What do you think?
Rate this book
A Little Book on the Human Shadow: A Poetic Journey into the Dark Side of the Human Personality, Shadow Work, and the Importance of Confronting Our Hidden Self
Robert Bly, renowned poet and author of the ground-breaking bestseller Iron John, mingles essay and verse to explore the Shadow -- the dark side of the human personality -- and the importance of confronting it.
81 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
292 people are currently reading
3744 people want to read
About the author
Robert Bly
284 books412 followersRobert Bly was an American poet, author, activist and leader of the Mythopoetic Men's Movement.
Robert Bly was born in western Minnesota in 1926 to parents of Norwegian stock. He enlisted in the Navy in 1944 and spent two years there. After one year at St. Olaf College in Minnesota, he transferred to Harvard and thereby joined the famous group of writers who were undergraduates at that time, which included Donald Hall, Adrienne Rich, Kenneth Koch, John Ashbery, Harold Brodky, George Plimpton, and John Hawkes. He graduated in 1950 and spent the next few years in New York living, as they say, hand to mouth.
Beginning in 1954, he took two years at the University of Iowa at the Writers Workshop along with W. D. Snodgrass, Donald Justice, and others. In 1956 he received a Fulbright grant to travel to Norway and translate Norwegian poetry into English. While there he found not only his relatives but the work of a number of major poets whose force was not present in the United States, among them Pablo Neruda, Cesar Vallejo, Gunnar Ekelof, Georg Trakl and Harry Martinson. He determined then to start a literary magazine for poetry translation in the United States and so begin The Fifties and The Sixties and The Seventies, which introduced many of these poets to the writers of his generation, and published as well essays on American poets and insults to those deserving. During this time he lived on a farm in Minnesota with his wife and children.
In 1966 he co-founded American Writers Against the Vietnam War and led much of the opposition among writers to that war. When he won the National Book Award for The Light Around the Body, he contributed the prize money to the Resistance. During the 70s he published eleven books of poetry, essays, and translations, celebrating the power of myth, Indian ecstatic poetry, meditation, and storytelling. During the 80s he published Loving a Woman in Two Worlds, The Wingéd Life: Selected Poems and Prose of Thoreau,The Man in the Black Coat Turns, and A Little Book on the Human Shadow.
His work Iron John: A Book About Men is an international bestseller which has been translated into many languages. He frequently does workshops for men with James Hillman and others, and workshops for men and women with Marion Woodman. He and his wife Ruth, along with the storyteller Gioia Timpanelli, frequently conduct seminars on European fairy tales. In the early 90s, with James Hillman and Michael Meade, he edited The Rag and Bone Shop of the Heart, an anthology of poems from the men's work. Since then he has edited The Darkness Around Us Is Deep: Selected Poems of William Stafford, and The Soul Is Here for Its Own Joy, a collection of sacred poetry from many cultures.
Robert Bly was born in western Minnesota in 1926 to parents of Norwegian stock. He enlisted in the Navy in 1944 and spent two years there. After one year at St. Olaf College in Minnesota, he transferred to Harvard and thereby joined the famous group of writers who were undergraduates at that time, which included Donald Hall, Adrienne Rich, Kenneth Koch, John Ashbery, Harold Brodky, George Plimpton, and John Hawkes. He graduated in 1950 and spent the next few years in New York living, as they say, hand to mouth.
Beginning in 1954, he took two years at the University of Iowa at the Writers Workshop along with W. D. Snodgrass, Donald Justice, and others. In 1956 he received a Fulbright grant to travel to Norway and translate Norwegian poetry into English. While there he found not only his relatives but the work of a number of major poets whose force was not present in the United States, among them Pablo Neruda, Cesar Vallejo, Gunnar Ekelof, Georg Trakl and Harry Martinson. He determined then to start a literary magazine for poetry translation in the United States and so begin The Fifties and The Sixties and The Seventies, which introduced many of these poets to the writers of his generation, and published as well essays on American poets and insults to those deserving. During this time he lived on a farm in Minnesota with his wife and children.
In 1966 he co-founded American Writers Against the Vietnam War and led much of the opposition among writers to that war. When he won the National Book Award for The Light Around the Body, he contributed the prize money to the Resistance. During the 70s he published eleven books of poetry, essays, and translations, celebrating the power of myth, Indian ecstatic poetry, meditation, and storytelling. During the 80s he published Loving a Woman in Two Worlds, The Wingéd Life: Selected Poems and Prose of Thoreau,The Man in the Black Coat Turns, and A Little Book on the Human Shadow.
His work Iron John: A Book About Men is an international bestseller which has been translated into many languages. He frequently does workshops for men with James Hillman and others, and workshops for men and women with Marion Woodman. He and his wife Ruth, along with the storyteller Gioia Timpanelli, frequently conduct seminars on European fairy tales. In the early 90s, with James Hillman and Michael Meade, he edited The Rag and Bone Shop of the Heart, an anthology of poems from the men's work. Since then he has edited The Darkness Around Us Is Deep: Selected Poems of William Stafford, and The Soul Is Here for Its Own Joy, a collection of sacred poetry from many cultures.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 148 reviews
February 23, 2012
If this were instead "a Medium-sized Book on the Human shadow," things may have been more clear but, then, they'd probably be more annoying, too.
Bly is not a gentle (note the space) man. He is a bull. In a way, he's the perfect person to talk about the Human Shadow, because he's living proof of its existence. But I suspect he doesn't even have a clear idea how he's managed to "eat his [own] shadow" and so who is he really to advise us? Well, again, he's a bull - that's who. He's got a resonant, self-assured voice and that helps people relate to concepts like the shadow. But he forces too much. Let me explain that . . .
A near mirror image of Bly is William Stafford. Where Bly is muted black, Stafford is off-white. In a sit-down chat, Stafford once explained to Bly the concept of Blake's "Golden Thread" and how it relates to writing poetry. The Blake lines are:
"I give you the end of a golden string
Only wind it into a ball
It will let you in at Heaven's Gate
Built in Jerusalem's Wall."
Stafford said that any thread in writing is golden if you don't pull it too hard. "Masterful people," he said, "break that thread" and then he tells Bly, "watch out, Robert." He claims he's not suggesting that Bly breaks the threads, so I'll say it for him.
Bly eschews definition. One of the problems with him is that he uses metaphorical, poetical language throughout his prose with little to no clarification on what he means other than by sketching outward from the vague image and sort of smudge-shading it. For example, he refers to the "white nightgown mentality" and keeps on going as if that image should to make sense to everyone. One can never even be sure if the image is his own or if he's borrowing from another poet. In the case of the white nightgown, the sketch later turns out to be signed by Wallace Stevens, but still with no reference to its original usage. Sometimes Bly will interrupt himself to ask, "is the image clear?" Well, if it's not, how're we meant to answer? If my image of smudge-shading isn't clear, it's in keeping.
A college professor of mine was all but obsessed with Robert Bly and while I enjoy a lot of what Bly has to say, I am cautious. I remember telling my professor that Bly was too powerful a force in the poetry/literary community - that his ideas carry too much weight and that they run the risk of capsizing the whole ordeal (at least for certain writers). See, Bly likes to go on as if he knows what he's talking about, but about 40-50% of the time, he's talking shit. He's liable to contradict himself from year to year, poem to poem, and talk to talk and think nothing of it. That's all fine and dandy for him, but there's a danger in his mode of expression, too (and here I'm well aware that I'm using Bly's diction).
When Bly engages in equivocation, it's tempting to accuse him of obfuscation. The problem is that there's no direct way to address this idea of the Human Shadow. But one thing I think I can say is that his stark gender roles are the product of a free-for-all era in psychology. Like horoscopes, Jungian archetypes are fun to think about, but they're not terribly instructive and if you take them too seriously, they can be quite limiting. Bly hurts his arguments by putting the sexes into clearly labeled boxes.
It occurs to me, though, that Bly's success is probably largely due to his flexability. Just when you catch him in a contradiction (as William Booth does toward the end of the book), he merely retracts his statement and agrees to pursue another path. That bastard. Nothing phases him and he goes on to lead another round-circle meeting of repressed men trying to invoke the animus.
But despite all of this, he'll then say something charming like, "Critics usually accept the world the poet creates. If he says east is north, they say: Why didn't I think of that before!" and you love him again for his willingness to admit that we're all probably full of shit.
Bly is not a gentle (note the space) man. He is a bull. In a way, he's the perfect person to talk about the Human Shadow, because he's living proof of its existence. But I suspect he doesn't even have a clear idea how he's managed to "eat his [own] shadow" and so who is he really to advise us? Well, again, he's a bull - that's who. He's got a resonant, self-assured voice and that helps people relate to concepts like the shadow. But he forces too much. Let me explain that . . .
A near mirror image of Bly is William Stafford. Where Bly is muted black, Stafford is off-white. In a sit-down chat, Stafford once explained to Bly the concept of Blake's "Golden Thread" and how it relates to writing poetry. The Blake lines are:
"I give you the end of a golden string
Only wind it into a ball
It will let you in at Heaven's Gate
Built in Jerusalem's Wall."
Stafford said that any thread in writing is golden if you don't pull it too hard. "Masterful people," he said, "break that thread" and then he tells Bly, "watch out, Robert." He claims he's not suggesting that Bly breaks the threads, so I'll say it for him.
Bly eschews definition. One of the problems with him is that he uses metaphorical, poetical language throughout his prose with little to no clarification on what he means other than by sketching outward from the vague image and sort of smudge-shading it. For example, he refers to the "white nightgown mentality" and keeps on going as if that image should to make sense to everyone. One can never even be sure if the image is his own or if he's borrowing from another poet. In the case of the white nightgown, the sketch later turns out to be signed by Wallace Stevens, but still with no reference to its original usage. Sometimes Bly will interrupt himself to ask, "is the image clear?" Well, if it's not, how're we meant to answer? If my image of smudge-shading isn't clear, it's in keeping.
A college professor of mine was all but obsessed with Robert Bly and while I enjoy a lot of what Bly has to say, I am cautious. I remember telling my professor that Bly was too powerful a force in the poetry/literary community - that his ideas carry too much weight and that they run the risk of capsizing the whole ordeal (at least for certain writers). See, Bly likes to go on as if he knows what he's talking about, but about 40-50% of the time, he's talking shit. He's liable to contradict himself from year to year, poem to poem, and talk to talk and think nothing of it. That's all fine and dandy for him, but there's a danger in his mode of expression, too (and here I'm well aware that I'm using Bly's diction).
When Bly engages in equivocation, it's tempting to accuse him of obfuscation. The problem is that there's no direct way to address this idea of the Human Shadow. But one thing I think I can say is that his stark gender roles are the product of a free-for-all era in psychology. Like horoscopes, Jungian archetypes are fun to think about, but they're not terribly instructive and if you take them too seriously, they can be quite limiting. Bly hurts his arguments by putting the sexes into clearly labeled boxes.
It occurs to me, though, that Bly's success is probably largely due to his flexability. Just when you catch him in a contradiction (as William Booth does toward the end of the book), he merely retracts his statement and agrees to pursue another path. That bastard. Nothing phases him and he goes on to lead another round-circle meeting of repressed men trying to invoke the animus.
But despite all of this, he'll then say something charming like, "Critics usually accept the world the poet creates. If he says east is north, they say: Why didn't I think of that before!" and you love him again for his willingness to admit that we're all probably full of shit.
June 28, 2011
This book is a fabulous resource for my Jungian Psychology research paper on the shadow. It explores various components of the shadow in a very accessible manner. Bly offers essentially what I would call a great dialogue on the shadow, interspersed with his poetry. One chapter is even an interview between Bly and his editor Booth. I really feel like I just sat down with these two men and listened to a beautiful conversation about this complex idea. I call it complex primarily because the shadow maintains such a negative connotation, but it is not necessarily always that way. As Booth stated, “it is not something destructive in its very essence” (60).
In the first part, Bly discusses “Problems in the Ark,” and really shares the most poetry here, giving us images of the polarization of lightness and darkness. In second part, “The Long Bag We Drag Behind Us,” Bly dissects the human shadow. Essentially, we are born as a full 360 ball of energy. But we slowly start putting things away in our “bag” to receive positive attention from our parents; what they don’t like gets buried in our bag. We carry on in this manner through high school, now putting the things our peers don’t like in our bag. By our early 20’s, Bly says we only have a sliver of that original ball. Then after a decade or so, we’re ready to dig into our bag and pull it all back out. While all this is going on, we also start projecting (another thing which is not always inherently bad). Then we’re carrying out things we’ve buried in relationships with parents, children, spouses, friends. If our projection is strong enough, the other person is ultimately forced into wearing that mask. It’s a complicated business! And my mind is stuck right now in the thought of the many images and ideas we live with consciously and subconsciously. I’m back to thinking first about perception, and how our reality is what we experience. Throw in that that at the same time we are receiving projections and giving projects, and the self is becoming an even more complicated thing for me to wrap my mind around.
In the third part, Bly discusses “Five Stages in Exiling, Hunting, and Retrieving the Shadow.” First we project, but then something starts to rattle and there’s a disconnect. In the third stage we seek to repair the rattle, and what I see going on is justification, a way of working with the disconnect that is incomplete. In the fourth stage, we come to feel diminished. However many ways we’ve projected ourselves, given away a part of ourselves, those are all ways we now feel diminished. The most interesting commentary here is that Bly said when you share this feeling of diminishment with a friend, the last thing that friend should do is try to cheer you up. I guess this really spoke to me, because I’m always trying to bring everyone sunshine (a nick-name I’ve earned by many). Finally, in the fifth stage, we retrieve that very thing we originally threw out or projected. And then we eat it. We can do this by giving the thing language, or perhaps first with working with it through images or art. And why should we do this? Because “every bit of energy that we don’t actively engage with language or art of floating somewhere in the air . . . No one should make you feel guilty for not keeping a journal, or creating art, but such activity helps the whole world” (43). Here’s the thing about these stages: they can be going on all at once, and they continually reoccur. Also, as Bly really discussed in the second part, the shadow isn’t just personal; there is also a communal shadow and a national shadow, which means we also must deal with the communal projections and the national projections.
In part four, we have the great interview with Booth and Bly. The first key note is that hatred is something that can help us get at our shadows. Who or what is it that really gets us riled up? What is it that you are despising? It’s something in yourself you have buried. Booth questions Bly about the “negative connotations and associations with evil” that are present in the shadow, where Bly explains that evil is separate, but the dark imagery of the shadow can get confused with it. Yet, in fact, “a person who absorbs the shadow becomes not dark, but light and playful” (54). Ultimately, “The shadow energies seem to be a part of the human psyche, a part of its 30-degree nature, and the shadow energies becomes destructive only when they are ignored” (59).
In the fifth and final part, Bly discusses “Wallace Stevens and Dr. Jekyll,” claiming that “[a]ll literature, both of the primitive and the modern peoples, can be thought of as creations by the ‘dark side’ to enable it to rise up from the earth and join the sunlit consciousness again” (63). Bly discusses the shadow-side of Dr. Jekyll, and how we see stories where the shadow side rises and ultimately fails. The discussion also examines a handful of modern poems, and here’s the one I found the most significant.
Twenty men crossing a bridge,
Into a village,
Are twenty men crossing twenty bridges,
Into twenty villages,
Or one man
Crossing a single bridge into a village.
Comes back to what I was thinking about perception and the unique experiences we all have, no matter how many are sharing that experience with us.
Bly leaves us with this reflection: “If the shadow’s gifts are not acted upon, it evidently retreats and returns to the earth. It gives the writer or person ten or fifteen years to change his life, in response to the amazing visions the shadow has brought him – that change may involve only a deepening of the interior marriage of male and female within the man or woman – but if that does not happen, the shadow goes back down, abandoning him, and the last state of that man is evidently worse than the first.
And this is just a touch of the ideas offered in this small text. I will mention one more small idea that spoke to me personally:
“Our culture teaches us from early infancy to split and polarize dark and light . . . some admire the left-thinking, poorly-lit side, and that group one can associate with the mother, if one wants to, and mythologically with the Great Moth. Most artists, poets, and musicians belong to the second group and love intuition, music, the feminine, owl and the ocean. The right-thinking group loves action, commerce and Empire.”
I never really gave this much thought before, but I’m clearly a left-thinker. I hadn’t really considered myself an artist, but I suppose being a writer places me in the category. My jaw just dropped though when I first read this passage and it defined me so well! I always follow my intuition. One of my favorite things on this planet is live music. I’m definitely in touch with my feminine side. I even collect figures of owls. And, most importantly, to me at least, is the ocean. The wonderful, beautiful, deep, endless ocean with all its creatures and magnificent power. As far back as I can remember, I have always loved sitting in the sand gazing at the waves. I’ve never cared to go to the beach during the summer because it’s filled with people, clutter and noise. But cool winter nights? The ocean exists by itself, and it always fills me with serenity.
In the first part, Bly discusses “Problems in the Ark,” and really shares the most poetry here, giving us images of the polarization of lightness and darkness. In second part, “The Long Bag We Drag Behind Us,” Bly dissects the human shadow. Essentially, we are born as a full 360 ball of energy. But we slowly start putting things away in our “bag” to receive positive attention from our parents; what they don’t like gets buried in our bag. We carry on in this manner through high school, now putting the things our peers don’t like in our bag. By our early 20’s, Bly says we only have a sliver of that original ball. Then after a decade or so, we’re ready to dig into our bag and pull it all back out. While all this is going on, we also start projecting (another thing which is not always inherently bad). Then we’re carrying out things we’ve buried in relationships with parents, children, spouses, friends. If our projection is strong enough, the other person is ultimately forced into wearing that mask. It’s a complicated business! And my mind is stuck right now in the thought of the many images and ideas we live with consciously and subconsciously. I’m back to thinking first about perception, and how our reality is what we experience. Throw in that that at the same time we are receiving projections and giving projects, and the self is becoming an even more complicated thing for me to wrap my mind around.
In the third part, Bly discusses “Five Stages in Exiling, Hunting, and Retrieving the Shadow.” First we project, but then something starts to rattle and there’s a disconnect. In the third stage we seek to repair the rattle, and what I see going on is justification, a way of working with the disconnect that is incomplete. In the fourth stage, we come to feel diminished. However many ways we’ve projected ourselves, given away a part of ourselves, those are all ways we now feel diminished. The most interesting commentary here is that Bly said when you share this feeling of diminishment with a friend, the last thing that friend should do is try to cheer you up. I guess this really spoke to me, because I’m always trying to bring everyone sunshine (a nick-name I’ve earned by many). Finally, in the fifth stage, we retrieve that very thing we originally threw out or projected. And then we eat it. We can do this by giving the thing language, or perhaps first with working with it through images or art. And why should we do this? Because “every bit of energy that we don’t actively engage with language or art of floating somewhere in the air . . . No one should make you feel guilty for not keeping a journal, or creating art, but such activity helps the whole world” (43). Here’s the thing about these stages: they can be going on all at once, and they continually reoccur. Also, as Bly really discussed in the second part, the shadow isn’t just personal; there is also a communal shadow and a national shadow, which means we also must deal with the communal projections and the national projections.
In part four, we have the great interview with Booth and Bly. The first key note is that hatred is something that can help us get at our shadows. Who or what is it that really gets us riled up? What is it that you are despising? It’s something in yourself you have buried. Booth questions Bly about the “negative connotations and associations with evil” that are present in the shadow, where Bly explains that evil is separate, but the dark imagery of the shadow can get confused with it. Yet, in fact, “a person who absorbs the shadow becomes not dark, but light and playful” (54). Ultimately, “The shadow energies seem to be a part of the human psyche, a part of its 30-degree nature, and the shadow energies becomes destructive only when they are ignored” (59).
In the fifth and final part, Bly discusses “Wallace Stevens and Dr. Jekyll,” claiming that “[a]ll literature, both of the primitive and the modern peoples, can be thought of as creations by the ‘dark side’ to enable it to rise up from the earth and join the sunlit consciousness again” (63). Bly discusses the shadow-side of Dr. Jekyll, and how we see stories where the shadow side rises and ultimately fails. The discussion also examines a handful of modern poems, and here’s the one I found the most significant.
Twenty men crossing a bridge,
Into a village,
Are twenty men crossing twenty bridges,
Into twenty villages,
Or one man
Crossing a single bridge into a village.
Comes back to what I was thinking about perception and the unique experiences we all have, no matter how many are sharing that experience with us.
Bly leaves us with this reflection: “If the shadow’s gifts are not acted upon, it evidently retreats and returns to the earth. It gives the writer or person ten or fifteen years to change his life, in response to the amazing visions the shadow has brought him – that change may involve only a deepening of the interior marriage of male and female within the man or woman – but if that does not happen, the shadow goes back down, abandoning him, and the last state of that man is evidently worse than the first.
And this is just a touch of the ideas offered in this small text. I will mention one more small idea that spoke to me personally:
“Our culture teaches us from early infancy to split and polarize dark and light . . . some admire the left-thinking, poorly-lit side, and that group one can associate with the mother, if one wants to, and mythologically with the Great Moth. Most artists, poets, and musicians belong to the second group and love intuition, music, the feminine, owl and the ocean. The right-thinking group loves action, commerce and Empire.”
I never really gave this much thought before, but I’m clearly a left-thinker. I hadn’t really considered myself an artist, but I suppose being a writer places me in the category. My jaw just dropped though when I first read this passage and it defined me so well! I always follow my intuition. One of my favorite things on this planet is live music. I’m definitely in touch with my feminine side. I even collect figures of owls. And, most importantly, to me at least, is the ocean. The wonderful, beautiful, deep, endless ocean with all its creatures and magnificent power. As far back as I can remember, I have always loved sitting in the sand gazing at the waves. I’ve never cared to go to the beach during the summer because it’s filled with people, clutter and noise. But cool winter nights? The ocean exists by itself, and it always fills me with serenity.
April 9, 2008
Simple: This book should be required reading for every human. It concisely describes the most powerful human decision making engine, which our culture refuses to acknowledge, the shadow, which has been identified as the "id" and "super-ego" by Freud and the "collective unconscious" by a smarter guy named Carl Jung, who was one of Freuds students, but discarded all the psychosis of Freud and framed it in a far more intuitive way.
Bly, a great poet/writer, describes the power we project onto others that should rightfully be our own. The projection looks ugly, and is upsetting, when projected and witnessed, but can become our best energy when reclaimed.
Anyone who would like to develop a new understanding of how they interact with others will enjoy this book, but more it's just nice to read.
He describes the process of becoming a mere "slice" by age twenty, after staring off in life as an infant with a 360' personality.
Both prose and poetry, it's an excellent read, takes about two hours to get through, and perhaps a lifetime to process.
Great book.
Bly, a great poet/writer, describes the power we project onto others that should rightfully be our own. The projection looks ugly, and is upsetting, when projected and witnessed, but can become our best energy when reclaimed.
Anyone who would like to develop a new understanding of how they interact with others will enjoy this book, but more it's just nice to read.
He describes the process of becoming a mere "slice" by age twenty, after staring off in life as an infant with a 360' personality.
Both prose and poetry, it's an excellent read, takes about two hours to get through, and perhaps a lifetime to process.
Great book.
May 22, 2011
Robert Bly has this wonderful Jungian lens through which he sees the world. Here he is discussing the subconscious mind, which he represents with the metaphor of the shadow. The book is distilled from three or four poetry readings he gave in the 1970s. He wants us to be in touch with our dark side, meaning the subconcious. The metaphor of the shadow he sees is also a bag in which we are forced to put every personal attribute not desired by our parents, who want us to be only "nice." Yet we are essentially wild animals at heart. What should we do with all that anger, rage, sexuality, creativity, whatever, that we've been forced to suppress? Well, when we get to about 35 or 40, Bly says, we have to start taking things out of the bag. Unless we take them out, unless we address them, we will become damaged. Please don't read this book if you've never had a psychology course or have not familiarized yourself with psychological concepts through reading, esp. Jungian ones. Those without such a background are likely to see Bly as little more than a raving lunatic. He is not. What I found fascinating (again) was how very discursive Bly's thought process is. He's been thinking in Jungian terms for so long that his analysis, essentially cultural analysis, psychohistory, can be a little dense at times. This is one of those books that you have to absorb over time, reflect upon, pick up again, and re-read. Fortunately it's only 81 pages long.
August 19, 2007
Bloviant. I am making up that word just for this book.
Coarse opinions masquerading as poetic depth.
When a poet has a stupid personality, it shows. Every bloviant detail. This book exposed more superficial opinions and obtuse viewpoints than I could bother to digest. It exposed me to the fact that the scholarly Mr. Bly is indeed not at all well read.
I especially love the long passage in chapter four, in which the author ravages "generalizers" (a general term for God-knows-who). He has so much inexplicable distate for this inchoate group, delivered with all the analytical clarity of a high school honors student, that it is clear that his own shadow is alive and well in this fuzzy projection that he would foist upon his readers.
Good practice for spotting a weak mind in action.
Coarse opinions masquerading as poetic depth.
When a poet has a stupid personality, it shows. Every bloviant detail. This book exposed more superficial opinions and obtuse viewpoints than I could bother to digest. It exposed me to the fact that the scholarly Mr. Bly is indeed not at all well read.
I especially love the long passage in chapter four, in which the author ravages "generalizers" (a general term for God-knows-who). He has so much inexplicable distate for this inchoate group, delivered with all the analytical clarity of a high school honors student, that it is clear that his own shadow is alive and well in this fuzzy projection that he would foist upon his readers.
Good practice for spotting a weak mind in action.
July 30, 2016
I strongly believe the title to be deceiving. Expected a lot more & was disappointed . Had to sift through pages and pages of poetry, Politics in 80's America, and Wallace Stevens, to find something I could make sense of. I understand why so many people appreciate it, but to me it was a huge pile of unrelatedness.
March 30, 2014
The idea behind this little book is, essentially, that we all have a shadow to our personality, a dark side where we repress things about ourselves that we don't like. The longer we ignore it, the more powerful can get and (in a sense) the less psychologically whole we are.
The book uses metaphor, poetry, and references to writing and popular culture to expand on that idea, and touches upon how we may identify and start to own our own shadow. The reason I loved it so much is because the idea resonated with me, and came at a time when I (personally) really needed to hear it. So it that germinating idea that did it for me. The actual content itself is often vague, open to interpretation and, as I said earlier, highly metaphorical.
So if you're someone who likes to come straight to the point, and deal in facts not ideas, this is probably likely to frustrate you. But if the idea itself, of the human shadow, rings a bell or piques your interest, I'd strongly recommend this book. It's a short, powerful and provocative read, and is likely to lead to a lot of introspection.
The book uses metaphor, poetry, and references to writing and popular culture to expand on that idea, and touches upon how we may identify and start to own our own shadow. The reason I loved it so much is because the idea resonated with me, and came at a time when I (personally) really needed to hear it. So it that germinating idea that did it for me. The actual content itself is often vague, open to interpretation and, as I said earlier, highly metaphorical.
So if you're someone who likes to come straight to the point, and deal in facts not ideas, this is probably likely to frustrate you. But if the idea itself, of the human shadow, rings a bell or piques your interest, I'd strongly recommend this book. It's a short, powerful and provocative read, and is likely to lead to a lot of introspection.
July 16, 2018
`One of the things we need to do as Americans is to work hard individually at eating our shadows, and so make sure that we are not releasing energy which can then be picked up by the politicians, who can use it against Russia, China, or the South American countries.`
This is a little gem of a book. Although written in the 80`s it seems to be a timeless classic.
This is a little gem of a book. Although written in the 80`s it seems to be a timeless classic.
February 1, 2022
There was some really helpful stuff in this book, especially the stuff on repression and projection Personally though, he uses a lot of poetry to get his points across, and I'm still not big on poetry.
March 31, 2012
This book is thought-provoking, and I'm glad I read it, and thought of about ten people who I wanted to ask to read it so I could discuss it. At 90ish pages you can get through it in about an hour or two, and the ideas within it are worth having running through your mind as you look at the world. All that being said, I'm looking forward to rereading it when I have a better understanding of Jung's actual writings on the shadow; the 'definitions' of it in here I find a little bit reductionist. And the idea that this book gives you a way to overcome the shadow as suggested in the foreward, I'm sorry to say, but I find laughable. The only thing in here that really discusses how to confront your shadow is a suggestion to write, paint, or otherwise find a method of artistic expression where your secret shadowness will reveal itself. That strikes me as more than a little easy for a poet to say, although I am sympathetic to the general principle that one must deal with their sh*t before it deals with you (/the loved ones in your life/your coworkers).
March 21, 2017
My new favorite poet, Robert Bly, and another Savior of a book—a psychological poem on the human shadow.
My shadow bag is dense with unconscious mud; and I do, like everybody else, practice random mud-slinging (projection) on daily basis. This book taught me how and where to aim, redirecting my overworked slinger back to the one responsible—the one holding it!
My shadow bag is dense with unconscious mud; and I do, like everybody else, practice random mud-slinging (projection) on daily basis. This book taught me how and where to aim, redirecting my overworked slinger back to the one responsible—the one holding it!
May 24, 2017
Half of the time I understood and appreciated the parts about facing your shadow.
The other half I had no idea where Bly was going.
The other half I had no idea where Bly was going.
October 16, 2020
It is indeed a little book, but packed full of interesting psychological insights from the unique (but unsurprising) viewpoint of a poet. Chock full of thought-worthy ideas.
May 19, 2013
می دانیم که وقتی نور آفتاب به بدن می تابد، بدن را روشن می کند؛ اما همزمان سایه ای هم ایجاد می شود که سیاه و تاریک است. هر چه شدت نور بیشتر باشد، سایه سیاه تر و تاریک تر خواهد بود. پدر و مادر و معلم ها ما را تشویق می کنند تا بخش روشن شخصیت مان را رشد و توسعه دهیم، به طرف موضوعاتی مثل ریاضیات و هندسه برویم و سعی کنیم که موفق باشیم. در این حالت بخش تاریک وجودمان گرسنه و تشنه باقی می ماند.فرهنگ کهن چینی ها روی نماد یین و یَنگ تاکید می ورزد. این نماد ها نشان دهندۀ بخش تاریک و روشن شخصیت ما هستند که در یک دایره با هم متحد و یگانه می شوند. اما فرهنگ ما از ابتدا به ما می آموزد که تاریکی و روشنی را به دو بخش دور از هم تقسیم کنیم و به شکل دو قطب متضاد و مخالف به آنها نگاه کنیم. متاسفانه در شخصیت ما تصمیمی به صورت مخفیانه گرفته می شود که باید با بخش تاریک وجود مقابله شود. این تصمیم باعث می شود خودآگاه و ناخودآگاه موقعیت هایی مخالف و متناقض اتخاذ کنند و موقعیت های مخالف به سرعت روی دیگر تصمیم گیری های ما اثر می گذارد و در نتیجه دو نیمۀ یین و یَنگ هرگز با هم یکی نمی شوند. شکاف میان تاریکی و روشنایی در اینجا کاملا آشکار است، اما با همین شرایط هم می توان شروع کرد.ا
اجازه بدهید ابتدا دربارۀ «سایۀ شخصی» برایتان صحبت کنم. وقتی یک یا دو ساله بودیم، شخصیتی داشتیم که می توان آن را کامل و 360 درجه تصور کرد. انرژی از تمام قسمت های بدن ما و تمام بخش های روان ما به بیرون می تراوید. کودک در حال دویدن مثل توپی از انرژی است! اما روزی متوجه شدیم که پدر و مادرمان بخش هایی از این توپ را دوست ندارند. به دنبال همۀ ما کوله باری است نادیدنی، در برگیرندۀ بخش هایی از ما که پدر و مادران مان دوست ندارند. ما برای اینکه عشق و علاقۀ پدر و مادرانمان را به دست بیاوریم بخش هایی از وجودمان را که آنها دوست نداشتند، در این کوله بار قرار دادیم. در مدرسه معلم هایمان به ما می گفتند: «بچه های خوب به خاطر چیز های بی اهمیت عصبانی نمی شوند.» به همین دلیل خشم و عصبانیت مان را نیز در این کوله بار گذاشتیم. تا قبل از دبیرستان، کوله بارمان چیزی به طول یک متر بود!ا
بعد از آن دیگر بزرگ تر ها به ما فشار نمی آوردند که چه چیز هایی خوب و چه چیز هایی بد است، بلکه افراد هم سن و سال مان بودند که به خاطر کسب تایید آنان چیز هایی را در کوله بارمان مخفی می کردیم. هر بخش از وجودمان که کمی کُند بود به درون این کوله بار می رفت...ا
حالا همین اتفاق برای فرزندانم در حال رخ دادن است. به دخترهایم نگاه می کنم و با ناراحتی می بینم که آنها چه چیز هایی را در کوله بارشان می گذارند؛ اما از دست من و مادرشان کاری ساخته نیست. خیلی وقت ها دخترهایم تصمیم های شان را بر اساس ایدۀ جمعی دربارۀ «زیبایی» و یا آنچه مد روز است می گیرند. آنها، به همان اندازه از دخترها آسیب دیده اند، که از پسر ها. آنچه اتفاق می افتد این است که از آن توپ انرژیِ دوران کودکی فقط یک قاچ نازک از انرژی برای یک مرد می ماند، در حالی که بقیه اش را در کوله بارش سرکوب کرده است. فرض کنید او در سن بیست و چهار سالگی با خانمی هم سن خودش ملاقات می کند که او نیز فقط یک قاچ نازک از انرژی برایش باقی مانده است. آنـها تصمیم می گیرند این دو قاچ نازک را در مراسمی به نام ازدواج شریک شوند. اما این دو قاچ برای یک نفر هم کافی نیست! ازدواج با این کوله بارهای دراز در ماه عسل، فقط تنهــایی را به ارمغان می آورد. البته همه ما دربارۀ این هم دروغ می گوییم!ا
در فرهنگ ایده آل گرای ما بخش زیبا و دوست داشتنی شخصیت، هر روز زیبا و زیباتر می شود. انسان ممکن است یک پزشک آزاد اندیش باشد که همیشه در خدمت دیگران است. از نظر اخلاقی او یک فرد «خوب» است، اما آنچه در کوله بار سایه اش حمل می کند، شخصیتی کاملا متفاوت است که نمی تواند نادیده گرفته شود. آنچه در کوله بار این فرد وجود دارد، روزی در جایی دیگر پدیدار می شود و خودش را نشان می دهد و هنگامی که شکل هیولا مانند آن را ببینید، شگفت زده خواهید شد.وقتی بخشی از خودمان را در کوله بار سایه قرار می دهیم، آن بخش پس رفت می کند و تکاملی معکوس به سوی دوران بربریت خواهد داشت. تجسم کنید مردی در سن بیست سالگی کوله بارش را مهر و موم کند و پانزده یا بیست سال بعد دوباره آن را باز کند. چه جیزی در کوله بارش خواهد یافت؟ با کمال تاسف باید بگویم تمایلات جنسی، وحشی گری، امیال آنی و حساب نشده و خشمی که تمام مدت آن را سرکوب کرده است. این ویژگی ها همگی بدوی هستند و به او آسیب می رسانند. این مرد وقتی سرش را بلند می کند، سایۀ هیولایی را می بیند که روی دیوار افتاده است! هر کسی با چنین منظره ای روبرو شود خواهد ترسید.ا
فکر می کنم که در بسیاری از فرهنگ ها بیشتر آقایان بخش زنانۀ وجودشان را سرکوب و در کوله بار سایه می گذارند. آنها در سنین سی و پنج تا چهل سالگی دوباره سعی می کنند با بخش زنانۀ وجودشان ارتباط برقرار کنند؛ در حالی که ممکن است این بخش در این سن و سال احساس خصمانه ای نسبت به آن ها داشته باشد. به همین دلیل این مردان در دنیای بیرون نیز روابط نا خوشایندی با زنان دارند. قانون این است که دنیای بیرون ما درست مثل دنیای درون مان خواهد شد. در این کرۀ خاکی قانون اینگونه است. زنی که دوست دارد زنانگی اش تایید شود، اگر جنبه های مردانه اش را در این کوله بار بگذارد، ممکن است بیست سال بعد نتواند رابطه ای دوستانه با بخش مردانۀ وجودش ایجاد کند. او حتی ممکن است احساس کند این بخش به شکل وحشیا��ه ای از او انتقاد می کند. این خانم با پیدا کردن مردی که رابطه ای آزار دهنده با او دارد، می تواند او را مقصر بداند و از فشار درونی اش بکاهد، اما این چیزها مشکل کوله بار او را حل نمی کند. آنگاه او ممکن است در دو جهت پس زده شود، هم از طرف مرد درونی اش و هم از طرف مرد بیرونی!هر بخش از شخصیتمان را که دوست نداشته باشیم به دشمن مان تبدیل می شود و به جایی در دور دست می رود و شورشی بر علیه ما آغاز می کند.ا
فرافکنی هم پدیده جالبیست. ماری لوییس فان فرانتز می گوید: «چرا همیشه فکر می کنیم فرافکنی بد است؟ فرافکنی در میان طرفداران یونگ نوعی اتهام محسوب می شود. اما گاهی این کار درست است و می تواند به ما کمک کند.» به خاطر دارم که سالها پیش از شدت عطشی که نسبت به پذیرش سایه خود داشتم، خودم را تا سر حد مرگ گرسنگی داده بودم. اما دانش، نمی توانست به طور مستقیم از کوله بار سایه به ذهنِ خودآگاهم منتقل بلکه ابتدا باید وارد دنیای واقعی می شد.ا
فان فرانتز به ما یاد می دهد که اگر فرافکنی نکنیم، ممکن است اصلا نتوانیم با دنیای اطراف مان ارتباط برقرار کنیم. زنان گاهی گلایه می کنند که مرد ها، اغلب تصویر ایده آل زنانگی شان را روی یک زن فرافکنی می کنند. اما اگر آنها چنین کاری نکنند، چگونه می توانند از خانۀ مادری یا اتاق مجردی شان خارج شوند؟ مسئله این نیست که ما فرافکنی می کنیم، بلکه نکته مهم این جاست که تا چه مدت فرافکنی ها را بیرون از خود رها می کنیم. فرافکنی بدون ایجاد ارتباط مستقیمِ شخصی خطرناک است. هزاران و حتی میلیون ها مرد آمریکایی بخش زنانۀ وجودشان را روی مرلین مونرو فرافکنی کردند. فرافکنی های یک میلیون مرد و بازپس نگرفتنِ آنها، برای مرگ مرلین مونرو کافی بود و او مرد. فرافکنی بدون ارتباط شخصی می تواند به فرد گیرندۀ آن آسیب برساند. فرآیندِ فرافکنی و بازپس گیری آن، در فرهنگ های محلی و ارتباطات مستقیم چهره به چهره، سیر حساس و دقیقی را طی می کند که با ورود ابزار ارتباط جمعی از سیر طبیعی خود خارج می شود. هیچ انسانی توانایی تحمل این مقدار فرافکنی را ندارد.ا
وقتی بخش های نامطلوب وجودمان را در کوله بار سایه قرار می دهیم، انرژی کمی برایمان باقی می ماند و هر چه کوله بارمان بزرگتر باشد، انرژی کمتری خواهیم داشت. بعضی از آدمها نسبت به دیگران طبیعتا پرانرژی تر هستند اما در هر حال همه ما بیش از مقدار استفاده مان انرژی در اختیار داریم. پس این همه انرژی کجا می رود؟!اگر تمایلات جنسی مان را به عنوان یک کودک در کوله بار مان بگذاریم، روشن است که همراه آن مقدار زیادی انرژی از دست می دهیم. وقتی زنی بخش مردانه وجودش را در کوله بارش قرار می دهد یا آن را فرافکنی می کند، همراه با آن مقداری انرژی از دست می دهد. بنابراین می توانیم به کوله بارهایمان به عنوان ذخیره هایی از انرژی نگاه کنیم که در حال حاضر در اختیار ما نیستند. هنگامی که شخص فرافکنی می کند، انرژی و توان متعلق به گنجینه درونی خود را به بیرون می فرستد.ا
درباره کوله بارِ شخصی صحبت کردیم. اما جالب است بدانید که هر شهر و هر جامعه ای هم کوله باری مخصوص به خود دارد. سالها در شهر کوچکی نزدیک به مینه سوتا زندگی می کردم. در این شهر بنظر می رسید که آدم ها چیز های مشابهی را در کوله بارشان حمل می کنند. احتمالا در شهر دیگری در یونان هم، مردم چیز های دیگری را در کوله بارشان حمل می کنند. مثل این بود که مردم بصورت دسته جمعی تصمیم گرفته بودند انرژی های خاصی را در کوله بارشان قرار دهند و به کسی اجازه نمی دادند این انرژی ها را آزاد کند. جامعه یونگی هم درست مثل مردم یک شهر، کوله بار خودش را دارد و معمولا یونگین ها را وادار میکند خلق و خوی عوامانه وعشق به پول شان را در کوله بار هایشان پنهان کنند. و همچنین جامعه فرویدی هم معمولا فرویدی ها را ملزم به پنهان کردن زندگی مذهبی شان در این کوله بار می نماید.من در اینجا از سه استعاره استفاده کرده ام؛ کوله بار [سرکوب]، قوطی فیلم [تسخیر] و فرافکنی. از آنجا که قوطی فیلم و کوله بار هر دو درهایی بسته دارند، تصویرهایشان هم در تاریکی باقی می ماند. تنها زمانی محتویات کوله بار خودمان را مشاهده می کنیم که آنها را، به اصطلاح، از روی سادگی و بی گناهی به جهان بیرون پرتاب کنیم. در این صورت است که عنکبوت ها موجوداتی شیطانی می شوند، مارها حیله گر و مکار می شوند، بزها را حیواناتی می بینیم که شهوت جنسی بیش از اندازه دارند، مردها بنظرمان سطحی و زن ها ضعیف می آیند. روس ها را مردمی غیر اصولی و هر دمبیل می خوانیم و تک تک مردم چین را عین هم می بینیم و یکجا به حساب می آوریم.ا
بیست تا بیست و پنج سالِ اولِ زندگیِ همه ما صرف این می شود که چیزهایی را به سایه مان بفرستیم و در چهل سال بعدی سعی می کنیم با آنچه سرکوب کرده ایم، دوباره ارتباط برقرار کنیم. در فرهنگ های مختلف آنچه سرکوب می شود متفاوت است. به طور کلی می توان گفت هر چه در محتوای سایۀ شما قرار دارد، همگی جزو غرایز شما هستند. هر آنچه دُم دارد و روی بدنش موهای فراوان روییده ، در محتوای سایه تان سرکوب شده است. در جوامع متعصب، تمایلات جنسی و ترس از مرگ به بخش سایه رانده و سرکوب می شوند و بهمراه آن شادی زیادی نیز از دست می رود.ا
برخی مکاتب دینی در طول تاریخ تلاش کرده اند، «شخصیت تاریک» و «شخصیت روشن» را در دو قطب مخالف هم قرار دهند. اخلاق گرایان این مکاتب، قدمی فراتر نهاده و شخصیت تاریک را سرکوب کرده اند. از آنجا که نتایج این سرکوب هر روز شدیدتر می شود، پس از گذشت قرن ها به وضعیتی رسیده ایم که در آن روان آدمی به دو بخش تقسیم شده و این دو بخش بقدری از هم دور شده اند که نمی توانند همدیگر را پیدا کنند.به زبان ما، در یک طرف این طیف، انسان رام و مطیع وجود دارد و در انتهای دیگر آن، انسان وحشی ای است که نماد آن جنایتکاران هستند. اما میان انسان وحشی و انسان جنایتکار تفاوت زیادی وجود دارد. ما در روان مان جایی برای مرد وحشی نگذاشته ایم که نه جزو دسته انسان های رام و مطیع است و نه جزو دسته جنایتکاران. مرد وحشی دارای خودانگیزشی و وجه زنانه است و امیال جنسی مثبت دارد. هیچ یک از اینها به خشونت یا سلطه بر دیگران نمی انجامد. تصویر این مرد وحشی، حالتی از روان است که اجازه می دهد محتوای سرکوب شدۀ سایه اش به آهستگی به وجودش بازگردد، به گونه ای که به «من» یا شحصیت او آسیب نرسد. اگر قدیمی ها درست گفته باشند که تاریکی، هوش و آگاهی به همراه دارد، فردی که سایه اش را جذب کرده است، آرامش را در اطرافش می گستراند و از انرژی بیشتری برخوردار است و علاوه بر آن باهوش تر هم هست.ا
اگر مطابق دیدگاه یونگ درباره سایۀ ایده آلیست ها فکر می کنیم، برایمان روشن خواهد شد که ایده آلیست ها مردان یا زنانی هستند که می خواهند با سایه های سرکوب شده خود این جهان را ترک کنند. ایده آلیست ها از خودِ سایه نفرت دارند. آنها با علاقه مفرط به «حقیقت»، سایه هاشان را تبعید می کنند و در تبعید نگه می دارند. هنگامی که کسی در مقابل آنها می ایستد، در واقع گویا در مقابل یک بهشتِ کامل ایستاده است؛ در مقابل ذهن آماری، در مقابل تعالی گراییِ سهل الوصول و بی توجهی به کمبودها، فجایع و مصیبت ها. پافشاری ایده آلیست ها بر اینکه تنها یک حقیقت وجود دارد، برای این است که می خواهند سایه را برای همیشه از پدیدار شدن باز دارند.یونگ می گفت اگر سایه به شکل موفقیت آمیزی سرکوب شود، فرد بسختی می تواند دربارۀ درونیات و احساساتش با دیگران سخن بگوید. برخی افراد برای نجات از ناهماهنگی درونی به توجیه اخلاقی روی می آورند. در این حالت فردی که در حال عذاب کشیدن است به اصول اخلاقی پناه می برد تا آن بهم ریختگی و تناقض ها را تسکین بدهد. این ایدۀ وحشتناکی است زیرا ما به هر صورت به اخلاقیات نیازمندیم، اما در اینجا اصول اخلاقی تبدیل به وصیله ای می شود که ناآگاهی ما را تداوم می بخشد. افرادی که این گونه به اصول اخلاقی پای بند می شوند می توانند خطرناک باشند، چون در لحظه ای که امکان افتادن نقاب شان وجود داشته باشد، آنها فراتر می روند تا نقاب را به جای اولش بازگردانند. به عنوان مثال در بدرفتاری با کودکان قانون این است: هر عملی که حاکی از خشونت باشد و به صورت آگاهانه یا ناآگاهانه از طرف والدین سر بزند، به عنوان عشق و علاقه به فرزند به حساب می آید. بنابراین همین اصول اخلاقی، بدرفتاری و خشونت های انسانی را به صورت عشق و علاقه تعریف می کند.ا
رابرت بلای / اسرار سایه
اجازه بدهید ابتدا دربارۀ «سایۀ شخصی» برایتان صحبت کنم. وقتی یک یا دو ساله بودیم، شخصیتی داشتیم که می توان آن را کامل و 360 درجه تصور کرد. انرژی از تمام قسمت های بدن ما و تمام بخش های روان ما به بیرون می تراوید. کودک در حال دویدن مثل توپی از انرژی است! اما روزی متوجه شدیم که پدر و مادرمان بخش هایی از این توپ را دوست ندارند. به دنبال همۀ ما کوله باری است نادیدنی، در برگیرندۀ بخش هایی از ما که پدر و مادران مان دوست ندارند. ما برای اینکه عشق و علاقۀ پدر و مادرانمان را به دست بیاوریم بخش هایی از وجودمان را که آنها دوست نداشتند، در این کوله بار قرار دادیم. در مدرسه معلم هایمان به ما می گفتند: «بچه های خوب به خاطر چیز های بی اهمیت عصبانی نمی شوند.» به همین دلیل خشم و عصبانیت مان را نیز در این کوله بار گذاشتیم. تا قبل از دبیرستان، کوله بارمان چیزی به طول یک متر بود!ا
بعد از آن دیگر بزرگ تر ها به ما فشار نمی آوردند که چه چیز هایی خوب و چه چیز هایی بد است، بلکه افراد هم سن و سال مان بودند که به خاطر کسب تایید آنان چیز هایی را در کوله بارمان مخفی می کردیم. هر بخش از وجودمان که کمی کُند بود به درون این کوله بار می رفت...ا
حالا همین اتفاق برای فرزندانم در حال رخ دادن است. به دخترهایم نگاه می کنم و با ناراحتی می بینم که آنها چه چیز هایی را در کوله بارشان می گذارند؛ اما از دست من و مادرشان کاری ساخته نیست. خیلی وقت ها دخترهایم تصمیم های شان را بر اساس ایدۀ جمعی دربارۀ «زیبایی» و یا آنچه مد روز است می گیرند. آنها، به همان اندازه از دخترها آسیب دیده اند، که از پسر ها. آنچه اتفاق می افتد این است که از آن توپ انرژیِ دوران کودکی فقط یک قاچ نازک از انرژی برای یک مرد می ماند، در حالی که بقیه اش را در کوله بارش سرکوب کرده است. فرض کنید او در سن بیست و چهار سالگی با خانمی هم سن خودش ملاقات می کند که او نیز فقط یک قاچ نازک از انرژی برایش باقی مانده است. آنـها تصمیم می گیرند این دو قاچ نازک را در مراسمی به نام ازدواج شریک شوند. اما این دو قاچ برای یک نفر هم کافی نیست! ازدواج با این کوله بارهای دراز در ماه عسل، فقط تنهــایی را به ارمغان می آورد. البته همه ما دربارۀ این هم دروغ می گوییم!ا
در فرهنگ ایده آل گرای ما بخش زیبا و دوست داشتنی شخصیت، هر روز زیبا و زیباتر می شود. انسان ممکن است یک پزشک آزاد اندیش باشد که همیشه در خدمت دیگران است. از نظر اخلاقی او یک فرد «خوب» است، اما آنچه در کوله بار سایه اش حمل می کند، شخصیتی کاملا متفاوت است که نمی تواند نادیده گرفته شود. آنچه در کوله بار این فرد وجود دارد، روزی در جایی دیگر پدیدار می شود و خودش را نشان می دهد و هنگامی که شکل هیولا مانند آن را ببینید، شگفت زده خواهید شد.وقتی بخشی از خودمان را در کوله بار سایه قرار می دهیم، آن بخش پس رفت می کند و تکاملی معکوس به سوی دوران بربریت خواهد داشت. تجسم کنید مردی در سن بیست سالگی کوله بارش را مهر و موم کند و پانزده یا بیست سال بعد دوباره آن را باز کند. چه جیزی در کوله بارش خواهد یافت؟ با کمال تاسف باید بگویم تمایلات جنسی، وحشی گری، امیال آنی و حساب نشده و خشمی که تمام مدت آن را سرکوب کرده است. این ویژگی ها همگی بدوی هستند و به او آسیب می رسانند. این مرد وقتی سرش را بلند می کند، سایۀ هیولایی را می بیند که روی دیوار افتاده است! هر کسی با چنین منظره ای روبرو شود خواهد ترسید.ا
فکر می کنم که در بسیاری از فرهنگ ها بیشتر آقایان بخش زنانۀ وجودشان را سرکوب و در کوله بار سایه می گذارند. آنها در سنین سی و پنج تا چهل سالگی دوباره سعی می کنند با بخش زنانۀ وجودشان ارتباط برقرار کنند؛ در حالی که ممکن است این بخش در این سن و سال احساس خصمانه ای نسبت به آن ها داشته باشد. به همین دلیل این مردان در دنیای بیرون نیز روابط نا خوشایندی با زنان دارند. قانون این است که دنیای بیرون ما درست مثل دنیای درون مان خواهد شد. در این کرۀ خاکی قانون اینگونه است. زنی که دوست دارد زنانگی اش تایید شود، اگر جنبه های مردانه اش را در این کوله بار بگذارد، ممکن است بیست سال بعد نتواند رابطه ای دوستانه با بخش مردانۀ وجودش ایجاد کند. او حتی ممکن است احساس کند این بخش به شکل وحشیا��ه ای از او انتقاد می کند. این خانم با پیدا کردن مردی که رابطه ای آزار دهنده با او دارد، می تواند او را مقصر بداند و از فشار درونی اش بکاهد، اما این چیزها مشکل کوله بار او را حل نمی کند. آنگاه او ممکن است در دو جهت پس زده شود، هم از طرف مرد درونی اش و هم از طرف مرد بیرونی!هر بخش از شخصیتمان را که دوست نداشته باشیم به دشمن مان تبدیل می شود و به جایی در دور دست می رود و شورشی بر علیه ما آغاز می کند.ا
فرافکنی هم پدیده جالبیست. ماری لوییس فان فرانتز می گوید: «چرا همیشه فکر می کنیم فرافکنی بد است؟ فرافکنی در میان طرفداران یونگ نوعی اتهام محسوب می شود. اما گاهی این کار درست است و می تواند به ما کمک کند.» به خاطر دارم که سالها پیش از شدت عطشی که نسبت به پذیرش سایه خود داشتم، خودم را تا سر حد مرگ گرسنگی داده بودم. اما دانش، نمی توانست به طور مستقیم از کوله بار سایه به ذهنِ خودآگاهم منتقل بلکه ابتدا باید وارد دنیای واقعی می شد.ا
فان فرانتز به ما یاد می دهد که اگر فرافکنی نکنیم، ممکن است اصلا نتوانیم با دنیای اطراف مان ارتباط برقرار کنیم. زنان گاهی گلایه می کنند که مرد ها، اغلب تصویر ایده آل زنانگی شان را روی یک زن فرافکنی می کنند. اما اگر آنها چنین کاری نکنند، چگونه می توانند از خانۀ مادری یا اتاق مجردی شان خارج شوند؟ مسئله این نیست که ما فرافکنی می کنیم، بلکه نکته مهم این جاست که تا چه مدت فرافکنی ها را بیرون از خود رها می کنیم. فرافکنی بدون ایجاد ارتباط مستقیمِ شخصی خطرناک است. هزاران و حتی میلیون ها مرد آمریکایی بخش زنانۀ وجودشان را روی مرلین مونرو فرافکنی کردند. فرافکنی های یک میلیون مرد و بازپس نگرفتنِ آنها، برای مرگ مرلین مونرو کافی بود و او مرد. فرافکنی بدون ارتباط شخصی می تواند به فرد گیرندۀ آن آسیب برساند. فرآیندِ فرافکنی و بازپس گیری آن، در فرهنگ های محلی و ارتباطات مستقیم چهره به چهره، سیر حساس و دقیقی را طی می کند که با ورود ابزار ارتباط جمعی از سیر طبیعی خود خارج می شود. هیچ انسانی توانایی تحمل این مقدار فرافکنی را ندارد.ا
وقتی بخش های نامطلوب وجودمان را در کوله بار سایه قرار می دهیم، انرژی کمی برایمان باقی می ماند و هر چه کوله بارمان بزرگتر باشد، انرژی کمتری خواهیم داشت. بعضی از آدمها نسبت به دیگران طبیعتا پرانرژی تر هستند اما در هر حال همه ما بیش از مقدار استفاده مان انرژی در اختیار داریم. پس این همه انرژی کجا می رود؟!اگر تمایلات جنسی مان را به عنوان یک کودک در کوله بار مان بگذاریم، روشن است که همراه آن مقدار زیادی انرژی از دست می دهیم. وقتی زنی بخش مردانه وجودش را در کوله بارش قرار می دهد یا آن را فرافکنی می کند، همراه با آن مقداری انرژی از دست می دهد. بنابراین می توانیم به کوله بارهایمان به عنوان ذخیره هایی از انرژی نگاه کنیم که در حال حاضر در اختیار ما نیستند. هنگامی که شخص فرافکنی می کند، انرژی و توان متعلق به گنجینه درونی خود را به بیرون می فرستد.ا
درباره کوله بارِ شخصی صحبت کردیم. اما جالب است بدانید که هر شهر و هر جامعه ای هم کوله باری مخصوص به خود دارد. سالها در شهر کوچکی نزدیک به مینه سوتا زندگی می کردم. در این شهر بنظر می رسید که آدم ها چیز های مشابهی را در کوله بارشان حمل می کنند. احتمالا در شهر دیگری در یونان هم، مردم چیز های دیگری را در کوله بارشان حمل می کنند. مثل این بود که مردم بصورت دسته جمعی تصمیم گرفته بودند انرژی های خاصی را در کوله بارشان قرار دهند و به کسی اجازه نمی دادند این انرژی ها را آزاد کند. جامعه یونگی هم درست مثل مردم یک شهر، کوله بار خودش را دارد و معمولا یونگین ها را وادار میکند خلق و خوی عوامانه وعشق به پول شان را در کوله بار هایشان پنهان کنند. و همچنین جامعه فرویدی هم معمولا فرویدی ها را ملزم به پنهان کردن زندگی مذهبی شان در این کوله بار می نماید.من در اینجا از سه استعاره استفاده کرده ام؛ کوله بار [سرکوب]، قوطی فیلم [تسخیر] و فرافکنی. از آنجا که قوطی فیلم و کوله بار هر دو درهایی بسته دارند، تصویرهایشان هم در تاریکی باقی می ماند. تنها زمانی محتویات کوله بار خودمان را مشاهده می کنیم که آنها را، به اصطلاح، از روی سادگی و بی گناهی به جهان بیرون پرتاب کنیم. در این صورت است که عنکبوت ها موجوداتی شیطانی می شوند، مارها حیله گر و مکار می شوند، بزها را حیواناتی می بینیم که شهوت جنسی بیش از اندازه دارند، مردها بنظرمان سطحی و زن ها ضعیف می آیند. روس ها را مردمی غیر اصولی و هر دمبیل می خوانیم و تک تک مردم چین را عین هم می بینیم و یکجا به حساب می آوریم.ا
بیست تا بیست و پنج سالِ اولِ زندگیِ همه ما صرف این می شود که چیزهایی را به سایه مان بفرستیم و در چهل سال بعدی سعی می کنیم با آنچه سرکوب کرده ایم، دوباره ارتباط برقرار کنیم. در فرهنگ های مختلف آنچه سرکوب می شود متفاوت است. به طور کلی می توان گفت هر چه در محتوای سایۀ شما قرار دارد، همگی جزو غرایز شما هستند. هر آنچه دُم دارد و روی بدنش موهای فراوان روییده ، در محتوای سایه تان سرکوب شده است. در جوامع متعصب، تمایلات جنسی و ترس از مرگ به بخش سایه رانده و سرکوب می شوند و بهمراه آن شادی زیادی نیز از دست می رود.ا
برخی مکاتب دینی در طول تاریخ تلاش کرده اند، «شخصیت تاریک» و «شخصیت روشن» را در دو قطب مخالف هم قرار دهند. اخلاق گرایان این مکاتب، قدمی فراتر نهاده و شخصیت تاریک را سرکوب کرده اند. از آنجا که نتایج این سرکوب هر روز شدیدتر می شود، پس از گذشت قرن ها به وضعیتی رسیده ایم که در آن روان آدمی به دو بخش تقسیم شده و این دو بخش بقدری از هم دور شده اند که نمی توانند همدیگر را پیدا کنند.به زبان ما، در یک طرف این طیف، انسان رام و مطیع وجود دارد و در انتهای دیگر آن، انسان وحشی ای است که نماد آن جنایتکاران هستند. اما میان انسان وحشی و انسان جنایتکار تفاوت زیادی وجود دارد. ما در روان مان جایی برای مرد وحشی نگذاشته ایم که نه جزو دسته انسان های رام و مطیع است و نه جزو دسته جنایتکاران. مرد وحشی دارای خودانگیزشی و وجه زنانه است و امیال جنسی مثبت دارد. هیچ یک از اینها به خشونت یا سلطه بر دیگران نمی انجامد. تصویر این مرد وحشی، حالتی از روان است که اجازه می دهد محتوای سرکوب شدۀ سایه اش به آهستگی به وجودش بازگردد، به گونه ای که به «من» یا شحصیت او آسیب نرسد. اگر قدیمی ها درست گفته باشند که تاریکی، هوش و آگاهی به همراه دارد، فردی که سایه اش را جذب کرده است، آرامش را در اطرافش می گستراند و از انرژی بیشتری برخوردار است و علاوه بر آن باهوش تر هم هست.ا
اگر مطابق دیدگاه یونگ درباره سایۀ ایده آلیست ها فکر می کنیم، برایمان روشن خواهد شد که ایده آلیست ها مردان یا زنانی هستند که می خواهند با سایه های سرکوب شده خود این جهان را ترک کنند. ایده آلیست ها از خودِ سایه نفرت دارند. آنها با علاقه مفرط به «حقیقت»، سایه هاشان را تبعید می کنند و در تبعید نگه می دارند. هنگامی که کسی در مقابل آنها می ایستد، در واقع گویا در مقابل یک بهشتِ کامل ایستاده است؛ در مقابل ذهن آماری، در مقابل تعالی گراییِ سهل الوصول و بی توجهی به کمبودها، فجایع و مصیبت ها. پافشاری ایده آلیست ها بر اینکه تنها یک حقیقت وجود دارد، برای این است که می خواهند سایه را برای همیشه از پدیدار شدن باز دارند.یونگ می گفت اگر سایه به شکل موفقیت آمیزی سرکوب شود، فرد بسختی می تواند دربارۀ درونیات و احساساتش با دیگران سخن بگوید. برخی افراد برای نجات از ناهماهنگی درونی به توجیه اخلاقی روی می آورند. در این حالت فردی که در حال عذاب کشیدن است به اصول اخلاقی پناه می برد تا آن بهم ریختگی و تناقض ها را تسکین بدهد. این ایدۀ وحشتناکی است زیرا ما به هر صورت به اخلاقیات نیازمندیم، اما در اینجا اصول اخلاقی تبدیل به وصیله ای می شود که ناآگاهی ما را تداوم می بخشد. افرادی که این گونه به اصول اخلاقی پای بند می شوند می توانند خطرناک باشند، چون در لحظه ای که امکان افتادن نقاب شان وجود داشته باشد، آنها فراتر می روند تا نقاب را به جای اولش بازگردانند. به عنوان مثال در بدرفتاری با کودکان قانون این است: هر عملی که حاکی از خشونت باشد و به صورت آگاهانه یا ناآگاهانه از طرف والدین سر بزند، به عنوان عشق و علاقه به فرزند به حساب می آید. بنابراین همین اصول اخلاقی، بدرفتاری و خشونت های انسانی را به صورت عشق و علاقه تعریف می کند.ا
رابرت بلای / اسرار سایه
September 6, 2019
Was the least impressive/impactful of all the books on shadow that I've read. Filled with poems and abstraction which even for a book on shadow is overwhelming. Multiple references to other poets and other works by the author themselves only decrease interest as the book goes on. The new ways of looking at the shadow are novel but questionable as they are described as a hodgepodge of multiples schools of thought. The biggest takeaway from the book is the interview section.
June 17, 2024
We all drag a long bag behind us. Know what's in it & keep it light.
January 13, 2024
It is indeed a little book, however, there’s a full meal between the covers. An excellent introduction to the shadow marred only by Bly’s writing voice which, for me, is too deliberately, unnaturally ‘poetic’.
February 8, 2025
Damn they really just used to let men say anything huh
January 10, 2015
Highly variable in its readability. I found some of the text too convoluted to read. The sections on anger and the shadow in the poetry of Wallace Stevens, Rilke, and Yeats were compelling. A central idea that shadow material must be LIVED, not just brought to light, was quite interesting and worth musing on further. Since the political context of Bly's writing is mostly unknown to me, I think I may have missed some of his points. There were some questionable theories in the section on projection. Bly's notion of the witch/giant dichotomy ring false. I can't buy applying a single archetypal image to women and another to men, with no other possibilities for framing the experiences of each gender. Bly also creates a strict division between what is male and what is female which leaves no room for a gender continuum. There were some interesting ideas here nonetheless, but I was hoping for more.
April 29, 2018
This little book was a real joy to read and absorb. There is a lot to take in here and to use, because in these pages it is said several times that when you look into the shadow self, the long bag of shadow you drag behind you, you must change due to the encounter of it. This is very true. We broadcast out our insecurities and our hate and anger to others based on our shortcomings. Shortcomings, fear and many other things are our shadow. The shadow of the human is not evil, though it can be. What it truly is may be many things and where you are in life as to when and how you encounter the shadow. Bly runs through theologians, psychologists, scientists and many writers and poets to provide a cross-section of the shadow and why we need it. For many of us it is something we can seldom dip into or confront. For others it is never confronted and that is sad. Repressed emotions, probably with sex and intimacy, anxiety at speaking to others, these are things this man was commenting on and writing about four or five decades ago. They are still relevant and important now, maybe even more important with the trend for people to bottle up and avoid everything. The shadow we carry is the person we should use and learn from. It is what we want and should say, where we should go and who we can ultimately be.
This was a wonderful book and I have started another on written by Bly, but this one is poems.
Check this out. Great stuff!
Danny
This was a wonderful book and I have started another on written by Bly, but this one is poems.
Check this out. Great stuff!
Danny
May 20, 2025
This is a fascinating little book about mythology, symbolism, and the darker aspects of our psychology. Essentially, this book speaks on the integration of our shadow selves into our daily lives. Only when we make peace and reconcile with the parts of ourselves we shame, reject, or despise can our lives really be more peaceful and meaningful.
There are some really beautiful passages here and lots of great poetry to point to this mystical process. While the book is brief and helpful, it is only a soft introduction to shadow work--which remains a mystery to most. I would recommend this to anyone who is seeking to unify the many different dimensions and aspects of "self."
There are some really beautiful passages here and lots of great poetry to point to this mystical process. While the book is brief and helpful, it is only a soft introduction to shadow work--which remains a mystery to most. I would recommend this to anyone who is seeking to unify the many different dimensions and aspects of "self."
May 22, 2020
The concept of our dark sides emerging as we age and being projected onto other people is an interesting one... but I think trying to explain “the shadow” through psychology is an inherently flawed approach. How can the mind explain something intangible? The poetry used throughout was the best way to understand what the author was trying to say but that’s because good poetry doesn’t come from the mind. Anyways don’t give me your witch, motherfucker.
October 23, 2023
This book ishas an interesting take on the jungian shadow, and what makes it interesting is the poetic approach the author takes, being a poet himself. That said, I think this book can be enjoyed fully by a reader who is really into poetry, and who also has read some of the work of the authors that are analyzed by Bly in this book: Joseph Conrad, Wallace Stevens (Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde), etc.
Want to read
May 1, 2024My therapist lent and assigned me this read; my curiosity is peaked. The one passage I randomly flipped to was about the moon and made me think of Tom Thomson, the Group of Seven, Atwood's Death by Landscape, and her Lucy, which I recently studied in English. So I think this will fit the theme my life is on at the moment. Although I guess we'll see once I actually start reading it...
May 24, 2017
Bly discusses shadow work in true Jungian spirit. Reads like a chat over a glass of wine remembered for a long time.
December 28, 2024
Incredible stuff. Going to have some convos with my shadow…
December 29, 2024
Thought provoking
October 24, 2022
What a curious book. I was glad to find a book on Jung's shadow at a thrift store. This is apparently a poet of some note. Bly is an engaging author, for sure. He speaks on the Shadow with authority, and at times I really feel like I understand where he's coming from, and maybe where he's going. And then, I frequently found myself wondering, "does he even understand?" And truly, I don't know. The Shadow is immense in form, and slippery to define. I appreciated this book mostly because it was an exploration. I struggled when the author was definitive. That's either because he was wrong, or I was wrong. Likely it's both. It's obvious I have a ways to go. This was a worthwhile read, though.
June 11, 2015
This is remarkably small for the amount of good knowledge in it. Not a difficult book to read, but certainly not easy to understand.
The book talks about the part of us we tend to deny ourselves and the world from experiencing it. It is not difficult to see how much of our being we repress from our lives, specially the instincts with “tails and lots of hair”, meaning the most “primitive“ side of ourselves. In our civilized, religiously raised world, the meaning of the world primitive is usually negative, meaning uncivilized or out of order. But those same instincts are the ones responsible for our achievements as human beings and are the most well developed and powerful side of our nature, because they had more time to develop themselves.
It made me remember that we live under one of two paradigms, “repression or expression”, and as it happens with all Yin-yang those two things are directly related to each other. You cannot repress without expressing and vice-versa. When you repress your “darkness”, or shadow if you prefer, you are just expressing your vulnerability to it, giving it more power and making it effectively rule your life. Those instincts are the deepest roots in the human psyche, denying them is just planting the seed for an incomplete life, full of the “hidden” effects of the same instinct you denied.
Suddenly, prudish, puritanical, saintly and religious girls became so much more interesting to me.
Angry, miserable man, ask your darkness what it wants from you...
This book taught me:
Feelings are feelings, do not judge them. Be conscious of them, know them and ask them what they want. See the path they are making inside of you and outside of you. But DO NOT JUDGE THEM, they are as part of you as your hands or eyes.
There are no “bad feelings”; bad effects of feelings are caused by overpowering some of them by repression. All repression causes a force in the direction of expression that has at least as much energy in it as the repression itself. This explains a lot of sex scandals, corrupt politicians and world saviors hiding their faces with their suits.
It also gives an amazing in-depth explanation to the quote: “Humans always create what they fear the most”.
Best quotes in the book: If we think of the idealists in terms of Jung’s speculations about the shadow, it’s clear the idealist is a man or woman who does not want to go down. They plan to go to the grave with the shadow still repressed. The idealists are shadow-haters. They all end as does Dr. Jekyll, with a monkey-like Mr. Hyde scurrying among back buildings elsewhere in the city.
_________
It has been said that the greatest harm the Christian church has done is to make people mistrust instincts, but who taught us to mistrust our anger?
____________
Hey nice guys, read this: I like the idea that the work a person does on his or her shadow results in a condensation, a thickening or a densening, of the psyche which is immediately apparent, and which results in a feeling of natural authority without the authority being demanded.
The book talks about the part of us we tend to deny ourselves and the world from experiencing it. It is not difficult to see how much of our being we repress from our lives, specially the instincts with “tails and lots of hair”, meaning the most “primitive“ side of ourselves. In our civilized, religiously raised world, the meaning of the world primitive is usually negative, meaning uncivilized or out of order. But those same instincts are the ones responsible for our achievements as human beings and are the most well developed and powerful side of our nature, because they had more time to develop themselves.
It made me remember that we live under one of two paradigms, “repression or expression”, and as it happens with all Yin-yang those two things are directly related to each other. You cannot repress without expressing and vice-versa. When you repress your “darkness”, or shadow if you prefer, you are just expressing your vulnerability to it, giving it more power and making it effectively rule your life. Those instincts are the deepest roots in the human psyche, denying them is just planting the seed for an incomplete life, full of the “hidden” effects of the same instinct you denied.
Suddenly, prudish, puritanical, saintly and religious girls became so much more interesting to me.
Angry, miserable man, ask your darkness what it wants from you...
This book taught me:
Feelings are feelings, do not judge them. Be conscious of them, know them and ask them what they want. See the path they are making inside of you and outside of you. But DO NOT JUDGE THEM, they are as part of you as your hands or eyes.
There are no “bad feelings”; bad effects of feelings are caused by overpowering some of them by repression. All repression causes a force in the direction of expression that has at least as much energy in it as the repression itself. This explains a lot of sex scandals, corrupt politicians and world saviors hiding their faces with their suits.
It also gives an amazing in-depth explanation to the quote: “Humans always create what they fear the most”.
Best quotes in the book: If we think of the idealists in terms of Jung’s speculations about the shadow, it’s clear the idealist is a man or woman who does not want to go down. They plan to go to the grave with the shadow still repressed. The idealists are shadow-haters. They all end as does Dr. Jekyll, with a monkey-like Mr. Hyde scurrying among back buildings elsewhere in the city.
_________
It has been said that the greatest harm the Christian church has done is to make people mistrust instincts, but who taught us to mistrust our anger?
____________
Hey nice guys, read this: I like the idea that the work a person does on his or her shadow results in a condensation, a thickening or a densening, of the psyche which is immediately apparent, and which results in a feeling of natural authority without the authority being demanded.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 148 reviews