Upload
vuphuc
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
-- ~ - - - -- --
Loved into Wholeness, Made Whole to be Loved:
Discovering the Animus in C.S. Lewis's
Till We Have Faces
by
Sarah E. MacFadyen
AN HONORS THESIS SUBM ITIED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF ARTS
Jeffrey Bilbro, 8 .D. Assist ant Professor of English
Spring Arbor University April 2013
.. · '
RunningHead:ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 1
ENG490SeniorHonorsThesis
LovedintoWholeness,MadeWholetoLove:
DiscoveringtheAnimusinC.S.Lewis’sTillWeHaveFaces
SarahE.Macfadyen
SpringArborUniversity
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 2
LovedintoWholeness,MadeWholetoLove:DiscoveringtheAnimusinC.S.Lewis’sTillWe
HaveFaces
Tobebeautiful,whole,andtrulylovedarethelongingsofOrual,theprotagonistand
narratorofC.S.Lewis’sfinalnovel,TillWeHaveFaces(1956).Theprocessbywhichsheis
abletorealizethesedesiresisillustratedthroughoutthenovelthroughtheimageofbeing
givenaface—thatis,acompletepsycheorsoul,—andOrualmustknowandacceptthis
facebeforeshecanstandinthepresenceofthegods;thequestion,“Howcantheymeetus
facetofacetillwehavefaces?”(Lewis,p.257)iscentraltoherspiritualandpsychological
development.Whilethequestionseemsratherobvious,theprocessthatitpromptsis
certainlynoteasyorpainless.Orual’snarrationtracesahighlycomplexprocessof
developmentthat,withoutcloseexamination,iseasilymisunderstood.Astheculmination
ofLewis’sfictionalworksand,inmanyways,acapstonetohislifeandcareer,TillWeHave
Facesisabeautifulandintricatelywoventalethatcangiveabundantenjoyment,butwhich
alsodeservesandrequiresexactinganalysis.
AmethodbywhichtodelveintotheworldofOrual’smindistostudyandapplythe
psychoanalytictheoryofSwisspsychotherapistCarlGustavJungtoOrual’sdevelopmental
processandjourneytocompletion.Orual’spersonalandspiritualgrowthisinextricably
connectedtoherstrugglewithgenderandtheconflictingqualitiesexistingwithinher
unconsciousmind;byrecognizingthesequalitiesandseekingtotracetheirmovement
fromherunconscioustoherconsciousmindbyapplyingJung’stheoryofarchetypes—and,
morespecifically,oftheanimus—itispossibletodiscernhowOrual,withthedirectionof
thegods,isabletogainafaceandtocommunewiththegodsasabeautiful,complete,
loved,andfullyindividuatedcharacter.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 3
TheAnimusArchetype
AccordingtoJungiantheory,thereexistwithineachindividualasetofarchetypes;
thatis,primordialimagesthathavebeenengrainedwithinthepsycheandinheritedby
eachgenerationfromthelast.IntheirintroductiontoJungianpsychology,HallandNordby
(1973)describethesearchetypesas“thecontentsofthecollectiveunconscious”(p.41),
abstractformsthataregenerallyunderstoodatbirthbutnotnecessarilyexperiencedyetin
aconcrete,physicalreality.Thesearchetypesaresimilartoinstinctinanimals,whichare
bornwithsomeunderstandingaboutsuchthingsaswhatfoodisgoodtoeat,howtoattract
amate,andhowtoavoidpredators.Inhumans,theseinnateideasarecountless,butJung
citesGod,magic,thehero,thedemon,thepersona,theanima,theanimus,theshadow,and
theselfassomeofthecentralarchetypesembeddedwithinthehumanpsyche(p.41‐42).
Humanstendtoinitiallyjudgeactualexperiencebasedupontheirconceptionofthese
archetypes,yetinamaturepsyche,theconcreteexperiencewillalterthearchetypebefore
seriousdiscomfortensuesasaresultofdisunitybetweenarchetypeandreality.
Althoughthearchetypesformcombinationsastheyrelatetooneanother,and
thereforeofteninfluenceeachother,asinglearchetypestandsasparticularlyprominentin
TillWeHaveFaces.Thearchetypeoftheanimusis“themasculinesideofthefemale
psyche”(Hall&Nordby,1973,p.46)andhasaconsiderableinfluenceuponthe
developmentofthecharacterofOrual.Herinabilitytointegrateherfemininitywithher
masculinity(heranimus)causesdiscordwithinherpsycheandkeepsherfromachieving
individuationor,inLewis’sterms,fromhavingatrueface.Thepersonalwholenessthat
occursatindividuation,asD.L.Hart(2008)explains,“isachievednotbyanypsychic
structurewhichoccursunconsciously,butrather...onlyinthecontextofbecoming
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 4
consciousofthoseconflictingelementswhichmakeupthepsyche”(p.101).Junghimself
explainsthearchetypeofawoman’sanimus—andofaman’sanima,orinternalfeminine
personality,—inTheRelationsBetweentheEgoandtheUnconscious(1938),wherehe
statesthatonemust“bringthesecontentsintothelight;andonlywhenthistaskhasbeen
completed,andtheconsciousmindhasbecomesufficientlyfamiliarwiththeunconscious
processesreflected”intheanimuswillitfunctionasitought(p.181).ThestoryofTillWe
HaveFacesisthereforeanaccountofOrual’sbattlewithheranimusandtheprocessby
whichsheisable—withtheinterventionofthegods—touncoverheranimusandbringit
intoconsciousness.
Theintegrationofthecontra‐sexualaspectofahumanpsycheis,although
necessaryforeachgender,decidedlydifferentinamaleandafemale.Althoughthe
animus,themasculinepersonalitythatexistswithinawoman,isofprimaryimportance
herebecauseofthecentralroleofwomeninTillWeHaveFaces,acomparisonofthetwois
helpfulindefiningtherolethattheanimusplaysinthedevelopmentofawoman’sSelf.R.
Robertson,inC.G.JungandtheArchetypesoftheCollectiveUnconscious(1987)compares
thetwo,saying:“WhileAnimaisGreekforsoul,AnimusisGreekformindorspirit”(p.
122).Aman,therefore,mustlearntounitehissoul—hisfeelings,passions,and
emotions—withtherestofhisSelf,andawomanmustlearntointegrateherspirit—her
ideas,beliefs,andthoughts—withherSelf.Robertsongivesanaccountforthisdifference,
statingthatthediscrepancyexists“becausethecourseofdevelopmenthasalreadyforceda
mantointegratehismind,awomanhersoul”(p.122).Thetaskofanimaoranimus
integrationisthereforetorestorethatpartofoneselfwhichismissingoris
underdeveloped.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 5
Therearisesinthisinterpretation,however,theuncomfortableandcurrentlymuch
debatedquestionofgenderrolesandsocialexpectationofbeliefandbehaviorbasedsolely
uponone’ssex.Arewomenlesslikelytodeveloptheirspiritbecausetheytrulylackit,or
becausesomanysocietieshavehistoricallyandcontinuetoplaceuponwomenthe
judgmentthattheyarenaturallylessrational,logical,andreasonablethanmen?Aremen
lesslikelytodeveloptheirsoulsbecausetheyarelessemotional,affectionate,andintuitive
orbecausetheyaregenerallyregardedwithdisdainforexposingthissideofthemselves?
Inheressay“Anima/Animus,”V.Kast(2006)presentsherbeliefthat“indescribinganima
andanimus,Jungisbasicallyusingtheestablishedgenderstereotypesofhistimetodefine
whatisfemaleandwhatismale”(p.113).Inadditiontothis,Jungtendstodepictthe
anima—thepartofamanassociatedwiththefeminine—asweakerthanthemalepartof
women,theanimus.Jung’swife,Emma,helpedhimextensivelyinhisunderstandingand
interpretationoftheanimusfor,beingaman,hewaslessabletopresentanaccurate
descriptionoftheanimus.In“OntheNatureoftheAnimus”,EmmaJung(1957)explains
thetaskofmen,who“havetoacceptwhatisregardedaslessvaluable,whatisweak,
passive,subjective,illogical,boundtonature—inaword,femininity”(p.41).Sucha
definitionoftheword“femininity”certainlyseemstosuggestsexismintheJungian
evaluationoftheanimusandanima.
Thesetwocomplaints—toogreatarelianceupongenderrolesandthepresenceof
sexisminJung’stheoryoftheanimusandanima—can,however,beevaluatedandaccepted
withouthavingtodismissthemaintenetsofthetheory.Itmustbeseriouslyconsidered
thatmenandwomenarepsychologicallydifferentaswellasphysicallydifferentandthat,
althoughmanysocietieshaveassignedtheattributesmostcommonlyheldbywomenless
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 6
importancethanthoseheldbymen,itmaybeobjectivelytruethatthesequalitiesactually
dobelongmoretoonegenderthantotheother.Therefore,Jungcouldbecorrectinsaying
thatwomenaremorelikelytohaveintegratedtheiremotionalsensibilitiesthantheir
rationalsensibilitiesandthatmenaremorelikelytohaveintegratedreasonthanintuition,
butthisneednotmeanthatonegenderisaccordinglyofmoreorlesssignificancethanthe
other.Withoutbothreasonandintuition,nooneiswhole;bothareimportantregardlessof
thejudgmentstraditionallyheldbymostsocieties.Intheaforementionedstatementmade
byE.Jung,thisisacknowledgedintheword“regarded.”Sheisnot,then,sayingthat
weakness,passivityandillogicalityarefeminineattributes,butthatbecauseofaccepted
genderroles,suchqualitiesaregenerally“regardedaslessvaluable”(p.41)andare
clothedinnegativelanguage;therefore,toacceptfemininecharacteristics,menmust
overcomethesocialstigmathatthequalitiespossess.
JungianPsychoanalysisintheThoughtofC.S.Lewis
Thereiscertainlynonecessitywhenapplyingtheworkofonepersontothatof
anotherfortheretobeanydirectinfluenceorknowledgebetweenthetwo.Afaithful
interpretationofonetextbyanotherwillrelyonlyuponthelegitimacyofthetexts
themselvesinconjunctionwithoneanotherandtheusefulnessoftheconclusionsdrawn
fromthestudy.However,insuchacaseasevaluatingJungianelementsinthefictionofC.S.
Lewis,itoughttobenotedthatLewiswasveryfamiliarwiththeworkofJung(Myers,
2004,p.7).InherdetailedstudyofTillWeHaveFacesentitledBareface,DorothyMyers
makesnotethat“Lewis’sstudyofJungwaslifelong”(p.197).Suchanextensiveinfluence
shouldnotbeignored,forinadditiontolendinglegitimacytotheinterpretiveapproach,it
alsohasthepotentialtolendfurtherinsighttothestudybyallowingforotherofLewis’s
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 7
ownwritingstoaidintheJungianinterpretationofhisfinalnovel.TillWeHaveFaces,
althoughnotstrictallegoryinthesamemannerasLewis’sChroniclesofNarnia,certainly
containsallegoricalelements.Itspeaksdirectlytothehumanconditionandemploysmany
themesthatarecentraltoChristianity,suchastheideaoffollowersofChristbeingHis
bride(asPsychebecomesthebrideofagod)andthecentralityofsacrificial,self‐giving
love.MyersnotesthecomplexityofthevariouselementsthatinteractinTillWeHaveFaces
byrecognizingthat“thestoryiscomplicatedbytheintegrationoftheJungianprocesswith
Christianspiritualwisdom”(p.202).ThesedifferentaspectsofLewis’sworkneednot,
however,standinoppositionwithoneanother;theyaremostfullyintegratedinoneofthe
centralthemesofLewis’slifeandthought:myth.
TheSignificanceofMythinJung’sArchetypes
Jung’sarchetypesarebasedontheideaofengrained,ancientideasexistentwithin
eachperson’sunconsciousmind.Becauseoftheirprimordialnature,theyareoftenbest
expressedanddescribedintherealmofmyth.Inhisessay“ArchetypesandGender:
Goddesses,Warriors,andPsychologicalHealth,”C.Z.Enns(1994)explains,“archetypes
appearmostfrequentlyinthemythsandprimitiveloreofcultures”(par.3).Theancient
qualitythatdefinesthearchetypeiscommunicatedmostaccuratelythroughmyth.Lewis
himselfsupportsthisinhisdirectanalysisofJungiantheoryentitled“Psycho‐Analysisand
LiteraryCriticism”(1969),stating,“Myths,oratanyratetheolderandgreatermyths,are
suchimagesrecoveredfromthecollectiveunconscious”(p.297).Theseimages,ofcourse,
areJung’sarchetypes,andareofsuchanaturethattheyareinseparablefromthemythical
form.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 8
Jungunderstoodtheimportanceofmythinthecomprehensionofarchetypes.In
Aion:ResearchesIntothePhenomenologyoftheSelf,Jung(1959)offersanexplanationof
whymythmustcontributetoone’sunderstandingofarchetypes:
Itispossibletodescribethiscontentinrational,scientificlanguage,butinthisway
oneentirelyfailstoexpressitslivingcharacter.Therefore,indescribingtheliving
processesofthepsyche,Ideliberatelyandconsciouslygivepreferencetoa
dramatic,mythologicalwayofthinkingandspeaking,becausethisisnotonlymore
expressivebutalsomoreexactthananabstractscientificterminology,whichis
wonttotoywiththenotionthatitstheoreticformulationsmayonefinedaybe
resolvedintoalgebraicequations.(p.13)
Although,asLewisconcedes,itcanbetemptingtoacceptJung’stheorytoounreservedly
becauseofitsbeautyandtheemotivepowerofsuchanidea(creatingaconnection
betweenourselvesandtheancientpastthroughmythiscertainlypoeticregardlessofits
veracity),thissameemotionalpoignancyservesas“proofthatheisquiterightinclaiming
thatcertainimages,inwhatevermaterialtheyareembodied,haveastrangepowerto
excitethehumanmind”(Lewis,p.299).Itis,therefore,morethanpossiblethatinwriting
TillWeHaveFaces,hisretellingofthemythofErosandPsyche,Lewishadthesearchetypal
imagesinmindandwasconsciousoftheirpresenceinhisstory.Todecipherthese
archetypes—astheanimusarchetypeisherebeinganalyzed—isthereforenotonlyto
discoverJung’sinfluenceuponLewis,butalsotodiscovertheinfluenceofthesearchetypes
uponhumanity.Mythfunctionsasamediumthroughwhichthearchetypesofeachhuman
unconsciouscanberevealed.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 9
TheFourStagesoftheAnimus
DemonstratedinLewis’smytharebothexamplesofhowtheanimuscanremain
detachedfromawoman’spsycheandhowitcanbeintegrated,foralthoughOrualdenies
herfemininitythroughoutmostofthenovel—andindoingsoallowsheranimustopossess
her,—thestoryisalsoOrual’sjourneytoindividuationandafullunificationofanimuswith
psyche.BeforeembarkinguponachronologicalstudyofOrual’spathtoindividuationand
animusintegration,ageneralstudyofhowpossessionbytheanimusand,alternatively,
acceptanceofit,willalteraperson’sbehaviorandpsyche,willbeveryhelpfulforan
accurateanalysisofOrual’spsychologicalstateateachpointinthenovel.
Ennsdescribesthestateofanimuspossessionanditsconsequencesobserving,
“Jungbelievedthatwomencouldbecomepossessedbytheanimus,astateinwhichthe
animusisoftencorrupted,resultinginhostility,obstinacy,dogmatism,power‐driven
behaviors,andirrationalandopinionatedperspectives”(par.6).Thisreactionoccurs
becausetheanimusisresponsibleforrationalityandreason.Iftheanimusisnotallowed
tobecomeconsciousandisthereforenotfullydevelopedandintegrated,then,although
opinionscontinuetobeheldstrongly,theyareoftenillogicalandunexamined.Inthesame
waythatmen,inthegripoftheiranima,arelikelytofeelthingsstronglyandirrationally
andyetnotbeabletoidentifythesourceoftheiremotions,womenpossessedbythe
animusareunabletoevaluatetheiropinions(Robertson,1987,p.133).
Apositive,integratedfunctioningoftheanimuscanoccuronlywhentheanimusis
fullyrealizedandacceptedbytheindividual.Robertsonpresentsfurtherinsight,
remarking,“Forawoman,integratingthepersonalcontentsoftheAnimusenablesherto
acceptthatrationalthoughtsareanecessarypartoflife.Sheisabletoactinboththeinner
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 10
andouterworldwiththeswiftnessofthought”(p.134).Yetsuchintegrationdoesnot
occurwithoutmucheffortbytheindividualtobringtheanimusintoconsciousness.
AnthonyStorr(1973)inhisintroductiontoJungandhistheoriesstates,“itisonlywhena
manorwomanunderstands,becomesfamiliarwith,andfacesthesepersonificationsof
subjectivedesireandemotionthattheyceasetooperateasautonomouspersonalitiesin
oppositiontotheconsciouswill”(p.46‐47).Theprocessofunderstandingandaccepting
theanimusisthereforeinvolved,andcantakemuchtime,effort,andevensorrow.
Therearefourmainphasesthroughwhichawomanmustpassbeforetheanimus
canbeintegratedandindividuationfinallyachieved.Thesephasesareoutlinedinmost
detailinEmmaJung’sessay,“OntheNatureoftheAnimus”(1957).Inordertoaccurately
explainthefourphases,EmmaJungusestypesofmenasexamplesoftheanimusateach
stage;thisapproachissimilartoCarlJunginusingmythtodescribeandillustratethe
archetypes.Thefirststage,theManofPower,ischaracterizedbyphysicalstrengthorby
strengthofwill.Thisdoesnotmeanthatthewomannecessarilyfocusesuponherown
strength,butthatshemaybedrawntosuchfiguresas“theheroesoflegend,orpresent‐day
sportscelebrities,cowboys,bullfighters,aviators,andsoon”(p.3).Thewomanprojects
heranimusontosuchfiguresatthisstageinparticular,asthefoundationalandmost
primalstageofanimusdevelopment.
FollowingthisisaconcentrationontheManofDeed,orthosewhofocustheir
strengthuponaparticulargoal.Atthisstagetheintellectbeginstoassertitselffor,instead
ofdirectionlesspower,significanceisbeingsought.M.L.vonFranzin“TheProcessof
Individuation”(1978)givesexamplesofthetypesofmenwhowouldbeembodimentsof
theanimusatcertainstagesofitsdevelopment.Suchmenwouldeitherappearinthe
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 11
dreamsofawomanduringthisphase,wouldexemplifytheprojectionsofthewomanupon
othermen,orwhosevalueswouldbeenactedinthewoman’sownlife.Whilethefigureof
TarzancorrespondstotheManofPowerfromthefirststage,vonFranzassigns19th
CenturyBritishRomanticpoetPercyShelleytothesecondstage(p.205).Actionbasedon
strengthandreflectionismostvaluedatthisstage,andtheManofDeedimage
demonstratesthisprinciple.
Thethirdstage,symbolizedbytheManoftheWordassumesanevengreatermental
powerandcannowbe“understoodasbeingaspiritualguideandasrepresentingthe
intellectualgiftsofthewoman”(Jung,1957,p.4).E.Jungdescribesthisstageasoneofthe
mostimportantanddangerousstages,foralthoughwomenatthisstageare“active,
energetic,brave,andforcefulwomen”(p.4),thereisalsothepotentialfortheanimusto
overcomethewoman’spsycheandstifleherfemininity,causinghertobecomebrutaland
over‐aggressive.Inahealthyanimusdevelopment,theseanti‐feminine,hostileelementsof
theanimuswillhavebeensubduedinphaseonewiththeestablishmentoffeminine
lifestyles.Positiveanimusdevelopmentisessentiallyastruggletoharmonizethe
masculinespiritwithinawoman,“tolearntoknowthesefactors,tocoordinatethemso
thattheycanplaytheirpartinameaningfulway”(p.5).
Finally,thefourthstageispersonifiedbytheManofMeaning,thecatalystof
spiritualtruthandwisdom,andisrepresentedbyvonFranzbythefigureofGandhi(p.
205).Thisisthestageofindividuationwhentheanimusisfullyconscious,fullyexamined,
andfullyintegratedintoawoman’spsyche.Eachstageisnowpresentandunderstood,and
theirunionformsthe“logos,thequintessenceofthemasculineprinciple”(Jung,1957,p.3).
Bythisstage,awomanwillhavelearnedtocriticizeandevaluateherownopinions,to
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 12
standfirminherdecisionsaftertheyhavebeenmade,andtosynthesizethesegenerally
masculinequalitieswithherownfemininenature.
TheFourStagesofOrual’sAnimus
ThestoryofTillWeHaveFacesfocusesnotonPsyche,thecentralcharacterofthe
originalmyth,butuponhersister,Orual.Orualnarratesthestory,anditscontentsform
herhonestaccounttothegodsofthewaysinwhichshebelievestheyhavewrongedher.
Theaccount,becauseofitshonestyanddepth,givesuniqueinsightintothedevelopmentof
Orual’sownanimus.Throughoutthecourseofthenovelitispossibletodiscerneachofthe
aforementionedfourstagesofOrual’sanimusdevelopment.Althoughthephasesdotend
tooverlap,forthesakeofanalysisthestageswillherebedefinedinfourparticular
chronologicalstages:(1)ChildhoodandYouth,(2)Post‐Sacrifice,(3)Queenship,and(4)
Individuation,orReceivingaFace.StageonewillincludedeathofOrual’smother,her
childhoodwithRedivalandPsyche,hereducationwiththeFox,andherrelationshipwith
herabusivefather,theKing.StagetwowillincludePsyche’ssacrifice,Orual’sangerand
rage,herdiscoveryofPsycheinthemountains,hermanipulativeplantomakePsyche
returnhome,andtheexileofPsycheasaresultofherdisobedience.Thethirdstage—the
longest,inaccordancewiththeimportanceitholds—willspanamajorityofOrual’slifeand
mostofhertimeasQueen.Itwillcoverherdecisiontoalwayswearaveil,herbattlewith
Argan,andherdecisiontowritehercomplaint.Finally,thefourthstagewillincludethe
tasksshemustcompleteinherdreamsandvisions,herreunitingwithPsyche,andher
unionwiththegod.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 13
ChildhoodandYouth
Correspondingtothefirststageofanimusdevelopment,thestageofstrengthandof
will,Orual’schildhoodandyouthareparticularlyformative,foritisherethatshefirst
encounterstensionwithinherpsyche,stemmingfromheranimus.AccordingtoJungian
theory,“thefirstprojectionoftheanimusisonthefather”(Hall&Nordby,1973,p.47).As
aphysicallyabusivemantoallthosearoundhim,KingTromcertainlyfulfillstheroleofa
ManofPower.Orualisverylikeherfather,particularlyintheearlystagesofherlife,and
thesimilaritiesaremostcommonlybaseduponstrengthandstubbornness.Forexample,
whenOrualbecomesangrywiththepeopleofGlomeforcallingPsyche“TheAccursed”
whensheisunabletohealthemfromtheirsicknesses,Orualeruptsinragedeclaring,“Oh,I
couldteartheminpieces!”(Lewis,p.35).Psycherecognizestheangerofherfatherwithin
Orual,whichoftenmanifestsitselfinherbehavior,andrebukesOrual,exclaiming,“You
lookjustlikeourfatherwhenyousaythosethings”(p.35).ThischastisementcausesOrual
aseverewoundthat,sheadmits,stillcausesherpainsometimes,anditislargelythetruth
ofthestatementthatmakesitsosearing.Shehasadoptedherfather’srage;heranimus
beginstostifleherfemininityandbecomesuncontrollable.
Toaddtothisemphasisuponthemasculineinherlife,thenarrativeopenswiththe
deathofOrual’smother(p.4).AlthoughwearenottoldofthedispositionofOrual’s
mother,thelossofsuchacentralandformativerolemodelisparticularlysignificantto
Orual’sgenderdevelopment.Shehashenceforthlostanystablefemaleinfluenceinherlife.
AsHelenM.Lukenotesin“TheWayofWoman,”(1992),“Thereisnotruehumanwomanin
Orual’senvironment”for,nowthathermotherhasdied,sheisleftwithonlyherpompous
nurseBattaandhervainsisterRedivalasexamplesofwomanhood(p.45‐46).InAnthony
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 14
Steven’sintroductiontoJung(1994),theimportanceofbothfatherlyandmotherlylovein
achild’slifeishighlighted,forthetwoaredifferentandeachisnecessaryforthe
developmentofthemasculineandfemininenatureofachild:“thefather’sloveis
contingentlove”orlargelydependantuponthechild’saccomplishmentsandconduct,
“whilethemother’sloveislargelyunconditional”(p.52).Hecontinues,associating
motherlylovewithEros—“theprincipleoflove,intimacy,andrelatedness”—andfatherly
lovewithLogos—“theprincipleofreason,judgment,anddiscrimination”(p.52).These
threedescriptorsoffatherlylove,orLogos,willberecognizedfromthepreviousdiscussion
oftheanimus,foritisrepresentativeoftheseprincipleswithinthefemalepsyche.In
relationtoOrual’sfamilysetting,therefore,shehasfrequentlyhadLogosmodeledforher
andcouldeasilyprojectituponhermainadultrolemodel,herfather.Thissituationalone
couldexplainherfuturetendencytorelytoostronglyuponheranimusandtoletit
consumeherfemininity.
Toaddtothealreadypresenttendencytowardsthemasculine,Orualhasamannish
appearance,andisconstantlycalleduglybyherfatherandotherpeopleofthecourt.King
Tromharborsintensebitternessatnothavingbeenabletohaveasonasanheir,and
releasesthisangerbyabusingOrual.Hecallshernamessuchas“curdface”(Lewis,p.17)
and“hobgoblin”(p.78).TheseoutburstsleaveOrualwithnodoubtofheruglyappearance,
andcertainlycontributetotheharmfulwayinwhichheranimusassertsitselfwithinher
psychelaterinlife.
Inmanycases,becausegirlsareexpectedtoassumeafemininerole,“thepersona
takesprecedenceoverandstiflesthe...animus”(Hall&Nordby,1973,p.48).Theeffectof
thisunderstandingofgenderroleswould,insuchcases,causetheanimustobetooweak
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 15
andundevelopedwithinanindividual,andwouldcreatetheneedforthemasculinetobe
betterunderstoodandallowedtobecomeanacceptedpartofone’spsycheandbehavior.If
thisisnotallowedtooccur,theanimuswouldeitherhavetoolittlepower,orthepower
thatitdidhavewouldbeusedonlyforill,fortheopinionsitsostronglyholdswouldbe
entirelyunexamined.Orual’schildhoodisnotlikethis,however.Sheisnevertoldbyher
fathertofulfillherfemininerolesand,becauseofherlooks,isdeniedthechancetoeven
try.TheKingtellstheFox,aslavewhoistoeducateOrual:“Seeifyoucanmakeherwise;
it’saboutallshe’lleverbegoodfor”(p.6).Tobewisewas,intheKingdomofGlomeandin
manysocieties,aparticularlymasculinecalling.Becauseofherlooks,Orualneverhasto
assumeafemininepersona,suchasawifeoramother,andallowsheranimustopossess
allaspectsofherlife.
InhischargetoeducateOrualandtomakeherwise,theFoxbecomesanother
significantinfluenceuponthedevelopmentofOrual’sanimus.AsaGreekmanwhowas
capturedasaslavebytheKingdomofGlome,acivilizationmuchlessdevelopedthanthat
ofhishomeland,theFoxbecomesafigureofreasonandrationalismamidstthe
superstitiouspeopleofGlome.TheFoxistheclosestthingtoafriendthatOrualhasbefore
thebirthofPsyche,andafterPsyche’sbirth,thethreeofthemoftenareoftentogether,
learningandplaying(Lews,p.20‐21).TheFox,soonknownas“Grandfather”toOrual,
becomestoher“asecondfather:awiseandgentleman,aphilosopher,arationalist,the
bestkindofhumanistwhothoughthehadoutgrownbeliefintheoldgodsandtheir
superstitions”(Luke,1992,p.45).Hisactionsandattitudeinmanywaysstarklyoppose
thoseoftheKing:wheretheKingisbrutal,theFoxiskind;wheretheKingisfearful,the
Foxisconfident.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 16
TheFox’sinfluenceprovidesforOrualapersonificationoftheanimusinitsthird
stage,forhiswillhasbeentamedandhisloveisfortheword,andforwisdom.Yeteventhe
influenceoftheFoxisincomplete,forhecannotacceptanymeaningbeyondanearthly
realm.Hedeniestheexistenceofthegods,callingtheideairrational;thereasoningofthe
PriestofUngithedismissesas“nonsense”(p.44).AtnopointcanOrual,despiteher
aptness—becauseofthecontrolofheranimus—tostronglyrelyonherintellectoverher
emotions,fullyacceptthesystemofbeliefheldbytheFox.AsH.M.Lukecontinues,Orual
“remainedawoman,and,tryasshewould,shecouldnotsimplyaccepttheFox’s
reasoningsastheonlytruth,forintuitivelysheknewthegodsexisted”(p.50).TheFox’s
rationalism,likeherfather’sstrength,urgedhertowardsanacceptanceofheranimusbut
didnothingtodemonstratetheneedforabalancebetweenherfemininesensibilitiesand
hermasculineideas,causingdisunitywithinherpsyche.
ItmustnotbeforgottenthatalthoughOrual’sanimusbecamethemostprominent
partofherbecauseofthesituationinwhichshegrewupandthechoicesthatshemade,the
masculineisnevertheonlypartofOrual.Althoughtheanimusdominatesherpsyche,
femininequalities—andevenlongingstoexhibitfemininequalities—doexistwithinher.
ThisbecomesthesourceofmuchofOrual’smalicetowardshersisterRedival.Asa
beautifulgirl,RedivaloftenbecomesacanvasontowhichOrualprojectshershadowside:
“Orual,whiledespisingRedival’svanityandmeanness,displayedtheseburiedqualitiesin
herself”(p.47).Redival’sveryfemininenature—qualitiesthatOrualsuppressesbut
cannotdestroy—causesresentmentinOrualand,althoughRedivalisoftenbothvainand
mean,Orualaccentuatesthesequalities,dismissingRedival’svalueentirely.Intheaccount
ofTillWeHaveFaces,OrualspeaksofRedivalwithcontempt,andreadersarerarely
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 17
promptedtorememberthat“[Redival]grewupwithnothingtolovebutherownpretty
face”(p.45).Orualisabletorecognizelonelinessastheprimarymotiveforhersister’s
behavioryearsafter,uponachievingindividuation,allthroughoutherchildhoodandmost
ofheradultlife,OrualusesRedivalasascapegoatofsorts,uponwhichsheprojectsboth
herfemininenatureandthebitternessharboredwithinheratnotassertingthisnature.
Post‐Sacrifice
ItisafterOrual’sbelovedsisterPsycheissacrificedtothegodoftheGreyMountain
thattherelationshipbetweenthetwosistersbeginstobetheprimaryarenainwhich
Orual’sanimusissueismostevidentlyseen.Althoughherroleasacharacterinherown
rightmustnotbeneglected,itmustberememberedthatthestoryofTillWeHaveFacesis
predominantlyaboutOrual’sspiritualdevelopmentandjourneytoindividuation.Itistold
byherandfromherownperspective;therefore,eventheothercharactersarepresentedas
Orualperceivesthem,andnotnecessarilyastheytrulyare.WhileOrual’sstoryisher
honestaccountwrittensothatallmayjudgebetweenherconductandthatofthegods,
Orualdoesnotprovetobeanentirelytrustworthynarratorinsomeinstances.Most
blatantisherclaiminchaptertwelvethatshe“eithersaworthought[she]sawtheHouse”
inwhichPsychelivedwiththegodandwhichwasatfirstinvisibletoOrual(Lewis,p.118),
whichdisagreeswithherlaterstatementthattheideathatshehadseenthecastlewasa
“twistedfalsit[y]”(p.213).Sheisnotcompletelyunbiasedinheraccount,afactwhich
oughttoremindreadersoftheformofthenovel.
Takingthisformintoaccount,onecanmoreaccuratelyunderstandhowOrual’s
relationshipwithPsycheaffectsheranimus,andalsohowheranimusaffectsthe
relationship.H.M.Lukedescribesthesignificanceofsamegenderrelationshipsaccording
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 18
toJungiantheoryexplaining,“whileweprojecttheimageoftheanimusoranimaontothe
oppositesex,weareapttoprojecttheSelfontoourown,anditisthisthatmakeslovefor
someoneofourownsexextremelydangerousaswellasanintenselycreativeopportunity”
(1992,p.70).ForOrual,thedangerisalwaysverynear;shebecomessopossessiveofher
sisterthattheloveconsumesherthoughtsandheractions.Inaphysicalwaythis
voraciouslovenearlydestroysher,forsheiswillingtokillherselfifitmeansthatshecan
persuadePsycheawayfromhernewhusband.Thisisfarfromasacrificialact—although
thatiswhatOrualhaspersuadedherselftobelieve—foritservesonlyOrual’sowndesires
withnoregardforPsyche’swillorduty.Yetparalleledwiththisdanger,therealsoexists
creativity—aconstructive,beautifulpassion—withinOrual’sloveforPsyche.Orual’slove
allowsherapurposewherepurposehadbeenrefusedher,andbringsherjoywhere
hopelessnesshadabounded.Becauseofherappearance,Orualwasdeniedtheopportunity
tohavechildrenofherown,andbecauseofhersituation,friendsofherownageand
genderwereveryscarce.WiththebirthofPsyche,Orualbeginstoknowhappinessand
delight,actingasamothertothechildandexperiencingmuchofthejoyamotherfeels:“I
laughedbecauseshewasalwayslaughing,”sheacknowledges(p.19).
BecauseOrualnarratesherrelationshipwithPsyche,thecharacterofPsychecanbe
seentobeapartofOrualherself.InmanywaysPsycheis—ashernamesuggests—a
representationofOrual’sownpsyche.UponPsyche’sdisobediencetothegodofthe
Mountain,thegodbanisheshertoexileandaimlesswandering,anddeclarestoOrual:“You
alsoshallbePsyche”(p.152).AlthoughOrualfirstbelievesthatshetoowillbeforcedinto
exile,itbecomesapparentthroughoutthecourseofthestorythatthedeclarationwasless
apunishmentandmoreapromise.ShewillbecomePsyche,beunitedwithinherSelf.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 19
Itisinthis,thesecondstageofheranimusdevelopment,thatthedestructivenessof
Orual’srelationshipwithPsycheismostevident,and,accordingly,thatheranimusmost
activelyresistssynthesisorcooperationwiththeSelf.Jungexplainsin“TheRelations
BetweentheEgoandtheUnconscious,”(1938),that“Amancannotgetridofhimselfin
favorofanartificialpersonalitywithoutpunishment.Eventheattempttodosobringson,
inallordinarycases,unconsciousreactionsintheformofbadmoods,affects,phobias,
compulsiveideas,backslidings,vices,etc.”(p.164).ThesameistrueofOrual,who
becomescompulsivelycontrollingofPsyche.Orualinflictsharmuponherself,forcing
PsychetochoosebetweendisobeyingherhusbandandOrual’sownlife.Inanattemptto
persuadePsychetoreturnwithhertothecastleinGlome,OrualdemandsthatPsychelook
atherhusband’sface—anactforbiddenbythegod—whenhecomestoherthatnight.
OrualbelievesthelightPsycheusestoseeherhusbandwillexposeabeggarorruffianand,
horrifiedathermistake,PsychewillwillinglyandapologeticallycometoOrualforcomfort.
AlthoughPsycherefusesatfirst,Orualthreatenstokillherselfand,toproveher
seriousness,stabsherarmdramaticallywithadagger.Becauseofthisemotionalcoercion,
Psychereluctantlyagreestodisobeythegod—achoicethatresultsintheexile.
Thisinteraction,giventhepreviousexplanationofhowJung’stheoryoftheanimus
canbeappliedtoOrual’scharacterdevelopment,revealsthattheanimushasnowtaken
possessionofOrual’sunconscious,andisnowusingforce—developedinthefirststage—to
accomplishthespecificgoalofcontrollingherpsyche.Thesecondstageoftheanimus,that
ofdeeds,isthereforedemonstratedprimarilyinOrual’sinteractionwithPsyche.Herbelief
thatshemustemotionallycoercePsycheintodisobedience,althoughshecontemplatesthe
actionbriefly,islargelyunexamined,anothercharacteristicoftheManofDeeds.Atno
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 20
pointdoesitoccurtoherthatsuchanactionisnotlove,butselfishnessandoppression.
PsychedoesbringthistoOrual’sattention,statingthatOrual’skindofloveisno“better
thanhatred,”“atool,aweapon,athingofpolicyandmastery,aninstrumentoftorture”
(Lewis,p.146),yetOrualrefusestoacknowledgethevalidityofPsyche’sstatement.Orual
continuestoact,toforcePsyche’sdisobedience,withnofurtherthoughtaboutheractions.
ThesecondstageofthedevelopmentofOrual’sanimusiscertainlyharmful,bothto
herownpsycheandtohersister.Yet,inastrangeway,Orualmustpassthroughthisstage
toeventuallyachievewholeness.H.M.Lukein“TheWayofWoman,”recognizesandseeks
togiveanaccountforthesituation’scomplexity:
Itisnowthattheparadoxes,incredibletothereasoningmind,ofthewayto
individuationbreakthroughtous,andwebegintosensehowwithouttheworstin
us,thebestwouldremaininanunconsciousstate,unabletoknowthatsheknows.
OrualhorriblybetrayedherloveforPsyche;butwithoutthatbetrayalPsyche
herselfwouldhavecontinuedtoexistinaninfantileparadiseofinnocenceremote
fromhumanlife.(p.52)
TherisetopowerofOrual’sanimus,althoughitseffectsarewrong,unpleasant,andpainful,
arenecessaryfortheeventualintegrationofheranimusintoherpsyche,for“Self‐
knowledgeisthepathtoself‐realization”(Hall&Nordby,1973,p.52),andOrualmustpass
througheachofthefourstagesofanimusdevelopment,learningtoknowandunderstand
bothhermasculineandfemininenatures,beforeshecanreachself‐realization.Tofurther
illustratethispoint,H.M.LukepointstoOrual’sdescriptionofthegod’svoice,“likeabird
singingonthebranchaboveahangedman,”(Lewis,p.153),saying:“Thosewhocandeeply
experiencethejoyofthebirdandthehorrorofthehangedmanasonerealityhavesaidyes
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 21
tolifeandtothe‘dreadfulbeauty’ofthegod”(Luke,p.53).Thisexplanationdescribesthe
extentofthefearandthejoythatOrual’sjourneytoindividuationcontains.Oneisnot
possiblewithouttheother,forexperiencingthedreadandpainthatshedoesisnecessary
forhertodeeplyandconsciouslyunderstandherselfthatshemayknowhertruefaceand
beabletocommunewiththegodasawholeperson.
Queenship
ThethirdphaseofOrual’sanimusdevelopmentisthestageinwhichtheanimus
exertsthemostinfluenceoverher,stiflinghertrueselfalmostcompletelyunderitspower.
Unlikethetransitionfromstageonetostagetwo,themovetostagethreeisnotvague,but
canbeseentooccurataparticularmoment.Uponreturninghomefromherdisastrous
questtoreclaimPsyche,Orualdetermines:“that[she]wouldgoalwaysveiled”(Lewis,p.
159).Thisveilactsasapersona,definedbyJungas“acomplicatedsystemofrelations
betweenindividualconsciousnessandsociety,fittinglyenoughakindofmask,designedon
theonehandtomakeadefiniteimpressionuponothers,and,ontheother,toconcealthe
truenatureoftheindividual”(p.162).TomorefirmlygrasptheextentofOrual’spersona,
herdesiredimpressionwillfirstbeinvestigated,followedbythatwhichshedesiresto
conceal.
VerysoonafterOrualreturns,herfatherbecomesill,falls,anddiesafewdayslater.
Inadditiontogainingherveil,therefore,OrualalsogainsQueenship,andthetwobecome
inextricableinOrual’smindandinthemindsofhersubjects.Beforeherfatherdies,sheis,
withthehelpofhernewpersona,abletoassertherselfoverhiminawayinwhichshe
previouslynevercould.Herfatherrebukesherforwearingtheveil,callingit“frippery”
andcommandinghertoremoveit.Orualrefuses,calmlyandfirmly,andtellsusthather
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 22
father“neverstruck[her],and[she]neverfearedhimagain”(p.160).Theconcealmentof
herface,whathadpreviouslybeenasourceofembarrassmentandvulnerability,allows
Orualanewstrength.Hergoal,sheexplains,is“tobuildupmoreandmorethatstrength,
hardandjoyless,...bylearning,fighting,andlabouring,todriveallthewomanoutof
[her]”(p.162).Suchagoaliscertainlyanexampleofthepowertheanimusnowexerts
overherfor,asJungexplains,“Awomanpossessedbytheanimusisalwaysindangerof
losingherfemininity,heradaptedfemininepersona”(Jung,1938,p.180).Sheassumesthe
androgynousmaskoftheveil,andbecomesaformidablefigure—forwhodoesnotfeel
somediscomfortinthepresenceofonewhomyoucannotsee,butwhocanseeyou?Yet
sheisagoodQueen,belovedbypeopleforherbravery,justice,andwisdom.
WhattheQueenrepressesprovidesagreateropportunityforJungianevaluation.
Underherveil,theQueendesiresthatOrual“vanishaltogether”(p.177).Sheexplains:“the
QueenofGlomehadmoreandmorepartinme...Orualhadlessandless.IlockedOrual
uporlaidherasleepasbestIcouldsomewheredeepdowninsideme;shelaycurledthere”
(p.198).Beneathherpersonaandtheoppressiveinfluenceofheranimus,Orual’strueself
issuppressed.Althoughasaresultofheranimuspossessionsheisabletogrowinstrength
andwisdom,thisgrowthisofnouse,foritremainsdetachedfromherpsyche.D.Myers
discussesthisprocess,remarkingthattheQueen“haddevelopedobjectivityandcontrolof
heremotions,butattheexpenseoflivingalmostcompletelyinherconsciousmind.There
comesatime,though,whenthespiritual,transcendentpartofahumanbeingcannolonger
beneglected”(p.120).EvenOrual,hiddenbehindherveil,couldnotstayrepressedbyher
animusforever.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 23
Intheevenings,whenOrualwouldretiretoherbedchamberandremoveherveil,
shewasagainawareofthestrugglesthathadbeenragingwithinhersincechildhood.At
thistimeofday,shehearsthewindrattlingthechainsofawelloutsidethecastle,makinga
soundthatcouldeasilybemistakenforagirl’swailing.Psyche’stormentinexilehaunts
Orualintheevenings,bothinwakefulnessandsleep.Totrytofurthersuppresssuch
remindersofheroldlife,Orual“builtstonewallsroundthewellandputathatchedroof
overitandaddedadoor”(p.205).Orualherselfunderstandsthesignificanceofthis
action,stating:”Ihadwalledup,gaggedwithstone,notawellbutPsyche(orOrual)
herself”(p.206).H.M.LukeagreesthatOrual’s“truepsycheweepsasshesearchesforthe
god”(p.58).Asadoortounderground,awellisaparticularlysignificantimageforsuchan
idea,for,asJ.R.Christopherexplainsin“ArchetypalPatternsinTillWeHaveFaces,”(1977),
“theunconsciousmindofpsycho‐analyticstudiesispopularlypicturedasbeneaththe
consciousmindandpopularlycalledthesubconscious”(p.205).Intryingtoblockupthe
well,Orualblocksupherunconsciousandrefusestoallowhertruepsychetoencroach
uponthepersonaassumedbyheroverassertiveanimus.
AnotherdeviceusedbyOrual’sanimustosuppressthefemininenaturenow
existentmostlywithintheunconsciousisthetypicallymaleactofswordfighting.Inorder
tosolidifyherpoliticalstandinguponbecomingQueen,Orualchoosestoenterintohand‐
to‐handcombatwithArganinabattlewhichwilldeterminethefateofthekingdomandof
PrinceTrunia,apoliticalallywhoseeksrefugefromQueenOrual.Fromthetimeof
Psyche’ssacrifice,Orualhasbeentakingsword‐fightinglessonsfromBardia,thehead
warriorofthearmyofGlome,andbelievesshecantriumphoverthisenemy.Orual
explicitlyassociatesthepowerandcouragetokillwiththemasculinepersonawhichshe
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 24
nowwears,asisdemonstratedwhenitissuggestedthatsheslaughterthepigforthe
sacrificeinpreparationforthebattle.Attheproposition,shewrites:“IfIshrankfromthis
therewouldatoncebelessQueenandmoreOrualinme”(p.182).Becauseheranimusis
stillunwillingtoallowtheSelfanycontroloverheractions,Orualbrushesasideherfear
andisabletosacrificethepigandtodefeatherfoewithrelativeease.
AlsosignificanttothepresenceoftheanimusinthebattleisOrual’sresponseto
killingArgan:“Ifeltmyselfchangedtoo,asifsomethinghadbeentakenawayfromme.I
haveoftenwonderedifwomenfeellikethatwhentheylosetheirvirginity”(p.193).
AlthoughtheprocessofrecoveringherSelfandreducingtheanimustoitsappropriate
positionisnotresolveduntilmuchlaterinOrual’slife,thisisanexampleofthecontinued
existenceofthefemininewithinher.Althoughhermasculinepersonaexertsastrong
influenceoverOrualduringthisphaseinherlife,femininefeelingscontinuetoexist
underneaththemaskoftheQueen.HerresponsetothekillingofArganisoneofthe
primaryinstancesinwhichOrualbeginstointrudeuponthelifeoftheQueen.Her
suppressedfemininityandtheelementsofhertrueSelfassociatedtherewithconsistently
trytoassertthemselvesovertheQueenevenasheroveraggressiveanimusattemptsto
subduethem.
Orual’sdiscomfortwithherassumedmasculineidentityisevenmoreexplicitly
revealedatthecelebrationfeastheldafterthefight.Here,she“couldlaughloudanddrink
deeplikeamanandawarrior”(p.196),butingivingthefeastwasalso“allwomanagain
andcaughtupinhousewife’scares”(p.195).Orualisdesperatelytryingtodenyher
femininenature,butsheisunabletoridherselfofitcompletely.Forinstance,whilesheis
atfirstacceptedasamanbythepeopleofGlome,thisimagefadeswithtime.Shesaysof
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 25
Bardia,whohasbecomeherfriendandtrustedadvisor:“I’minhisman’slife”(p.204).
Thosearoundher,whoknowofheruglyface,cometoacceptherandinteractwithheras
thoughshewereamanratherthanawoman.Thosewhodonotknowofherappearance
however—anumberthatsignificantlyincreasesbythelateryearsofherreign—areless
easilypersuadedtoviewherasaman,asshedesirestobeviewed.PrinceTrunia,for
example,believesthatshehidesherfaceinmodesty,becauseofextremebeauty.He
complimentsheronherbeautifulvoiceandthroughtheencounterwearetoldthatOrual
alsohasaniceform,forsheneverhadchildrenasmostofthewomenofGlomedid.As
yearspassitbecomesmoreandmoredifficultforOrualtoperpetuatetheviewinothers
thatsheshouldbetreatedasanyman.
ContributingtothefailingpresentationofheranimuswasherloveforBardia.
Althoughthelovewasneverdeclaredorreciprocated—itwasnot,infact,evenfully
comprehendedbyOrualuntilafterBaria’sdeath—herdesiretobewithBardiainsucha
relationshipdemonstratesanaspectofOrual’sbeingnotinfullcongruitywithheranimus.
Despitetheauthorityoftheanimuswithinher,Orualisstillfragmented.H.M.Lukelabels
heratthispointas“anundifferentiatedman‐woman.ShewantsBardiatoloveherasa
woman,Psychetoloveherasaman”(p.58).ForyearsOrualisplaguedbyherrelationship
withBardiabecause,whilehebecomesoneofhermosttrustedcounselorsandbest
friends,sheknowsthatshecanonlybeapartofhismanworld.Shetellsusofthiswoe,
lamenting:“Iwashiswork;heearnedhisbreadbybeingmysoldier.Whenhistableof
workforthedaywasdone,hewenthomelikeotherhiredmenandtookuphistruelife”(p.
196).Sheisnotsatisfiedwiththerulingofheranimuswithinher,andyetshelivesinthis
conflictformuchofherlife.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 26
ItisBardia’sdeaththatfirstawakensherneedtoacknowledge,inaminorway,her
largelyunconsciousfemininenature.OrualvisitsBardia’swife,Ansit,topayher
condolencesandtoofferwordsofsympathy.Whilethere,Ansitiscoldandangry,forshe
feelsasthoughOrualmonopolizedherhusbandbyexploitinghisintensesenseofdutyand
demandingtoomuchofhistimeandenergy.ShebelievesthatbecauseOrualdesiredtobe
withBardiaasmuchasshecould,shehadworkedhimtodeath.Orualisastoundedby
Ansit’saccusation,foruntilthispointOrualhassuppressedanyknowledgeofhertrueSelf
becauseofheroveraggressiveanimusandthepaininvolvedinbeginningtobringher
psycheintoharmonywithitself.Stunnedbythisfirstmomentofclarity,sheasksAnsit,“Is
itpossibleyou’rejealous?”(p.229),rippingtheveilfromherfacetoexposeheruglinessto
Ansit.YetAnsitdoesnotseeugliness;sheseeslove.“Youlovedhim.You’vesuffered,too”
(p.230)isherresponse.Andtheybothweep.ThisisamomentinwhichOrualfinally
admitshertruenature.Althoughshehasnotreachedindividuation—heranimusquickly
reassertsitselfandshehurriedlyresumestheveil—thisisacriticalmomentatwhichOrual
beginstogainknowledgeaboutherself.
Totrulyreachthisself‐knowledge,however,Orualmustengageinataskuniqueto
thethirdstageofanimusdevelopment,thestagecharacterizedbyanemphasisonthe
word.AswarnedbyE.Jungin“OntheNatureoftheAnimus,”thethirdstageisdangerous,
anditparalyzesOrual’sdevelopmentformanyyears.YetafterhearingthemythofPsyche,
toldbyapriestinatempleofPsyche,sheresolvestowritehercomplainttothegods,a
complaintthathasbeenbrewingandfesteringformanyyearsbothconsciouslyand
unconsciously.Itistheactofwritingthatisanofficialharbingerofthethirdstage,for,as
Junghimselfstates,“Thepurposeofthedialecticalprocessistobringthesecontentsinto
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 27
thelight”(p.181).Justasshemustsortseedsinthefirsttaskassignedtoherbythegods
inhervisions,inwritingherbookshemustsortthroughpainfulmemoriesandpreviously
unacknowledgedmotives(H.M.Luke,p.60;E.K.Gibson,1980,p.251;D.T.Myers,p.202).
Towriteistobeginthetaskofachievingtheself‐knowledgethatisnecessaryifOrualis
evertoachieveindividuation.
Individuation
Occurringinthefinalfourchaptersofthebook,thefourthstageofOrual’sanimus
developmentandtheconcludingincidentsintheprocessofherindividuationtranspire
largelyindreamsandvisions.Becausetheultimatechangemusthappeninthemind—the
verysphereinwhichdreamsoperate—theeventsthatprecipitateOrual’sindividuation
neednot,however,beanylessrealthaniftheyhadactuallyhappened.Inthesameway
thatmythcanoftenconveygreaterormoreaccuratetruththanscience,Orual’sdreamsare
morerealandinfluentialinshapingherpsychethanphysicalevents.HallandNordby
observe,“Knowledgeoftheselfisaccessiblethroughthestudyofone’sdreams.More
importantly,throughtruereligiousexperiencesonecanunderstandandrealizetheself”(p.
52).Orualencountersbothdreamsandreligiousexperiences—communicationwiththe
gods—andisabletocometoacompleterealizationofherlife,hermind,andevenherown
complainttothegods.ThisrealizationistherepresentationoftheManofMeaningofthe
fourthstageofanimusdevelopment.
OnceOrualhascometothisdegreeofself‐knowledge,sheisthenabletoachieve
individuation.Itishere,perhaps,thatLewismostdiffersfromJung’stheory,forwhere
Junganticipatesanindividualcomingtowholenessandindividuationhimorherself,Lewis
includestheworkofthegods;infact,itisthegodsthatdirecttheentireprocess.Orual
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 28
doesnottakeherveiloffherself,butsays:“Handscamefrombehindmeandtoreoffmy
veil—afterit,everyragIhadon”(p.253).Itisthegodswhoaidherinreunitingheranimus
withhertruepsyche,thatherpsychemaybewholeandthattheanimusandtheSelfmay
workinharmonywithoneanother.Thissynthesisisillustratedinthereunificationof
OrualandPsyche.
Afterbothsistersaccomplishthetaskssetforthembythegods—metaphoricalor,
moreaccurately,mythical,representationsoftheirindividualjourneystoindividuation—
thetwocometogetherinthepresenceofthegod.Inthismoment,Orualis“unmade,”and
thenremadeintothelikenessofPsyche(p.268).Finally,thegod’spromise,“Youalsoshall
bePsyche”(p.152),hascometofruition,andOrualismadebeautifulandcomplete.She
doesnotloseheranimus—indeed,couldnothavecompletedhertaskswithoutit—yether
masculineandherfemininearenowinperfectbalance,for“thetruesymboloftheSelfis
alwaysaunionofopposites”(H.M.Luke,p.70).Inthisunion,Orualisabletoknowherself
asthegodsknowher,andassuchisabletobegintoknowthem.
Conclusion
TheprocessofOrual’sindividuationislifelongandexceedinglycomplex.Such
factorsasanemotionallyandphysicallyabusivechildhoodandbeingbornwithamannish
appearancecontributetotheoveremphasisofheranimus,hermasculinepersonality,and
thesuppressionofherfemininity.Throughoutherlife,Orualmustlearntoknowherown
psyche,tobringwhatisunconscious—suchastheoverreactionofheranimus—intoher
consciousness,aprocesswhichisdifficultandpainful,butwhichrequiressorrowandpain
inorderthathereventualjoymaybecompleteinbeinggivenafacebywhichtoknowand
communewiththegodsandwithherbelovedsister,Psyche.Theoppositesnecessarily
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 29
existentwithinhermind—mostsignificantly,masculineandfeminine,—mustbeunitedin
Orual’spsychethatshemaybetrulycomplete.Thistask,althoughunderstandablewithout
theknowledgeofJung’stheories,becomesevenmoreconsequentialwheninterpreted
throughaJungianlens,foralthoughOrualisafictionalcharacter,thearchetypesshe
experiencesfunctioninallhumanmindsandpsyches.TillWeHaveFacesexemplifies
Jung’sbeliefthatarchetypesarebestunderstoodthroughmythratherthanthroughplain,
scientificlanguage.ExploringthecomplexitiesofthedevelopmentofOrual’spsycheand
herlongbutfruitfuljourneytowardsunity,wholeness,andthegainingofa“face,”andby
viewingthisjourneythroughJung’sarchetypaltheory,onecomestounderstandthe
complexitiesofallhumanpsyches;intheactofknowingher,wecanbetterknowourselves.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 30
Bibliography
Carnell,C.S.(1974).Brightshadowofreality:C.S.Lewisandthefeelingintellect.
GrandRapids,MI:WilliamB.EerdmansPublishingCompany.
Christopher,J.R.(1977).ArchetypalpatternsinTillWeHaveFaces.InSchakel,P.J.
(Ed.),Thelongingforaform:EssaysonthefictionofC.S.Lewis.Eugene,OR:Wipf&
Stock.
Cox,D.(1968).Modernpsychology:TheteachingsofCarlGustavJung.NewYork,NY:
Barnes&Noble,Inc.
Edinger,E.F.(1972).Egoandarchetype:Individuationandthereligiousfunctionof
thepsyche.NewYork,NY:C.G.JungFoundationforAnalyticalPsychology.
Enns,C.Z.(1994).Archtypesandgender:Goddesses,warriors,andpsychological
health.JournalofCounselingandDevelopment:JCD,73(2),127‐127.
Retrievedfrom:
http://ezproxy.arbor.edu:80/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/2191
03214?accountid=13998
Filmer,K.(1993).ThefictionofC.S.Lewis.Houndmills,UK:MacmillanPressLtd.
Gibson,E.K.(1980).C.S.Lewisspinneroftales:Aguidetohisfiction.GrandRapids,
MI:WilliamB.EerdmansPublishingCo.
Hall,C.S.andNordby,V.J.(1973).APrimerofJungianPsychology.NewYork,NY:
TheNewAmericanLibraryInc.
Hart,D.L.(2008).TheclassicalJungianschool.InYoung‐Eisendrath,P.and
Dawson,T.(Eds.),TheCambridgecompaniontoJung.Cambridge,UK:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 31
Jung,C.G.(1959).Aion:Researchesintothephenomenologyoftheself.NewYork,
NY:BollingenFoundationInc.
Jung,C.G.(1938).Therelationsbetweentheegoandtheunconscious.InDeLaszlo,
V.S.(Ed.),ThebasicwritingsofC.G.Jung.NewYork:TheModernLibrary.
Jung,E.(1957).“OntheNatureoftheanimus.”InJung,E.(Ed.),AnimusandAnima.
Dallas,TX:SpringPublications,Inc.
Lewis,C.S.(1969).Psycho‐analysisandliterarycriticism.InHooper,W.(Ed.),
SelectedliteraryessaysbyC.S.Lewis(286‐300).Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Lewis,C.S.(1956).TillWeHaveFaces.NewYork,NY:TimeIncorporated.
Luke,H.M.(1992).Thewayofwoman.InBaker,R.(Ed.),Kaleidoscope:Thewayof
womanandotheressays.NewYork,NY:ParabolaBooks.
Kast,V.(2006).Anima/animus.InPapadopolous,R.K.(Ed.),Thehandbookof
Jungianpsychology.NewYork,NY:Routledge.
Labouvie‐Vief,G.(1994).PsycheandEros:Mindandgenderinthelifecourse.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Myers,D.T.(2004).Bareface:AguidetoC.S.Lewis’slastnovel.Columbia,MO:
UniversityofMissouriPress.
Neumann,E.(1956).AmorandPsyche.NewYork,NY:BollingenFoundationInc.
Robertson,R.(1987).C.G.Jungandthearchetypesofthecollectiveunconscious.
NewYork,NY:PeterLang.
Stevens,A.(1994).Jung.Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress.
Storr,A.(1973).C.G.Jung.NewYork,NY:TheVikingPress.
ENG490SENIORHONORSTHESIS 32
vonFranz,M.L.(1964).Theprocessofindividuation.InJung,C.G.(Ed.),Manand
hissymbols.London:DellPublishing.
Young‐Eisendrath,P.,&Dawson,T.(Eds.).(2008).TheCambridgecompanionto
Jung.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Zogby,EdwardG.(2007).TriadicPatternsinLewis’sLifeandThought.In
Schakel,P.J.(Ed.),TheLongingforaForm:EssaysontheFictionofCS.Lewis.Eugene:
WipfandStockPublishers.