Collected 7 集体无意识的原型 98

Collected 7
Analytical Psychology
Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格


161 I must now emphasize the not unimportant fact, which must
also have struck the reader, that in the dream the collective un¬conscious appears under a very negative aspect, as something dangerous and harmful. This is because the patient has a richly developed, indeed positively luxuriant, fantasy life, possibly due to her literary gift. Her powers of fantasy are a symptom of ill¬ness in that she revels in them far too much and allows real life to slip by. Any more mythology would be exceedingly danger¬ous for her, because a great chunk of external life stands before her, still unlived. She has too little hold upon life to risk all at once a complete reversal of standpoint. The collective uncon¬scious has fallen upon her and threatens to bear her away from a reality whose demands have not been adequately met. Accord¬ingly, as the dream indicates, the collective unconscious had to be presented to her as something dangerous, otherwise she would have been only too ready to make it a refuge from the demands of life.


162 In judging a dream we must observe very carefully how the
figures are introduced. For example, the crab that personifies the unconscious is negative in that it “walks backwards” and, in addition, holds back the dreamer at the critical moment. Misled by the so-called dream mechanisms of Freudian manufacture, such as displacement, inversion, etc., people have imagined they could make themselves independent of the “facade” of the dream by supposing that the true dream-thoughts lay hidden behind it.


As against this I have long maintained that we have no right to accuse the dream of, so to speak, a deliberate ma¬noeuvre calculated to deceive. Nature is often obscure or im¬penetrable, but she is not, like man, deceitful. We must there¬fore take it that the dream is just what it pretends to be, neither more nor less.lO If it shows something in a negative light, there is no reason for assuming that it is meant positively. The arche¬typal “danger at the ford” is so patent that one is almost tempted to take the dream as a warning.

9 Those of my readers who have a deeper interest in the problem of opposites and its solution, as well as in the mythological activity of the unconscious, are referred to Symbols of Transformation, Psychological Types, and The Arche¬types and the Collective Unconscious. [Cf. also Mysterium Coniunctionis.¬EDITORS.]
10 Cf. “General Aspects of Dream Psychology.” 100

But I must discounte¬nance all such anthropomorphic interpretations. The dream it¬self wants nothing; it is a self-evident content, a plain natural fact like the sugar in the blood of a diabetic or the fever in a patient with typhus. It is only we who, if we are clever and can unriddle the signs of nature, turn it into a warning.


163 But-a warning of what? Of the obvious danger that the un-
conscious might overpower the dreamer at the moment of cross¬ing. And what would being overpowered mean? An invasion by the unconscious may very easily occur at moments of critical change and decision. The bank from which she approaches the river is her situation as known to us so far. This situation has precipitated her into a neurotic deadlock, as though she had come up against an impassable obstacle. The obstacle is repre¬sented by the dream as a perfectly passable river. So things do not seem to be very serious.


But in the river, most unexpectedly, the crab is hiding, and this represents the real danger on ac¬count of which the river is, or appears to be, impassable. For had she only known beforehand that the dangerous crab was lurking at this particular spot, she might perhaps have ventured to cross somewhere else, or have taken other precautions. In the dream¬er’s present situation it is eminently desirable that a crossing should be made.


The crossing means in the first place a carrying over-a transference-of the earlier situation to the doctor. That is the new feature. Were it not for the unpredictable uncon¬scious, this would not involve such a great risk. But we saw that through the transference the activity of archetypal figures is li¬able to be let loose, a fact we had not banked on. We have reck¬oned without our host, for we “forgot the gods.”


164 Our dreamer is not a religious person, she is “modern.” She
has forgotten the religion she was once taught, she knows noth¬ing of those moments when the gods intervene, or rather she does not know that there are age-old situations whose nature it is to stir us to the depths. One such situation is love, its passion and its danger. Love may summon forth unsuspected powers in the soul for which we had better be prepared. “Religio” in the sense of a “careful consideration” of unknown dangers and agencies-that is what is in question here. From a simple projec¬tion love may come upon her with all its fatal power, some daz¬zling illusion that might throw her life off its natural course.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: