo per un attimo di leggere Platone come uno sporco fascista dagli ideali irrealistici e di immaginare la democrazia come una massa confusa di vittime vocianti opinioni. E allora forse vedremo che platonismo e
democrazia non devono necessariamente respingersi come i poli opposti di un magnete, ma sono costruiti sulla stessa cosa, hanno la medesima carica: l’importanza dell’anima individuale. Lo Stato platonico esiste per quell’anima, non per se stesso né per alcun gruppo particolare al suo interno. Anzi, l’analogia che percorre tutta la Repubblica è il parallelismo tra gli strati dell’anima e i diversi livelli dello Stato. Ciò che facciamo nello Stato, lo facciamo all’anima e ciò che facciamo nell’anima lo facciamo per lo Stato – se l’idea platonica è portata alle sue ultime conseguenze e non è abortita prima che le sue articolazioni siano formate completamente.”
January 23, 2017
Once, I don't remember where, when I travelled a lot, I met a friendly stranger at a bar, and in the course of our innocuous conversation he mentioned that he has always tried to believe-- particularly when he felt powerless or overly-stressed-- that before his birth, he had deliberately chosen this time period to exist in. I've never remembered that guy's name, but I've never forgotten about his fascinating belief. It may sound impossible to you, but I promise you that, when life is trying, it is well worth the effort of temporarily trying on that belief, and discovering what an earnest exploration of its consequences can do to your perspective.
There are some parts of this book that may threaten your basic assumptions about what is "obvious" or simply strain your credulity, but if you tough up stay with it, these are always followed by original-- and surprisingly lucid-- insights.
There are some parts of this book that may threaten your basic assumptions about what is "obvious" or simply strain your credulity, but if you tough up stay with it, these are always followed by original-- and surprisingly lucid-- insights.
August 26, 2013
James Hillman offers observations on the human experience and the nature of the mind that stands outside of the mainstream of American psychology, refreshingly so, with its current emphasis upon reducing all our experience to biological processes, whether it be sociobiology, neuropsychology, cognitive-behavioral, or applied behavior analysis. All these orientations are based upon an unquestioned epistomological assumption that the material reality is the only reality, since it is what science has focused upon with its obsession on measurement and predictability. What Hillman's work asserts, aligning itself with the anthropomorphic cosmological orientation of the ancient Greeks (and really most of our so-called indigenous peoples), is that to fully understand the nature of our human experience, we have to return to the concept of soul. To unquestioningly accept the idea that we exist only on a "horizontal" dimension of material extension and eventual personal finality, is to live utterly blind to what gives our lives meaning, the "vertical" dimension of the soul. Our culture has so lost its way that we are only allowed an occasional glimpse of the soul dimension, which we inhabit every bit as much as the material dimension. It often comes to us as "symptoms", or "struggles" where things just aren't working the way they're "supposed" to work. We then go to a psychologist or psychiatrist, to "get better." What Hillman is trying to bring back into our cultural experience is that we not only inhabit a soul dimension, whether we are aware of it or not, but it is often only when we confront our "struggles" and "symptoms" that we begin to catch a glimpse of who we really are, what we are called to be. As we grapple with our own immediate experience, we begin to become aware of and oriented within a world that is full of unimagined depth and meaning. It is the world we long to find ourselves within and which we project outward and seek out somewhere else or in some other time. Of course, it is our fundamental nature and we inhabit it all the time, but it is not until it becomes an object of our conscious experience that understanding begins to grow. And this happens only in the context of relationship with the inhabitants of this soul dimension, which includes not just other human beings, but the Gods, which Hillman refers to as the archetypes. Once awareness of the soul dimension is born, we become aware that it is actually the Gods that are intruding into our lives and causing us these pesky "symptoms" and "struggles." We become aware that we actually inhabit a world of divinities, the manifestations of the soul dimension, that are calling us to become conscious of our relationship with them. The task of archetypal psychology is to assist as we grow into this deeper awareness that is really our birthright and destiny to discover. Read Hillman and recognize who we really are.
April 30, 2015
This book challenged the part of me that is partial to existential philosophy. In this book James Hillman presents his acorn theory of human development. Other terms for the acorn are image, character, fate, calling, daimon, soul, or destiny. Everyone is born with a defining image— we embody our soul. This is not to be confused with fatalism. He is not undermining free will. Or is he? He skirts around the issue as only a genius psychologist could…. to focus on free will is to miss his point.
The book presents his rich scholarship, thick with opinion. If Hillman mentions Ella Fitzgerald, however briefly, you will probably find one or two Ella Fitzgerald biographies mentioned in the notes. And he is critical. Critical of psychology, critical of modern western culture. I found his opinions thought provoking and profound.
The chapter on parental fallacy to be particularly poignant to me. With the parental fallacy our parents are seen as crucial in determining who we are by supplying us with our genes, conditioning, and behavioral patterns. Placing extreme importance of parenting leads to over-parenting, and the value overall environment and culture are deemphasized. It also allows us to blame our deficiencies on bad parenting. He concludes that this fallacy is harmful to self-awareness. I am not doing justice to these concepts, but that’s it in a nutshell (haha). The oak tree the produces the acorn has only so great an influence on the tree that grows from the acorn. There are many other factors.
The book presents his rich scholarship, thick with opinion. If Hillman mentions Ella Fitzgerald, however briefly, you will probably find one or two Ella Fitzgerald biographies mentioned in the notes. And he is critical. Critical of psychology, critical of modern western culture. I found his opinions thought provoking and profound.
The chapter on parental fallacy to be particularly poignant to me. With the parental fallacy our parents are seen as crucial in determining who we are by supplying us with our genes, conditioning, and behavioral patterns. Placing extreme importance of parenting leads to over-parenting, and the value overall environment and culture are deemphasized. It also allows us to blame our deficiencies on bad parenting. He concludes that this fallacy is harmful to self-awareness. I am not doing justice to these concepts, but that’s it in a nutshell (haha). The oak tree the produces the acorn has only so great an influence on the tree that grows from the acorn. There are many other factors.
January 6, 2022
No person is a genius or can be a genius, because the genius or daimon or angel is an invisible nonhuman escort, not the person with whom the genius lives.
Like all Jungian analysts, Hillman was some sort of neo-Platonist. It may be true that all reality descends from the One, but I don't think anyone knows what that One is. So what you get in this book is a mish-mash of Christianity, Buddhism, Greek philosophy, nebulous Goddess-ism, what have you, to say that we have a soul that precedes birth.
Really? Are these all the saying the same thing? How convenient!
To be honest, I'm not sure what to make of this book. Yes, I agree that there is more to life than nature or nurture and that there is a calling that each person is drawn to but runs away from because of some Jonah complex. Freudian incestuous "inner child" theory is completely deterministic. Hillman's gripes with psychoanalysis are clear here.
However, this philosophy is way too individualistic.
There's a section on how it is only natural for fathers to be absent from their child's lives; the father's acorn doesn't belong in domestic life but working away. Now, I'm all for a guy living his best life, but let's not act as though there aren't detrimental effects to his children if he's not present. Nonetheless, I can concede that the atomic family can be a hotspot for neuroses. It only makes me realize more the importance of having a close multi-generational extended family. If your father's not in the picture, you could expect drunken political rants from your great-uncle.
Anyway, the inherent individualism and self-centeredness of made me think of the book as purely American. But Hillman's definition of American is different that mine.
Sure, holding on to "family values" isn't as glamorous as being Judy Garland, but if everyone became lonely "face-lifted drunks, sex freaks, religious paranoids (p. 53)" to satisfy their inhuman daimon, then what could society even accomplish? The politics at the end made the book seem like it was advocating for disruption for disruption's sake.
Judeo-skeptics, take heed, because in a book about finding your calling, there's for some reason an entire chapter analyzing Hitler lol.
Like all Jungian analysts, Hillman was some sort of neo-Platonist. It may be true that all reality descends from the One, but I don't think anyone knows what that One is. So what you get in this book is a mish-mash of Christianity, Buddhism, Greek philosophy, nebulous Goddess-ism, what have you, to say that we have a soul that precedes birth.
For centuries we have searched for the right term for this "call." The Romans named it your genius; the Greeks, your daimon; and the Christians your guardian angel... The Neoplatonists referred to an imaginal body, the ochema… For some it is Lady Luck or Fortuna; for others a genie or jinn... In Egypt, it might have been the ka, or the ba… Among the people we refer to as Eskimos and others who follow shamanistic practices, it is your spirit, your free-soul, your animal-soul, your breath-soul. (p. 8)
Really? Are these all the saying the same thing? How convenient!
To be honest, I'm not sure what to make of this book. Yes, I agree that there is more to life than nature or nurture and that there is a calling that each person is drawn to but runs away from because of some Jonah complex. Freudian incestuous "inner child" theory is completely deterministic. Hillman's gripes with psychoanalysis are clear here.
However, this philosophy is way too individualistic.
When your child becomes the reason for your life, you have abandoned the invisible reason you are here. (p. 84)
There's a section on how it is only natural for fathers to be absent from their child's lives; the father's acorn doesn't belong in domestic life but working away. Now, I'm all for a guy living his best life, but let's not act as though there aren't detrimental effects to his children if he's not present. Nonetheless, I can concede that the atomic family can be a hotspot for neuroses. It only makes me realize more the importance of having a close multi-generational extended family. If your father's not in the picture, you could expect drunken political rants from your great-uncle.
Anyway, the inherent individualism and self-centeredness of made me think of the book as purely American. But Hillman's definition of American is different that mine.
The American character remains blind to the fact that the virtues of mediocrity -- those pieties of disciplined energy, order, self-control, probity, and faith -- are themselves messengers of the devil they would overcome.
...
Maybe inviting mediocrity in -- just doing a passable job as a team player, not upsetting the boat, holding on to "family values," joining the Wal-Mart community, staying cool, fearing extremists and ungrounded underground ideas -- is precisely what drives the invisibles away. (p. 268)
Sure, holding on to "family values" isn't as glamorous as being Judy Garland, but if everyone became lonely "face-lifted drunks, sex freaks, religious paranoids (p. 53)" to satisfy their inhuman daimon, then what could society even accomplish? The politics at the end made the book seem like it was advocating for disruption for disruption's sake.
Judeo-skeptics, take heed, because in a book about finding your calling, there's for some reason an entire chapter analyzing Hitler lol.
April 25, 2020
I am so happy that I have finally completed this book!!! It seemed to take a very long time to get through it. It wasn't that it wasn't interesting and meaningful and it definitely resonated with my soul in parts but, my God, it was so incredibly dry and that made it very difficult to get through. It was a slog.
Many years ago I had a daily calendar that had quotes from this book and I loved it. I think I should have left it at that.
Many years ago I had a daily calendar that had quotes from this book and I loved it. I think I should have left it at that.
May 23, 2025
"Ethos anthropoi daimon"
February 28, 2021
Videorecensione su Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gc-D...
March 1, 2008
The Soul's Code is one of the best books I've read in a long time. Using Plato's Myth of Er as a backdrop, Hillman skillfully applies Platonic reasoning to the problem of purpose and destiny. Rather than approaching destiny as a secondary concern of the human pursuit, Hillman elevates it to a place of unequaled parallel.
Hillman's ideas are personified in what he calls the acorn theory. The basic tenet of this theory "…holds that each person bears a uniqueness that asks to be lived and that is already present before it can be lived." [6] To illustrate this theory in action, Hillman uses many examples of exceptional people whose lives and actions, early in their development, clearly demonstrate a sense of purpose and calling that extends beyond the mundane. He uses extraordinary people and events to "reveal the ordinary in an enlarged and intensified image." [31]
In essence, Hillman hypothesizes that each individual is born into the world with a daimon or destiny, a guardian angel (concepts that Hillman uses interchangeably to denote the same thing) that seeks to order our lives to some predetermined end. Similar to Plato's Myth of Er, Hillman proposes that we each choose this path before birth and that we choose our parents and the station in life that will best suit this innate potential. Its something that is wired into the code of our soul. Life's fulfillment is found only in satisfying the mandate of this mission.
This view creates a very unique way of looking at life: our childhood, compulsions, choices, etc. Similar to Kierkegaard's theory that life can only be understood backwards, Hillman takes the reader through example after example of extraordinary people who endured extraordinary things in life, yet these things prepared them and ultimately provided for what was clearly seen as their destiny once their life was over.
I heartily recommend this book to anyone who is searching for meaning in life. While some of Hillman's proposals appear outlandish at first glance, he does an excellent job of creating an alternative view of life and how we experience it.
Hillman's ideas are personified in what he calls the acorn theory. The basic tenet of this theory "…holds that each person bears a uniqueness that asks to be lived and that is already present before it can be lived." [6] To illustrate this theory in action, Hillman uses many examples of exceptional people whose lives and actions, early in their development, clearly demonstrate a sense of purpose and calling that extends beyond the mundane. He uses extraordinary people and events to "reveal the ordinary in an enlarged and intensified image." [31]
In essence, Hillman hypothesizes that each individual is born into the world with a daimon or destiny, a guardian angel (concepts that Hillman uses interchangeably to denote the same thing) that seeks to order our lives to some predetermined end. Similar to Plato's Myth of Er, Hillman proposes that we each choose this path before birth and that we choose our parents and the station in life that will best suit this innate potential. Its something that is wired into the code of our soul. Life's fulfillment is found only in satisfying the mandate of this mission.
This view creates a very unique way of looking at life: our childhood, compulsions, choices, etc. Similar to Kierkegaard's theory that life can only be understood backwards, Hillman takes the reader through example after example of extraordinary people who endured extraordinary things in life, yet these things prepared them and ultimately provided for what was clearly seen as their destiny once their life was over.
I heartily recommend this book to anyone who is searching for meaning in life. While some of Hillman's proposals appear outlandish at first glance, he does an excellent job of creating an alternative view of life and how we experience it.
August 4, 2022
This is such an interesting book. I didn't agree with all of it. I myself believe in the theory of the inherent goodness of humans and I could never believe that a baby could be born evil. Most of the book, however, resounded beautifully with me. I wrote down lots of quotes from it.
The couple came together, not for their personal unity, but to beget the unique person, endowed with a specific acorn, who turns out to be you. (64)
How does what comes with you to the world find a place in the world? (76)
The more I believe my nature comes from my parents, the less open I am to the ruling influences around me. The less the surrounding world is felt to be intimately important to my story. Yet even biographies begin by located the subject in a place; the self starts off amid the smells of a geography. The moment the angel enters a life it enters an environment. We are ecological from day one. (87)
The couple came together, not for their personal unity, but to beget the unique person, endowed with a specific acorn, who turns out to be you. (64)
How does what comes with you to the world find a place in the world? (76)
The more I believe my nature comes from my parents, the less open I am to the ruling influences around me. The less the surrounding world is felt to be intimately important to my story. Yet even biographies begin by located the subject in a place; the self starts off amid the smells of a geography. The moment the angel enters a life it enters an environment. We are ecological from day one. (87)
Want to read
February 25, 2021Abbandonato senza ombra di rancore o pentimento a pag.92, manco un terzo del libro.
Mi dispiace ma la vita è troppo breve per ascoltare i vaneggi di un moralista, chiaramente vittima del pensiero privilegiato occidentale, che sostiene che scegliamo i nostri genitori prima di nascere e che qualsiasi cosa succeda i nostri daimon ci proteggeranno per fare in modo che noi tutti realizziamo la nostra vocazione.
Poteva avere degli spunti interessanti, non fosse stato così assertivo su degli aspetti incondivisibili.
Ciá ciá (manina che saluta).
Avanti il prossimo.
Mi dispiace ma la vita è troppo breve per ascoltare i vaneggi di un moralista, chiaramente vittima del pensiero privilegiato occidentale, che sostiene che scegliamo i nostri genitori prima di nascere e che qualsiasi cosa succeda i nostri daimon ci proteggeranno per fare in modo che noi tutti realizziamo la nostra vocazione.
Poteva avere degli spunti interessanti, non fosse stato così assertivo su degli aspetti incondivisibili.
Ciá ciá (manina che saluta).
Avanti il prossimo.
January 11, 2011
Hillman's acorn theory, exposed in this book, is a rejuvenation of Heraclitus' dictum "ethos anthropoi daimon" (normally rendered into "Character is fate") and its later embodiments, such as Plato's myth of the daimon calling for a body to incarnate after passing through the hands of the Fates and Necessity, Plotinus' postillae and commentaries, Romans' "homo faber fortunae suae", Ficino's ideas on souls, and so on and on. The echo of the oraculus of Apollo ("know yourself") lives on and inspires again the sensible reader of this famous work by the founder of the Archetypal psychology (as a follower of C. G. Jung).
Hillman indeed goes back to the myths as self-contained (bootstrapped) explanation of aspects of reality, and calls to re-install the right place and importance of the invisibles in human life after the rough blinding (that is, overflowing its original context) due to the Enlightment. So the book carries an atmosphere of fable and romanticism as it tells of genius, daimon, soul, angel and other wordly names of that acorn that may reside at the core of each person's life, thereby containing all further blossomings in a nutshell. Happyness as eudaimonia (assolving the requests of the daimon), fate and necessity, accidents to help the daimon express its power to give direction and an impelling sense of urgence and importance though without exceeding into the extremist position of fatalism and consequent de-responsabilization.
Hillman criticizes the current psychology's exclusive accent on "parental fallacy", genetical and environmental factors as all-inclusive explanations for children's future and achievements, and offers the daimon as a third way, besides nature and nurture, to explain the proper and unquestionably irreproducible development of the individual lives.
Hillman produces a large number of pieces of eminent biographies (and also discusses the often observed repulsion of relevant characters to encapsule their lives into biographies) to support his claims, considering the extraordinary as general case containing the ordinary as special. His style is soft and eloquent throughout, well spoken and passionate at times, devoid of technicisms but rich in images and facts.
Overall, this essay can be very stimulating in its provocative (yet old) claim, as it is provocative in calling for a return to older positions re-invented in hindsight and sub specie aeternitatis.
Hillman indeed goes back to the myths as self-contained (bootstrapped) explanation of aspects of reality, and calls to re-install the right place and importance of the invisibles in human life after the rough blinding (that is, overflowing its original context) due to the Enlightment. So the book carries an atmosphere of fable and romanticism as it tells of genius, daimon, soul, angel and other wordly names of that acorn that may reside at the core of each person's life, thereby containing all further blossomings in a nutshell. Happyness as eudaimonia (assolving the requests of the daimon), fate and necessity, accidents to help the daimon express its power to give direction and an impelling sense of urgence and importance though without exceeding into the extremist position of fatalism and consequent de-responsabilization.
Hillman criticizes the current psychology's exclusive accent on "parental fallacy", genetical and environmental factors as all-inclusive explanations for children's future and achievements, and offers the daimon as a third way, besides nature and nurture, to explain the proper and unquestionably irreproducible development of the individual lives.
Hillman produces a large number of pieces of eminent biographies (and also discusses the often observed repulsion of relevant characters to encapsule their lives into biographies) to support his claims, considering the extraordinary as general case containing the ordinary as special. His style is soft and eloquent throughout, well spoken and passionate at times, devoid of technicisms but rich in images and facts.
Overall, this essay can be very stimulating in its provocative (yet old) claim, as it is provocative in calling for a return to older positions re-invented in hindsight and sub specie aeternitatis.
February 27, 2018
Ho avuto un'intensa discussione con il prof. Hillman, da quando ho aperto il libro fino alla fine!
Naturalmente la conversazione è avvenuta tutta dentro la mia testa ma non per questo la reputo meno interessante per me stesso. Pronti, Via!...e fin dalle prime pagine non mi sono trovato per niente d'accordo con il punto di vista del professore, devo ammettere però che con il procedere della lettura ho cominciato a capire meglio la sua idea di fondo e...a restarne affascinato.
La Vocazione come "daimon" della nostra anima. Il nostro personalissimo Virgilio (o a volte Caronte) che ci guida, ci spinge, spesso addirittura ci incalza fino alla psicopatologia, per il raggiungimento del suo di lui scopo.
I nostri geni e l'ereditarietà? A mare!
L'ambiente in cui siamo cresciuti, il nostro habitat culturale? Pinzillacchere!
E' la Vocazione il "primo motore"!
Ammetto che definirmi scettico a riguardo è poco, che i lunghi trascorsi del prof. Hillman a Zurigo lo abbiano troppo impregnato della predestinazione di stampo calvinista? Me lo sono chiesto di sicuro. Però, nonostante tutto lo scetticismo che questo libro può sollevare, non si può negare che è un'opera che fa riflettere, che forse non è del tutto dalla parte del torto e che leggerla fa crescere l'eventuale lettore di almeno un "zic".
Qui dentro qualcosa di noi c'è, la possibilità di scoprire qualcosa anche. Bravo Professore!
Naturalmente la conversazione è avvenuta tutta dentro la mia testa ma non per questo la reputo meno interessante per me stesso. Pronti, Via!...e fin dalle prime pagine non mi sono trovato per niente d'accordo con il punto di vista del professore, devo ammettere però che con il procedere della lettura ho cominciato a capire meglio la sua idea di fondo e...a restarne affascinato.
La Vocazione come "daimon" della nostra anima. Il nostro personalissimo Virgilio (o a volte Caronte) che ci guida, ci spinge, spesso addirittura ci incalza fino alla psicopatologia, per il raggiungimento del suo di lui scopo.
I nostri geni e l'ereditarietà? A mare!
L'ambiente in cui siamo cresciuti, il nostro habitat culturale? Pinzillacchere!
E' la Vocazione il "primo motore"!
Ammetto che definirmi scettico a riguardo è poco, che i lunghi trascorsi del prof. Hillman a Zurigo lo abbiano troppo impregnato della predestinazione di stampo calvinista? Me lo sono chiesto di sicuro. Però, nonostante tutto lo scetticismo che questo libro può sollevare, non si può negare che è un'opera che fa riflettere, che forse non è del tutto dalla parte del torto e che leggerla fa crescere l'eventuale lettore di almeno un "zic".
Qui dentro qualcosa di noi c'è, la possibilità di scoprire qualcosa anche. Bravo Professore!
August 14, 2018
I found this book quite refreshing, and amusing. I may not agree with it completely. The concept is not new, tough, they have in India, in some 'philosophies' the idea of 'svadharma', which translates into this book, the 'acorn theory'.
The author gives famous examples, which becomes a bit tedious, and brings out the question what about everyone else?And he answers this question later, almost in the end. Frankly, this part could have been in the beginning, and then he could give the more extreme examples to make his pint.
Also, I did not get the insisting of the relationship between the pupil and mentor being erotic. I his examples he mentions Truman Capote and his teacher, and older woman. We know Capote was gay, so where's the eroticism in that? The author sees very clearly the hidden meanings in mythologies etc, but why then does the Freudian sexualization?
The whole ephemeral way of expression was the amusing part. I imagined myself in a stuffy, private library, with old big armchairs, and this old man rambling on with interesting anecdotes.What is really good about this book is that it gives another perspective to the 'victim' mode. It makes on more of an actor in a play.
I had to add that the author writes that some things are true about love- that women fall for a man with a luxury car, or something like this, but I haven't yet met a woman who would have chosen a guy because of his car! Maybe this is just car industry propaganda, ha ha?
The author gives famous examples, which becomes a bit tedious, and brings out the question what about everyone else?And he answers this question later, almost in the end. Frankly, this part could have been in the beginning, and then he could give the more extreme examples to make his pint.
Also, I did not get the insisting of the relationship between the pupil and mentor being erotic. I his examples he mentions Truman Capote and his teacher, and older woman. We know Capote was gay, so where's the eroticism in that? The author sees very clearly the hidden meanings in mythologies etc, but why then does the Freudian sexualization?
The whole ephemeral way of expression was the amusing part. I imagined myself in a stuffy, private library, with old big armchairs, and this old man rambling on with interesting anecdotes.What is really good about this book is that it gives another perspective to the 'victim' mode. It makes on more of an actor in a play.
I had to add that the author writes that some things are true about love- that women fall for a man with a luxury car, or something like this, but I haven't yet met a woman who would have chosen a guy because of his car! Maybe this is just car industry propaganda, ha ha?
September 15, 2019
The general idea Hillman espouses, a criticism of marginalizing the exceptional and inspired in society, has its merits. But this book is often a rambling contradictory mess, especially towards the end. I feel like I probably would have liked this book better when I still smoked pot lol because it definitely has that sense of stoner “woah dude” pseudo-wisdom. But god some parts are really a mess. It’s funny that during the chapter on the “bad seed” he warns of the empty and deceptive intellectualism of “trivial knowledge”, when I found that the deluge of biographical facts and references in this book seem to be just that. Just random trivial facts about famous people that never really seem to add up to any insight. And the contradictions. At one point he refers to “freakishness” as a sign of an inherently evil person and gives examples of Nazi masterminds who had physical disabilities and how they were a sign of the shadow just the like the disabled who the Nazis sought to purge from society. This was just such a senseless and off-putting passage to me. And then his contradictory flip flopping on concepts of both mediocrity and eminence just left me feeling like what was meant to be an inspiring message just came off as more disheartening and hopeless.
November 22, 2012
Interesting concept, but I could barely start the book, let alone try to finish it. The style and content was completely ethereal. I mean that in several connotations. First, the book is so spiritual/philosophical in nature that it loses all possibility of practical application. Secondly, there seems to be no real substance. Lots of words, but little content. Nothing to indicate how to use this theory or any suggestions on how to be proactive in one's life.
October 22, 2023
The acorn theory of human ontogenesis is indeed nuts. Jungian archetypes are lavishly invoked to explain just about everything. When do psychologists finally realize that archetypes are just one of many man-made tools, not real entities; they are retrofitted staple narratives, potentially useful in generating meaning and guiding future action; that’s it.
September 13, 2024
*DNF at 50 pages.
This was way too fantastical for me. I didnt connect or feel inspired by a single concept this presented in 50 pages. The author feared or felt an anger towards the lack of emotion and personal connection of certain psychological practices which, to him, apparently discredits these ideas entirely. It also played into ego, and that's not my cup of tea.
This was way too fantastical for me. I didnt connect or feel inspired by a single concept this presented in 50 pages. The author feared or felt an anger towards the lack of emotion and personal connection of certain psychological practices which, to him, apparently discredits these ideas entirely. It also played into ego, and that's not my cup of tea.
June 22, 2010
I don't agree with everything he says, but I was fascinated by the idea of the current you and the eternal you. Give ya hope, if current you is kind of a nerdhole.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 327 reviews