diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/69219-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/69219-0.txt | 2000 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 2000 deletions
diff --git a/old/69219-0.txt b/old/69219-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index ab773ec..0000000 --- a/old/69219-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,2000 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of Psychoanalysis and the unconscious, by -D. H. Lawrence - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: Psychoanalysis and the unconscious - -Author: D. H. Lawrence - -Release Date: October 24, 2022 [eBook #69219] - -Language: English - -Produced by: Steve Mattern, David King, and the Online Distributed - Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net. (This file was - produced from images generously made available by The - Internet Archive.) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PSYCHOANALYSIS AND THE -UNCONSCIOUS *** - - - PSYCHOANALYSIS AND THE UNCONSCIOUS - - - - - Psychoanalysis and the Unconscious - - - BY - D. H. LAWRENCE - - NEW YORK - THOMAS SELTZER - 1921 - - - - - Copyright, 1921, by - THOMAS SELTZER, INC. - - All rights reserved - - - PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - - - - - CONTENTS - - - I. PSYCHOANALYSIS _vs._ MORALITY 9 - - II. THE INCEST MOTIVE AND IDEALISM 26 - - III. THE BIRTH OF CONSCIOUSNESS 45 - - IV. THE CHILD AND HIS MOTHER 64 - - V. THE LOVER AND THE BELOVED 83 - - VI. HUMAN RELATIONS AND THE UNCONSCIOUS 102 - - - - - CHAPTER I - PSYCHOANALYSIS _vs._ MORALITY - - -Psychoanalysis has sprung many surprises on us, performed more than one -_volte face_ before our indignant eyes. No sooner had we got used to the -psychiatric quack who vehemently demonstrated the serpent of sex coiled -round the root of all our actions, no sooner had we begun to feel -honestly uneasy about our lurking complexes, than lo and behold the -psychoanalytic gentleman reappeared on the stage with a theory of pure -psychology. The medical faculty, which was on hot bricks over the -therapeutic innovations, heaved a sigh of relief as it watched the -ground warming under the feet of the professional psychologists. - -This, however, was not the end. The ears of the ethnologist began to -tingle, the philosopher felt his gorge rise, and at last the moralist -knew he must rush in. By this time psychoanalysis had become a public -danger. The mob was on the alert. The Œdipus complex was a household -word, the incest motive a commonplace of tea-table chat. Amateur -analyses became the vogue. “Wait till you’ve been analyzed,” said one -man to another, with varying intonation. A sinister look came into the -eyes of the initiates—the famous, or infamous, Freud look. You could -recognize it everywhere, wherever you went. - -Psychoanalysts know what the end will be. They have crept in among us as -healers and physicians; growing bolder, they have asserted their -authority as scientists; two more minutes and they will appear as -apostles. Have we not seen and heard the _ex cathedra_ Jung? And does it -need a prophet to discern that Freud is on the brink of a -Weltanschauung—or at least a Menschanschauung, which is a much more -risky affair? What detains him? Two things. First and foremost, the -moral issue. And next, but more vital, he can’t get down to the rock on -which he must build his church. - -Let us look to ourselves. This new doctrine—it will be called no -less—has been subtly and insidiously suggested to us, gradually -inoculated into us. It is true that doctors are the priests, nay worse, -the medicine-men of our decadent society. Psychoanalysis has made the -most of the opportunity. - -First and foremost the issue is a moral issue. It is not here a matter -of reform, new moral values. It is the life or death of all morality. -The leaders among the psychoanalysts know what they have in hand. -Probably most of their followers are ignorant, and therefore -pseudo-innocent. But it all amounts to the same thing. Psychoanalysis is -out, under a therapeutic disguise, to do away entirely with the moral -faculty in man. Let us fling the challenge, and then we can take sides -in all fairness. - -The psychoanalytic leaders know what they are about, and shrewdly keep -quiet, going gently. Yet, however gently they go, they set the moral -stones rolling. At every step the most innocent and unsuspecting analyst -starts a little landslide. The old world is yielding under us. Without -any direct attack, it comes loose under the march of the psychoanalyst, -and we hear the dull rumble of the incipient avalanche. We are in for a -debâcle. - -But at least let us know what we are in for. If we are to rear a serpent -against ourselves, let us at least refuse to nurse it in our temples or -to call it the cock of Esculapius. It is time the white garb of the -therapeutic cant was stripped off the psychoanalyst. And now that we -feel the strange crackling and convulsion in our moral foundations, let -us at least look at the house which we are bringing down over our heads -so blithely. - -Long ago we watched in frightened anticipation when Freud set out on his -adventure into the hinterland of human consciousness. He was seeking for -the unknown sources of the mysterious stream of consciousness. Immortal -phrase of the immortal James! Oh stream of hell which undermined my -adolescence! The stream of consciousness! I felt it streaming through my -brain, in at one ear and out at the other. And again I was sure it went -round in my cranium, like Homer’s Ocean, encircling my established mind. -And sometimes I felt it must bubble up in the cerebellum and wind its -way through all the convolutions of the true brain. Horrid stream! -Whence did it come, and whither was it bound? The stream of -consciousness! - -And so, who could remain unmoved when Freud seemed suddenly to plunge -towards the origins? Suddenly he stepped out of the conscious into the -unconscious, out of the everywhere into the nowhere, like some supreme -explorer. He walks straight through the wall of sleep, and we hear him -rumbling in the cavern of dreams. The impenetrable is not impenetrable, -unconsciousness is not nothingness. It is sleep, that wall of darkness -which limits our day. Walk bang into the wall, and behold the wall isn’t -there. It is the vast darkness of a cavern’s mouth, the cavern of -anterior darkness whence issues the stream of consciousness. - -With dilated hearts we watched Freud disappearing into the cavern of -darkness, which is sleep and unconsciousness to us, darkness which -issues in the foam of all our day’s consciousness. He was making for the -origins. We watched his ideal candle flutter and go small. Then we -waited, as men do wait, always expecting the wonder of wonders. He came -back with dreams to sell. - -But sweet heaven, what merchandise! What dreams, dear heart! What was -there in the cave? Alas that we ever looked! Nothing but a huge slimy -serpent of sex, and heaps of excrement, and a myriad repulsive little -horrors spawned between sex and excrement. - -Is it true? Does the great unknown of sleep contain nothing else? No -lovely spirits in the anterior regions of our being? None! Imagine the -unspeakable horror of the _repressions_ Freud brought home to us. -Gagged, bound, maniacal repressions, sexual complexes, fæcal -inhibitions, dream-monsters. We tried to repudiate them. But no, they -were there, demonstrable. These were the horrid things that ate our -souls and caused our helpless neuroses. - -We had felt that perhaps we were wrong inside, but we had never imagined -it so bad. However, in the name of healing and medicine we prepared to -accept it all. If it was all just a result of illness, we were prepared -to go through with it. The analyst promised us that the tangle of -complexes would be unravelled, the obsessions would evaporate, the -monstrosities would dissolve, sublimate, when brought into the light of -day. Once all the dream-horrors were translated into full consciousness, -they would sublimate into—well, we don’t quite know what. But anyhow, -they would sublimate. Such is the charm of a new phrase that we accepted -this sublimation process without further question. If our complexes were -going to sublimate once they were surgically exposed to full mental -consciousness, why, best perform the operation. - -Thus analysis set off gaily on its therapeutic course. But like -Hippolytus, we ran too near the sea’s edge. After all, if complexes -exist only as abnormalities which can be removed, psychoanalysis has not -far to go. Our own horses ran away with us. We began to realize that -complexes were not just abnormalities. They were part of the -stock-in-trade of the normal unconscious. The only abnormality, so far, -lies in bringing them into consciousness. - -This creates a new issue. Psychoanalysis, the moment it begins to -demonstrate the nature of the unconscious, is assuming the rôle of -psychology. Thus the new science of psychology proceeds to inform us -that our complexes are not just mere interlockings in the mechanism of -the psyche, as was taught by one of the first and most brilliant of the -analysts, a man now forgotten. He fully realized that even the psyche -itself depends on a certain organic, mechanistic activity, even as life -depends on the mechanistic organism of the body. The mechanism of the -psyche could have its hitches, certain parts could stop working, even as -the parts of the body can stop their functioning. This arrest in some -part of the functioning psyche gave rise to a complex, even as the -stopping of one little cog-wheel in a machine will arrest a whole -section of that machine. This was the origin of the complex-theory, -purely mechanistic. Now the analyst found that a complex did not -necessarily vanish when brought into consciousness. Why should it? Hence -he decided that it did not arise from the stoppage of any little wheel. -For it refused to disappear, no matter how many psychic wheels were -started. Finally, then, a complex could not be regarded as the result of -an inhibition. - -Here is the new problem. If a complex is not caused by the inhibition of -some so-called normal sex-impulse, what on earth is it caused by? It -obviously refuses to sublimate—or to come undone when exposed and -prodded. It refuses to answer to the promptings of normal sex-impulse. -You can remove all possible inhibitions of the normal sex desire, and -still you cannot remove the complex. All you have done is to make -conscious a desire which previously was unconscious. - -This is the moral dilemma of psychoanalysis. The analyst set out to cure -neurotic humanity by removing the cause of the neurosis. He finds that -the cause of neurosis lies in some unadmitted sex desire. After all he -has said about inhibition of normal sex, he is brought at last to -realize that at the root of almost every neurosis lies some -incest-craving, and that this incest-craving is _not the result of -inhibition of normal sex-craving_. Now see the dilemma—it is a fearful -one. If the incest-craving is not the outcome of any inhibition of -normal desire, if it actually exists and refuses to give way before any -criticism, what then? What remains but to accept it as part of the -normal sex-manifestation? - -Here is an issue which analysis is perfectly willing to face. Among -themselves the analysts are bound to accept the incest-craving as part -of the normal sexuality of man, normal, but suppressed, because of moral -and perhaps biological fear. Once, however, you accept the -incest-craving as part of the normal sexuality of man, you must remove -all repression of incest itself. In fact, you must admit incest as you -now admit sexual marriage, as a duty even. Since at last it works out -that neurosis is not the result of inhibition of so-called _normal_ sex, -but of inhibition of incest-craving. Any inhibition must be wrong, since -inevitably in the end it causes neurosis and insanity. Therefore the -inhibition of incest-craving is wrong, and this wrong is the cause of -practically all modern neurosis and insanity. - -Psychoanalysis will never openly state this conclusion. But it is to -this conclusion that every analyst must, willy-nilly, consciously or -unconsciously, bring his patient. - -Trigant Burrow says that Freud’s _unconscious_ does but represent our -conception of conscious sexual life as this latter exists in a state of -repression. Thus Freud’s unconscious amounts practically to no more than -our repressed incest impulses. Again, Burrow says that it is knowledge -of sex that constitutes sin, and not sex itself. It is when the mind -turns to consider and _know_ the great affective-passional functions and -emotions that sin enters. Adam and Eve fell, not because they had sex, -or even because they committed the sexual act, but because they became -aware of their sex and of the possibility of the act. When sex became to -them a mental object—that is, when they discovered that they could -deliberately enter upon and enjoy and even provoke sexual activity in -themselves, then they were cursed and cast out of Eden. Then man became -self-responsible; he entered on his own career. - -Both these assertions by Burrow seem to us brilliantly true. But must we -inevitably draw the conclusion psychoanalysis draws? Because we discover -in the unconscious the repressed body of our incest-craving, and because -the recognition of _desire_, the making a mental objective of a certain -desire causes the introduction of the sin motive, the desire in itself -being beyond criticism or moral judgment, must we therefore accept the -incest-craving as part of our natural desire and proceed to put it into -practice, as being at any rate a lesser evil than neurosis and insanity? - -It is a question. One thing, however, psychoanalysis all along the line -fails to determine, and that is the nature of the pristine unconscious -in man. The incest-craving is or is not inherent in the pristine psyche. -When Adam and Eve became aware of sex in themselves, they became aware -of that which was pristine in them, and which preceded all knowing. But -when the analyst discovers the incest motive in the unconscious, surely -he is only discovering a term of humanity’s repressed _idea_ of sex. It -is not even _suppressed_ sex-consciousness, but _repressed_. That is, it -is nothing pristine and anterior to mentality. It is in itself the -mind’s ulterior motive. That is, the incest-craving is propagated in the -pristine unconscious by the mind itself, even though unconsciously. The -mind acts as incubus and procreator of its own horrors, _deliberately -unconsciously_. And the incest motive is in its origin not a pristine -impulse, but a logical extension of the existent idea of sex and love. -The mind, that is, transfers the idea of incest into the -affective-passional psyche, and keeps it there as a repressed motive. - -This is as yet a mere assertion. It cannot be made good until we -determine the nature of the true, pristine unconscious, in which all our -genuine impulse arises—a very different affair from that sack of horrors -which psychoanalysts would have us believe is source of motivity. The -Freudian unconscious is the cellar in which the mind keeps its own -bastard spawn. The true unconscious is the well-head, the fountain of -real motivity. The sex of which Adam and Eve became conscious derived -from the very God who bade them be not conscious of it—it was not spawn -produced by secondary propagation from the mental consciousness itself. - - - - - CHAPTER II - THE INCEST MOTIVE AND IDEALISM - - -It is obvious we cannot recover our moral footing until we can in some -way determine the true nature of the unconscious. The word unconscious -itself is a mere definition by negation and has no positive meaning. -Freud no doubt prefers it for this reason. He rejects _subconscious_ and -_preconscious_, because both these would imply a sort of nascent -consciousness, the shadowy half-consciousness which precedes mental -realization. And by his unconscious he intends no such thing. He wishes -rather to convey, we imagine, that which _recoils from_ consciousness, -that which reacts in the psyche away from mental consciousness. His -unconscious is, we take it, that part of the human consciousness which, -though mental, ideal in its nature, yet is unwilling to expose itself to -full recognition, and so recoils back into the affective regions and -acts there as a secret agent, unconfessed, unadmitted, potent, and -usually destructive. The whole body of our repressions makes up our -unconscious. - -The question lies here: whether a repression is a primal impulse which -has been deterred from fulfilment, or whether it is an _idea_ which is -refused enactment. Is a repression a repressed passional impulse, or is -it an idea which we suppress and refuse to put into practice—nay, which -we even refuse to own at all, a disowned, outlawed idea, which exists -rebelliously outside the pale? - -Man can inhibit the true passional impulses and so produce a derangement -in the psyche. This is a truism nowadays, and we are grateful to -psychoanalysis for helping to make it so. But man can do more than this. -Finding himself in a sort of emotional _cul de sac_, he can proceed to -deduce from his given emotional and passional premises conclusions which -are not emotional or passional at all, but just logical, abstract, -ideal. That is, a man finds it impossible to realize himself in -marriage. He recognizes the fact that his emotional, even passional, -regard for his mother is deeper than it ever could be for a wife. This -makes him unhappy, for he knows that passional communion is not complete -unless it be also sexual. He has a body of sexual passion which he -cannot transfer to a wife. He has a profound love for his mother. Shut -in between walls of tortured and increasing passion, he must find some -escape or fall down the pit of insanity and death. What is the only -possible escape? To seek in the arms of the mother the refuge which -offers nowhere else. And so the incest-motive is born. All the labored -explanations of the psychoanalysts are unnecessary. The incest motive is -a logical deduction of the human reason, which has recourse to this last -extremity, to save itself. Why is the human reason in peril? That is -another story. At the moment we are merely considering the origin of the -incest motive. - -The logical conclusion of incest is, of course, a profound decision in -the human soul, a decision affecting the deepest passional centers. It -rouses the deepest instinctive opposition. And therefore it must be kept -secret until this opposition is either worn away or persuaded away. -Hence the repression and ultimate disclosure. - -Now here we see the secret working of the process of idealism. By -idealism we understand the motivizing of the great affective sources by -means of ideas mentally derived. As for example the incest motive, which -is first and foremost a logical deduction made by the human reason, even -if unconsciously made, and secondly is introduced into the affective, -passional sphere, where it now proceeds to serve as a principle for -action. - -This motivizing of the passional sphere from the ideal is the final -peril of human consciousness. It is the death of all spontaneous, -creative life, and the substituting of the mechanical principle. - -It is obvious that the ideal becomes a mechanical principle, if it be -applied to the affective soul as a fixed motive. An ideal established in -control of the passional soul is no more and no less than a supreme -machine-principle. And a machine, as we know, is the active unit of the -material world. Thus we see how it is that in the end pure idealism is -identical with pure materialism, and the most ideal peoples are the most -completely material. Ideal and material are identical. The ideal is but -the god in the machine—the little, fixed, machine principle which works -the human psyche automatically. - -We are now in the last stages of idealism. And psychoanalysis alone has -the courage necessary to conduct us through these last stages. The -identity of love with sex, the single necessity for fulfilment through -love, these are our fixed ideals. We must fulfil these ideals in their -extremity. And this brings us finally to incest, even incest-worship. We -have no option, whilst our ideals stand. - -Why? Because incest is the logical conclusion of our ideals, when these -ideals have to be carried into passional effect. And idealism has no -escape from logic. And once he has built himself in the shape of any -ideal, man will go to any logical length rather than abandon his ideal -corpus. Nay, some great cataclysm has to throw him down and destroy the -whole fabric of his life before the motor-principle of his dominant -ideal is destroyed. Hence psychoanalysis as the advance-guard of -science, the evangel of the last _ideal_ liberty. For of course there is -a great fascination in a completely effected idealism. Man is then -undisputed master of his own fate, and captain of his own soul. But -better say engine-driver, for in truth he is no more than the little god -in the machine, this master of fate. He has invented his own automatic -principles, and he works himself according to them, like any little -mechanic inside the works. - -But ideal or not, we are all of us between the pit and the pendulum, or -the walls of red-hot metal, as may be. If we refuse the Freudian -_pis-aller_ as a means of escape, we have still to find some way out. -For there we are, all of us, trapped in a corner where we cannot, and -simply do not know how to fulfil our own natures, passionally. We don’t -know in which way fulfilment lies. If psychoanalysis discovers incest, -small blame to it. - -Yet we do know this much: that the pushing of the ideal to any further -lengths will not avail us anything. We have actually to go back to our -own unconscious. But not to the unconscious which is the inverted -reflection of our ideal consciousness. We must discover, if we can, the -true unconscious, where our life bubbles up in us, prior to any -mentality. The first bubbling life in us, which is innocent of any -mental alteration, this is the unconscious. It is pristine, not in any -way ideal. It is the spontaneous origin from which it behooves us to -live. - -What then is the true unconscious? It is not a shadow cast from the -mind. It is the spontaneous life-motive in every organism. Where does it -begin? It begins where life begins. But that is too vague. It is no use -talking about life and the unconscious in bulk. You can talk about -electricity, because electricity is a homogeneous force, conceivable -apart from any incorporation. But life is inconceivable as a general -thing. It exists only in living creatures. So that life begins, now as -always, in an individual living creature. In the beginning of the -individual living creature is the beginning of life, every time and -always, and life has no beginning apart from this. Any attempt at a -further generalization takes us merely beyond the consideration of life -into the region of mechanical homogeneous force. This is shown in the -cosmologies of eastern religions. - -The beginning of life is in the beginning of the first individual -creature. You may call the naked, unicellular bit of plasm the first -individual, if you like. Mentally, as far as thinkable simplicity goes, -it is the first. So that we may say that life begins in the first naked -unicellular organism. And where life begins the unconscious also begins. -But mark, the first naked unicellular organism is an _individual_. It is -a specific individual, not a mathematical unit, like a unit of force. - -Where the individual begins, life begins. The two are inseparable, life -and individuality. And also, where the individual begins, the -unconscious, which is the specific life-motive, also begins. We are -trying to trace the unconscious to its source. And we find that this -source, in all the higher organisms, is the first ovule cell from which -an individual organism arises. At the moment of conception, when a -procreative male nucleus fuses with the nucleus of the female germ, at -that moment does a new unit of life, of consciousness, arise in the -universe. Is it not obvious? The unconscious has no other source than -this, this first fused nucleus of the ovule. - -Useless to talk about the unconscious as if it were a homogeneous force -like electricity. You can only deal with the unconscious when you -realize that in every individual organism an individual nature, an -individual consciousness, is spontaneously created at the moment of -conception. We say _created_. And by _created_ we mean spontaneously -appearing in the universe, out of nothing. _Ex nihilo nihil fit._ It is -true that an individual is also generated. By the fusion of two nuclei, -male and female, we understand the process of generation. And from the -process of generation we may justly look for a new unit, according to -the law of cause and effect. As a natural or automatic result of the -process of generation we may look for a new unit of existence. But the -nature of this new unit must derive from the natures of the parents, -also by law. And this we deny. We deny that the nature of any new -creature derives from the natures of its parents. The nature of the -infant does _not_ follow from the natures of its parents. The nature of -the infant is _not_ just a new permutation-and-combination of elements -contained in the natures of the parents. There is in the nature of the -infant that which is utterly unknown in the natures of the parents, -something which could never be derived from the natures of all the -existent individuals or previous individuals. There is in the nature of -the infant something entirely new, underived, underivable, something -which is, and which will forever remain, _causeless_. And this something -is the unanalyzable, indefinable reality of individuality. Every time at -the moment of conception of every higher organism an individual nature -incomprehensibly arises in the universe, out of nowhere. Granted the -whole cause-and-effect process of generation and evolution, still the -individual is not explained. The individual unit of consciousness and -being which arises at the conception of every higher organism arises by -pure creation, by a process not susceptible to understanding, a process -which takes place outside the field of mental comprehension, where -mentality, which is definitely limited, cannot and does not exist. - -This causeless created nature of the individual being is the same as the -old mystery of the divine nature of the soul. Religion was right and -science is wrong. Every individual creature has a soul, a specific -individual nature the origin of which cannot be found in any -cause-and-effect process whatever. Cause-and-effect will not explain -even the individuality of a single dandelion. There is no assignable -cause, and no logical reason, for individuality. On the contrary, -individuality appears in defiance of all scientific law, in defiance -even of reason. - -Having established so much, we can really approach the unconscious. By -the unconscious we wish to indicate that essential unique nature of -every individual creature, which is, by its very nature, unanalyzable, -undefinable, inconceivable. It cannot be conceived, it can only be -experienced, in every single instance. And being inconceivable, we will -call it the unconscious. As a matter of fact, _soul_ would be a better -word. By the unconscious we do mean the soul. But the word _soul_ has -been vitiated by the idealistic use, until nowadays it means only that -which a man conceives himself to be. And that which a man conceives -himself to be is something far different from his true unconscious. So -we must relinquish the ideal word soul. - -If, however, the unconscious is inconceivable, how do we know it at all? -We know it by direct experience. All the best part of knowledge is -inconceivable. We know the sun. But we cannot conceive the sun, unless -we are willing to accept some theory of burning gases, some -cause-and-effect nonsense. And even if we do have a mental conception of -the sun as a sphere of blazing gas—which it certainly isn’t—we are just -as far from knowing what _blaze_ is. Knowledge is always a matter of -whole experience, what St. Paul calls knowing in full, and never a -matter of mental conception merely. This is indeed the point of all full -knowledge: that it is contained mainly within the unconscious, its -mental or conscious reference being only a sort of extract or shadow. - -It is necessary for us to know the unconscious, or we cannot live, just -as it is necessary for us to know the sun. But we need not explain the -unconscious, any more than we need explain the sun. We can’t do either, -anyway. We know the sun by beholding him and watching his motions and -feeling his changing power. The same with the unconscious. We watch it -in all its manifestations, its unfolding incarnations. We watch it in -all its processes and its unaccountable evolutions, and these we -register. - -For though the unconscious is the creative element, and though, like the -soul, it is beyond all law of cause and effect in its totality, yet in -its processes of self-realization it follows the laws of cause and -effect. The processes of cause and effect are indeed part of the working -out of this incomprehensible self-realization of the individual -unconscious. The great laws of the universe are no more than the fixed -habits of the living unconscious. - -What we must needs do is to try to trace still further the habits of the -true unconscious, and by mental recognition of these habits break the -limits which we have imposed on the movement of the unconscious. For the -whole point about the true unconscious is that it is all the time moving -forward, beyond the range of its own fixed laws or habits. It is no good -trying to superimpose an ideal nature upon the unconscious. We have to -try to recognize the true nature and then leave the unconscious itself -to prompt new movement and new being—the creative progress. - -What we are suffering from now is the restriction of the unconscious -within certain ideal limits. The more we force the ideal the more we -rupture the true movement. Once we can admit the _known_, but -incomprehensible, presence of the integral unconscious; once we can -trace it home in ourselves and follow its first revealed movements; once -we know how it habitually unfolds itself; once we can scientifically -determine its laws and processes in ourselves: then at last we can begin -to live from the spontaneous initial prompting, instead of from the dead -machine-principles of ideas and ideals. There is a whole science of the -creative unconscious, the unconscious in its law-abiding activities. And -of this science we do not even know the first term. Yes, when we know -that the unconscious appears by creation, as a new individual reality in -every newly-fertilized germ-cell, then we know the very first item of -the new science. But it needs a super-scientific grace before we can -admit this first new item of knowledge. It means that science abandons -its intellectualist position and embraces the old religious faculty. But -it does not thereby become less scientific, it only becomes at last -complete in knowledge. - - - - - CHAPTER III - THE BIRTH OF CONSCIOUSNESS - - -It is useless to try to determine _what is consciousness_ or _what is -knowledge_. Who cares anyhow, since we know without definitions. But -what we fail to know, yet what we must know, is the nature of the -pristine consciousness which lies integral and progressive within every -functioning organism. The brain is the seat of the ideal consciousness. -And ideal consciousness is only the dead end of consciousness, the spun -silk. The vast bulk of consciousness is non-cerebral. It is the sap of -our life, of all life. - -We are forced to attribute to a star-fish, or to a nettle, its own -peculiar and integral consciousness. This throws us at once out of the -ideal castle of the brain into the flux of sap-consciousness. But let us -not jump too far in one bound. Let us refrain from taking a sheer leap -down the abyss of consciousness, down to the invertebrates and the -protococci. Let us cautiously scramble down the human declivities. Or -rather let us try to start somewhere near the foot of the calvary of -human consciousness. Let us consider the child in the womb. Is the fœtus -conscious? It must be, since it carries on an independent and -progressive self-development. This consciousness obviously cannot be -ideal, cannot be cerebral, since it precedes any vestige of cerebration. -And yet it is an integral, individual consciousness, having its own -single purpose and progression. Where can it be centered, how can it -operate, before even nerves are formed? For it does steadily and -persistently operate, even spinning the nerves and brain as a web for -its own motion, like some subtle spider. - -What is the spinning spider of the first human consciousness—or rather, -where is the center at which this consciousness lies and spins? Since -there must be a center of consciousness in the tiny fœtus, it must have -been there from the very beginning. There it must have been, in the -first fused nucleus of the ovule. And if we could but watch this prime -nucleus, we should no doubt realize that throughout all the long and -incalculable history of the individual it still remains central and -prime, the source and clue of the living unconscious, the origin. As in -the first moment of conception, so to the end of life in the individual, -the first nucleus remains the creative-productive center, the quick, -both of consciousness and of organic development. - -And where in the developed fœtus shall we look for this -creative-productive quick? Shall we expect it in the brain or in the -heart? Surely our own subjective wisdom tells us, what science can -verify, that it lies beneath the navel of the folded fœtus. Surely that -prime center, which is the very first nucleus of the fertilized ovule, -lies situated beneath the navel of all womb-born creatures. There, from -the beginning, it lay in its mysterious relation to the outer, active -universe. There it lay, perfectly associated with the parent body. There -it acted on its own peculiar independence, drawing the whole stream of -creative blood upon itself, and, spinning within the parental -blood-stream, slowly creating or bodying forth its own incarnate -amplification. All the time between the quick of life in the fœtus and -the great outer universe there exists a perfect correspondence, upon -which correspondence the astrologers based their science in the days -before mental consciousness had arrogated all knowledge unto itself. - -The fœtus is not _personally_ conscious. But then what is personality if -not ideal in its origin? The fœtus is, however, radically, individually -conscious. From the active quick, the nuclear center, it remains single -and integral in its activity. At this center it distinguishes itself -utterly from the surrounding universe, whereby both are modified. From -this center the whole individual arises, and upon this center the whole -universe, by implication, impinges. For the fixed and stable universe of -law and matter, even the whole cosmos, would wear out and disintegrate -if it did not rest and find renewal in the quick center of creative life -in individual creatures. - -And since this center has absolute location in the first fertilized -nucleus, it must have location still in the developed fœtus, and in the -mature man. And where is this location in the unborn infant? Beneath the -burning influx of the navel. Where is it in the adult man? Still beneath -the navel. As primal affective center it lies within the solar plexus of -the nervous system. - -We do not pretend to use technical language. But surely our meaning is -plain even to correct scientists, when we assert that in all mammals the -center of primal, constructive consciousness and activity lies in the -middle front of the abdomen, beneath the navel, in the great nerve -center called the solar plexus. How do we know? We feel it, as we feel -hunger or love or hate. Once we _know_ what we are, science can proceed -to analyze our knowledge, demonstrate its truth or its untruth. - -We all of us know what it is to handle a newborn, or at least a quite -young infant. We know what it is to lay the hand on the round little -abdomen, the round, pulpy little head. We know where is life, where is -pulp. We have seen blind puppies, blind kittens crawling. They give -strange little cries. Whence these cries? Are they mental exclamations? -As in a ventriloquist, they come from the stomach. There lies the -wakeful center. There speaks the first consciousness, the audible -unconscious, in the squeak of these infantile things, which is so -curiously and indescribably moving, reacting direct upon the great -abdominal center, the preconscious mind in man. - -There at the navel, the first rupture has taken place, the first break -in continuity. There is the scar of dehiscence, scar at once of our pain -and splendor of individuality. Here is the mark of our isolation in the -universe, stigma and seal of our free, perfect singleness. Hence the -lotus of the navel. Hence the mystic contemplation of the navel. It is -the upper mind losing itself in the lower first-mind, that which is last -in consciousness reverting to that which is first. - -A mother will realize better than a philosopher. She knows the rupture -which has finally separated her child into its own single, free -existence. She knows the strange, sensitive rose of the navel: how it -quivers conscious; all its pain, its want for the old connection; all -its joy and chuckling exultation in sheer organic singleness and -individual liberty. - -The powerful, active psychic center in a new child is the great solar -plexus of the sympathetic system. From this center the child is drawn to -the mother again, crying, to heal the new wound, to re-establish the old -oneness. This center directs the little mouth which, blind and -anticipatory, seeks the breast. How could it find the breast, blind and -mindless little mouth? But it needs no eyes nor mind. From the great -first-mind of the abdomen it moves direct, with an anterior knowledge -almost like magnetic propulsion, as if the little mouth were drawn or -propelled to the maternal breast by vital magnetism, whose center of -directive control lies in the solar plexus. - -In a measure, this taking of the breast re-instates the old connection -with the parent body. It is a strange sinking back to the old unison, -the old organic continuum—a recovery of the pre-natal state. But at the -same time it is a deep, avid gratification in drinking in the sustenance -of a new individuality. It is a deep gratification in the exertion of a -new, voluntary power. The child acts now separately from its own -individual center and exerts still a control over the adjacent universe, -the parent body. - -So the warm life-stream passes again from the parent into the aching -abdomen of the severed child. Life cannot progress without these -ruptures, severances, cataclysms; pain is a living reality, not merely a -deathly. Why haven’t we the courage for life-pains? If we could depart -from our old tenets of the mind, if we could fathom our own -_unconscious_ sapience, we should find we have courage and to spare. We -are too mentally domesticated. - -The great magnetic or dynamic center of first-consciousness acts -powerfully at the solar plexus. Here the child knows beyond all -knowledge. It does not see with the eyes, it cannot perceive, much less -conceive. Nothing can it apprehend; the eyes are a strange plasmic, -nascent darkness. Yet from the belly it knows, with a directness of -knowledge that frightens us and may even seem abhorrent. The mother, -also, from the bowels knows her child—as she can never, never know it -from the head. There is no thought nor speech, only direct, ventral -gurglings and cooings. From the passional nerve-center of the solar -plexus in the mother passes direct, unspeakable effluence and -intercommunication, sheer effluent contact with the palpitating -nerve-center in the belly of the child. Knowledge, unspeakable knowledge -interchanged, which must be diluted by eternities of materialization -before they can come to expression. - -It is like a lovely, suave, fluid, _creative_ electricity that flows in -a circuit between the great nerve-centers in mother and child. The -electricity of the universe is a sundering force. But this lovely -polarized vitalism is creative. It passes in a circuit between the two -poles of the passional unconscious in the two now separated beings. It -establishes in each that first primal consciousness which is the sacred, -all-containing head-stream of all our consciousness. - -But this is not all. The flux between mother and child is not all sweet -unison. There is as well the continually widening gap. A wonderful rich -communion, and at the same time a continually increasing cleavage. If -only we could realize that all through life these are the two -synchronizing activities of love, of creativity. For the end, the goal, -is the perfecting of each single individuality, unique in itself—which -cannot take place without a perfected harmony between the beloved, a -harmony which depends on the at-last-clarified singleness of each being, -a singleness equilibrized, polarized in one by the counter-posing -singleness of the other. - -So the child. In its wonderful unison with the mother it is at the same -time extricating itself into single, separate, independent existence. -The one process, of unison, cannot go on without the other process, of -purified severance. At first the child cleaves back to the old source. -It clings and adheres. The sympathetic center of unification, or at -least unison, alone seems awake. The child wails with the strange -desolation of severance, wails for the old connection. With joy and -peace it returns to the breast, almost as to the womb. - -But not quite. Even in sucking it discovers its new identity and -_power_. Its own new, separate _power_. It draws itself back suddenly; -it waits. It has heard something? No. But another center has flashed -awake. The child stiffens itself and holds back. What is it, wind? -Stomach-ache? Not at all. Listen to some of the screams. The ears can -hear deeper than eyes can see. The first scream of the ego. The scream -of asserted isolation. The scream of revolt from connection, the revolt -from union. There is a violent anti-maternal motion, anti-everything. -There is a refractory, bad-tempered negation of everything, a hurricane -of temper. What then? After such tremendous unison as the womb implies, -no wonder there are storms of rage and separation. The child is -screaming itself rid of the old womb, kicking itself in a blind paroxysm -into freedom, into separate, negative independence. - -So be it, there must be paroxysms, since there must be independence. -Then the mother gets angry too. It affects her, though perhaps not as -badly as it affects outsiders. Nothing acts more direct on the great -primal nerve-centers than the screaming of an infant, this blind -screaming negation of connections. It is the friction of irritation -itself. Everybody is implicated, just as they would be if the air were -surcharged with electricity. The mother is perhaps less affected because -she understands primarily, or because she is polarized directly with the -child. Yet she, too, must be angry, in her measure, inevitably. - -It is a blind, almost mechanistic effort on the part of the new organism -to extricate itself from cohesion with the circumambient universe. It -applies direct to the mother. But it affects everybody. The great -centers of response vibrate with a maddening, sometimes unbearable -friction. What centers? Not the great sympathetic plexus this time, but -its corresponding voluntary ganglion. The great ganglion of the spinal -system, the lumbar ganglion, negatively polarizes the solar plexus in -the primal psychic activity of a human individual. When a child screams -with temper, it sends out from the lumbar ganglion violent waves of -frictional repudiation, extraordinary. The little back has an amazing -power once it stiffens itself. In the lumbar ganglion the unconscious -now vibrates tremendously in the activity of sundering, separation. -Mother and child, polarized, are primarily affected. Often the mother is -so _sure_ of her possession of the child that she is almost unmoved. But -the child continues, till the frictional response is roused in the -mother, her anger rises, there is a flash, an outburst like lightning. -And then the storm subsides. The pure act of sundering is effected. Each -being is clarified further into its own single, individual self, further -perfected, separated. - -Hence a duality, now, in primal consciousness in the infant. The warm -rosy abdomen, tender with chuckling unison, and the little back -strengthening itself. The child kicks away, into independence. It -stiffens its spine in the strength of its own private and separate, -inviolable existence. It will admit now of no trespass. It is awake now -in a new pride, a new self-assertion. The sense of antagonistic freedom -is aroused. Clumsy old adhesions must be ruthlessly fused. And so, from -the lumbar ganglion the fiery-tempered infant asserts its new, blind -will. - -And as the child fights the mother fights. Sometimes she fights to keep -her refractory child, and sometimes she fights to kick him off, as a -mare kicks off her too-babyish foal. It is the great _voluntary_ center -of the unconscious flashing into action. Flashing from the deep lumbar -ganglion in the mother to the newly-awakened, corresponding center in -the child goes the swift negative current, setting each of them asunder -in clean individuality. So long as the force meets its polarized -response all is well. When a force flashes and has no response, there is -devastation. How weary in the back is the nursing mother whose great -center of repudiation is suppressed or weak; how a child droops if only -the sympathetic unison is established. - -So, the polarity of the dynamic consciousness, from the very start of -life! Direct flowing and flashing of two consciousness-streams, active -in the bringing forth of an individual being. The sweet commingling, the -sharp clash of opposition. And no possibility of creative development -without this polarity, this dual circuit of direct, spontaneous, honest -interchange. No hope of life apart from this. The primal unconscious -pulsing in its circuits between two beings: love and wrath, cleaving and -repulsion, inglutination and excrementation. What is the good of -inventing “ideal” behavior? How order the path of the unconscious? For -let us now realize that we cannot, even with the best intentions, -proceed to order the path of our own unconscious without vitally -deranging the life-flow of those connected with us. If you disturb the -current at one pole, it must be disturbed at the other. Here is a new -moral aspect to life. - - - - - CHAPTER IV - THE CHILD AND HIS MOTHER - - -In asserting that the seat of consciousness in a young infant is in the -abdomen, we do not pretend to suggest that all the other -conscious-centers are utterly dormant. Once a child is born, the whole -nervous and cerebral system comes awake, even the brain’s memories begin -to glimmer, recognition and cognition soon begin to take place. But the -spontaneous control and all the prime developing activity derive from -the great affective centers of the abdomen. In the solar plexus is the -first great fountain and issue of infantile consciousness. There, -beneath the navel, lies the active human first-mind, the prime -unconscious. From the moment of conception, when the first nucleus is -formed, to the moment of death, when this same nucleus breaks again, the -first great active center of human consciousness lies in the solar -plexus. - -The movement of development in any creature is, however, towards a -florescent individuality. The ample, mature, unfolded individual stands -perfect, perfect in himself, but also perfect in his harmonious relation -to those nearest him and to all the universe. Whilst only the one great -center of consciousness is awake, in the abdomen, the infant has no -separate existence, his whole nature is contained in the conjunction -with the parent. As soon as the complementary negative pole arouses the -voluntary center of the lumbar ganglion, there is at once a retraction -into independence and an assertion of singleness. The back strengthens -itself. - -But still the circuit of polarity, dual as it is, positive and negative -from the positive-sympathetic and the negative-voluntary poles, still -depends on the duality of two beings—it is still extra-individual. Each -individual is vitally dependent on the other, for the life circuit. - -Let us consider for a moment the _kind_ of consciousness manifested at -the two great primary centers. At the solar plexus the new psyche acts -in a mode of attractive vitalism, drawing its objective unto itself as -by vital magnetism. Here it drinks in, as it were, the contiguous -universe, as during the womb-period it drank from the living continuum -of the mother. It is darkly self-centered, exultant and positive in its -own existence. It is all-in-all to itself, its own great subject. It -knows no objective. It only knows its own vital potency, which potency -draws the external object unto itself, subjectively, as the blood-stream -was drawn into the fœtus, by subjective attraction. Here the psyche is -to itself the _All_. Blindly self-positive. - -This is the first mode of consciousness for every living -thing—fascinating in all young things. The second half of the same mode -commences as soon as direct activity sets up in the lumbar ganglion. -Then the psyche recoils upon itself, in its first reaction against -continuity with the outer universe. It recoils even against its own mode -of assimilatory unison. Even it must break off, interrupt the great -psychic-assimilation process which goes on at the sympathic center. It -must recoil clean upon itself, break loose from any attachment -whatsoever. And then it must try its _power_, often playfully. - -This reaction is still subjective. When a child stiffens and draws away, -when it screams with pure temper, it takes no note of that from which it -recoils. It has no objective consciousness of that from which it reacts, -the mother principally. It is like a swimmer endlessly kicking the water -away behind him, with strong legs vividly active from the spinal -ganglia. Like a man in a boat pushing off from the shore, it merely -thrusts away, in order to ride free, ever more free. It is a purely -subjective motion, in the negative direction. - -After our long training in objectivation, and our epoch of worship of -the objective mode, it is perhaps difficult for us to realize the -strong, blind power of the unconscious on its first plane of activity. -It is something quite different from what we call _egoism_—which is -really mentally derived—for the ego is merely the sum-total of what we -_conceive_ ourselves to be. The powerful pristine subjectivity of the -unconscious on its first plane is, on the other hand, the root of all -our consciousness and being, darkly tenacious. Here we are grounded, say -what we may. And if we break the spell of this first subjective mode, we -break our own main root and live rootless, shiftless, groundless. - -So that the powerful subjectivity of the unconscious, where the self is -all-in-all unto itself, active in strong desirous _psychic_ assimilation -or in direct repudiation of the contiguous universe; this first plane of -psychic activity, polarized in the solar plexus and the lumbar ganglion -of each individual but established in a circuit with the corresponding -poles of another individual: this is the first scope of life and being -for every human individual, and is beyond question. But we must again -remark that the whole circuit is established between _two_ -individuals—that neither is a free thing-unto-itself—and that the very -fact of established polarity between the two maintains that -correspondence between the individual entity and the external universe -which is the clue to all growth and development. The pure subjectivity -of the first plane of consciousness is no more _selfish_ than the pure -objectivity of any other plane. How can it be? How can any form of pure, -balanced polarity between two vital individuals be in any sense selfish -on the part of one individual? We have got our moral values all wrong. - -Save for healthy instinct, the moralistic human race would have -exterminated itself long ago. And yet man _must_ be moral, at the very -root moral. The essence of morality is the basic desire to preserve the -perfect correspondence between the self and the object, to have no -trespass and no breach of integrity, nor yet any refaulture in the -vitalistic interchange. - -As yet we see the unconscious active on one plane only and entirely -dependent on _two_ individuals. But immediately following the -establishment of the circuit of the powerful, subjective, abdominal -plane comes the quivering of the whole system into a new degree of -consciousness. And two great upper centers are awake. - -The diaphragm really divides the human body, psychically as well as -organically. The two centers beneath the diaphragm are centers of dark -subjectivity, centripetal, assimilative. Once these are established, in -the thorax the two first centers of objective consciousness become -active, with ever-increasing intensity. The great thoracic sympathetic -plexus rouses like a sun in the breast, the thoracic ganglion fills the -shoulders with strength. There are now two planes of primary -consciousness—the first, the lower, the subjective unconscious, active -beneath the diaphragm, and the second upper, objective plane, active -above the diaphragm, in the breast. - -Let us realize that the subjective and objective of the unconscious are -not the same as the subjective and the objective of the _mind_. Here we -have no concepts to deal with, no static objects in the shape of ideas. -We have none of that tiresome business of establishing the relation -between the mind and its own ideal object, or the discriminating between -the ideal thing-in-itself and the mind of which it is the content. We -are spared that hateful thing-in-itself, the idea, which is at once so -all-important and so _nothing_. We are on straightforward solid ground; -there is no abstraction. - -The unconscious subjectivity is, in its positive manifestation, a great -imbibing, and in its negative, a definite blind rejection. What we call -an _unconscious_ rejection. This subjectivity embraces alike creative -emotion and physical function. It includes alike the sweet and -untellable communion of love between the mother and child, the -irrational reaction into separation between the two, and also the -physical functioning of sucking and urination. Psychic and physical -development run parallel, though they are forever distinct. The child -sucking, the child urinating, this is the child acting from the great -_subjective_ centers, positive and negative. When the child sucks, there -is a sympathetic circuit between it and the mother, in which the -sympathetic plexus in the mother acts as negative or submissive pole to -the corresponding plexus in the child. In urination there is a -corresponding circuit in the voluntary centers, so that a mother seems -gratified, and _is_ gratified, inevitably, by the excremental -functioning of her child. She experiences a true polar reaction. - -Child and mother have, in the first place, no objective consciousness of -each other, and certainly no _idea_ of each other. Each is a blind -desideratum to the other. The strong love between them is effectual in -the great abdominal centers, where all love, real love, is primarily -based. Of that reflected or moon-love, derived from the head, that -spurious form of love which predominates to-day, we do not speak here. -It has its root in the _idea_: the beloved is a mental objective, -endlessly appreciated, criticized, scrutinized, exhausted. This has -nothing to do with the active unconscious. - -Having realized that the unconscious sparkles, vibrates, travels in a -strong subjective stream from the abdominal centers, connecting the -child directly with the mother at corresponding poles of vitalism, we -realize that the unconscious contains nothing ideal, nothing in the -least conceptual, and hence nothing in the least personal, since -personality, like the ego, belongs to the conscious or mental-subjective -self. So the first analyses are, or should be, so impersonal that the -so-called _human_ relations are not involved. The first relationship is -neither personal nor biological—a fact which psychoanalysis has not -succeeded in grasping. - -For example. A child screams with terror at the touch of fur; another -child loves the touch of fur, and purrs with pleasure. How now? Is it a -complex? Did the father have a beard? - -It is possible. But all-too-human. The physical result of rubbing -fur is to set up a certain amount of frictional electricity. -Frictional electricity is one of the sundering forces. It -corresponds to the voluntary forces exerted at the lower spinal -ganglia, the forces of anger and retraction into independence and -power. An over-sympathetic child will scream with fear at the touch -of fur; a refractory child will purr with pleasure. It is a reaction -which involves even deeper things than sex—the primal constitution -of the elementary psyche. A sympathetically overbalanced child has a -horror of the electric-frictional force such as is emitted from the -fur of a black cat, creature of rapacity. The same delights a -fierce-willed child. - -But we must admit at the same time that from earliest days a child is -subject to the definite _conscious_ psychic influences of -its surroundings and will react almost automatically to a -conscious-passional suggestion from the mother. In this way personal sex -is prematurely evoked, and real complexes are set up. But these derive -not from the spontaneous unconscious. They are in a way dictated from -the deliberate, mental consciousness, even if involuntarily. Again they -are a result of _mental_ subjectivity, self-consciousness—so different -from the primal subjectivity of the unconscious. - -To return, however, to the pure unconscious. When the upper centers -flash awake, a whole new field of consciousness and spontaneous activity -is opened out. The great sympathetic plexus of the breast is the heart’s -mind. This thoracic plexus corresponds directly in the upper man to the -solar plexus in the lower. But it is a correspondence in creative -opposition. From the sympathetic center of the breast as from a window -the unconscious goes forth seeking its object, to dwell upon it. When a -child leans its breast against its mother it becomes filled with a -primal awareness of _her_—not of itself desiring her or partaking of -her—but of her as she is in herself. This is the first great acquisition -of primal objective knowledge, the objective content of the unconscious. -Such knowledge we call the treasure of the heart. When the ancients -located the first seat of consciousness in the heart, they were neither -misguided nor playing with metaphor. For by consciousness they meant, as -usual, objective consciousness only. And from the cardiac plexus goes -forth that strange effluence of the self which seeks and dwells upon the -beloved, lovingly roving like the fingers of an infant or a blind man -over the face of the treasured object, gathering her mould into itself -and transferring her mould forever into its own deep unconscious psyche. -This is the first acquiring of objective knowledge, sightless, -unspeakably direct. It is a dwelling of the child’s unconscious within -the form of the mother, the gathering of a pure, eternal impression. So -the soul stores itself with dynamic treasures; it verily builds its own -tissue of such treasure, the tissue of the developing body, each cell -stored with creative dynamic content. - -The breasts themselves are as two eyes. We do not know how much the -nipples of the breast, both in man and woman, serve primarily as poles -of vital _conscious_ effluence and connection. We do not know how the -nipples of the breast are as fountains leaping into the universe, or as -little lamps irradiating the contiguous world, to the soul in quest. - -But certainly from the passional conscious-center of the breast goes -forth the first joyous discovery of the beloved, the first objective -discovery of the contiguous universe, the first ministration of the self -to that which is beyond the self. So, functionally, the mother ministers -with the milk of her breast. But this is a yielding to the great _lower_ -plexus, the basic solar plexus. It is the breast as part also of the -alimentary system—a special thing. - -In sucking the hands also come awake. It is strange to notice the -pictures by the old masters of the Madonna and Child. Sometimes the -strange round belly of the Infant seems the predominant mystery-center, -and sometimes from the tiny breast it is as if a delicate light glowed, -the light of love. As if the breast should illumine the outer world in -its seeking administering love. As if the breast of the Infant glimmered -its light of discovery on the adoring Mother, and she bowed, submissive -to the revelation. - -The little hands and arms wave, circulate, trying to touch, to grasp, to -know. To grasp in caress, not to reive. To grasp in order to identify -themselves with the cherished discovery, to realize the beloved. To -cherish, to realize the beloved. To administer the outward-seeking self -to the beloved. We give this the exclusive name of love. But it is -indeed only the one direction of love, the outgoing from the lovely -center of the breast—the nipples seeking, the hands delicately, -caressively exploring, the eyes at last waking to perception. The eyes, -the hands, these wake and are alert from the center of the breast. But -the ears and feet move from the deep lower centers—the recipient ears, -imbibing vibrations, the feet which press the resistant earth, -controlled from the powerful lower ganglia of the spine. And thus great -scope of activity opens, in the hands that wave and explore, the eyes -that try to perceive, the legs, the little knees that thrust, thrust -away, the small feet that curl and twinkle upon themselves, ready for -the obstinate earth. - -And so, also a wholeness is established within the individual. The two -fields of consciousness, the first upper and the first lower, are based -upon a correspondence of polarity. The first great complex circuit is -now set up _within the individual_, between the upper and lower centers. -The individual consciousness has now its own integral independent -existence and activity, apart from external connection. It has its right -to be alone. - - - - - CHAPTER V - THE LOVER AND THE BELOVED - - -Consciousness develops on successive planes. On each plane there is the -dual polarity, positive and negative, of the sympathetic and voluntary -nerve centers. The first plane is established between the poles of the -sympathetic solar plexus and the voluntary lumbar ganglion. This is the -active first plane of the subjective unconscious, from which the whole -of consciousness arises. - -Immediately succeeding the first plane of subjective dynamic -consciousness arises the corresponding first plane of objective -consciousness, the objective unconscious, polarized in the cardiac -plexus and the thoracic ganglion, in the breast. There is a perfect -correspondence in difference between the first abdominal and the first -thoracic planes. These two planes polarize each other in a fourfold -polarity, which makes the first great field of individual, -self-dependent consciousness. - -Each pole of the active unconscious manifests a specific activity and -gives rise to a specific kind of dynamic or creative consciousness. On -each plane, the negative voluntary pole _complements_ the positive -sympathetic pole, and yet the consciousness originating from the -complementary poles is not merely negative versus positive, it is -categorically different, opposite. Each is pure and perfect in itself. - -But the moment we enter the two planes of corresponding -consciousness, lower and upper, we find a whole new range of -complements. The upper, dynamic-objective plane is complementary to -the lower, dynamic-subjective. The mystery of creative opposition -exists all the time between the two planes, and this unison in -opposition between the two planes forms the first whole field of -consciousness. Within the individual the polarity is fourfold. In a -relation between two individuals the polarity is already eightfold. - -Now before we can have any sort of scientific, comprehensive psychology -we shall have to establish the _nature_ of the consciousness at each of -the dynamic poles—the nature of the consciousness, the direction of the -dynamic-vital flow, the resultant physical-organic development and -activity. This we must do before we can even begin to consider a genuine -system of education. Education now is widely at sea. Having ceased to -steer by the pole-star of the mind, having ceased to aim at the cramming -of the intellect, it veers hither and thither hopelessly and absurdly. -Education can never become a serious science until the human psyche is -properly understood. And the human psyche cannot begin to be understood -until we enter the dark continent of the unconscious. Having begun to -explore the unconscious, we find we must go from center to center, -chakra to chakra, to use an old esoteric word. We must patiently -determine the psychic manifestation at each center, and moreover, as we -go, we must discover the psychic results of the interaction, the -polarized interaction between the dynamic centers both within and -without the individual. - -Here is a real job for the scientist, a job which eternity will never -see finished though even to-morrow may see it well begun. It is a job -which will at last free us from the most hateful of all shackles, the -shackles of ideas and ideals. It is a great task of the liberators, -those who work forever for the liberation of the free _spontaneous_ -psyche, the effective soul. - -In these few chapters we hope to hint at the establishment of the first -field of the unconscious—at the nature of the consciousness manifested -at each pole—and at the already complex range of dynamic polarity -between the various poles. So far we have given the merest suggestion of -the nature of the first plane of the unconscious and have attempted the -opening of the second or upper plane. We profess no scientific -_exactitude_, particularly in terminology. We merely wish intelligibly -to open a way. - -To balance the solar plexus wakes the great plexus of the breast. In our -era this plexus is the great planet of our psychic universe. In the -previous sympathetic era the flower of the universal blossomed in the -navel. But since Egypt the sun of creative activity beams from the -breast, the heart of the supreme Man. This is to us the source of -light—the loving heart, the Sacred Heart. Against this we contrast the -devouring darkness of the lower man, the devouring whirlpool beneath the -navel. Even theosophists don’t realize that the universal lotus really -blossoms in the abdomen—that our lower man, our dark, devouring -whirlpool, was once the creative source, in human estimation. - -But in calling the heart the sun, the source of light, we are -biologically correct even. For the roots of vision are in the cardiac -plexus. But if we were to consider the heart itself, not its great nerve -plexus, we should have to go further than the nervous system. If we had -to consider the whole lambent blood-stream, we should have to descend -too deep for our unpractised minds. Suffice it here to hint that the -solar plexus is the first and main clue to the great alimentary-sexual -activity in man, an activity at once functional and creatively -emotional, whilst the cardiac plexus is first and main clue to the -respiratory system and the active-productive manifestations. The mouth -and nostrils are gates to each great center, upper and lower—even the -breasts have this duality. Yet the clue to respiration and hand activity -and vision is in the breast, while the clue to alimentation and passion -and sex is in the lower centers. The duality goes so far and is so -profound. And the polarity! The great organs, as well as the lymphatic -glands, depend each on its own specific center of the unconscious; each -is derived from a specific _dynamic_ conscious-clue, what we might -almost call a soul-cell. The inherent unconscious, or soul, is the first -nucleus subdivided, and from its own subdivisions produced, from its own -still-creative constellated nuclei, the organs, glands, nerve-centers of -the human organism. This is our answer to materialism and idealism -alike. The _nuclear unconscious_ brought forth organs and consciousness -alike. And the great nuclei of the unconscious _still_ lie active in the -great living nerve-centers, which nerve centers, from the original -solar-plexus to the conclusive brain, form one great chain of dual -polarity and amplified consciousness. - -All this is a mere incoherent stammering, broken first-words. To return -to the direct path of our progress. It is not merely a metaphor, to call -the cardiac plexus the sun, the Light. It is metaphor in the first -place, because the conscious effluence which proceeds from this first -upper center in the breast goes forth and plays upon its external -object, as phosphorescent waves might break upon a ship and reveal its -form. The transferring of the objective knowledge to the psyche is -almost the same as vision. It is root-vision. It happens before the eyes -open. It is the first tremendous mode of _apprehension_, still dark, but -moving towards light. It is the eye in the breast. Psychically, it is -basic objective apprehension. Dynamically, it is love, devotional, -administering love. - -Now we make already a discrimination between the two natures, even of -this first upper consciousness. First from the breast flows the -devotional, self-outpouring of love, love which gives its all to the -beloved. And back again returns to the ingathered objective -consciousness, the first objective content of the psyche. - -This argues the dual polarity. From the positive pole of the cardiac -plexus flows out that effluence which we call selfless love. It is -really self-devoting love, not self-less. This is the one form of love -we recognize. But from the strong ganglion of the shoulders proceeds the -negative circuit, which searches and explores the beloved, bringing back -pure objective apprehension, not critical, in the mental sense, and yet -passionally discriminative. - -Let us discriminate between the two upper poles. From the sympathetic -heart goes forth pure administering, like sunbeams. But from the strong -thoracic center of the shoulders is exerted a strong rejective force, a -force which, pressing upon the object of attention, in the mode of -separation, succeeds in transferring to itself the impression of the -object to which it has attended. This is the other half of devotional -love—perfect _knowledge_ of the beloved. - -Now this knowledge in itself argues a contradistinction between the -lover and the beloved. It is the very mould of the contradistinction. It -is the impress upon the lover of that which was separate from him, -resistant to him, in the beloved. Objective knowledge is always of this -kind—a knowledge based on unchangeable difference, a knowledge truly of -the gulf that lies between the two beings nearest to each other. - -In two kinds, then, consists the activity of the unconscious on the -first upper plane. Primal is the blissful sense of ineffable transfusion -with the beloved, which we call love, and of which our era has perhaps -enjoyed the full. It is a mode of creative consciousness essentially -objective, but yet it preserves no object in the memory, even the -dynamic memory. It is a great objective flux, a streaming forth of the -self in blissful departure, like sunbeams streaming. - -If this activity alone worked, then the self would utterly depart from -its own integrity; it would pass out and merge with the beloved—which -passing out and merging is the goal of enthusiasts. But living beings -are kept integral by the activity of the great negative pole. From the -thoracic ganglion also the unconscious goes forth in its quest of the -beloved. But what does it go to seek? Real objective knowledge. It goes -to find out the wonders which itself does not contain and to transfer -these wonders, as by impress, into itself. It goes out to determine the -limits of its own existence also. - -This is the second half of the activity of upper or self-less or -spiritual love. There is a tremendous great joy in exploring and -discovering the beloved. For what is the beloved? She is that which I -myself am not. Knowing the breach between us, the uncloseable gulf, I in -the same breath realize her _features_. In the first mode of the upper -consciousness there is perfect surpassing of all sense of division -between the self and the beloved. In the second mode the very discovery -of the features of the beloved contains the full realization of the -irreparable, or unsurpassable, gulf. This is objective knowledge, as -distinct from objective emotion. It contains always the element of -self-amplification, as if the self were amplified by knowledge in the -beloved. It should also contain the knowledge of the _limits_ of the -self. - -So it is with the Infant. Curious indeed is the look on the face of the -Holy Child, in Leonardo’s pictures, in Botticelli’s, even in the -beautiful Filippo Lippi. It is the Mother who crosses her hands on her -breast, in supreme acquiescence, recipient; it is the Child who gazes, -with a kind of _objective_, strangely discerning, deep apprehension of -her, startling to northern eyes. It is a gaze by no means of innocence, -but of profound, pre-visual discerning. So plainly is the child looking -across the gulf and _fixing_ the gulf by very intentness of pre-visual -apprehension, that instinctively the ordinary northerner finds Him -anti-pathetic. It seems almost a cruel objectivity. - -Perhaps between lovers, in the objective way of love, either the -voluntary separative mode predominates, or the sympathetic mode of -communion—one or the other. In the north we have worshipped the latter -mode. But in the south it is different; the objective sapient manner of -love seems more natural. Moreover in the face of the Infant lingers -nearly always the dark look of the pristine mode of consciousness, the -powerful self-centering subjective mode, established in the lower -body—the so-called sensual mode. - -But take our own children. A small infant, as soon as it really begins -to direct its attention. How often it seems to be gazing across a -strange distance at the mother; what a curious look is on its face, as -if the mother were an object set across a far gulf, distinct however, -discernible, even obtrusive in her need to be apprehended. A mother will -chase away this look with kisses. But she cannot chase away the -inevitable effluence of separatist, objective apprehension. She herself -sometimes will fall into a half-trance, and the child on her lap will -resolve itself into a strange and separate object. She does not -criticize or analyze him. She does not even _perceive_ him. But as if -rapt, she apprehends him lying there, an unfathomable and inscrutable -objective, outside herself, never to be grasped or included in herself. -She seizes as it were a sudden and final, objective impression of him. -And the conclusive sensation is one of _finality_. Something final has -happened to her. She has the strange sensation of unalterable certainty, -a sensation at once profoundly gratifying and rather appalling. She -_possesses_ something, a certain entity of primal, pre-conscious -knowledge. Let the child be what he may, her knowledge of him is her -own, forever and final. It gives her a sense of wealth in possession, -and of power. It gives her a sense also of fatality. From the very -satisfaction of the objective finality derives the sense of fatality. It -is a knowledge of the other being, but a knowledge which contains at the -same time a final assurance of the eternal and insuperable gulf which -lies between beings—the isolation of the self first. - -Thus the first plane of the _upper_ consciousness—the outgoing, the -sheer and unspeakable bliss of the sense of union, communion, at-oneness -with the beloved—and then the complementary objective _realization_ of -the beloved, the realization of that which is apart, different. This -realization is like riches to the objective consciousness. It is, as it -were, the adding of another self to the own self, through the mode of -apprehension. Through the mode of dynamic objective apprehension, which -in our day we have gradually come to call _imagination_, a man may in -his time add on to himself the whole of the universe, by increasing -pristine realization of the universal. This in mysticism is called the -progress to infinity—that is, in the modern, truly male mysticism. The -older female mysticism means something different by the infinite. - -But anyhow there it is. The attaining to the Infinite, about which the -mystics have rhapsodized, is a definite process in the developing -unconscious, but a process in the development only of the -objective-apprehensive centers—an exclusive process, naturally. - -A soul cannot come into its own through that love alone which is unison. -If it stress the one mode, the sympathetic mode, beyond a certain point, -it breaks its own integrity, and corruption sets in in the living -organism. On both planes of love, upper and lower, the two modes must -act complementary to one another, the sympathetic and the separatist. It -is the absolute failure to see this, that has torn the modern world into -two halves, the one half warring for the voluntary, objective, -separatist control, the other for the pure sympathetic. The individual -psyche divided against itself divides the world against itself, and an -unthinkable progress of calamity ensues unless there be a -reconciliation. - -The goal of life is the coming to perfection of each single individual. -This cannot take place without the tremendous interchange of love from -all the four great poles of the first, basic field of consciousness. -There must be the twofold passionate flux of sympathetic love, -subjective-abdominal and objective-devotional, both. And there must be -the twofold passional circuit of separatist realization, the lower, -vital _self-realization_, and the upper, intense realization of the -other, a realization which includes a recognition of abysmal -_otherness_. To stress any one mode, any one interchange, is to hinder -all, and to cause corruption in the end. The human psyche must have -strength and pride to accept the whole fourfold nature of its own -creative activity. - - - - - CHAPTER VI - HUMAN RELATIONS AND THE UNCONSCIOUS - - -The aim of this little book is merely to establish the smallest foothold -in the swamp of vagueness which now goes by the name of the unconscious. -At last we form some sort of notion what the unconscious actually is. It -is that active spontaneity which rouses in each individual organism at -the moment of fusion of the parent nuclei, and which, in polarized -connection with the external universe, gradually evolves or elaborates -its own individual psyche and corpus, bringing both mind and body forth -from itself. Thus it would seem that the term _unconscious_ is only -another word for life. But life is a general force, whereas the -unconscious is essentially single and unique in each individual -organism; it is the active, self-evolving soul bringing forth its own -incarnation and self-manifestation. Which incarnation and -self-manifestation seems to be the whole goal of the _unconscious_ soul: -the whole goal of life. Thus it is that the unconscious brings forth not -only consciousness, but tissue and organs also. And all the time the -working of each organ depends on the primary spontaneous-conscious -center of which it is the issue—if you like, the soul-center. And -consciousness is like a web woven finally in the mind from the various -silken strands spun forth from the primal center of the unconscious. - -But the unconscious is never an abstraction, _never to be abstracted_. -It is never an ideal entity. It is always concrete. In the very first -instance, it is the glinting nucleus of the ovule. And proceeding from -this, it is the chain or constellation of nuclei which derive directly -from this first spark. And further still it is the great nerve-centers -of the human body, in which the primal and pristine nuclei still act -direct. The nuclei are centers of spontaneous consciousness. It seems as -if their bright grain were germ-consciousness, consciousness germinating -forever. If that is a mystery, it is not my fault. Certainly it is not -mysticism. It is obvious, demonstrable scientific fact, to be verified -under the microscope and within the human psyche, subjectively and -objectively, both. Of course, the subjective verification is what men -kick at. Thin-minded idealists cannot bear any appeal to their bowels of -comprehension. - -We can quite tangibly deal with the human unconscious. We trace its -source and centers in the great ganglia and nodes of the nervous system. -We establish the nature of the spontaneous consciousness at each of -these centers; we determine the polarity and the direction of the -polarized flow. And from this we know the motion and individual -manifestation of the psyche itself; we also know the motion and rhythm -of the great organs of the body. For at every point psyche and functions -are so nearly identified that only by holding our breath can we realize -their _duality_ in identification—a polarized duality once more. But -here is no place to enter the great investigation of the duality and -polarization of the vital-creative activity and the mechanico-material -activity. The two are two in one, a polarized quality. They are -unthinkably different. - -On the first field of human conscious—the first plane of the -unconscious—we locate four great spontaneous centers, two below the -diaphragm, two above. These four centers control the four greatest -organs. And they give rise to the whole basis of human consciousness. -Functional and psychic at once, this is their first polar duality. - -But the polarity is further. The horizontal division of the diaphragm -divides man forever into his individual duality, the duality of the -upper and lower man, the two great bodies of upper and lower -consciousness and function. This is the horizontal line. - -The vertical division between the voluntary and the sympathetic systems, -the line of division between the spinal system and the great -plexus-system of the front of the human body, forms the second -distinction into duality. It is the great difference between the soft, -recipient front of the body and the wall of the back. The front of the -body is the live end of the magnet. The back is the closed opposition. -And again there are two parallel streams of function and consciousness, -vertically separate now. This is the vertical line of division. And the -horizontal line and the vertical line form the cross of all existence -and being. And even this is not mysticism—no more than the ancient -symbols used in botany or biology. - -On the first field of human consciousness, which is the basis of life -and consciousness, are the four first poles of spontaneity. These have -their fourfold polarity within the individual, again figured by the -cross. But the individual is never purely a thing-by-himself. He cannot -exist save in polarized relation to the external universe, a relation -both functional and psychic-dynamic. Development takes place only from -the polarized circuits of the dynamic unconscious, and these circuits -must be both individual and extra-individual. There must be the circuit -of which the complementary pole is external to the individual. - -That is, in the first place there must be the _other individual_. There -must be a polarized connection with the other individual—or even other -individuals. On the first field there are four poles in each individual. -So that the first, the basic field of extra-individual consciousness -contains eight poles—an eightfold polarity, a fourfold circuit. It may -be that between two individuals, even mother and child, the polarity may -be established only fourfold, a dual circuit. It may be that one circuit -of spontaneous consciousness may never be fully established. This means, -for a child, a certain deficiency in development, a psychic inadequacy. - -So we are again face to face with the basic problem of human conduct. No -human being can develop save through the polarized connection with other -beings. This circuit of polarized unison precedes all mind and all -knowing. It is anterior to and ascendant over the human will. And yet -the mind and the will can both interfere with the dynamic circuit, an -idea, like a stone wedged in a delicate machine, can arrest one whole -process of psychic interaction and spontaneous growth. - -How then? Man doth not live by bread alone. It is time we made haste to -settle the bread question, which after all is only the A B C of social -economies, and proceeded to devote our attention to this much more -profound and vital question: how to establish and maintain the circuit -of vital polarity from which the psyche actually develops, as the body -develops from the circuit of alimentation and respiration. We have -reached the stage where we can settle the alimentation and respiration -problems almost off-hand. But woe betide us, the unspeakable agony we -suffer from the failure to establish and maintain the vital circuits -between ourselves and the effectual correspondent, the other human -being, other human beings, and all the extraneous universe. The tortures -of psychic starvation which civilized people proceed to suffer, once -they have solved for themselves the bread-and-butter problem of -alimentation, will not bear thought. Delicate, creative desire, sending -forth its fine vibrations in search of the true pole of magnetic rest in -another human being or beings, how it is thwarted, insulated by a whole -set of India-rubber ideas and ideals and conventions, till every form of -perversion and death-desire sets in! How can we _escape_ neuroses? -Psychoanalysis won’t tell us. But a mere shadow of understanding of the -true unconscious will give us the hint. - -The amazingly difficult and vital business of human relationship has -been almost laughably underestimated in our epoch. All this nonsense -about love and unselfishness, more crude and repugnant than savage -fetish-worship. Love is a thing to be _learned_, through centuries of -patient effort. It is a difficult, complex maintenance of individual -integrity throughout the incalculable processes of interhuman-polarity. -Even on the first great plane of consciousness, four prime poles in each -individual, four powerful circuits possible between two individuals, and -each of the four circuits to be established to perfection and yet -maintained in pure equilibrium with all the others. Who can do it? -Nobody. Yet we have all got to do it, or else suffer ascetic tortures of -starvation and privation or of distortion and overstrain and slow -collapse into corruption. The whole of life is one long, blind effort at -an established polarity with the outer universe, human and non-human; -and the whole of modern life is a shrieking failure. It is our own -fault. - -The actual evolution of the individual psyche is a result of the -interaction between the individual and the outer universe. Which means -that just as a child in the womb grows as a result of the parental -blood-stream which nourishes the vital quick of the fœtus, so does every -man and woman grow and develop as a result of the polarized flux between -the spontaneous self and some other self or selves. It is the circuit of -vital flux between itself and another being or beings which brings about -the development and evolution of every individual psyche and physique. -This is a law of life and creation, from which we cannot escape. -Ascetics and voluptuaries both try to dodge this main condition, and -both succeed perhaps for a generation. But after two generations all -collapses. Man doth not live by bread alone. He lives even more -essentially from the nourishing creative flow between himself and -another or others. - -This is the reality of the extra-individual circuits of polarity, those -established between two or more individuals. But a corresponding reality -is that of the internal, purely individual polarity—the polarity within -a man himself of his upper and lower consciousness, and his own -voluntary and sympathetic modes. Here is a fourfold interaction within -the self. And from this fourfold reaction within the self results that -final manifestation which we know as _mind_, mental consciousness. - -The brain is, if we may use the word, the terminal instrument of the -dynamic consciousness. It transmutes what is a creative flux into a -certain fixed cypher. It prints off, like a telegraph instrument, the -glyphs and grafic representations which we call percepts, concepts, -ideas. It produces a new reality—the ideal. The idea is another static -entity, another unit of the mechanical-active and materio-static -universe. It is thrown off from life, as leaves are shed from a tree, or -as feathers fall from a bird. Ideas are the dry, unliving, inscutient -plumage which intervenes between us and the circumambient universe, -forming at once an insulator and an instrument for the subduing of the -universe. The mind is the instrument of instruments; it is not a -creative reality. - -Once the mind is awake, being in itself a finality, it feels very -assured. “The word became flesh, and began to put on airs,” says Norman -Douglas wittily. It is exactly what happens. Mentality, being automatic -in its principle like the machine, begins to assume life. It begins to -affect life, to pretend to make and unmake life. “In the beginning was -the Word.” This is the presumptuous masquerading of the mind. The Word -cannot be the beginning of life. It is the _end_ of life, that which -falls shed. The mind is the dead end of life. But it has all the -mechanical force of the non-vital universe. It is a great dynamo of -super-mechanical force. Given the _will_ as accomplice, it can even -arrogate its machine-motions and automatizations over the whole of life, -till every tree becomes a clipped tea-pot and every man a useful -mechanism. So we see the brain, like a great dynamo and accumulator, -accumulating _mechanical_ force and presuming to apply this mechanical -force-control to the living unconscious, subjecting everything -spontaneous to certain machine-principles called ideals or ideas. - -And the human will assists in this humiliating and sterilizing process. -We don’t know what the human will is. But we do know that it is a -certain faculty belonging to every living organism, the faculty for -self-determination. It is a strange faculty of the soul itself, for its -own direction. The will is indeed the faculty which every individual -possesses from the very moment of conception, for exerting a certain -control over the vital and automatic processes of his own evolution. It -does not depend originally on mind. Originally it is a purely -spontaneous control-factor of the living unconscious. It seems as if, -primarily, the will and the conscience were identical, in the pre-mental -state. It seems as if the will were given as a great balancing faculty, -the faculty whereby automatization is _prevented_ in the evolving -psyche. The _spontaneous_ will reacts at once against the exaggeration -of any one particular circuit of polarity. Any vital circuit—a fact -known to psychoanalysis. And against this automatism, this degradation -from the spontaneous-vital reality into the mechanic-material reality, -the human soul must always struggle. And the will is the power which the -unique self possesses to right itself from automatism. - -Sometimes, however, the free psyche really collapses, and the will -_identifies_ itself with an automatic circuit. Then a complex is set up, -a paranoia. Then incipient madness sets in. If the identification -continues, the derangement becomes serious. There may come sudden jolts -of dislocation of the whole psychic flow, like epilepsy. Or there may -come any of the known forms of primary madness. The second danger is -that the will shall identify itself with the mind and become an -instrument of the mind. The same process of automatism sets up, only now -it is slower. The mind proceeds to assume control over every -organic-psychic circuit. The spontaneous flux is destroyed, and a -certain automatic circuit substituted. Now an automatic establishment of -the psyche must, like the building of a machine, proceed according to -some definite fixed scheme, based upon certain fixed principles. And it -is here that ideals and ideas enter. They are the machine-plan and the -machine-principles of an automatized psyche. - -So, humanity proceeds to derange itself, to automatize itself from the -mental consciousness. It is a process of derangement, just as the fixing -of the will upon any other primary process is a derangement. It is a -long, slow development in madness. Quite justly do the advanced Russian -and French writers acclaim madness as a great goal. It is the genuine -goal of self-automatism, mental-conscious supremacy. - -True, we must all develop into mental consciousness. But -mental-consciousness is not a goal; it is a cul-de-sac. It provides us -only with endless _appliances_ which we can use for the -all-too-difficult business of coming to our spontaneous-creative -fullness of being. It provides us with means to adjust ourselves to the -external universe. It gives us further means for subduing the external, -materio-mechanical universe to our great end of creative life. And it -gives us plain indications of how to avoid falling into automatism, -hints for the _applying_ of the will, the loosening of false, automatic -fixations, the brave adherence to a profound soul-impulse. This is the -use of the mind—a great indicator and instrument. The mind as author and -director of life is anathema. - -So, the few things we have to say about the unconscious end for the -moment. There is almost nothing said. Yet it is a beginning. Still -remain to be revealed the other great centers of the unconscious. We -know four: two pairs. In all there are seven planes. That is, there are -six dual centers of spontaneous polarity, and then the final one. That -is, the great upper and lower consciousness is only just broached—the -further heights and depths are not even hinted at. Nay, in public it -would hardly be allowed us to hint at them. There is so much to know, -and every step of the progress in knowledge is a death to the human -idealism which governs us now so ruthlessly and vilely. It must die, and -we _will_ break free. But what tyranny is so hideous as that of an -automatically ideal humanity? - - - - - ● Transcriber’s Notes: - ○ Text that was in italics is enclosed by underscores (_italics_). - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PSYCHOANALYSIS AND THE -UNCONSCIOUS *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |