# [[Owning Your Own Shadow]] ## Summary > [!abstract] Summary > We are born whole, but we quickly learn that to join civilization, we must repress parts of ourselves. And so we become divided: one part of us (the light) defines our ideals and our participation in culture, and the other (the shadow) contains the rejected scraps of our personality that we've found unappealling. These two halves are intrinsically linked, such that it is impossible to feed one without feeding the other. The more cultured we become, and the more we express that civility, the more we must express our shadow self. > > When we don't express our shadow selves, they find a way to express themselves. We project our shadow upon others, usually with destructive consequences. Falling in love is a projection of our shadow on someone else: we see not what they are, but what we want to see. > > A non-destructive way to find equilibrium between the two halves is to find a way to symbolically express our shadow selves, by creating vivid art or by making "shadow vows" to voice our dark desires. The work of our second half of life consists in finding a way to successfully integrate the shadow into ourselves: a religious (*re+ligare*) experience. ## Thesis > [!question] What are the main points of the book? > What was the author trying to say? Identify the overarching ideas and how the author connected them. ### Inherent division in our psyches We have two parts of our psyches: the light and the shadow. The light is the source of kindness, beauty, creativity, and art. The author also refers to this as the "gold" in the shadow: the part of us that is noble and represents our ideals. It represents civilization and culture. The light is also the "right-hand personality". The shadow is comprised of all the elements of our personalities and urges that we've repressed, and this side is called the shadow life. The shadow can be destructive, angry, lustful, vengeful, proud, or insecure. When allowed to run unchecked, it can lead us into sin. It is the "left-hand personality". The light and the shadow are faces of the same thing, and so grow in parallel. Creative and professional endeavors feed the light, but they also feed the shadow. The two forces seek an equilibrium: whichever is not expressed, eventually bursts forth whether we like it or not. ### Two halves of life We are born whole, but the division in us starts as we mature. In the first half of our lives, we learn discipline and civilization. Civilization requires us to turn towards the light and cut out everything that interferes with our ideals. Civilization is necessary, but it also creates shadow. In the second half of life, we begin the process of reintegration of the shadow back into our whole selves. ### Symbolic expression avoids projection of shadow The author suggests that too much focus on the light and not enough expression of the shadow leads the shadow to exert itself. Usually, this means the projection of the shadow on someone: hurting someone destructively, so as to place the burden of the shadow on them. This also has the disadvantage of "sterilizing" ourselves of the shadow, which sounds like it could be a good thing but actually robs us of the chance to change. Falling in love (not loving) is the projection of a shadow (and the gold in it) onto another person, and it is dangerous because we see not the person for who they are, but for their reflection back to us of what we perceive as divinity. While inevitable, we can acknowledge our shadows by making "shadow vows" that expresses these dark desires to each other. To avoid this, we must seek an expression of the shadow that is symbolic rather than real. The author suggests the creation of rituals that acknowledge the presence of the shadow in some vivid, creative way that does not conflict with the expression of the light and doesn't have real consequences. ### Religion and mandorla The religious (*re-ligare*) process involves not just acknowledging the shadow, but finding a way to reintegrate it into our wholeness of self. This creates a paradox containing both the light and the shadow. A paradox is a compromise of opposites to an extent. Religious work involves turning opposition into paradox and letting both parts of the psyche sit with each other and cause the creation of something new in compromise. The mandorla starts out small at first, but the religious work increases it until we are whole. The author uses the image of a *mandorla* to explain this. A mandorla is the almond-shaped intersection between two circles, and represents the unity of two opposing forces. The author also refers to this space as a seesaw: a balance between the light and shadow. Language is a religious space, a mandorla. Specifically, verbs unite paradoxes and otherwise opposing ideas. Good talk can heal. ## Antithesis > [!question] What was missing? > Identify points the author made that you disagree with or feel should have been included. What are some related ideas from other authors that might conflict with this author's ideas? - The characterization of the light and the shadow as good vs. evil is embarrassingly reductive and doesn't allow for much nuance. - The author expressed many concepts using religious (Catholic) themes that were unnecessary. I would have preferred a more secular and neutral discourse. - Purely symbolic acknowledgment of the shadow is sometimes insufficient. - The author seems to take for granted that everything that's in the shadow self *should* stay in the shadow, and that even when in the space of the mandorla, the shadow is never allowed to come to the fore. - Duality is reductive - In [[Qabbalah]], the [[Tree of Life]] organizes [[Sefirot]] (attributes) into a networked constellation. Instead of the duality that Johnson suggests, though, there are 10 sefirot connected by 22 paths, and together they represent the flow of divine energy. - [[Buddhism]] also warns against the categorisation of things into dualities. Things are often not that easily distinguished from each other. It's much more likely that there is a spectrum of desires, with a lot of nuance. - Lack of empirical evidence. What was this all even based on, other than conjecture? - The expression of a forbidden desire can have the opposite effect to the one the author intends. Johnson assumes that expression leads to [[Catharsis]], but it could just as easily be reinforced by expression, increasing its intensity instead of allowing it to subside. - Johnson speaks of the Shadow as something to be integrated into a psyche, but in [[Buddhism]], [[Nirvana]] is the state of having no desires at all. In this way, Buddhism would seem to suggest the eradication of the Shadow rather than its integration. ## Synthesis > [!question] Middle ground > How would you reconcile conflicting ideas? What are some other similar ideas you've heard of from others? How is this relevant to you? - [[Sex]] is an appropriate form of "symbolic expression" of one's shadow self. [[Esther Perel]] talks about sex as a way to [[sources/Book/Mating in Captivity#^73dc30|transgress social norms in the dark]], without having to change your publicly held values. - In [[Macroeconomics]], a market equilibrium exists when two forces are balanced: supply and demand, which interact to determine the price. However, demand and supply also directly affect each other: an increase in supply can decrease demand, and an increase in demand, given enough time and availability, can increase supply. There's also the concept of an [[Unstable Equilibrium]], where there appears to be a lack of movement but is ultimately fragile. A [[Stable Equilibrium]] is a true equilibrium, which could be akin to having integrated the shadow into oneself. - In [[Daoism]], the duality of the universe is expressed in terms of [[Yin]] (darkness, passivity, femininity, the moon) and [[Yang]] (light, activity, masculinity, the sun). ## Related - [[readwise/Books/Owning Your Own Shadow|Owning Your Own Shadow]] (My highlights) - [[Notizbuch – Owning Your Own Shadow-2023-07-27-17-11.pdf]] ([[Kindle Scribe]] highlights) - [[Shadow]] ## Citation ``` [^johnson]: Johnson, R. A. (2013). *Owning your own shadow: Understanding the dark side of the psyche.* [[sources/Book/Owning Your Own Shadow|My notes]]. ```