June 25, 2010
- Remedios Varo and C. G. Jung -
A long time ago, before it ever got released, I’d heard about CG Jung’s Red Book and got a little obsessed with it. Fascinated by what it represented, I scoured the internet, looking for any images from it that were available. I found of few, one of the most fascinating of which was this one:
This, supposedly, is an image of Jung’s “Shadow” archtype, right when Jung finally cornered it. Note the hat, wing-like robes, and checkerboard floor, as well as the overall colors.
Then, recently, someone on tumblr posted some work by Remedios Varo, a Spanish/Mexican surrealist active in the mid 1900′s, right around the same time as Jung. I was fascinated by the piece I saw and decided to go looking for more. And then I came upon this piece:
The same flowing clothes, the same checkerboard floor, the same hat (or close enough), the same color scheme, the same weird ambient lighting, and the same hallway leading to the suggestion of a doorway behind the figure. The same symmetrical layout of the robes, with the split down the middle.
I suppose there’s a slim chance Remedios Varo saw Jung’s piece, as they were active around the same time. But Jung was notoriously secretive about his Red Book (hence it only being published now) and Varo was based in Paris and then Mexico after the nazi’s took Paris. Jung was also not a big fan of the surrealists (a fact I learned a talk given by the curator of the Red Book exhibit at the Rubin Museum, which I’ve written about here) so it seems pretty likely that the Varo would never have had a chance to review Jung’s private paintings.
But the similarities here are striking, and given the realms of exploration of both Jung and Varo, I think this says a lot about the underlying layers of the psyche and the idea of thoughts being just another thing we perceive “out there”. If only we could figure out what this “out there” is…
I’m curious if “out there” is through the door. Of course the Shadow obscures access, and it seems we confront That within the Shadow as we move to the door.
Also, I’m curious how the checkerboard flooring was used in the architecture in the time of Jung and Varo. For instance, was it used for a particular room in a structure, or was the checkerboard particular to the type of structure (i.e. hospital; ballroom; etc.). If these two figures are shadows, how much of their environment is informed by the collective? What would the environment of our (contemporary) shadows look like?
From Wikipedia:
Comment by Donn — June 25, 2010 @ 9:55 am
Thanks for this post, Ian. I have been a huge fan of Jung for years, reading the whole Collected Works, and undergoing Jungian analysis. I still have great respect for dreams and the unconscious. Regarding your ‘out there’, question, specifically in regards to the shadow, it’s always amazed me how challenging it is for one to grasp one’s own, when everyone else around can see it so clearly! :)
Comment by Marguerite Manteau-Rao — June 25, 2010 @ 10:08 am
@ Donn:
Maybe it’s the fact that “out there” is out there is what creates the shadow in the first place? Brings to mind the idea of Plato’s cave, although I admit I’m mixing my shadow metaphors… :)
As for the place of the chessboard, it seems to have been pretty popular in surrealist works. I stumbled on this page while trying (with no luck) to find the title of the Varo’s painting. LOTS of chessboards. Plus I think there’s an association with chessboard floors in Freemasonry too, though that’s not my area of expertise. Perhaps something to do with the “knowledge of good and evil” from the bible? The polarizing of reality?
That is an interesting quote from Jung as well. Why would only the shadow be creative? Strange…
from the same wiki article:
This bottom layer of the shadow is also what Jung referred to as the collective unconscious.
Hmmm…. Out there is in here after all?
Comment by Ian — June 25, 2010 @ 11:11 am
@ MArguerite:
Yeah, the idea of the unrecognized shadow is one that really freaks me out. The mind is such a tricky place… We have to really pay attention to others to see their responses to our behavior, it seems the only way to really tackle the shadow. And often, people won’t directly point this out either, except in confrontations (or therapy). It’s really up to us to see, and it’s easier, I think, the more we get rid of the distinction between ourselves and others (as your recent Lowering The Bar post kind of points too).
Comment by Ian — June 25, 2010 @ 11:18 am
Good post. On the subject of Jung I found the following blog post interesting:
The Craftsman’s Trowel: Jung, Grof, and the Archetype of Death and Rebirth
Comment by Justin Russell — June 25, 2010 @ 12:19 pm
The mosaic floor is indeed a classic Masonic symbol.
My conclusion from my time spent staring down the freemasonry rabbithole is that anything you can write down about the masonic symbols is immediately false…
Comment by speedbird — June 26, 2010 @ 3:41 pm
@ Justin:
Thanks, I’ll have to check out that article and get back to you. it’s a long one…
@ speedbird:
I recently got to see all of Matthew Barney’s Cremaster movies. Weird weird weird shit. Definitely watch them in you ever have a chance, given your prior interest in Masonry. Particularly Cremaster 3.
They’re not out on DVD or anything, but it looks like part of number 3 is available to purchase on Amazon. I’m sure there are bits on Youtube as well.
If anything, after watching this, I agree with you even more that “anything you can write down (or in this case film) about the masonic symbols is immediately false…”
Comment by Ian — June 28, 2010 @ 9:52 am
>> Particularly Cremaster 3.
Just watched the online trailer… that’s some messed up shit!
Reminds me of my time spent watching Peter Greenaway at Uni.
Comment by speedbird — June 28, 2010 @ 10:32 am
Yeah, Barney basically takes the Guggenheim museum here in New York, turns it into an obstacle course:
Topless synchronized swimmers/gogo dancers on the first floor,
the punk bands “Agnostic Front” and “Murphy’s Law” fight it out on the second floor,
a naked cheetah woman with no lower legs tried to kill him on the third floor,
some weird caber tossing thing on the 4th floor,
and Richard Sera (as Hiram Abiff) on the 5th floor
throughthrowing melted petroleum jelly at the wall.barney makes it up to the top, back to the bottom, and then starts his way back up again as the credits roll. Craziness.
Comment by Ian — June 28, 2010 @ 11:52 am
@ Justin
Just finished reading that article, fascinating. Grof’s four BPM patterns parallel rather well with the Insight cycle as championed by Daniel Ingram and Kenneth Folk.
Also fascinating is:
“The most important common denominator and focus of the experiences originating in this area of the unconscious is a group of problems related to biological birth, physical pain and agony, disease, aging, decrepitude, dying and death”
Those are the exact same problems Buddha sought answers to: birth, suffering, old age, sickness, and death. Though I assume Grof would have been familiar with Buddhism to some extent at least, so perhaps that’s not so surprising as the correlation to the insight cycles.
The mention of Christ at the end reminded me of a podcast I’d listened to recently. I haven’t gotten through the whole thing, but its pretty fascinating. One key point is that “resurrection” is a mistranslation of a greek word that was more akin to “awakening”. So we have Jesus’s awakening instead of Jesus’s resurrection.
Like I said, I haven’t finished it, but check out parts 1 and 2 here.
Comment by Ian — June 28, 2010 @ 2:38 pm
>> The Craftsman’s Trowel …
‘My, Grandma, what big words you have!’ :)
Comment by speedbird — June 29, 2010 @ 4:49 pm
Am I the only one that sees a giant Vagina?
Comment by Ted — June 29, 2010 @ 6:09 pm
@ speebird:
:)
@ Ted:
No, no you’re not. Not anymore, anyway.
Comment by Ian — June 30, 2010 @ 11:43 am
Ha Ha! The vagina didn’t just jump out at you until I mentioned it? Its an enormous vulva and spreading labia revealing the deepest darkest void imaginable. Pure Jung, Freud too.
Comment by Ted — June 30, 2010 @ 11:49 am
Ha! Yeah, its undeniable.
Comment by Ian — June 30, 2010 @ 11:53 am
“related to biological birth”
Comment by Donn — June 30, 2010 @ 1:39 pm
Both pictures, right? :D
*
I remember as a student standing next to a Dali poster I was thinking of buying. (That’s how long ago it was, folks, Klimt wasn’t in vogue yet!) I was with an arty friend, and so as I noticed a feature I didn’t recognise, I pointed to it and asked ‘What’s that supposed to be, then?’. Without missing a beat my friend replied,
‘The head of the great masturbator.’
Which shut me up pretty quick.
Comment by speedbird — June 30, 2010 @ 2:01 pm
The head of the great masturbator! That’s awesome. I think the bottom one actually has four vaginas, and lots of wrinkly labile type stuff.
The top one too is a Vagina then in context. Its like that movie, “The door in the floor” Its the ultimate dark scary thing that we all came from and ultimately wish to return.
Comment by Ted — June 30, 2010 @ 2:20 pm
I think we need to find ourselves a professional Freudian analyst RIGHT NOW and show them this thread.
:D
Comment by speedbird — June 30, 2010 @ 2:26 pm
“The door in the floor”
‘Don’t you open that Trap Door
Cos there’s something down there…’
(Did that make it across th’atlantic?)
Comment by speedbird — June 30, 2010 @ 2:28 pm
Nice guys, real nice. :)
I second speedbird’s comment.
Comment by Ian — June 30, 2010 @ 3:11 pm
Caught my Shadow in the Cucumber salad
Comment by Donn — July 2, 2010 @ 7:54 pm
Nice one Donn. Its got the right colors too! :)
Comment by Ian — July 5, 2010 @ 12:01 pm
@Ian, it looks like the name of the Varos piece is there… right above the signature.
It seems to depict a vagina, a clitoris (with a face) and a moon caged in front of an anus, ie a fundamental view of the fundament.
Do the red shoes in Jung’s picture have anything to do with the Pope?
I see that the shadow’s tongue is showing… a sign of ‘respect’ in some contexts [or merely an acknowledgment that the one displaying it is in a position of inferiority or vulnerability, relative to the... ah, protagonist(?) here]. I’m struck by the sense that the relativity of the ‘room’ the shadow inhabits could also be a box, ie as if one were looking down at something inside. The implication of a funnel-shaped opening behind the Shadow is certainly food for thought… ^..^
Comment by John Browne — September 16, 2010 @ 1:53 pm
In that case, I’m surprised its only a crescent moon… (bad joke, sorry)
Yeah, all good points “john”. I can’t make out the name of the piece, though I’d love to hear your thoughts. I’m guessing something “Luna” or “Lune”
I think you (and Ted) are certainly right about the vaginal aspects of the Varos piece. I find it interesting that there are so many overlaps with the Jung piece though, when I do not think Jung meant his painting to have the same symbology. And I don’t think that’s a tongue, I believe its a mustache. So definitely not a feminine image…
Comment by Ian — September 17, 2010 @ 11:07 am
Until I’d scrolled down to Ted’s comment I was surprized that no one else had mentioned that crucial aspect of the Varo piece that I then saw a kind of prim, formal echo of in Jung’s picture.
Given the color, and the organic, flowing shape in the Varo piece, I also was reminded of Chanterelle mushrooms. It seemed like a Rorschach reflection of a cluster.
Comment by Kate — January 15, 2011 @ 8:26 pm
Well, I can definitely see the vaginal aspects in the Varo piece, and its no surprise considering that it’s a depiction of the (feminine) moon. But I’m not sure Jung meant to depict his shadow in a feminine way, or even in a vaginal way. I imagine Jung’s unconscious reaction to that kind of data coming up in his psyche WOULD be prim and formal, but I don’t believe he would have done so intentionally.
Who knows though? In any case, the similarities present in the two pieces still really do amaze me. The way different people around the world working on similar problems can come up with remarkable similar results (nearly simultaneously) fascinates me to no end….
Comment by Ian — January 18, 2011 @ 2:28 pm