Lecture by David L. Miller to Minnesota Jung Association

I had the privilege of hearing a lecture by Dr. David L. Miller on May 8, 2015.  David L. Miller, Ph.D., is Watson-Ledden Professor of Religion Emeritus at Syracuse University and a retired Core Faculty Person in Mythological Studies at Pacifica Graduate Institute in Santa Barbara. Since 1963, Dr. Miller has worked at the intersections of religions and mythologies, literature and literary theory, and theology and depth psychology. (This, from the Minnesota Jung Assn. website.)

His lecture to the Minnesota Jung Association at Luther Seminary focused on the archetype of the Good Shepherd as it impinges on the helping professions (teaching, medicine, psychotherapy, social work, counseling, education, life coaching, spiritual and religious ministry, etc.).  Dr. Miller’s focus was on the importance of being aware of the darker aspects of the archetype.  To be conscious of the existence of the negative archetypal influences is critical for the individual in the helping professions in particular.  The task for each of us is to “be aware of the images that are using us”, Dr. Miller said.  The Shadow sides of the archetypal image of the Good Shepherd are:  the Power Complex; the Savior Complex; Single-minded Vision and Narcissism.  The following is a summary what was said, along with some additional comments/observations — and belated personal reactions after assimilating the material Dr. Miller delivered. 

One of Dr. Miller’s first quotes was from Heraclitus (535-475 B.C.):  “Don’t listen to me, listen to the logos.”  In other words, don’t pay attention to the deliverer of the message; listen to the message, the animating idea/spirit behind the words.  [Aha! I thought to myself:  the golden bird who whispers in the little girl’s ear in “The Golden Bough, a FairytaleBallet for Children”!]  The particulars of the human vehicle delivering the message are tangential except, apparently, in the case of Jesus of Nazareth, whose life was the message — which is why the writer of the Gospel of John calls him the Logos.

Pointing to the painting of 'St. Francis Feeding the Birds' projected on the screen, Dr. Miller said two things that particularly resonated with me. [“Hmmm, yet more avian ‘intrusions’ into my 'air space'!,” I thought, reminded once again of the persistence of the idea that I must do something more with my fairytale ballet which features a golden bird as the main image of the ballet.].  Miller said:  “The point should be (a) that St. Francis feeds the birds because he is contained in the aura (the halo), not, (b) that St. Francis has the aura/halo because he's [a ‘saint’] for feeding the birds.” In other words, the person is the bond servant of the idea that is forming in him or her.  The person doesn't have the idea; the idea ‘has’ the person (sometimes, by the scruff of the neck, I might add).  Our job is to discover what is living and manifesting itself through us.  We must beware of the stories that are living themselves out through us and aware of the larger ‘opus’ in which we play a part.  We need to become conscious of the archetype that demands expression:  both its positive aspects and potentials (‘good outcomes’) and its negative aspects and potentials — those aspects that present a danger to the unconscious individual.
 

Painting by Giotto (1267-1337)

Dr. Miller seemed to be describing my experience as an artist.  In creating “The Golden Bough, a Fairytale Ballet for Children”, it was crystal clear to me at the time (1996) that I was the idea’s servant, taken by the scruff of the neck and told, “Do this!”  I had some say in the matter, of course, but knowing that regardless — whether I did the work or did not bend myself to the task — I would be burned up no matter what, I might just as well manifest the intention positively in outer life!  Because if I didn't, the archetype-that-would-not-be-denied would cause much mischief, and in either case, I would be unbearable to myself and others! 

I have written about this experience in “Companion Guide to The Golden Bough, a Fairytale Ballet: the Ballet as Parable”.  What I have learned over many years of struggle is that, in addition to knowing that you are by far the weaker of the two entities in the equation, part of the ‘protective armor’ that one needs when approached by the archetype is an attitude of simultaneously knowing two diametrically opposed things about your situation:  you are necessary for the fulfillment of the idea; and, yet, you are also ultimately superfluous to the expression of the archetype, for it will be expressed one way or another. 

Dr. Miller asked for personal comments regarding how we become aware of and deal with those ‘shadow’ aspects of the archetype.  I commented to the group that as a ballet teacher, I have on several occasions told the students in my class that if I am not becoming more and more superfluous to them, I am not doing my job as a trainer and teacher of the classical ballet.  My students should become more competent and more independent of my oversight, if I am doing my job.  (Of course, there are always those in class who will resist instruction, but it is my job to cajole them by whatever creative means I can to make a dent in their resistance.  I don’t always succeed, but I succeed with the vast majority.)  Taking myself lightly but the work seriously has been my guideline in teaching.  And, in the end, being all 'used up', I shall die of superfluity.  As C. S. Lewis, I believe, said, “Satan fell because of too much gravity!”

My thoughts can be somewhat 'delayed' at times as I digest things!  Had I thought of this at the time, I would have rejoined Dr. Miller’s comment about St. Francis feeding the birds with, "And, the 'birds' (or any creative idea that comes upon an artist) come to him/her because 'they' recognize they are safe and will be fed/nurtured in that aura."  This view, the view presented by the ballet “The Golden Bough”, tweaks the focus just a little more by emphasizing the synchronistic and the independent nature of any archetype.  It also shows (a) how the individual affects the archetype and (b) how the archetype 'gathers' ideas and people to itself and 'surrounds' a situation that contains a 'positive' intention.  Certainly the latter was true surrounding the creation of “The Golden Bough, a Fairytale Ballet for Children”.  It was absolutely astonishing to watch and feel the energy this ballet generated among students and parents during the creative process!  Quite frankly, the scale of the undertaking for a small ballet school such as ours could never have been done without all that archetypal energy shoving it forward to birth!  I am absolutely convinced of that.  But the creation of the ballet also required me to confront my own shadow.  [I have written about this in “Companion Guide to the Golden Bough, a Fairytale Ballet:  the Ballet as Parable.”]

On the other hand, an unconscious intention that is ignored or rejected by consciousness will infect the entire situation with negative consequences — very much like what happens in Scene 3 of the ballet when “The Blob” threatens.  So the attitude of consciousness is, as Jung has pointed out, critical to the overall outcome.  With respect to Dr. Miller’s example of St. Francis feeding the birds, putting things this (additional) way shifts the focus a bit more away from any ascription of moral goodness or competence to St. Francis — or any of us who are artists, teachers, healers, pastors, etc. 

One always has to be aware of the “hawk” (our shadow ambition) that swoops in out of nowhere to make off with a small bird.  When one feeds birds, the gathering of so many small birds attracts the hawks in the neighborhood as well.

Still, there are discernments to be made, compromises and “deals” that one can and must make with the unconscious, because to allow the archetype to swallow one up (which it can and will surely do if some kind of ‘conversation’ with the inner voice is not initiated and maintained) results in a kind of madness (grandiosity, separation from reality, tyrannical behavior, or worse) that has no regard for one’s human limitations or one's responsibilities to others to be 'present' to them.  That is how the good/negative aspect of the Good Shepherd archetype acts — by turning into a wolf and gobbling you up!