symbols in myth and physiognomy: the hind or deer

Joan of Arc is often given the long thin face and "doe eyes" that captures the deer as symbol. I think the bust below better captures it but it's not the best picture.

symbol in myth and physiognomy: the bull

While I do the research into the symbol I thought I'd share an example of looking like a bull (the volar stage father imago).

Heracles' Labors: A Study in Regression or repression of the passive-altruistic?

1.    Slay the Nemean Lion.

2.    Slay the nine-headed Lernaen Hydra .

3.    Capture the Golden Hind of Artemis.

4.    Capture the Erymanthian Boar.

5.    Clean the Augean stables in a single day.

6.    Slay the Stymphalian Birds.

7.    Capture the Cretan Bull.

8.    Steal the Mares of Diomedes.

9.    Obtain the girdle of Hippolyta, Queen of the Amazons.

10. Obtain the cattle of the monster Geryon.

11. Steal the apples of the Hesperides (He had the help of Atlas to pick them after Hercules had slain Ladon).

12. Capture and bring back Cerberus.

I've already made a connection between the sphinx of Oedipus and the Chimera of Bellerophon to show the symbol of the lion as the Oedipal father imago symbol.

I've also tried to connect the polyphallic to the proto-phallic high ego ideal that hasn't been split to enter the phallic deutero. I've also drawn attention to the combined parent centaur and death by fire in Heracles as important symbols. I can't remember if I mentioned the snakes that came from the head of Medusa as Perseus was flying back from his marriage to Andromeda and what is probably the combined parent image of Phineus trying to marry Andromeda despite her hand being given to Perseus. 

So far, then, Heracles begins with the Oedipal lion and then returns to the polyphallic hydra. Turning to the hind or deer it has clear urethral tones as shown in the work of Thomas R. Hersh

The connection of deer with water is ubiquitous. It is assumed in Psalm 42:2 ("As the hart pants after the water brooks, so my soul pants after thee"), and the Midrash on Psalm 22 reports that the hind is

...the most God-fearing of all animals, for her love for her young is very great. And so when the other animals are thirsty, all of them come to the hind, knowing that her deeds are God-fearing and that when she lifts her eyes to heaven, the Holy One, blessed be He, will show mercy to them also. And what does the hind do? She digs a hole, puts her horns into it, and pants; and the deep causes waters to come up for her sake, for it is said As the hart panteth after the water brooks [Braude 1959:309].

There is a parallel in the Pueblos where deer are universally bringers of water and rain (Tyler 1975:75, and see Hultkrantz 1979:51 for the Mundurucu of South America).

There is also the nearly universal idea of a Keeper of the Animals to whom one makes offerings to get deer. For the Cochiti, there is the kachina who "grows deer like corn" (Tyler 1975:72). For the Evenks of Siberia, there was the "mistress of the clan lands" who sent game animals. She was a giant cow elk or doe, and Jacobson sees her as the Animal Mother of tribe and animals (Jacobson 1993: 192ft). In the Claus Chee Sonny version of the Navajo Huntingway myth, "All livestock lives because of the deer. That is what keeps the animals moist, breathing, walking about, and altogether alive" (Luckert 1975:54).

(In the Deer as Riches section) at:

http://www.psychological-observations.com/universals-world-self/the-universals/worldly-vs-otherworldly/religion-mythology/201-published-deer-as-symbol

    

       The deer or hind with its two antlers has a connection to Hecate with her two torches. The water ties it to urine. The "mistress of the clan" and mothering of all the other animals also captures the description of the passive-altruistic urethral character I gave in a previous post as the mother of all. This along with the next stage's symbol, make me think that the regression may in fact be through the passive altruistic side of the personality. The boar or pig enters has been matched to the anal oedipal father imago. In an earlier post I've tied the 'upturned nose' to the feminine in the anal stage and, like the lion, it appears to be a symbol of physiognomy (i.e. people resemble pigs as they resemble lions, facially). However, it is very likely that having a big nose in general is related to the anal nuclear complex and there are many adages about great men in history having great noses.

      The next stage of cleaning the stables is obviously connected to the anal deutero and feces. Therefore the birds would be the volar trito as I've mentioned in a previous post about multiple objects in the air. The Bull would then correspond to the volar nuclear complex imago and I must stop here to do some more research on it.

    

political thoughts

The political import of psychoanalysis has become very clear to me. Those of lower classes and those who face sexism and racism are much more likely to face narcissistic injuries in their drives to find success or be dismissed when they seek to share the ideas they love by father-substitutes in positions of power. Those from higher classes and who don't face the sexism or racism are more likely to get access to institutions and companies without being treated unfairly and have the backing to move on to another avenue if they do.

The rational chooser model simply makes it a choice for these people to decide to continue to strive for their success or to share what they love. It doesn't want to see that we are primarily related by the ego and object drives.

Those who are narcissistic may regress and be unable to work or love and those who are neurotic continue to interact based upon social identities (i.e. conformity) but without the passions of the drives (once the injuries are defended against).

This has always been recognized in religion. Jesus saying that we should be like children is to recognize the individual before the injuries and disappointments caused them to defend themselves. In Taoism 'the Way' is the path of eros or at least continuing on in the defused castration complex without succumbing to defense against the drives.

...but this leaves things in a very awkward position. The passion of youth is needed for people to want the change but youth lacks wisdom and experience and all the radical positions of either left or right are too simplistic and misunderstand one another.

Those who have lost their youth and gained experience, as 'My Dinner with Andre' does a good job of showing, either want their creature comforts and security and, those who are more egoistic, don't like to see upcoming generations come into prominence without having to endure the same knocks that they endured and require submission to the paradigms they have adopted. The wisdom they'e acquired is noticeable through the strong reactions they have to more subtle work, even if it is to dismiss it, from their laziness or from its failure to to reference their work and respect their legacy.

In either direction, youth or elder, the fight to come won't be easy.

However, the bourgeoisie, in pandering to the masses though giving them reality TV and superhero movies to stimulate their sense of heroism and hopes of mobility is preparing this fight. It's just a question of how long people will be content with this fantasy and what amounts to 'masturbation' in the ego drives, before they are ready to bite into something real.

This isn't a rising up of all the lower classes. It isn't a case of pamphleting or fighting in the streets. Technology has ensured that a smaller group can gain control of mass communication.

...who is done with masturbation, and won't back away from the crudeness of the formulation or see it as an invitation to satisfy their lust? This is a union of both compassion for others and a vision that rises above both the chaos and boring security of trading in the business world. It's a union of wanting the city to be more beautiful instead of being filled with potholes and abandoned buildings, and for their to be divergent projects in ways of living and not a single way.  

primal scenes in altruism pt 2

The secrets in the primal scene of subject altruism has still been occupying me.

As compared with the humiliation to be found in the SE and OA I thought that the description in Jane Eyre of Rochester and his secret, insane wife Bertha who lives in the attic captures the different tone here.

 Despite Rochester never being alone with Bertha, and supposedly having had scarcely any interaction or conversation with her, he married her for her wealth and beauty, and with fierce encouragement from his own father and the Mason family. Rochester and Bertha began their lives as husband and wife in Jamaica. In recounting the history of their relationship, Rochester claims, "I thought I loved her. . . . Her relatives encouraged me; competitors piqued me; she allured me: a marriage was achieved almost before I knew where I was. Oh, I have no respect for myself when I think of that act! . . . I never loved, I never esteemed, I did not even know her."

Instead of the mother's harsh denigration of the father (i.e. like the illiterate, uncultured Baines in the Piano) the set up here, with transcription of the child-mother situation to the father, is that Rochester never really loved Bertha. So just as Flora, the object egoist, finds Ada with the uncultured and oafish Baines, the subject altruist finds the mother secretly visiting the father that "she never really loved" and sinning against love.     

It's been so long since I've read the story that I hesitate to say more but, in parallel to the reaction of humiliation it seems likely that the subject egoist who discovers the secret may experience her injury as a feeling of not being able to tell what is true or not. The injury is not to her, but to the idealization of the phallic mother, and to see her sinning against love in this way would leave the SA with the sense that "this can't be" "some external factor must have caused this" "I don't believe my eyes".

However, maybe by the time of the primal scene there is chance for a trauma regarding either oneself or the object...

I know that the narcissist has the idealization and debasement pattern and that it could be read as the idealization of the phallic mother (transcribed to the father in the ego drives) and then the discovery that she is castrated and beneath the father. However, the humiliation of the primal scene and feeling of betrayal issues from the idealization of self....

Primal scenes in altruism

I've been reading Leon Wurmser's The Mask of Shame and have found much inspiration.

I believe I've mentioned the primal scene of the object altruist in regards to the practical jokester who seeks to humiliate others. Like Chef Gordon Ramsay humiliating other subject egoists who take pride in their work as chefs this repetition is a projective identification in which one acts out the role of the father imago and projects the humiliation one felt in the mother's primal scene betrayal into others. In contrast to Ramsay the object altruist doesn't humiliate others in regards to the serious dedication they have to their job but rather more casually. In the movie Adventureland the main character is often punched in the groin by a "friend" when popular girls are around. The humiliation here is still apparent but has to be offset by the object altruist not having their central motivation as being potent in some skill or field of knowledge.

Wurmser points out that the Comedian is asking us to laugh at him. Although not all comics do self-depreciating humor I'd say that best one I know do (Louis CK, Bill Hicks, etc.). Additionally, these comics often have social commentary and are also asking to be loved for their interesting ideas which I associated with Apollo and the schizoid version of the object altruist. Their insights often find no translation into psychology or formal study of personality but they are none the less brilliant.

This has also made me think about the subject altruist and how many patients I've seen have brought up "family secrets" and that Freud initially attached the scopophillic drive to the parent's intercourse. I haven't quite wrapped my head around this one yet but a seed is planted.

The movie Perfume

I recently saw the movie Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006) and was very impressed. I have a couple of thoughts to share about it.

The main triangle involves a father, his daughter, and the main character Jean-Baptiste and I think this along with The Big Lebowski and other, illustrate the importance of the failure to renounce sibling incest and surmount the father complex or phallic trito.

There is a really wonderful point in the film when instead of condemning the main character as psychotic in pursuit of finding himself a perfume made up of beautiful women to make up for his own lack of a smell, the plot changes to represent the perfume as, in fact, being magical.

Jean-Baptiste releases a handkerchief with the perfume and the crowds gathered for his execution call him an angel and then engage in an orgy that effaces the difference between the sexes and generations as young and old, man and woman, man and man, and woman and woman remove their clothing. There is a particular focus on the old bishop becoming involved. This follows Chasseguet Smirgel's insight into perversion.

The narrator states that Jean-Baptiste could have sent a perfumed letter to the pope or fascinated a king and secured himself world domination if he wished (the anal phallus) but instead he returns to the marketplace he was born. He dumps the perfume on himself and becomes cannibalized there in what I've identified as the volar trito stage which is the first stage of an ego ideal that is measured by a permanent social ontology.  

More to come....

pathetic fallacy

Pathetic fallacy has been around for some time in literary theory. The term mainly notes the  attribution of human emotion to nature. In the auto-erotic stage I have noted that phantasy, as the production of images from one's own subjectivity to bring up to the "mind's eye" stands in contrast to the mnemic traces that are refound in the external world.

Freud marked this operation as central for the production of art, but since the artist is in rivalry with the world by creating his own world in phantasy the pathetic fallacy almost appears as a reversal in which the artist forces nature to express his or her feeling.

I call this a reversal because lately I've dealt with a few patients with "affective seasonal disorder," and in one patient in particular, I was surprised at the description of her "winter hibernation" and how closely it expressed a relation to the world/earth. It has me thinking about the altruistic superego and the imperative that one can't enjoy self-assertion and sexuality, and into very early stages, neither can one tolerate energy and life without the sense that it is unseemly and disloyal. The work of Michael Eigen has again been an inspiration here, as has been Leon Wurmser's.

The myth of Persephone, in which she must spend winter in the underworld, may be indicating this very simple point but, without science to offer an answer about basic questions, cause and effect are reversed.        

My First Book

I've recently had some good news.

My book The Economics of the Libido: Psychic Bisexuality, the Superego, and the Centrality of the Oedipus Complex has been accepted for publication by Karnac.

I'm also very close to finishing the The Symptom Reading, which will show the application of the theory to film and also provide a way of generating further data.

Here'a a brief synopsis:

This book is a return to Freud qua psychologist and philosopher in order to affirm the centrality of the Oedipus Complex, understand the contributions of personality to gender, and illustrate the characterological functioning of the pre-phallic-oedipal superego. This book is also an attempt to begin the work of synthesizing the different schools of psychoanalysis into a unified theory. Thus, I show the neo-Freudian, the Kleinian, the Reichian characterologist, etc. in Freud and criticize the interpretations of ego psychologists and, by implication, the Lacanians, self-psychologists, and relational schools that place too much emphasis on linguistically mediated values, and thereby affirm an ideologically based atomistic individual. The central argument I make in the text, under the heading of social ontology, is that Freud gives a model of the personality that is built upon the primary relatedness of the individual through the ego and object drives. An individual doesn’t rationally choose to be ambitious, shy, arrogant, or kind based upon values but, rather, these are part of his ‘psychical constitution’ of ego and object drives and their relation to the superego. The importance of this can be understood by implication that, all things being equal, much of political behavior can be understood as issuing from the emphasis of active- egoistic (Republican) or passive-altruistic (Democrat) drives in the individual.    

   In the first chapter I examine the passive and active in psychoanalysis in Freud’s concept of psychic bisexuality. Here I examine Freud’s psychological remarks to translate his generic terms into common language and, in doing so, I seek to corroborate his views with the work of other major analysts. Ultimately, I argue that activity and passivity basically stand for egoism and altruism and that they are different than masculine and feminine which have their own form in each pole. Along the egoistic pole I point out that someone can be narcissistic or possess an attitude of superiority (arrogance, vanity) about their physical or intellectual potency (subject egoism) as well as about their beauty, aesthetic refinements, or judging the lack of virtues in others (object egoism). Additionally, I point out that someone can masochistically put the desires of others before her own (subject altruism) or masochistically desire the approval of others or have the need to be liked or be seen as interesting by others (object altruism). The former is tied to 'people-pleasing', being 'self-effacing' etc. and the latter is tied to being a 'people person', endearing, and wanting to be the center of attention but not for admiration of one's skills or potency but to share enthusiasm, or to be interesting.

   In the second chapter I use David Milrod, as a recent exponent of ego psychology, to criticize the popular understanding of the Oedipus complex and superego and show several major misinterpretations of Freud’s work.  I show that Freud identified the subsequent ‘father complex’ as the point at which the guilt conscience arises and not the Oedipus complex. Moreover, this guilt conscience isn’t based upon linguistically mediated values for Freud but draws its strength against aggressive actions due to prohibition from a parental imago (or internalization of the parent). Ultimately, I argue that the centrality of the Oedipus complex is that it is a modification of the ego and object drives so that the individual recognizes ‘father-substitutes’ who are granted a transference of having more skill or knowledge than one. Thus, a highschool diploma, BA, MA, doctorate, etc. broadly represent “maturation” and interactions with father substitutes, as can someone who makes more money or has membership to different prestigious clubs. In the process of seeking recognition one may receive a narcissistic injury from a father substitute and this is what makes the Oedipus complex the central complex.  Any culture that recognizes the difference between neophytes and elders with more knowledge or skill (or magic) demonstrates the existence of the Oedipus complex. However, the castration complex, in which one gets into a rivalry with father substitutes in seeking to become one’s own father, doesn’t exist in every culture. Lastly, I show, contra ego psychologists, that the superego has both pre-phallic oedipal forms and continues developing into latency. The later developments have important implications for political behavior and I show the implications that this more nuanced view has for both clinicians as well as connections that can be made with sociology, gender studies, and the understanding of ideology.

   In the third chapter I examine how the pre-oedipal superego shows up in character by linking Freud’s work to the transcendental idealism of the philosopher Kant. Contra ego psychologists, Lacanians, self-psychologists, and relational psychoanalysts who place their weight on the need for a sophisticated cognition to navigate a sophisticated world and thus relegate the pre-oedipal to the phantasy in pathology, I show that classical psychoanalysis is justified in many of its insights. By placing primacy on social, instead of individual, ontology, Freud anchors seemingly complex concepts not in individual understanding but in the relationship to parental imagos. I argue that Freud and other classical analysts provide the foundation for four different ontologies that correspond to the auto-erotic, the narcissistic, the anal, and the phallic stage. They in turn correspond with the subjective encounter with Space, Time, the Superlative, and Prestige and are rooted in Freud’s conception of negativity underpinning the transference and sense of perfection of the parents. I use epic films such as Star Wars and Lord of the Rings to illustrate how egoistic drives, for example, can interact with father substitutes who are seen as more skilled or knowledgeable (phallic-Darth Vader), the most powerful or closest to omniscient  (anal- The Emperor), as using magic or psychic powers that are based upon the power of wishes overpowering time (i.e. investigating the efficacy of these wishes) (narcissistic-‘the force’),  and as the creation of a new fantasy world that rivals our world (auto-erotic- the location of new worlds in a ‘far off galaxy’) 

   The last section is an appendix that provides Wittgenstein’s private language argument. I’ve included it because it gives justification for the phenomenological/ common language approach I used in order to establish psychic bisexuality and it allows me to preempt a lot of criticism my approach will receive. Wittgenstein’s private language argument on one hand, shows that standard arguments of humanity’s rational nature from things like mathematics don’t actually work. On the other hand, it shows that sensation, emotional, and motivational language can’t arise from introspection and must arise from EQ or judgment of the behavior and actions of others that can be shared among experts.  I broadly separate views that don’t recognize a dialectic between the inputs of individual personality and culture into three errors: mechanistic, relativistic, and mystical. This is based upon whether they ignore the value of consciousness in understanding motivations, place motivation solely in cultural determination, or claim an atomistic rational essence and will (respectively).