Peacock

In alchemical imagery, the peacock symbolizes "all colors," “that is, the integration of all qualities” (Mysterium Coniunctionis, par. 391) and thus the union of opposites. (See Color.) Its arrival announces the completion of the work; the peacock also possesses qualities of a messenger (and acquires symbolic similarity with Iris, not least because of the “eyes” in its plumage).  

It is called "Hermes’ bird" and "the blessed greenness," both of which, according to Jung, symbolize the Holy Spirit, “in which the hermaphrodite’s male-female and the Rebis are integrated.” (Compare Green.)  

In early Christianity, the peacock was a symbol of sunrise, resurrection, and what we today might associate primarily with the Phoenix; with the same symbolic value, the peacock was a popular image in alchemy. When Osiris was resurrected by Isis, he triumphantly rode in a chariot drawn by peacocks.  

A similar image is the idea that peacock flesh never decayed, which gave it a symbolic quality as "the food of immortality."  

The Romans viewed the peacock as an attribute of Juno (and Iris was called Junonia); she is a mother goddess of renewal, just as the peacock renews its feathers every year (and in between is little more than a crow). In any case, the symbolism of renewal is recurrent.  

All of the above makes the peacock a symbol of the Self. However, it is also associated with pride and vanity—symptoms of inflation, identification with the Self. Eating peacock flesh (see Consume) would mean integrating its qualities, becoming conscious of them, and understanding that some qualities belong not to the ego but to the Self, which breaks identification without turning the qualities into their opposites.

Popular posts from this blog

Forget About the Archetype - It's the Complex

A good post on Reddit expresses criticism towards people seeking answers to their personal problems in Jung’s archetype theory, arguing that they misunderstand Jung’s fundamental theoretical framework, particularly the process of individuation. The post became popular, receiving many upvotes and quickly garnering several fairly lengthy, often well thought-out responses. But what struck me was that the writer didn’t mention complexes a single time in the nearly 600-word post, and no one else did either in their comments. This prompted me to write a short post highlighting the point that when people share their thoughts on Jung in relation to their own or others’ psychology, it is actually, in most cases, about complexes—not archetypes. A couple of days later, the thread had 54 comments and 246 upvotes, which are rather high numbers in this forum for a serious post that sticks to the topic of Jungian psychology. However, my post hadn't received any comments or upvotes. Still no-one e...
Read more

Shadow Work – A Critical Commentary

When browsing public channels on various platforms that deal with Jungian psychology, one is struck by how frequently “shadow work” appears.  It seems to be mostly young men, who don’t appear to have studied Jung to any significant extent, who are fascinated by and encourage this "work." As someone who has studied Jung and Jungian literature for a long time, I don’t recognize this focus on so-called shadow work in the sources at all. It actually seems to be a modern internet phenomenon rather than something genuinely Jungian. Yes, it is of course true that the “shadow” is a central concept in Jungian psychology, and it is true that Jung stated that it is "a therapeutic necessity for the ego to confront its shadow" (CW 14, par. 514) – but this shadow work they speak of, where does it come from? Because it certainly doesn’t come from Jung or any influential Jungians. What is the shadow according to Jung? It is simply hidden or unconscious aspects of ourselves that we...
Read more

3. The Muster of Rohan; 4. The Siege of Gondor

Since neither Frodo, Gandalf or Aragorn participates in the events of this chapter, there is very little symbolic significance. We may note that Théoden’s army meets Éowyn at Dunharrow, an ancient fortress to which the people have fled under her leadership. During supper, Merry asks about Aragorn and the Paths of the Dead, but no one—neither Théoden, Éomer or Éowyn—understands why he chose to take this hopeless road. No one knows of the Stone of Erech or the “peril in the south.” “Woe that so valiant a man should trifle with death in this dire hour!” Éomer exclaims. The reason for Aragorn’s reticence is probably that his initiation is an intensely private matter, a secret pure and simple. Théoden intends to leave both Éowyn and Merry behind here—neither of them is suited to battle, he believes. But when the host later rides toward Gondor, Éowyn and Merry ride with it in secret. Both refuse to be left in a place where their respective callings would remain unfulfilled. 4. The Siege of G...
Read more