Self and Shadow in Hesse's Siddhartha

Dedication

To Animus

Foreword

In this study, the author attempts to explicate the psychological complications regarding psychic duality of humans. With the help of various concepts, such as I-Ching Principle of China and others already known to the world, the dichotomy of two archetypes is deciphered. The author is of the opinion that the two archetypes, the Self and the Shadow, constitute the major binding forces of a human psyche. Consequently, it is through a process of integration between the two archetypes that a human psychologically achieves ‘wholeness’. By applying this theory to Siddhartha’s journey towards self-discovery, the author has skillfully concluded his viewpoint.

The book in hand is a true example of juxtaposing beautiful expression with logical argumentation. The diction, style and contents of the book do not, at any point, lead the reader astray from reading it and most of the readers, I am sure, will find this book as interesting as to finish it in just one sitting. The references made to Hesse’s biographical notes and textual allusions from his novel Siddhartha make it yet more alluring for, especially, the fan club of Bildungsroman novels and other writings related to self- actualization and individuation.

Since this is the first publication by this author in English language, I’d like to wish him all the best and hope to see more of his publications soon.

Milena Rampoldi, ProMosaik LAPH, Istanbul, May 2021

Astract

This research investigates the integration of the Self and the Shadow in Hermann Hesse’s Siddhartha.

The focus of the research is to investigate various symbols used by Hesse in Siddhartha. The archetypal analysis of these symbols makes an integral part of this work and theories governing symbols and archetypes provide a basis for the main idea of the research. Discussion, analysis, and criticism of the archetype of the shadow substantiate the statement of the research. The psychoanalytical nature of the study provides a thorough debate over how shadow is projected and how it can be integrated with the self. The study shows that this integration leads to the completeness of personality. The research is primarily of qualita-tive nature.

Introduction

This study presents an analysis of Hermann Hesse’s Siddhartha with special reference to Carl Jung’s archetypal framework. Focusing the two archetypes Self and Shadow, this research highlights the gradual development of Siddhartha’s nature and attitude in addition to analyzing archetypal events that form and deform the protagonist’s bonds with various characters in the novel. Finally, it unfolds the mystery of how Siddhartha’s persona achieves completeness by the integration of its shadow.

Carl Jung believed that archetypes are the underlying images and forms that are derived from the collective unconscious¹. They are hidden unless they are expressed in a particular way by individuals and their cultures. In their interaction with the outer world, individuals actualize them as images in their conscious or express them as their traits in their behavior. In short, according to Jung, an archetype is “the introspectively recognizable form of a priori psychic orderedness” (Jung 1985: 140).

The Self and the Shadow, inter alia, are two Jungian archetypes having an inverse relationship with each other. The Self comprises the characteristics that evolve an individual into the ‘I’ (Self). It is a sum-total of the conscious, the unconscious, and the ego. It signifies the unification of consciousness and unconsciousness in an individual and represents the individual’s psyche as a whole (Jung 1978: 120). Thus, every individual’s personality as it appears to the outer world is the individual’s Self.

The Shadow, on the other hand, is the unconscious aspect of an individual’s personality, which he does not recognize as a part of himself. The shadow is a veiled cult of one’s persona. Jung says that every individual has a shadow, adding that the less it is a part of the individual’s conscious life, the ‘blacker and the denser it is’ (Jung 1938: 131). The life one chooses not to live is one’s Shadow. Sylvia Lafair (2009) quotes Robert Johnson as saying that the Shadow is “our psychic twin that follows us like a mirror.” Hence, it is the oppositeness of the Self. If one chooses to be good, one chooses not to be bad and vice versa. Being a representation of the darker or hidden side of a personality, the Shadow may contain both good and bad elements; while owning one’s Shadow leads to the whole-making of an individual’s personality (Lafair 2009: 135).

Looking at Siddhartha from an archetypal spectacle, we find out that Hesse’s hero journeys from places to places only to own various aspects of his shadow in order to finally attain whole-making by integrating his shadow. Our protagonist, Siddhartha, makes different choices of life patterns and finds his way to whole-making. The obedient son chooses to become an ascetic mendicant. The ascetic mendicant chooses to part his ways with Buddha. The spiritual man chooses to be a business-man. The businessman chooses to be a lover and the lover finally chooses to be a ferryman. All this does not seem to be a mere play of coincidence. It rather shows Hesse’s mastery of presen-ting his protagonist with various cults of his shadow; thus to attain whole-making.

Instead of delving into the complicated religious terminology, Hesse (1877-1962) has told Siddhartha’s story with fictional twists that have beautified the novel to the extent that one does not bother to ponder over the psychoanalytical devices used to progress the character of the protagonist. It would, therefore, be a good idea to reread the novel and pause by every turn Siddhartha takes and every choice he makes in order to realize which aspect of his shadow he is about to own. By so doing, we will also be able to appreciate the author’s savvy of the prevailing psychological doctrines.

Keeping Jungian archetypal theory in mind, while reading Siddhartha, makes things very fascinating and intelligible. Every move of the protagonist introduces us to a newer aspect of life unlived by Siddhartha. Working on these lines calls for an in-depth study of psychological theories which has given way to some relevant findings; and they will prove to be a modest contribution attempt in this area of learning.

The techniques used by Hesse to psychoanalytically improve the persona of Siddhartha create a bridge between the fictional aesthetics of the story and psychological intricacies of persona cults. This makes the novel more than a Bildungsroman or Erziehungsroman².

The research presents a thorough analysis of Hesse’s Siddhartha with a particular focus on his attempt to mature the protagonist Siddhartha by introducing him to his Shadow. Instead of reproducing the narrative of the great sage, Siddhartha Gautama Buddha, Hesse develops the character of Siddhartha in his own particular way after having picked up certain patches from Buddha’s epic. The novel was first published in 1922 under the title of Siddhartha: Ein Indische Dichtung or Siddhartha: An Indian Poetic Work. The book has been read and cherished for its lyrical and romantic flavors. However, the present study highlights the Shadow pattern working behind the whole-making of Siddhartha, the son of Brahmin.

Thesis Statement

Control over one’s Shadow may result in completeness of one’s personality. Hermann Hesse’s protagonist, Siddhartha, journeys to his whole-making by owning different Shadow patterns of his personality, the Self. This study analyzes the text of Siddhartha to highlight Shadow projections and present findings on how Siddhartha, the hero, integrates them to attain whole-making.

Research Questions:

1 What is the significance and scope of an archetypal study?

2 What is the range of relevant texts of psychological sources that correspond to the archetypal paradigm, especially Shadow, with reference to Siddhartha?

3 Since the archetype Shadow is an unbounded entity, what should be the delimiting and controlling factors in selecting the range of archetypal readings?

Research Methodology:

For the most part, this research is qualitative in nature. The study has involved the method of library research and has been analytical, critical as well as psychoanalytical. The criticism of the text of the novel has been consistently supported by archetypal readings and an appraisal of the relevant literature has been made in the discipline.

Archetypes are formative patterns that compose the human collective psyche or collective unconscious. An archetype is a pattern found consistently and regularly in individuals across all times and cultures (Page, 2003:43). To put it in other words, archetypes describe the basic behavioral patterns within human psyche (Stevens, 1990:49). In order to make use of this cross referencing, I have been following a thorough reading schedule. In the course of this comprehensive schedule, I adopted the following line of action:

1 A study of literary and psychological theories to discover the prevailing archetypal parameters and to find out how the genre of fiction, such as Siddhartha, can be studied and analyzed under archetypal theories.

2 A close reading of Siddhartha which could help me figure out shadow projections and determine the process of whole-making.

3 An analysis of the character of Siddhartha and his making and breaking bonds with other characters with reference to shadow patterns.

 

4 Implementation of deductive as well as inductive approach while accomplishing the research work. Thereby, literary devices have been juxtaposed with archetypal devices in order to reach a conclusion as to how the novel’s position could be established within the literary standards.

5 Throughout, the research mentions the title of the novel in italics while the hero of the novel has been clearly separated from the historical Siddhartha Buddha by mentioning him as the hero or Hesse’s Siddhartha.

Archetypal Theory and its Various Dimensions:

Jung first used the word ‘archetype’ in 1919 (CW 8, Para. 270). The word originates from Greek and dates back from classical times. Primarily, the word ‘archetype’ means ‘prime imprinter’. It usually referred to an original manuscript from which copies would be made later. Interestingly, the etymology of the word ‘archetype’ is very much informative:

The first element ‘arche’ signifies ‘beginning, origin, cause, primal source principle’, but it also signifies ‘position of a leader, supreme rule and government’ (in other words a kind of ‘dominant’): the second element ‘type’ means ‘blow and what is produced by a blow, the imprint of a coin … form, image, prototype, model, order, and norm’, … in the figurative, modern sense, ‘pattern underlying form, primordial form’ (the form, for example, ‘underlying’ a number of similar human, animal or vegetable specimens).

(Jacobi 1959)

The simplest definition of ‘archetype’ comes from Anthony Stevens:

The archetypes (are) innate neuropsychic centres possessing the capacity to initiate, control and mediate the common behavioural characteristics and typical experiences of all human beings irrespective of race, culture or creed.

(Stevens 2004)

As for Jung, he describes archetypes as ‘typical modes of apprehension’. According to him, ‘whenever we meet with uniform and regularly recurring modes of apprehension we are dealing with an archetype’ (Jung, 1969:137-8). Steve Page gives further elaboration of the relationship between collective unconscious, personal conscious, and archetypes by presenting the following figure (Page, 2003:44):

A number of archetypes have been recognized so far. Some of them have mostly been described as personifications while others as patterns or forces. Mostly commonly discussed of the personified archetypes include trickster, mother, child, priest, and Messiah (Jung 1959).

Personifications of archetypes can also be ascribed to a particular type of person around us. However, it must be kept in mind that the said archetypes should not be confused with biological figures.

Hence, the archetype mother may not signify our biological parent. Any person that may have the charac-teristics of mother archetype can be a symbol of this archetype; for example a teacher, a friend or a guide. In a similar way, some institutions may also be viewed as mother archetype for inspiring a sense of devotion or awe. Thus, our college, university, mosque, church, or parliament could be telling examples in this respect (Page, 2003:44).

Archetypes other than the personifieds are images within the human psyche such as those of a destructive force or absolute evil. This image of the dark forces, for example, is the archetype of shadow. Thus, there are people around us that have proved to be symbols of evil. Those involved in murders, sexual and physical assaults, and other such activities become the embo-diments of the archetype of shadow. The archetype shadow does exist within the psyche of all humans. However, it may surface only at times of sheer emotional disturbances. Moreover, all humans do not possess all tinges of the archetype shadow. This is why, many psychologists will separate ‘personal shadow’ of a human from the archetype shadow. There are moments in our life when we want to force ourselves upon others, especially those disdainful of our attention, and moments when we strongly urge to attack someone for behavior unacceptable to us. These are the moments when our personal shadow surfaces and we feel driven by it (Page, 2003:45).

To Fordham, the archetype shadow is the nearest and closest to human ego. Also, it is very intimate to the ‘repressed unconscious’ and it keeps integrating with the unconscious on regular basis (Fordham, 1986:5).

Anthony Stevens relates the archetype Shadow to the man’s ‘animal nature’. According to Stevens, we pay a great price for acquiring a superego and that price is in the form of a ‘serious loss of freedom for the Self.’ He adds that the actualization of the Self calls for some components of the Self to remain repressed, which is because these components of the Self are not acceptable to the society or traditions. These unacceptable shades of the self, according to Stevens, are termed as ‘the beast within’. Stevens holds that these unacceptable components of the Self were collectively called the Shadow by Jung (Stevens, 2004:247).

A similar reference to ‘the beast within’ can also be found in Human Aggression by Anthony Storr when he writes in the introduction to his book:

The sombre fact is that we are the cruellest and most ruthless species that has ever walked the earth; and that, although we may recoil in horror when we read in newspaper or history book of the atrocities committed by man upon man, we know in our hearts that each one of us harbours within himself those same savage impulses which lead to murder, to torture and to war.

(Storr, 1968:9)

Referring to the same ‘beast within’, Mary Midgley criticizes the medieval practice of flaying wolves alive after they were captured for their ‘wickedness’. In her Beast and Man, she holds that when judged by human standards wolves prove to be

Paragons of steadiness and good conduct. They pair for life, they are faithful and affectionate spouses and parents, they show great loyalty to their pack and great courage and persistence in the face of difficulties, they carefully respect one another’s territories, keep their dens clean, and extremely seldom kill anything that they do not need for dinner. If they fight with another wolf, the encounter normally ends with submission. They have an inhibition about killing the suppliant and about attacking females and cubs. They have also, like all social animals, a fairly elaborate etiquette, including subtly varied ceremonies of greeting and reassurance, by which friendship is strengthened, cooperation achieved, and the wheels of social life generally oiled.

(Midgley, 1979:26)

The shadow of an individual may not necessarily be negative. ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’ are relative. A child grows to be ‘Good’ in terms of the norms and tradition of his parentage and culture. If a child’s Self is labelled as ‘Good’ in a culture, his repressed and unfulfilled capacities will be regarded as ‘Bad’ and his shadow will be a repository of all that can be labelled as ‘Bad’ (Stevens, 2004:252). Stevens also quotes Edwin Muir as saying, ‘The unfulfilled desires of the virtuous are evil; the unfulfilled desires of the vicious are good.’

Beebe stresses on confronting and integrating the Shadow. According to him, there are moments when a person is stuck in a situation where he feels that something is wrong with his will. He finds that the course of action he has adopted is not based on the motive that he intended. He stops and examines the real motive. He finds relief only when he has found the truth. This is the point when one feels secure in determining as what he must do. Beebe holds that this whole process, in Jungian realm, is called confronting and integrating the Shadow (Beebe 2005:33).