RepulsiveNumberOP•

I hate to repost something of mine from a week ago, but there was an unexplored angle I had in mind that does relate to this sub. When I read the excerpt, this infinitely flexible and disembodied consumer subject kept reminding me of the classic "Trickster" archetype. This is from Jung's own presentation:

Anyone who belongs to a sphere of culture that seeks the perfect state somewhere in the past must feel very queerly indeed when confronted by the figure of the trickster. He is a forerunner of the saviour, and, like him, God, man, and animal at once. He is both subhuman and superhuman, a bestial and divine being, whose chief and most alarming characteristic is his unconsciousness. Because of it he is deserted by his (evidently human) companions, which seems to indicate that he has fallen below their level of consciousness. He is so unconscious of himself that his body is not a unity, and his two hands fight each other. He takes his anus off and entrusts it with a special task. Even his sex is optional despite its phallic qualities: he can turn himself into a woman and bear children. From his penis he makes all kinds of useful plants. This is a reference to his original nature as a Creator, for the world is made from the body of a god.

On the other hand he is in many respects stupider than the animals, and gets into one ridiculous scrape after another. Although he is not really evil, he does the most atrocious things from sheer unconsciousness and unrelatedness. His imprisonment in animal unconsciousness is suggested by the episode where he gets his head caught inside the skull of an elk, and the next episode shows how he overcomes this condition by imprisoning the head of a hawk inside his own rectum. True, he sinks back into the former condition immediately afterwards, by falling under the ice, and is outwitted time after time by the animals, but in the end he succeeds in tricking the cunning coyote, and this brings back to him his saviour nature. The trickster is a primitive “cosmic” being of divine-animal nature, on the one hand superior to man because of his superhuman qualities, and on the other hand inferior to him because of his unreason and unconsciousness. He is no match for the animals either, because of his extraordinary clumsiness and lack of instinct. These defects are the marks of his human nature, which is not so well adapted to the environment as the animal’s but, instead, has prospects of a much higher development of consciousness based on a considerable eagerness to learn, as is duly emphasized in the myth.

What the repeated telling of the myth signifies is the therapeutic anamnesis of contents which, for reasons still to be discussed, should never be forgotten for long. If they were nothing but the remnants of an inferior state it would be understandable if man turned his attention away from them, feeling that their reappearance was a nuisance. This is evidently by no means the case, since the trickster has been a source of amusement right down to civilized times, where he can still be recognized in the carnival figures of Pulcinella and the clown. That is one important reason for his still continuing to function. But it is not the only one, and certainly not the reason why this reflection of an extremely primitive state of consciousness solidified into a mythological personage. Mere vestiges of an early state that is dying out usually lose their energy at an increasing rate, otherwise they would never disappear. The last thing we would expect is that they would have the strength to solidify into a mythological figure with its own cycle of legends—unless, of course, they received energy from outside, in this case from a higher level of consciousness or from sources in the unconscious which are not yet exhausted. To take a legitimate parallel from the psychology of the individual, namely the appearance of an impressive shadow figure antagonistically confronting a personal consciousness: this figure does not appear merely because it still exists in the individual, but because it rests on a dynamism whose existence can only be explained in terms of his actual situation, for instance because the shadow is so disagreeable to his ego-consciousness that it has to be repressed into the unconscious. This explanation does not quite meet the case here, because the trickster obviously represents a vanishing level of consciousness which increasingly lacks the power to take express and assert itself. Furthermore, repression would prevent it from vanishing, because repressed contents are the very ones that have the best chance of survival, as we know from experience that nothing is corrected in the unconscious. Lastly, the story of the trickster is not in the least disagreeable to the Winnebago consciousness or incompatible with it but, on the contrary, pleasurable and therefore not conducive to repression. It looks, therefore, as if the myth were actively sustained and fostered by consciousness. This may well be so, since that is the best and most successful method of keeping the shadow figure conscious and subjecting it to conscious criticism. Although, to begin with, this criticism has more the character of a positive evaluation, we may expect that with the progressive development of consciousness the cruder aspects of the myth will gradually fall away, even if the danger of its rapid disappearance under the stress of white civilization did not exist. We have often seen how certain customs, originally cruel or obscene, became mere vestiges in the course of time.

I'm not a Jungian, but there's something interesting here, I think.

2
AutoModeratorMOD•

Links in Sorcery Of The Spectacle requires a small description, at least 100 words explaining how this relates to this subreddit. Note, any post to this comment will be automatically collapsed.

As a reminder, this is our subreddit description:

We exist in a culture of narrative and media that increasingly, willfully combines agency-robbing fantasy mythos with instantaneous technological dissemination—a self-mutating proteum of semantics: the spectacle.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1
NixIsia•

Concerning that this sub is touching redscare now rip sots

1
RepulsiveNumberOP•

It's been that way here for some time. redscarepod was at one point a good place to discuss art. That's not so true anymore, and it's become more about shitposting.

The underlying issue, I think, is that people stopped reading and responding to longer posts and comments as the forum grew, so it became too frustrating to bother writing them. The slop was always more amusing and easier to create, and that's what has come to predominate. This isn't a fault of the specific forum or the people there; most Reddit subs tend to undergo such a metamorphosis, unless the moderators micromanage it and impede growth on purpose.

This is all basically irrelevant to the post, however. Mentioning it was intended to provide an occasion, an answer to "what led you to make this post?" In this case, it was because someone there linked to a certain post. If you're curious, you can find the link under the original post. My comment was automatically removed when I tried to link it here.

2
NixIsia•

Thanks for the reply, didn't realize the longer standing connection. I also found a lot of fantastic art on the sub, less so nowadays.

1
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1