About “Nature As Mirror”
photo by Karla Souder
Edited paper for 2008 class at Naropa University
Nature as Mirror for Our Projections
What happens to us psychologically when we intentionally go out into the wilderness with the intent of using that experience as a venue for psychological growth or healing? When one encounters a being in nature— for example, a tree, a rock, a storm or a fox— what are the psychological processes that occur between that being and oneself? Is nature a mirror for our internal psyches? Is there a dialogue with nature, something speaking back to us through messages of symbols and signs?
Sigmund Freud introduced the concept of the personal unconscious, a sort of psychic cellar where one can stash out of view one’s own unacceptable thoughts, impulses and memories—effectively hiding them from oneself. When our everyday consciousness— the ego— experiences thoughts that run counter to the concept we hold of ourselves, then an internal conflict is generated. To resolve the conflict the ego may split off and unconsciously deny, disown andproject those aspects of ourselves onto someone else by perceiving those undesirable qualities in the other person, rather than in the self (Plotkin, 2003).
Projection can be imagined as a movie of our own disowned parts being alighted onto the blank projection screen of another’s face so that we see our own rejected qualities and feelings as if in the other person instead of us. If one can become aware of one’s own projection occurring, then the projection screen turns into a mirror by which to take a look at oneself, and then we can withdraw the projection. Projection, when made conscious, can be a tool for self-learning and observation.
Everyone projects. We all are most likely to project in relationships where we know very little about the other person; the reality of that person’s real qualities don’t interfere with the theme of what we are projecting. Projection can also occur in relationships of high emotional intensity, or relationships that re-enact a primary dynamic of childhood—which often occurs with an authority figure, or in a love relationship. Projection is the misattribution of feelings to the wrong person and initially always occurs completely outside of our awareness. Projection can cause us problems since it lays a distorted foundation from which we form our initial impressions of another and make subsequent decisions and actions about that relationship from then forward.
Nature, too, can be the object that receives our projections. Other human beings are our best-fit projection screens because we see ourselves clearest in the features and mannerisms of other human beings. But exploring one’s projections onto nature may actually be preferable. Human relationships are so complex, with so many multiple layers of distortions, that it can be overwhelming and time-consuming to try make sense of all the complexity (H. Benoit, personal communication, Oct. 15, 2008). Since nature is not quite as good of a fit for our projections, we may find it actually easier to make sense of what occurs psychologically, which in the end, may make for a more successful self-examination process.
So, how do we know when we are projecting onto nature or other humans? Very strong emotional or somatic reactions to animals, persons or situations can indicate projection. When we react more strongly than the situation seems to call for, or we have any tendencies to perceive others as evil or saviors, these are strong indicators of projection or transference. It often takes someone else to help us know when we are projecting. Our psyches work very hard to project these unwanted aspects of ourselves to begin with, and our ego won’t be inclined to re-engage with the content of what was rejected.
THREE TYPES OF PROJECTION
Parallel Projections
Parallel projection is a common dynamic by which a person “puts another person in ourshoes”, so to speak, by assuming that the other person feels like we would. Functionally, this helps us feel bonded to another, albeit via false empathy. It helps us feel more secure and less self-defensive about the acceptability of our own characteristics (Halpern and Halpern, 1983). Of course, the downside is that we “assume” too much about the other, and may come to believe that our thoughts and feelings have more in common with others than may be actually be true.
Example: I see someone eating a lone in a restaurant and I assume they must feel lonely and I ache for them. If I act on my projection, I might even go up to them and make a conversation in order to relieve them from their “loneliness.”
Unconscious Projections
Transference is a specific kind of projection. Transference is an “unconscious redirection of feelings for one person to another… an inappropriate repetition in a present relationship that reenacts a relationship that was important in a person’s childhood” (Plotkin, 2003). During transference, people “turn into biological time machines” and project unresolved childhood interpersonal dynamics onto other current relationships. Unconscious personal projection and transference refers to the unconscious repression and subsequent projection of either unacceptable qualities about oneself or a reenactment of childhood situations that were painful
Example: I see an injured baby rabbit and I feel horrified and responsible that I must save its life. Later, I realize the bunny was a replacement symbol for feelings I had towards my younger sister who died as a child.
Archetypal Projections
Archetypal (or mythic) projection operates on a non-personal scale. Carl Jung expanded Freud’s concept of the personal unconscious to come up with the idea of the collective unconscious. The collective unconscious “collectively” holds the thoughts, feelings, implulses and behaviors of all sorts from the whole human experience. Archetypes are proposed to be common forms, symbols and experiences that all humans have shared over the course of history, and passed down to all individuals genetically through the course of evolution. However, any particular archetype may be undeveloped in a given individual’s conscious personally (Hopke, 1989). The collective unconscious theory asserts that there are an uncountable number of archetypal patterns represented in this composite map of human experience over the eons. Archetypal projection takes us outside our personal experience and psychology into the realm of all time.
Carol Pearson writes of archetypes: “They exist both inside and outside the human soul…. We can therefore, find them by going inward (to our own dreams…) or by going outward to myth, art… constellations of the sky, and the birds and animals of the earth” (p. 6).
Jung asserted that anything that is unconscious can be projected. “Archetypes are reflected in our myths as heroes, tricksters, fools, royalty and innocents. But they come as other-than-human types as well; archetypes of water, sun, rocks, and other objects that function as symbols” (Pearson, 1991, p. 6). These symbols are not intellectually created, as Evans quotes Jung again:
…man is born with a certain functioning…a certain pattern of behavior which is expressed in the form of archetypal forms…Archetypes are…dynamic. They are instinctual images that are not intellectually invented. They are always there and they produce certain processes in the unconscious that one could best compare with myths (p.66).
Archetypal projection is trickier to identify than personal projections and transference. One of the main indicators is the tremendous strength of emotions they can elicit (H. Benoit, personal communication, Oct. 15, 2008). The emotions can be strongly positive or negative, but they have great power over us. “When we are awake, we are not as awake as we think, and in the light of day we continue to dream mythic images.” (Halpern and Halpern, 1983).
Example one: Perhaps I am a quiet, reserved, a “play it safe” kind of person but I am drawn towards story-lines in books or movies with repetitive themes of adventure, quest, or conquest. On examination, I realize I am vicariously energizing and projecting my own unexpressed, conscious archetypal energy. I am driven by my intense attraction to into these archetypal mythic images.
Example two: A child who has never seen a picture of or a live snake or a picture of a snake sees one for the first time and is terrified and repulsed.
SIGNS AND OMENS
Because we are the only species whom we are certain is aware of our own future death, we try to plan beyond the here and now as a way to prepare for what will happen. To head off our anxiety about the unknown future, earlier humans have tried to read “signs” in nature as predictors of things to come. According to Sarvananda Bluestone (2002), initially, in reading signs and omens people were just applying their knowledge of nature. For example, a ring around the moon was accurately “read” as precipitation to come. But uncommon events such as comets and eclipses became associated with “ominous” events to come. Over time, rigid interpretations of signs led to beliefs and subsequent superstitions that became considered not just natural, but supernatural.
Bluestone suggests using signs and “non-ominous” omens in a different way, not as premonitions that act as an ego defense against our anxiety, but as a process of creating meaning out of the psychological dynamics of projection. Bluestone writes:
A sign is a momentary thing. We see it. We reflect. We understand. A sign that appears at one moment will mean something different to some one at a different time. There is no superstition involved in the interpretation of signs…When we no longer trust ourselves to see the world, we have to believe in other peoples’ experience. Belief and superstition are twins. Both are taught and conditioned. Neither comes from direct experience (p.11).
So, what occurs when an individual goes out into nature to seek the direct experience of a sign or a totem? I suggest that with intentional seeking we are consciously and voluntarily inviting our personal and collective unconscious to project upon our immediate environment so we can generate a look into our deeper psyche.
SOUL IN THE WOODS: ANIMA MUNDI
Storr (1983) quotes Jung:
In remote times, (which can still be observed among primitives living today) the main body of psychic life was apparently in human and nonhuman objects: it was projected… Consciousness can hardly exist in a state of complete projections…through the withdrawal of projections, conscious knowledge slowly developed. Science, curiously enough, began with the discovery of astronomical laws, and hence the withdrawal…of the most distant projections. This was the first stage in the despiritualization of the world. The gods were withdrawn from the mountains and rivers, from trees and animals (p.242).
If we stop here, projections identified and then withdrawn, Jung states that we have de-spiritualized nature. But what if, instead, we radically shift our notions of who and what embody soul? And, while we’re at it, what is soul? I like Bill Poltkin’s definition: “…a thing’s ultimate place in the world…the very core or heart of a thing’s identity, its decisive meaning or significance. It’s raison d’etre” (Plotkin, 2008, pg. 30). The term anima mundi, translated as world soul, is the notion that everything has a soul, individually and also collectively. Without anima mundi, the external world is dead, and we are left alone and lonely, isolated within our own internal experiences. Hillman writes:
A world without soul offers no intimacy…the patient must find ways to connect the psyche of the dream and feeling to the dead world so as to reanimate it. The world without soul can never return my glance, never look at me with appeal, with gratitude, nor relieve the essential isolation of my subjectivity. But at that moment when each thing…presents itself again as a psychic reality, then I am held in an enduring intimate conversation with matter (p. 120).
Hillman asserts that to come full circle and reconnect with the other being from whom we have withdrawn our projections, we must finally allow for the soul of the other to genuinely relate back to us. Also referred to as animism, this is a world-view which served humanity from as early as Plato right up through modern religious traditions such as Hinduism, Shintoism, Native American and other indigenous spirituality. Animism, of course, has generally been rejected in the West since Western civilization’s Enlightenment era.
But perhaps, to bring full circle the work with our projections, we need to take this radical step and re-animate the woods, the deer, the rocks, the water and trees. Not with the false connections of projected past woundings and repressions, but with the encountered, examined, mythic meaning gifted to us through our ancestors and the authentic encounter with the soul of the other. If, in fact, evolution has gifted us with archetypal forms, and if these archetypes exist in an animated world of soul, then it is our natural healing and meaning-making process to encounter and integrate these symbols into our daily lives.
Our goal, then, is not to stop projecting—which would be impossible anyway— but to project, even voluntarily at times, then own and reintegrate what is discovered, and allow for the soul of the other to be encountered clearly and directly. The soulful relationship between us and nature then becomes real, healed, liberated and deeply meaningful. For us and for the natural world.
References
Bluestone, S. (2002). How to read sign and omens in everyday life. Rochester: Destiny Books.
Evans, R. (1981). Dialogue with C.G. Jung. New York: Praeger Publishers.
Halpern, J., & Halpern, I., (1983). Projections: Our world of imaginary relationships. New York: Seaview/Putnam.
Hillman, J., Psychic Reality.
Hopcke, R. (1989). A guided tour of the collected works of C.G. Jung. Boston and Shaftesberry: Shambhala Publications, Inc.
Pearson, C. (1991). Awakening the heroes within: Twelve archetypes to help us find ourselves and transform the world. San Francisco: HarperCollins Publishers.
Plotkin, B. (2003). Soulcraft. Novato, CA: New World Library.
Plotkin, B. (2008). Nature and the Human Soul. Novato, CA: New World Library.
Storr, A.(Ed.),(1983). The essential Jung. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Copyright by Kate Guenther, 2009
