Two questions
The most common question I get asked is "I thought I'd worked this issue before, why is it coming up again?". The next most common question is "Will my work ever be done?". There are many answers to both these questions, which are no doubt familiar to many facilitators, and yet none of them have been to my personal satisfaction.
On the Dance Floor
After a year of so learning to dance salsa in classes, I finally took the step of going to a real Latin dance club and testing out my skills on a dance floor. I asked along a girl I was hoping to impress with my moves. And whilst the atmosphere was fabulous, the people friendly, and the music great, the DJ chose tracks for Latin dance styles I didn't know! I sat on the bench, whilst my girl got asked to dance by another guy, and I didn't see her for the rest of the night.
Jung
Lately, I've been reading lots of Jung, trying to dig deeper into the archetypes and his understanding of the nature of the self as a way of getting back to a grass roots understanding of all that I've learned so far. Till now, I had formed the impression that my work is about bringing into consciousness the parts that are in my unconscious, with the goal of bringing all my selves into consciousness.
Jung talks differently; he distinguishes between the personal unconscious and the universal unconscious, and locates the archetypes within the latter rather than the former. He notes that issues at the edge of the personal unconscious will bubble up into consciousness, rather than those issues deep within the personal unconscious. He also describes how the universal unconscious cannot be bounded by consciousness, and also describes how the archetypes within the universal unconscious have a powerful influence over the self. Jung actively warns against allowing parts of the universal unconsciousness from taking over consciousness, and associates many pathologies with this. Gillette and Moore talk about accessing the archetypal energies, but not identifying with them. This sounds like stuff that you don't want to take out the shadow bag, and in fact, may not even live within your bag, because your bag only holds your personal unconscious.
Shadow Work has identified the Warrior archetypal energy as the process by which I hold that ego-boundary between the conscious and unconscious. In ritual space, it seems that we apply archetypal energy to help shift the ego-boundary between a participant's conscious and personal unconscious; but those archetypal energies themselves never become integrated because they simply cannot be held within that boundary. Somehow they are different.
With my mathematical training, this looks to me like consciousness and personal unconsciousness are the objects, and the archetypal energies are processes (or functions) that work with the objects. I wanted to see what the ego-boundary might look like. Initially, I imagined that it would be a straight line, like a nicely marked hedge on a suburban lawn. Somehow this didn't feel right, and after much cogitation over the last month, the answer I found was rather surprising to me.
A beginners guide to fractals
I think that the ego-boundary looks rather like a fractal. Fractals are those complex and multi-coloured patterns that seemed to be everywhere in the early nineties. I don't propose to describe fractals in all their detail - a quick web search will show you much, including some pictures - but I would like to draw on the following properties of fractals:
1) A fractal is usually generated by the repeated application of a very simple process or rule on a two dimensional point, and seeing what happens to that point. Generally that point may stay within a finite boundary (e.g. go to zero, or stay within a circle); or zoom off to infinity (i.e. off the page). Fractals can be obtained by colouring the points that stay finite black, and everything else white.
2) The boundary between the black and white is incredibly convoluted and complex, and is often perceived as beautiful. Many of these patterns seem to mimic what we see in natural objects better than straight lines and simple geometric shapes can.
3) The boundary is incredibly difficult to locate with any precision. If you try zooming in to it, it simply doesn't get any simpler. The complexity is maintained at all levels of magnification.
4) The boundary is self-similar, in that it repeats itself within itself. Zoom down far enough and you'll find the same shape as what you started with.
5) The boundary is infinite in length, even though it bounds a finite area.
The similarities
There are many similarities between fractals and what happens within Shadow Work, and I will enumerate the first four similarities:
1) In Shadow work we believe that stuff goes into the bag often by a very simple rule: "Will I be loved more if I am not like this?”. The warrior archetype is characterised by its dual nature. Dual processes are the simplest processes possible - it's either In or Out; Black or White; Yes or No.
Secondly, archetypal energies seem to have this numinous quality that makes them both incredibly simple, and yet manifestly complex. The notion of a simple mathematical formula that produces wildly complex results helps me absorb the concept of numinosity. Also, the understanding that the archetypes are not points on the map of my self, but are processes applied to my selves fits with me better. It reminds me of Cliff's latest work on archetypes being dynamic energy loops rather than static qualities.
2) Personal issues can be complex whilst the underlying issue or pattern might be very simple. (A multitude of protracted financial problems, may reflect a belief that I don't take care of my money because I don't feel I am worth it.) I am also finding for me that participant issues have a natural beauty to them, despite all the pain that they have. There is a uniqueness in each client I have, and with compassionate eyes it is very easy for me to sit in wonder at the beauty of my client's life.
3) When a participant's issues come to the fore, they can seem incredibly complex if I stick to the level at which they manifest. For example, if a participant has financial issues, they are never simple financial issues, and often seem to get more and more complex if I stick to processing them at that level. "Well I can't pay Bob first, because I also owe the money to Sue, but if I don't pay Bob, then I won't be able to get the car that will help me earn more money to pay Sue..." There is often very little I can facilitate if I stick to processing at the level of the issue. Hence in Shadow Work, we identify the pattern and work with that.
4) It is the nature of patterns that they will take any opportunity to repeat themselves. In Shadow Work we identify this within the master overlay. A participant's issue will affect how they chose to process their issue. More generally, once a dynamic has been identified, characterised and regressed, it is often clear how that pattern has affected many aspects of the participant's life. There are always many overlays.
The infinite journey
As I said, these similarities were unsurprising. However, the infinite nature of the fractal boundary and how this might relate to my work was the new insight for me. Jung's observation that it is those issues at the edge of my consciousness that are most likely to be brought into my consciousness means that I will always be working at my edge. (In fact I'm sure that I have a risk manager who makes sure this is exactly what happens). Jung's later work is clear that the work is not about expanding the territory of consciousness, but about setting up a healthy relationship between conscious and unconscious aspects of the self.
Working my issues then becomes a journey along this infinite ego-boundary examining and improving communication between the two sides of the edge. But how can my finite experience of 29 years generate such a long journey for me?
One way to understand this paradox of infinite edge bounding a finite area is to think about what might happen if you chose to measure the length of the Australian coastline. One way to do this might be to take a satellite photo and measure the distance between points on the coast. Another way would be to get out a metre rule and walk around the coastline counting the number of times you use the metre rule. With a meter rule you'd be able to get into more of the nooks and crannies around the coastline than you'd see on the satellite photo, and you'd end up with a longer total length. If you used a half meter rule, you'd get an even longer answer, and so on to even a microscopic level where you were measuring around each grain of sand. The answer is therefore infinite, because it can be as large as you would like it to be. And despite all this, the total area of Australia is finite.
So, my issues encompass my finite personal experience, and yet working through those issues can be a much more than finite task. I might often chose to traverse my sense of self using a very long ruler (e.g. the New Warrior Training Adventure), and then I go round it again using a different ruler (e.g. long term personal therapy). Each time I traverse it I come across the same issues in a different way. Hence the first common question. Understanding the ego-boundary as a fractal, allows me to know that my issues will be self similar and will come up again and again. And as I zoom and focus on them again, they will manifest again. I can hold onto the understanding that this is not surprising, and is simply part of the beauty of who I am.
Secondly, this model makes sense of the personal growth work cliché that it's not the destination but the journey that matters (the usual answer to the second common question). Walking my boundary is not the linear, uphill, masculine journey I think it is; but rather is the circular, downhill, feminine journey that will simply take me back to where I started. So what's the point of taking the journey?
Back to the Dance Floor
In classic warrior style I chose to compete in the world of dance and women to test my sense of self ("I am a sexy dancer"). The result of this test could be taken in the critical magician way of "You met with failure, therefore you are not the sexy dancer you think you are". Of course, it could also be taken in a more golden magician's way of "Hey look! There are more styles to Latin dance than we knew about before – and that lambada style looks REALLY sexy! Let's go learn some of that."
A participant carrying a wound in the warrior quarter is likely to present their issue in a way that asks for a dual answer. ("Should I stick out my bad job with my angry boss, or should I throw it all in?"). At the end of the process it is rare for participants to reach one of the dualities as an answer. Instead it seems to me like the process allows them to open up to the inner complexity of the issue and from that richness find a different and more healthy way forward. I have always wondered how it is that the participant finds his or her own solution within his or her problem, and now I'm coming to believe that this is the simply the nature of the ego-boundary.
My experience of what Shadow Work theory calls the ritual nature of the ego-boundary often feels like a sharply defined boundary melting under the application of archetypal energy into a fractal like boundary that is rich in options for the participant. The shadow reversal routine within a good-guy-bad-guy process is rather like a convolution of a straight line edge into a fractal like pattern that is self-similar.
Conversely, the complex nature of a fractal-like boundary may leave a participant with the illusion that there is no boundary at all. Jung's warning about the dangers of being possessed by the unconscious remind me of the need to allow such a participant to know (through the healthy accessing of warrior energy) that whilst the boundary may be complicated, it is still a boundary and it exists.
As for the point of taking the journey? Well, I'd soon drop my meter rule, lie back on the warm sand, and enjoy the beautiful eternal dance of the deep blue-green waves rolling onto the white beach and receding once more to the depths of the ocean.
