Listening to the Crazy Woman
Understanding identified patients and the effects of projective identification
One of my favorite vignettes embedded in Jung’s writings speaks to the contagious nature of human psychology, and the danger to the more vulnerable members of society, families, and couples.
Jung tells the story of having once spent time with a man whom he felt could easily be called a saint. For three days, he observed this man’s behavior incredibly closely and—always seeking the deeper layers of a person’s psychology and character—was genuinely surprised to not observe anything amiss: “Never a mortal failing did I find in him.” This was unsettling to Jung whose understanding of psychology rests partially on the truth that everyone casts a shadow. “My feeling of inferiority grew ominous,” Jung wrote. The saintly man was testing his very sense of reality. Except, Jung stayed on for one more day.
On the fourth day, [the man’s] wife came to consult me. … Well, nothing of the sort has ever happened to me since. But this I did learn: that any man who becomes one with his persona can cheerfully let all disturbances manifest themselves through his wife without her noticing it though she pays for her self-sacrifice with a bad neurosis. (CW 7, par. 306)
Jung called this kind of shadow projection “subtle” because it’s easy to miss what’s going on unless you’re looking for it. Like hiding money in an offshore bank account, it’s possible to store parts of yourself that you’d prefer others not see in another person’s character—and it’s possible to be the unwitting bank account too. The saintly man’s wife was a neurotic mess and while plenty of people were likely whispering about how sad it was for such a wonderful man to have a wife like that, Jung was very clear about the true dynamic at play between the two.
When Jung used the phrase “any man who becomes one with his persona,” he was speaking to a person who doesn’t know that they are more than their career, or their brand, or their sermons. “These identifications with a social role are a very fruitful source of neuroses,” he elaborated. “A man cannot get rid of himself in favor of an artificial personality without punishment.”
A person cannot reject their spontaneity, their soul, their emotions, or their deeper self without consequence even if they’re storing those other parts of themselves in a surrogate whom they’re sure to always keep close by. (See what happens if the wife tries to leave.)
The #metoo movement helped to spread a sorely needed understanding that some women who might be easily dismissed as not-quite-right are the canaries in the coal mine for publicly wonderful but privately toxic and dangerous men. What looks to originate in the woman may not, in fact, be her character on display but his, or ours, collectively.
The shadow of a patriarchal world, a racist world, and a capitalist world will drive many people insane.
The term “projective identification” was coined by the psychoanalyst Melanie Klein in 1946, and though it quickly took on a different meaning than she may have intended, it remains a radical and life-giving concept to validate the experiences of many people who feel that it’s not them but the system that is insane.
I began exploring projective identification in my piece from a couple of weeks ago (without directly naming it as such.) It’s a psychological phenomenon that can arise societally in almost any relationship with varying power dynamics— certainly culturally among different populations—and also within families and social groups. In a family, the result of projective identification is what we call the “identified patient”: a family member who receives the burden of the family struggle, acting out or exhibiting mental health issues while the rest of the family kind of shrugs their shoulders in relative dismay. It’s understood within family systems thinking that the “identified patient” is the one who hosts, unwittingly, the family dysfunction, as a result of their sensitivity or position within the hierarchy. In a startlingly conscious and empathetic element of psychological theory, it’s well-understood that the identified patient can’t heal until the family system heals.
The American Psychological Association’s little online dictionary says this about the phenomenon: “Clinical investigation may reveal that there is a complex and seriously maladaptive behavioral pattern among members of the group as a whole but that the psychological stigma has fallen primarily on one person, the identified patient. Also called [the] symptom bearer.”
Treating the individual alone, the symptom bearer, won’t solve the problem. It’s more likely, in fact, that treating only the individual will serve to perpetuate the larger systemic issue, colluding with the dysfunction and further isolating the one who is suffering most.
Are there people around whom you’ve noticed feeling less like yourself? Have you ever been aware of off-loading parts of yourself onto another person? Where have you seen this phenomenon show-up most in society?
Upcoming gatherings, lectures, and seminars:
Next weekend! Sunday, February 25th at 10am PST / 6pm UK | Our Monthly Sunday Gathering for Paid Subscribers. This month’s topic: the shadow! I’ll share the Zoom link for these gatherings next weekend in advance for paid subscribers.
These hour-long gatherings are for community, self-reflection, slowing down, and learning from each other. There’s never any need to turn on your camera and participate if you don’t want to, but it’s always beautiful to see what arises when we’re together. I’ll provide some thoughts on the topic of the month and we’ll do a bit of journaling, but I’ll plan to host a lot of Q&A space this coming week. I think this topic has brought up a lot for people.
Six Saturdays, March 16th - April 20th, 9:30-11:30am PDT — Exploring C.G. Jung’s memoir Memories, Dreams, Reflections a new 6-week seminar online at The Salome Institute! (15% for paid subscribers.)
Sunday, March 24th at 10am PDT — March gathering for paid subscribers. Details to come, but put it in your calendar if you’d like to join!
Friday, May 3rd, 6-8pm EDT — A lecture on Christiana Morgan with the Maine Jung Center | Saturday, May 4th, 9:30-12:30pm EDT — A workshop on Christiana Morgan with the Maine Jung Center, in person in Brunswick, Maine.
Fridays, May 10 - June 14, 9-11am PDT — Community Dreamwork, a new 6-week seminar online at The Salome Institute. (15% for paid subscribers.)
If you are unable to afford a subscription but would like to join our Sunday gatherings, please reply to this email or send me a note at satyadoylebyock@ substack.com. Similarly, if you would like to join a seminar at The Salome Institute but finances prohibit you from doing so, send a brief note to kelley@ salomeinstitute.com. It is very important to us that these gatherings are accessible to everyone. I operate on trust and good faith for all discounts and scholarships and won’t ask anyone to defend their request.
Yes, I am thinking a lot about this too right now, as I enter my own threshold of Sacred Union. The external union reflects the internal, the internal the external. What does a healthy union process look like? I am brought to MLvF's Projection & Re-Collection. To recollect/withdraw the projections one has stockpiled on their partner ('both' parties) and assume responsibility for the behaviors in the other that one finds annoying, irritating, unacceptable, reprehensible, disappointing. Post-withdrawal, then shared responsibility, or co-responsibility, co-acknowledgment, Eye of the Thymus, becomes possible (intoxicatingly so! A true relational ekstasis). So many amazing threads here~
This seems to me a subtle but deeply intriguing mechanism. I remember, when I was married a long time ago, I had a persistent vision of a person made of shadow clinging to my back. At the time, no matter what I did, I was i error, and was punished for it. I realized intuitively it seemed to be my wife's shadow that she'd put onto me. For reasons that might be obvious, the marriage didn't last very long. I wasn't as grounded in Jungian theory at the time, but I understood enough to literally see that.