Join Urban Deva on Facebook Join Urban Deva on Facebook

February 5, 2012

Book Review: Gods in Everyman by Dr Jean Shinoda Bolen

Book Review:

Gods in Everyman by Dr Jean Shinoda Bolen

Well, we’ve dealt with the female deities, so it seems only fair that we move on to the male.

Not that this book is exclusively for men, any more than Goddesses in Everywoman was exclusively for women. As Bolen herself puts it in her preface:

‘When I speak about gods in Everyman [sic], I discover that women often find that a particular god exists in them as well, just as I found that when I spoke about goddesses men could identify a part of themselves with a specific goddess. Gods and goddesses represent different qualities in the human psyche. The pantheon of Greek deities together, male and female, exist as archetypes in us all, although the gods are usually the strongest and most influential determinants of a man’s personality, as the goddesses are for women.’

Gods in Everyman: Archetypes That Shape Men’s Lives was published in 1989, four years after Jean’s book on goddesses. If you’ve read the latter ― or at least read my review on it ― you’ll recognise in the former the same psychological device of using myths that have endured over centuries to express and understand archetypes: patterns of behaviour that are common to all humans.

In the sequel, men (and women) are encouraged to explore different aspects of their personalities represented by several god figures: Zeus, the powerful, ruthless patriarch; intense Poseidon, ruled by turbulent waves of emotion; Hades, the mysterious introvert whose still waters run infinitely deep; the favoured son Apollo, logical, self-motivated and emotionally distant; charming, eloquent Hermes, the spontaneous adventurer and trickster; passionate Ares, the fierce lover and fighter; soulful Hephaestus, the absorbed, wounded creator; and Dionysus, the attractive, sensual ecstatic, ruled by intense instinctive highs and lows.

Through such knowledge, Bolen’s readers may again find greater control over unconscious patterns of behaviour hidden within themselves via various ‘Aha!’ moments of self-recognition.

I’ve enjoyed the insights both fully gleaned and half-spied in both of Bolen’s books on this fascinating subject, and know that I shall return to them time and time again for further psychological insight at future times of need, or simple curiosity.

But, while reading Gods, an unexpected ‘Aha!’ moment came that wasn’t a realisation about my personality, or someone else’s character, but concerned something broader about society that has niggled at me for years.

For, while I like to think of myself as an independent and enlightened woman, ready to stand up for my position and that of others against negative cultural and sexual stereotyping, I’ve always steered clear of labelling myself a feminist. Perhaps I missed the main drive of the movement, having been privileged enough not to have had to personally fight for my political rights as I grew up. Perhaps it’s in my Persephone nature to sit on the fence, to argue both sides, to withdraw from outright commitment, to live in the world of grey rather than choose to be black or white.

But, then again, perhaps it’s because I hate debates where some people seem to automatically polarise everyone into one camp or another, solely by virtue of their gender. Perhaps I feel the frustration of men who say, ‘But we’re not all like that.’ Perhaps I felt, but never had the right words to express what Jean says so simply:

‘In a patriarchal society, women do not fare well. But male stereotypes also hold power over men, limiting who they can comfortably be by rewarding some qualities and rejecting others.’

Perhaps this is a remarkably facile revelation to have. But then, isn’t that the beauty of revelation? When something that’s been churning around in the white noise of your brain for years suddenly clicks into place, shudders into focus as the right words reverberate in your head for the first time and you realise that this, for you, is the simple truth that you’ve sensed all along.

Sure, my moments of ‘Aha’ won’t ring true for everyone. But then, if Jean Shinoda Bolen’s books tell us anything, it’s that we’re all different. Even though, united in the enduring archetypes of humanity, we’re also fundamentally the same.

Rowena Roberts

:::

UD:BOOKS

Urban Deva loves books. In fact, we’d go as far to say we’re obsessed. So we thought it’d be a good idea to share the love and regularly recommend some of our favourites. We hope you enjoy them too.

October 19, 2011

Book Review: Goddesses in Everywoman by Dr Jean Shinoda Bolen

Book Review:

Goddesses in Everywoman by Dr Jean Shinoda Bolen

I picked this book up because I believe in the power of stories.

As a lifelong bookworm, I know their power to fire the imagination and feed me awareness and understanding of people and worlds beyond my own experience. As an advertising copywriter, I also know their power to help brands gain customers’ interest, loyalty and (yes) cash ― and perhaps create a more imaginative, creative, and stimulating working environment for their employees.

But the notion that certain stories, when properly analysed and applied, could have the power to help me better understand, handle, and help my self? Now, this was intriguing.

Goddesses in Everywoman: Powerful Archetypes in Women’s Lives explains complex theories of Jungian depth psychology in simple terms that the layman (or woman) can understand. At its core, it is a book about archetypes, which ― according to Carl Jung ― are innate psychic dispositions that can influence and explain universal patterns of behaviour, common to all humans. Such patterns are usually hidden within the unconscious; only by recognising them consciously via some kind of psychological breakthrough can we understand motivations and habits that influence us, and perhaps keep us trapped in a certain cycle of behaviour.

The author, Dr Jean Shinoda Bolen, discovered during her work as a psychiatrist and analyst that using figures from Greek mythology to personify these archetypes helped some of her clients achieve this moment of breakthrough ― or “Aha!” as she terms it ― when what was unconscious becomes conscious and can therefore be tackled.

Her straightforward analysis of myths that have endured over thousands of years reveals patterns of behaviour and character traits that we can still recognise, identify with, and learn from today, realising as we do the eternal truth that we are human, and therefore we are not alone in what we feel.

Bolen’s approach may be simple, but her analysis is far from simplistic. Each goddess analysed in the book is a pattern, not a personality; the author explains how an individual may contain many goddesses, some of which may dominate ― or ‘become active’ ― during different life phases, events, even times of the month.

Bolen also challenges traditional Jungian thought that polarised archetypes into masculine and feminine attributes, which were often regarded as out of place in the opposite sex. Bolen’s approach is more holistic and less stereotypical, seeing goddesses ― and indeed gods ― in both women and men.

I experienced many moments of “Aha!” during the course of this book. For there, entwined in the myths of Athena, was my grandmother: practical, efficient, keen on crafts and good with her hands, but not so good with her heart; a critical and disappointed mother who focused on failure rather than nurture. And there was my closest school-friend, a classic Demeter-type whose desire to be a mother was already deep-rooted when we first met, at the age of 11. There was my Artemis great-aunt, independent of spirit, protector of the young, traveller, and lover of just causes.

And, of course, there was me in my 20s, stuck in the cycle of eager-to-please, quick-to-deceive Persephone, swept up by the desires of others, rather than her own, so greatly did she fear disapproval and dislike. That was a pattern that took me a while to acknowledge, and try to overcome.

Still, this is not a book that wags the finger accusingly; rather, it seeks to give the reader hope. For among our ‘goddess-given liabilities’ also lie ‘goddess-given gifts’, which we can discover and nurture, and even use to challenge society’s stereotypes from a point of inner certainty and truth ― stereotypes that might otherwise stop us from being the best we can be.

In this way, Bolen believes our inner goddesses can help us to live our own personal myths, empowering us with “the possibilities of finding personal meaning through choices others might not encourage.”

I could quote this book all day. But then you might not read it for yourself. And you really should, if you have any interest at all in discovering more about yourself and about others, female and male.

It’s an interesting story, after all; one that continues to endure across thousands of years: the story of humanity.

Rowena Roberts

:::

UD:BOOKS

Urban Deva loves books. In fact, we’d go as far to say we’re obsessed. So we thought it’d be a good idea to share the love and regularly recommend some of our favourite books.

We’d also like to take this opportunity to thank Rowena Roberts for doing such a stellar job of our first official book review, and look forward to sharing more of her thought-provoking finds with you.

July 15, 2011

The Tree of Life — Movie Review

The Tree of Life (12A)

Thea Euryphaessa reviews Terrence Malick’s Palme d’Or winner, The Tree of Life


“Unless you are educated in metaphor, you are not safe to be let loose in the world.” — Robert Frost

Terrence Malick’s movies have a history of testing my patience and this one was no different. It was only the sheer beauty of the cinematography in ‘The Thin Red Line’ and the achingly gorgeous Jim Caviezel in the lead role that stopped me walking out after the first half hour. This time, however, where I persevered, others gave up the ghost and left. It was the unashamedly Kubrickian and oft baffling imagery of the universe, including numerous shots of nebulae and big bangs, followed by dinosaurs apparently toying with the idea of morality that pushed several members of the audience over the edge — a scene which, in my opinion, rambled on a tad too long.

But, then, this is a director who’s grappling with the issue of Life with a capital ‘L’. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Malick has studied Carl Jung’s ‘Answer to Job’ which addresses the moral, mythological, and psychological implications of Job’s relationship with God; particularly as the movie opens with a quote from The Book of Job:

“Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (38:4,7)

And it’s this quote, together with the title itself, which underscores the entire film. Thing is, as a student of depth psychology, I’m familiar with Jung’s discourse of Job. I’m also familiar with metaphor and archetypal symbolism — which is a good job really, as Malick spends much of this film employing metaphors as a means of amplifying his core message.

If you like your movies to be coherent, with a linear narrative that have a beginning, a middle, and an end, steer well clear of this offering. Why? Because it spirals, backtracks, and seems to do whatever the hell it pleases. This is a movie that speaks to the circuitous, non-linear nature of the psyche, bypassing the rational, logical conscious mind. Like any good art, it’s about standing back and absorbing it as a whole while allowing the themes to wash over you. Whether or not it succeeds in making itself ‘transparent to the transcendent’ is another matter — but it’s not for lack of trying.

The movie focuses on a middle-aged Jack O’Brien (Sean Penn), reflecting back on his childhood and growing up with his brothers in 1950s Texas, with his authoritarian father, Mr O’Brien (Brad Pitt) and his ethereal, angelic mother, Mrs O’Brien (Jessica Chastain). The movie opens with Mrs O’Brien receiving a telegram that one of her teenage sons has died, followed immediately by Mr O’Brien also receiving the news. When a tree is planted outside Jack’s place of work, it acts as the springboard for his childhood reminiscence. From then on, the movie flits back and forth between the present day and his childhood memories.

We also learn early on, thanks to whispered voiceovers, that human beings are essentially torn between grace (divinity) and nature (ego will), with Mr O’Brien personifying the demanding, brusque nature of will and Mrs O’Brien the softer, ‘naive’ face of grace (in Mr O’Brien’s opinion). Their children are caught between these two polarised perspectives, while ongoing voiceovers provided by family members, past and present, pose various existential questions which the issues of grief and bereavement tend to throw into sharp relief.

Malick deftly touches on a wide range of psychological issues including a beautifully handled depiction of the Oedipal complex (watch for when Jack’s character breaks into a house, steals a nightdress, followed by him watching his mother waft around in her nightdress and then wanting to kill his father). His moments of brilliance for me, however, are when he opts to employ a symbol rather than narrative. This is a director who believes his audience to be far more intelligent than most and doesn’t believe they need everything spelled out to them in order to ensure understanding. His simple use of a bridge to consolidate Mrs O’Brien’s statement in the final scene is a stroke of understated genius.

I’m not going to wax lyrical and say this movie’s a masterpiece — it veers unnecessarily into pompous and grandiose territory on more than one occasion — but it’s certainly visionary, evocative, and thoughtful. Few directors would have the guts to bring such existential subjects to the big screen in an epic, unapologetic manner. And it’s for this reason alone I recommend you suspend your critical disbelief for a couple of hours and allow yourself to be immersed in the themes this movie so engagingly and poetically presents.

7.5/10

:::

To buy a copy of Running into Myself, visit Amazon UKAmazon US or, better still, order a limited edition signed copy direct from her publisher here (also ships worldwide). Also available to download on Kindle.

Thea’s personal journey is utterly compelling. I couldn’t put her book down. Thea manages to make Greek mythology not only understandable, interesting, and relevant to our lives today, but shows how it can be utilised as a tool for self development. She introduces ideas and ways of thinking that broaden your mind, and lights the way for others to follow.”

— Melinda Messenger (TV Presenter)

“This is a story that truly reveals its author. You’ll discover her beliefs, her flaws, her loves, her fears, her mistakes, her drive and her compassion.

And you’ll like her.”

— Rowena Forbes (Journalist)

July 14, 2011

Sacrifice of Innocence

Sacrifice of Innocence


“It’s not your job to like me — it’s mine.” — Byron Katie

This blog continues on from my previous post ‘The Rise of the Green-Eyed Monster’ which I wrote out ‘white hot’ so to speak. Thing with me, is, I like to get my thoughts and feelings out on paper (or on the screen) first, and then sit back and reflect on what I’ve said. It’s a process I call ‘seed sorting’.

What I’ve decided to do with this post, however, is share an excerpt from one of my favourite books ‘The Feminine in Fairy Tales’ by Marie-Louise von Franz. I was drawn to this book after writing my previous post and opened it at just the right place. I’ve already read it a couple of times, but it’s one of those books which is chock-full of wise insights and astute psychological observations.

I also found myself listening to one of Michael Meade’s lectures again and it was his words, too, that have also helped me make sense of the transition/growth I’m currently experiencing. I’ll speak more about what he had to say in my next blog but, suffice to say, it was his words ‘sacrifice of innocence’ which jumped out at me and helped me spot my own idealistic and often self-righteous nature (aka my shadow) regards certain issues.

For now though here’s the excerpt from ‘The Feminine in Fairytales’ which I’ll allow to stand on its own here, and comment on further in my next piece:

[This piece is a commentary of the fairytale ‘Vasilisa the Beautiful’ (similar archetypal motif to Cinderella and Psyche’s predicament in Apuleius’ tale, ‘Amor and Psyche’), the full version of which can be read here.]

The merchant then marries the witch with the two daughters, three jealous bitches who persecute the girl. This is an archetypal motif: where the pearl is, there is also the dragon, and vice versa. They are never separate. Frequently, just after the first intuitive realisation of the Self, the powers of desolation and darkness break in. A terrible slaughtering always take place at the same time as the birth of the hero, as for instance the killing of the innocents at Bethlehem when Christ was born. Some persecuting power starts at once to blot out the inner germ. Outwardly, it is often that the innermost kernel of the human being has an actually irritating effect upon outer surroundings. Realisation of the Self when in statu nascendi, when only a hunch, makes a person unadapted and difficult for those around, for it disturbs the unconscious instinctive order. Jung often said that it is as if a flock of sheep resented it bitterly that one sheep wanted to walk by itself.

In Germany, group psychology experiments have been made with hens and other birds. Hens and crows, for instance, observe a certain pecking order. There is the rooster, and his first wife, who has her first rights. The others have special rank in the order in which they may eat and build their nests. Most animals, and also apes, have an order which one calls the alpha, beta, gamma order. Some psychologists say that in a human group, or in a crowd, people also try to peck each other. The alpha hen is generally the most disgusting and pushy person, and the best in I.Q. are the gamma and delta hens. Clearly, wherever people form a group, there is this interplay of unconscious balance; however, if any one person gets just an idea of the Self, he falls out of the group, and the balance has to be re-established. Now that one factor is out, the others feel the gap and are naturally angry and try and force the miscreant to the former unconscious level. If you analyse one member of the family, usually the whole family begins to wobble and get upset. Insofar as we are herd animals, we have within ourselves that essential conflict between the inertia which wants to remain in the flock, and the disturbing factor, the possibility of individuation. A woman who gets the first hunch of the Self is immediately attacked, not only by the stepmother outside, but from within, by the inner stepmother, that is, the inertia of the old collective pattern of femininity, that regressive inertia which always pulls one back to do the thing in the least painful way. As in many other Cinderella stories, the stepsisters are characterised as lazy, and the heroine has to do tremendously hard work, such as separating grains, which entails a superhuman effort. There is the conflict between that which calls upon you to make the superhuman effort and the desire to follow the old pattern.

(My next blog will most likely be on my return from my holiday, week commencing 1 August: I’m going off-grid to an eco retreat beneath starry skies in deepest, darkest Spain. Hasta luego!)

:::

To buy a copy of Running into Myself, visit Amazon UKAmazon US or, better still, order a limited edition signed copy direct from her publisher here (also ships worldwide). Also available to download on Kindle.

Thea’s personal journey is utterly compelling. I couldn’t put her book down. Thea manages to make Greek mythology not only understandable, interesting, and relevant to our lives today, but shows how it can be utilised as a tool for self development. She introduces ideas and ways of thinking that broaden your mind, and lights the way for others to follow.”

— Melinda Messenger (TV Presenter)

“This is a story that truly reveals its author. You’ll discover her beliefs, her flaws, her loves, her fears, her mistakes, her drive and her compassion.

And you’ll like her.”

— Rowena Forbes (Journalist)

April 5, 2011

The Greatest Love Of All

Before I continue, I’d like to apologise for the disjointed nature of this blog. I have things I want to record, remember. My next book is constellating and the thoughts shared here will have a part to play in it.

The Greatest Love Of All

A couple of weeks ago, while walking through Manchester city centre, I was stopped dead in my tracks by the above advert emblazoned across a billboard. My mouth gaped open. Is that the ideal our society is now peddling as womanhood?

Now, images like this are nothing new in this day and age. What galled me about this particular advert, however, was its cringe-worthy attempt at depicting an alluring, mysterious form of women’s sexuality. No disrespect to the model but she looks like a pre-pubescent girl who’s just raided mummy’s make-up case and is now parading about in her nightie.

I was raised in a house where images of the naked female form adorned most every wall: images by Toulouse-Lautrec, Schiele, and Picasso to name but a few. No-one, in my not-so-humble opinion, got closer to capturing the dark alluring underworld of female sexuality quite like Toulouse-Lautrec’s late 19th century Parisian depictions — life splayed open in all its indecent and decadent glory.

Growing up, I was somewhat shielded from our culture’s parochial, myopic ideas of female beauty by my parents’ interests. From mum I inherit my studious love for words and books, and from my aunt I inherited my passion for the female form, art in all its guises, and interior design — beauty, beauty, beauty. My aunt also used to play George Benson’s song The Greatest Love Of All over and over — she later told me she played it for me in the hope it might sink  into my unconscious. They never bought fashion glossies or gossip magazines into the house, preferring instead Ideal Homes, Private Eye, The Economist, and The Manchester Guardian newspaper (RIP).

Anyway, as some of you know, I recently attended a women’s only Tantra workshop. Life-changing stuff. A month on and I’m still reeling from it. Complementing perfectly my ongoing studies into archetypal psychology (which itself is derived from Jung’s Analytical Psychology), it balances head with body; the intellect with the experiential. So when I saw the above advert, it immediately called to mind the following excerpt from a book I recently read by Ginette Paris entitled Pagan Meditations:

Insisting on the beauty of Aphrodite, as one inevitably does, we risk forgetting that her mysteries are concerned with the whole body and not only with the eye. The woman who has the qualities of Aphrodite knows how to move, breathe, and vibrate, and is capable of generating as well as receiving high-intensity sexual energy.

Some beautiful women give the impression that they are inhabited by Aphrodite’s qualities. Their seductive appearance which promises of pleasure, however, leads to deception each time this promise is not kept by the body.

But when competence at bodily love prevails over good looks, certain women, even though unsightly, may exert upon their lovers an extraordinary attraction.

Several years ago, while travelling in Morocco, I went to see two performances of belly dancing in the same evening. The first took place in an American hotel, where I had gone to meet some friends. The publicity insisted upon the splendid figure of the dancer: she wore a light veil embroidered with pearls and was indeed beautiful. She moved little, but with grace. Her gestures were those of the belly-dance, but perhaps because of the air-conditioning, or her bleached blonde hair, the whole thing appeared to be insipid and deceptive [my italics].

Later in the evening, in the public square of the old town, I watched a young Berber woman dancing. She was certainly very poor and had no chance of penetrating show-business; her figure was too heavy, and her features hard and imperfect. Although dressed to the neck in a poor cotton dress, and without any artifice of scenery, she kept the public under the spell of her dance with the brusque movements of her hips, her rhythmic cries, her vigour, and her delighted eyes. All her muscles, all her gestures expressed what is most sexual within us. Each movement proceeded from her belly as if from the centre of herself. I have never since seen a more erotic dance.

The first dancer, although beautiful and graceful, seemed to imitate the movements of love, but she could not radiate with Aphrodite’s energy. It was only upon seeing the ‘real’ belly dancing that I knew the first was only a pastiche.

Insipid and deceptive. Bingo. And that’s exactly the perspective those of us on the Sapphic or Tantric path view posters such as the above. Thing is, it takes a hell of a lot of (conscious) physical and psychological work to break free from the myriad forms of body fascism that so insidiously grip our modern western culture, affecting the lives of both men and women.

Just last Saturday night, I inadvertently ended up doing a ritual which turned out to be quite profound. With my boyfriend out for the night, I turned our bathroom into a temple fit for a modern-day goddess. With dozens of fragrant candles dotted about the place, I scattered the entire bathroom floor with hot-pink rose petals, filled the bath with fragrant rose oil, and put some beautiful music on. I then spent the next few hours mindfully caring for and befriending my body. But it’s what happened at the end which most surprised me.

After drying off I slowly began to massage my favourite oil into my calves and thighs, while saying the following which is adapted from an exercise in Margot Anand’s brilliant book The Art of Everyday Ecstasy — The Seven Tantric Keys for Bringing Passion, Spirit, and Joy into Every Part of Your Life:

Thank you (legs) for carrying my weight in the world and supporting my life. Thank you (knees) for your unique mobility. Without you I could not walk, run, dance, do Pilates or Yin yoga, and a thousand other joys. Thank you (thighs) for your strength, for your willingness to be pillars of support to connect my pelvis to my legs. You are a great help to me. I’m sorry I’ve beat up on you every day with scorn and self-loathing because I didn’t believe you were sylph-like and slinky enough…

I then spent the next ten or fifteen minutes, quietly, tenderly massaging the oil into my thighs. As I massaged they began to feel sore and somewhat bruised — as though they were releasing long repressed pain and ancient hurt. If a body part could cry — and I believe they do — then my thighs did just that. And, as they did, I soothed and smoothed them lovingly as though holding a child or loved one who was in pain. For the first time in my life, I held and stroked them with love — unconditional love and absolute acceptance for how they were right now; not how they could be sometime in the future, but right now, in this moment. I told them it was okay, that they could now let go of the hurt they’d held on to for goodness knows how long. That I loved them.

Each night since, I’ve continued this practice — quietly, tenderly soothing my legs — and ever since my entire body has been aching, as though it’s detoxing. And to think that, up until this point, I only ever thought a detox consisted of eliminating certain ‘toxic’ food and drinks. I never considered detoxing might also entail the release of long-held toxic thoughts and feelings towards oneself which would result in a similar ‘healing crisis’ to what one might experience during the first few days of a dietary detox.

We spend a lot of time in our heads, particularly those on a spiritual path — abstracting, meditating, theorising, praying, analysing — but not so much time consciously connected to our bodies, reconnecting with our own flesh and bones. We ‘think’ we do — but therein lies the problem. And a mindless, rote-routine of a yoga class won’t cut it. Our bodies carry so much grief, so much unexpressed sadness and repressed hurt and anger, I’m not surprised people turn to alcohol, for example, night after night in order to numb themselves, anaesthetise the pain they’ve long buried; overeat in order to swallow their anxiety, self-loathing, and shame; seek cake-filled sugar-rushes in order to counter their unconscious feelings of not feeling ‘sweet’ enough. The list is endless.

Thing is, we’re of no help to the outer environment (Earth, Nature) if we don’t first consciously and compassionately reconnect with ourselves. Charity begins at home. Many a spiritual teacher has said, You must know and love yourself before you can truly love another.

One final thing: this morning, while lay in bed, somewhere between sleep and waking, I felt my partner reach over and softly stoke my forearm before taking it in his embrace, kissing it, and holding it by his face. He’s never done that before. I guess when you truly begin to love yourself, treat yourself with tenderness and compassion, others follow suit. Put another way, when you change, others around you change. The best bit is, he has no idea of half the Sapphic/Tantric rituals and exercises I practise — and this is only the beginning.

:::

To buy a copy of Running into Myself, visit Amazon UKAmazon US or, better still, order a limited edition signed copy direct from her publisher here (also ships worldwide). Also available to download on Kindle.

Thea’s personal journey is utterly compelling. I couldn’t put her book down. Thea manages to make Greek mythology not only understandable, interesting, and relevant to our lives today, but shows how it can be utilised as a tool for self development. She introduces ideas and ways of thinking that broaden your mind, and lights the way for others to follow.”

— Melinda Messenger (TV Presenter)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“This is a story that truly reveals its author.
You’ll discover her beliefs, her flaws, her loves, her fears, her mistakes, her drive and her compassion.

And you’ll like her.”

February 21, 2011

The Miseducation of Thea E

The Miseducation of Thea E


“To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best day and night to make you like everybody else means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight and never stop fighting.” — E.E. Cummings

(This interview with Jamie Oliver is what set me off with today’s blog.)

The word ‘education’ stems from the Latin root educere which means to elicit, to bring out, to lead forth. This, however, was not the impression school left me with (the point being exactly that — I felt impressed upon). I felt frustrated — repressed, even — at being forced to study double science, maths, a language (French), a humanity-oriented subject, and two English GCSEs (although, admittedly, I did enjoy English). Sports and the arts were asides and deemed less important. I won’t blame my teachers for this, though, as their hands were equally bound by the System.

Thing was, I was artistically-inclined and loved sports. If those kinds of subjects, however, were considered less important than the aforementioned others (and they were and still are), then what I interpreted the System to be saying — from my adolescent perspective — was my hopes and dreams, the very essence of my being, were also less important. Didn’t matter I began self-studying body language at twelve years old, asked to learn Italian, had an intrigue with philosophy and how the mind worked. Didn’t matter I loved drama, public speaking, building and assembling things (I excelled in Craft, Design, and Technology). No. Because those subjects were considered peripheral, cast in ancillary roles. (Funny, CDT comes in very handy nowadays when I singlehandedly assemble flat-pack furniture.)

The System, you see, decided it’d be a better use of my time to study something ‘proper,’ something more academically-oriented such as science and maths. Thing is, I abhor maths; loathe it. Science too (well, human biology was OK). Whichever way you try and teach me, I’m just not psychically shaped for those subjects. Just as I’m 5’ 8” with an athletic ‘Amazonian’ physique, I will never be a petite 5’ 1” with the derrière of Kylie. I’m shaped the way I am and there ain’t nothing I can do about it.

Yes, I can make adjustments — slim down, bulk up — but the bottom line is (if you’ll forgive the unintended pun) I was dealt a specific set of genetic cards. To deny my fated physical stock and spend the rest of my life railing against and complaining about it would be a tragic and ultimately fruitless waste of time. Better to accept my physical limitations, play the hand I’ve been dealt as creatively as I can, and release the numerous other potentialities inherent within. As mythologist Michael Meade says, “When fully accepted, the destiny will be released from within the limitations of the fate.”

Equally, my psyche is shaped in a particular way. Just because we can’t ‘see’ the psyche, doesn’t mean it isn’t there. We each have unique twists of fate, unique ‘bents’ so to speak: innate, inborn talents, qualities, gifts. So for the System (parents and caregivers too, for that matter) to attempt to contort, standardise, and impress upon me subjects it deemed more ‘fitting’ — subjects it thought would better help me ‘get on’ in this world — was as ludicrous and as much a waste of time as it would be to attempt to change my height from 5’ 8” to 5’ 1”.

At no point did anyone ever ask me throughout my entire time in education, ‘What do you love doing? What do you enjoy doing/reading/watching when you’re not in school?’ Instead, I was given boxes of potential careers to tick, a limited list of subject ‘options’ in third-year secondary school and told to make my choices. Yeah, like I even knew what I wanted for tea that night, let-alone how I’d spend the rest of my life.

All this leaves me wondering where and when the System stopped eliciting/drawing out children’s innate, inborn talents (i.e. educating them) and started trying to standardise them? I mean, what society wants ‘standardised’ children for crying out loud? Thing is, we’re now seeing the ramifications of this all around us: people drifting from job to job looking for somewhere to ‘fit in’ — individuals endowed with endless talents seeking banal, mundane square-shaped existences within which to fit their uniquely-shaped lives; utterly heartbreaking and a woeful waste of talents that our culture ultimately loses out on.

I’ve much more to say on this (my thoughts are vast, rambling, disjointed), but it’s at this point I wish to provide a little inspiration and quote from one of my favourite books by psychologist James Hillman entitled, The Soul’s Code — In Search of Character and Calling:

School failures are common; is this because the child fails school or because school fails the child? Either way, the gap widens between the innate intuitive ability of the child and the formalised tuition of school. As the writer William Saroyan put it: “I resented school, but I never resented learning.” All the while he had trouble learning in school he was reading on his own “nearly every book in the Fresno, California, public library.”

General George S. Patton was dyslexic and was kept back; Winston Churchill, at Harrow, ‘refused to study mathematics, Greek, or Latin and was placed in the lowest form — in what today would be termed the remedial reading class, where slow boys were taught English. His English, however, was not poor; his knowledge of Shakespeare was unusual and self-motivated.’

The composer Edvard Grieg said: “School developed in me nothing but what was evil and left the good untouched.” Thomas Edison said, “I was always at the foot of the class.” Stephen Crane, Eugene O’Neill, William Faulkner, and F. Scott Fitzgerald all failed courses in college. For Ellen Glasgow, author of On Barren Ground and a Pulitzer Prize-winning writer, school was “intolerable.” Willa Cather, Pearl Buck, Isadora Duncan, and Susan B. Anthony also disliked school. Paul Cézanne was rejected by the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris. Marcel Proust’s teacher considered his compositions disorganised, and Emile Zola got a zero in literature, also failing in German language and in rhetoric. Albert Einstein wrote of his middle school (which he attended from age nine and a half): “I preferred to endure all sorts of punishments rather than to learn gabble by rote.” Earlier, at primary school, he was not especially noticeable and was called Biedermeier, meaning a little dull, a little simpler, a little ‘unclever.’ His sister wrote that “he wasn’t even good at arithmetic in the sense of being quick and accurate, though he was reliable and persevering.” Some of these characteristics were due to his slowness of speech.

(I’d just like to interject here by adding that I, too, suffered with a slight stutter during my younger years and was told my writing was particularly infantile and below the acceptable standard for my age. Didn’t stop me going on to win every public speaking competition I entered; become a writer, published author, and student of depth psychology though, eh? And all with no more than two grade Bs in GCSE English literature and language.)

The gap between what is seen by the school and what is felt by the child can work in two ways. Mostly, the child following his or her invisible track is perceived as ‘out of it,’ unteachable, obstinately difficult, even stupid. But pressure can build the other way as well. Diane Arbus, the quirky and extraordinary photographer, said: “The teachers always used to think I was smart and it would torment me because I knew that I was really terribly dumb.” Whether the child is perceived as ‘dumb,’ like Einstein, or ‘smart’ like Arbus, the gap in perception between child and school remains unbridged.

Examinations especially can be a trial. The master bacteriologist Paul Ehrlich had to be excused from school compositions because of his ‘complete ineptness.’ Giacomo Puccini consistently failed exams. Gertrude Stein would not take her final in a class in Harvard. Anton Chekhov refused to study classics, and failed his school exam twice. These failures at school gave him nightmares. “All his life he was to be haunted by dreams of teachers trying to ‘catch him out.’” Pablo Picasso, ‘who could never remember the sequence of the alphabet,’ left at ten ‘because he stubbornly refused to do anything but paint’; even his private tutor gave up on him because Picasso could not learn arithmetic.

Seems I’m in good company then.

:::

Thea is author of the inspiring memoir Running into Myself. Buy a copy from Amazon UKAmazon US or, better still, order a limited edition signed copy direct from her publisher here (also ships worldwide).

Thea’s personal journey is utterly compelling. I couldn’t put her book down. Thea manages to make Greek mythology not only understandable, interesting, and relevant to our lives today, but shows how it can be utilised as a tool for self development. She introduces ideas and ways of thinking that broaden your mind, and lights the way for others to follow.”

— Melinda Messenger (TV Presenter)

February 19, 2011

This Priceless Life

This Priceless Life

A couple of weeks back I shared an excerpt from Robert Sardello’s brilliant book, Freeing the Soul from Fear. At the time I wasn’t quite sure why I did (share it), but since doing so my mind’s been circling the piece, mulling it over. On reflection, there’s so much I want to comment on I almost don’t know where to start; which is why I’ve decided to approach this issue from multiple angles over numerous posts.

Money is a central issue for most everyone living in our modern western world. The dominating myth in our culture is the ‘Economic Myth’ as Sardello so astutely points out (‘myth’ in this particular context is based on the definition of social theorist Betty S. Flowers who defines it as ‘the contexts of imagination that people live within, the concepts that gives meaning to our existence and forms the patterns of our actions in the world’).

The way I see it, most folk allow their intrinsic, innate self-worth to be defined by their salaries, the amount of money in their bank accounts, their collateral (combined value of property/car/business) etc. Hmm… Parochial, myopic, unimaginative (read: soulless) way of living, don’t ya think? How so? Well, in that we allow ourselves to be so narrowly circumscribed by one particular, essentially abstracted manifestation of energy, i.e. money. That’s the Economic Myth. Thing is, I no longer buy into it the way I once did.

Here’s the script: leave school, attend college, go to university, gain a degree, and get a job. Kids and spouse (or the other way around), be saddled with pile of bricks, sorry, buy a house (mortgage), plod towards retirement. The End. (Play golf, take cruises — hey, now we’re living!) There are, of course, numerous other distractions along the way such as fancy holidays/meals out, designer furniture/clothes, particular model of car (must always look cool/keep up with the Joneses); but that’s pretty much it. And so it is we allow ourselves to be defined by our qualifications, credit rating, postcode, and salaries. That’s how we weigh one another up, including prospective partners. Sad, eh?

Doesn’t matter they (partner) are the most miserable, miserly, narcissistic bastard the world has known — just so long as they’re bringing home the bacon on a regular basis, are good with the children; doesn’t matter they have nothing else going for them other than the job they’re married to; doesn’t matter they’re in love with someone else and/or sleeping with other men and/or women every night, so long as they come home to me/keep me in relative comfort.

I’m also suspicious whenever someone feels compelled (particularly unprompted) to tell me how much they earn. Like I give a toss? So you’ve made it now you’re earning £50,000 plus a year? Well, congratulations. However, forgive me for being passé but I’m more interested in you — your passions, your creativity, your gifts, the kind words you shared with a stranger last week, the time you took to do something for a friend in need. I want to know what you’d do if you didn’t have a pot to piss in. I want to know what compels you/makes you tick/keeps you up all night/the career you’d pursue if money were no object; the man/woman you’d be with if you wasn’t so bothered about how you’d potentially be perceived by your peers/family/friends, didn’t care what they had to say, about their opinions. I want to know if you have the bollocks to be true to yourself, come what may.

Yes, money makes life easier but it’s not the whole story; rather, it’s just one of the many forms of currency (or energy) flowing through the culture. You may not have a penny in the bank; have bailiffs knocking at the door; debt collectors ringing your phone off the hook; but that doesn’t prevent you being the most enriched, most talented, most generous individual when it comes to sharing your innate gifts, qualities, and talents. No-one was born impoverished no matter what our culture may try and have us believe.

So although you may earn a wage on which you can barely live/earn ten times what you need; have no money in the bank/have a billion stashed away, remember this — you are worth more than all the money, oil, gold bullion, diamonds, platinum, and freshwater pearls in the world put together — for none of those things have any meaning other than what we put on them. Your one and precious life, what you bring to this world, the way in which you express it, is unrepeatable, is priceless.

So stop allowing your financial worth to define you: you’re worth more than that.

You’re worth more than you’ll ever know.

:::

Thea is author of the inspiring memoir Running into Myself. Buy a copy from Amazon UKAmazon US or, better still, order a limited edition signed copy direct from her publisher here (also ships worldwide).

Thea’s personal journey is utterly compelling. I couldn’t put her book down. Thea manages to make Greek mythology not only understandable, interesting, and relevant to our lives today, but shows how it can be utilised as a tool for self development. She introduces ideas and ways of thinking that broaden your mind, and lights the way for others to follow.”

— Melinda Messenger (TV Presenter)

February 8, 2011

Excerpt from ‘Freeing the Soul from Fear’ by Robert Sardello

Based on recent conversations with friends, I thought I’d share the following excerpt from the book, Freeing the Soul from Fear by archetypal psychologist, Robert Sardello. I’ll allow this piece to stand alone for now and will make reference to it in a future post. Don’t worry if it doesn’t all make sense immediately — the idea is to circle around it several times, gleaning deeper insights with each further reading.

Money Fears


The predominant myth within which we all now live is an economic myth. What we do, how we live, and what we value are largely determined by monetary worth. Money, no doubt, has always had enormous power, but now it overshadows all other values. The fears surrounding money have to do not only with survival but also with the loss of identity associated with not buying into this myth.

The difficulty with the economic myth, as with all myths based on a divisive illusion, is that it leaves out the soul. Statistics, polls, gross national product, inflation rates, production growth, and measures of the global economy form the abstract fabric of this way of organising the world. There is nothing for the soul to relate to, nothing in the outer world that reflects its own mode of reality, which arises through sacred images.

The fear hiding behind all of the vacuous statistical rhetoric of the economic myth is the fear of living without a sacred view of the world. Economics, a word that means ‘care of the household,’ can be a sacred matter; it is not economics per se that constitutes fear, but the sort of economy that depends on the fetishising of material wealth. Still, we must ask, what gives these numbers such power?

The myth of modern economics cannot hold people together as a community, and the world begins fracturing into those who possess and those who are dispossessed. Separation always forms a basis of fears, and in the case of economics, this separation is between those who have socioeconomic power and status and those who do not.

Economic fear also has a great deal to do with how people are treated in the workplace. Corporate culture treats individuals as units. This attitude has infected nearly all of work, whether one happens to work for a corporation or not, and it relies on fear. Here is a description of layoffs in a large corporation:

The way the layoffs were handled was legalistic, efficient, and demeaning. They hired two security guards to make sure things didn’t get out of control. In the meetings where people were told they were being laid off, the vice president read from a prepared statement, the same statement for each employee. Next the employee was escorted to his or her desk where they had little time to pack up, and they were escorted to the door. This was carried out in front of the rest of the company.

The picture reveals the way in which fear has become an unavoidable part of the corporate life. The layoffs described were evidently orchestrated to make the rest of the employees afraid. When corporations treat individuals in this way, soul has no place in daily endeavours. Work is diminished to the banality of keeping the economic machine running efficiently. Our talents and abilities are utilised to accomplish what someone else wants in the world, usually higher profits. The creativeness of our spirit and the depths of our individual soul often have to be relinquished, which results in working in fear. Creativeness and individuality interfere with efficiency and productivity, even though in the long run these qualities contribute most to a lasting, viable business. These days, however, business looks toward short-term gain as the way to perpetuate itself. Receiving a salary is often the only compensation for forgetting who we are.

A first small step — something each of us can do to assure that we do not sell our soul for work — is to perform a daily exercise, to build up the forces of the soul in the context of work that does little to nourish it.

Exercise: Imagine a scene that is typical of your job. You may, for example, picture writing at a computer, or teaching a class, or preparing a legal document — whatever your job consists of on a daily basis. Then, when you have this inner picture and have stabilised it, dissolve the picture into a ball of light. Then let the light re-form into a figure, the figure of a man or a woman, say, or any other form, such as a troll, or an angel, or another sort of being. Then ask this being, “What is your work in the world?” Do not be concerned if you feel you are making up an answer out of your head. Just let it happen. What does this figure say to you? After your conversation is completed, thank this being, and let the figure again dissolve into a ball of light, and then let the light return to your own image of your job. Then open your eyes. Doing this exercise periodically may produce quite interesting results. For example, you may find that while your job may seem the same day in and day out, the soul and spirit dimensions of what you are doing may change frequently. Being present to such change will bring new life to your job. You may also discover that what you think you are doing is something quite different from what your soul and spirit are doing.

In the past, when economic fear based on class distinctions came to dominate the whole of a culture, the situation was ripe for violent revolution. The intention of an exercise such as this is to bring about an inner revolution, the goal of which is to preserve soul. The difficulty in being treated with brutal anonymity lies in the fact that one can become forgetful of being more than a mere function. But if, under the rather dire circumstances prescribed by the economic myth, we keep an inner liveliness of spirit and soul, the possibility of creating a genuine, embracing myth remains open.

The many times I have done this exercise with groups of people has shown me that, indeed, a new myth is attempting to emerge, and that this myth has to do with being of selfless service to others. The reports from people who have done this exercise attest to this. One person, who works as a writer for a popular children’s television series, imagined a scene of himself as sitting at his desk, writing scripts. When this task became an inner figure, he saw an angel who said that his work was to bring courage of heart into the world. The writer was amazed and a bit overwhelmed, and viewed what he had been doing for years in a completely new light. Another person considered her job as answering telephones all day long. When this job became an inner figure, she saw a grandmotherly figure inviting people to dinner, and a group of people sitting around the table having a delicious dinner. When most people do this exercise, they most often experience images having to do with service. The soul apparently, feels most free from fear when it imagines doing something for others. The soul feels the call of the genuine need of others.

While it might seem strange to approach such overwhelming economic fears by suggesting we exercise the imagination, the goal is not to solve the problem of money and its power in our culture. It is simply to provide a way for the soul to keep from getting lost and forgotten in the presence of fears surrounding money. If we can keep soul connected with our jobs, our re-imagined work life will go a long way to alleviate financial fears.

Copyright © 1999 Robert Sardello

:::

Thea is author of the inspiring memoir Running into Myself. Buy a copy from Amazon UKAmazon US or, better still, order a limited edition signed copy direct from her publisher here (also ships worldwide).

Thea’s personal journey is utterly compelling. I couldn’t put her book down. Thea manages to make Greek mythology not only understandable, interesting, and relevant to our lives today, but shows how it can be utilised as a tool for self development. She introduces ideas and ways of thinking that broaden your mind, and lights the way for others to follow.”

— Melinda Messenger (TV Presenter)

Powered by WordPress