Dead Dragons, Alchemy, and Addictive Behavior
In November of 2018, I began a new project working in drug and alcohol counselling helping folks explore and work towards liberation from addictive behaviors.
After finishing up facilitator training with an organization called Smart Recovery to help with this we’ve been able to launch a weekly community support group.
I’m also in the process of formally announcing a scientific experiment we designed, and the private practice is starting to grow.
For this reason, a lot of energy has channelled towards this project and I’ve been extremely lucky to have the opportunity to present some ideas in a seminar format both at the Pittsburgh Jung Group and for an online working group.
In the seminar, I explore some theoretical ideas that are driving the clinical work going on in the group setting, experiment and in private practice.
To frame the seminar, I’ll use alchemical metaphors that describe the overarching project as it exists now.
- The prima materia: Psychodynamic theories of Carl Jung, Jacques Lacan, James Hilman, Melanie Klein, Wilfred Bion, Donald Winnicott, and Deluze & Guattari
- Crucible: A rigorous scientific experiment comparing clinical outcomes of a group receiving psychodynamic dream treatment and those who do not.
- Conjunctio: A synthesis with behavioral approaches to addiction recovery. (CBT, REBT, and SMART Recovery)
- Opus: A dynamic method that can create freedom from addictive behavior as well as insight into the underlying personality and motivations that are driving the behaviors.
During the seminar proper (and this essay that describes it) we are starting to boil and purify the prima materia (psychodynamic theories) down into a state where they can be more properly synthesized.
More concretely, I’m going to explore the theories themselves in more detail so you get a sense of the raw materials that go into a dream analysis treatment.
However, instead of quoting directly from the theorists work I will instead invite a reading of the myth St George and the Dragon from a psychological perspective.
In short, we’ll associate symbols and images from the story with important concepts drawn from the above theorists.
Before proceeding, it’s important to share a dialogue between my own internal self-critic and the “I” known as Brian Nuckols writing this essay.
Self-critic: Hmmm, the few people who make it this far already got past your alchemical metaphor. Bringing in a random associative method of literary criticism at this point is glib, decadent, and a bit arbitrary. What is wrong with you?
I: First, I love my readers. They are intelligent and philosophically sophisticated. If I lose them with an outbreak of fractal thinking they’ll ask for clarification. There’s no reason to dilute my thinking to conform to your low opinion of them.
Self — critic: Hmmmmm, well you should…
I: As for your other concern, I can think of three good reasons to use the myth. I will add them to the essay. Hey, sorry for interrupting you earlier. I know we don’t get along, but thanks for caring and I can sense a deeply buried sense of gratitude somewhere inside.
Self — critic: Goodbye.
Part 1: Why?
I can think of three good reasons to use the psychological reading of St. George.
The first is that both Carl Jung and Jaques Lacan, two important theorists who make up the prima materia of this project, used a similar technique to explain important parts of their work.
In the case of Jung, he analyzed the poems of Ms. Frank Miller in his 1912 text Psychology of the Unconcious (later republished as Symbols of Transformation)
For Lacan, there’s the 1956 seminar on Edgar Allan Poe’s short story The Purloined Letter.
Thus, by using Saint George and the Dragon as a guide to further refine psychodynamic theory we can participate in a tradition that includes some of my major intellectual influences.
Second, I believe one function of art is to explore difficult to articulate and nearly universal human experience and value systems.
Because these values are often unspoken and tacit they're experienced as unconscious psychological dynamics that shape both behavior and the personality.
Through elaborating the theories by use of mythological symbol we build a scaffolding to explore these psychological dynamics.
We do this by finding both patterns and similarities that build bridges between abstract theories and tangible reality.
Also, it helps to create a more memorable and clear shorthand for making statements about human experience against a shared framework and understanding.
The third reason is that the Jungian idea of a common origin point between psychotic images, personal fantasies, and dreams on the one hand and collective mythical and narrative images on the other is intriguing and I enjoy exploring it.
Part 2: Why Not?
Before proceeding into the myth and the subsequent interpretation we shall make another quick pitstop briefly discussing some basic pitfalls when it comes to discussing a shared framework to make statements about human experience.
It might seem like a curious move to undermine my own project, but I think it’s critically important for reasons I explored in an essay called Towards a Self Directed Healing where we looked at some of the work Michel Foucault and Tomas Szasz and their critiques of psychiatry and psychology.
To summarize, I think universal theories of human psychology are a bit disturbing, so it’s important to stay mindful of this as we build our mental models and approaches in this seminar.
Here are three things to keep in mind as we’re doing that:
First, I’d like to highlight a particular concept from the text A Thousand Plateaus by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari.
The concept is cartography vs. decalcomania.
Cartography refers to map making and decalcomania is a form of transferring a design of some sort from a medium like paper into an engraving on a piece of pottery or something similar. In more simple terms, decalcomania is like a tracing.
Maps are always unfinished, dynamic, they have no privileged point of entry, they can always be edited, amplified, and expanded.
Tracings on the other hand, once they’ve been completed you’re left with a finished product. They are not able to be revised and are static.
This is a fascinating distinction and an interesting critique of psychodynamic theory when it becomes too rigid and dogmatic. As we ultimately continue building models cartography and map making is the preferred approach.
The second thing to keep in mind is the myth of the procrustean bed. To summarize it briefly it describes the innkeeper who brags of having a bed that can fit customers of any size.
To accomplish this promise he would chop off the legs of any customer too tall and stretch any who were too short on a rack.
I think this is a risk of developing psychological theories when certain experiences are observed in real life and they're either stretched and contorted to fit preexisting models.
Similarly, aspects that don’t fit the theory are chopped off and ignored.
In our model, the theory (map) will be edited when confronted with new data and we will avoid the temptations of the innkeeper.
Lastly, a quick comment on Ockham's razor.
Since the crucible of this project involves a rigorous scientific experiment it’s important to note that introducing a broad range of theories and using alchemical metaphors, literary analysis, and intertextual dialogues with aspects of my psyche runs the risk of introducing unnecessary complexity and noise into the project.
This point is well taken, but frankly, the problem of liberation from addictive behavior is quite hard. There is a wide range of interconnected factors that we have to unravel and thinking creatively and across disciplines is crucial.
However, staying clever about reducing complexity where possible and using Ockham’s shaving gel when we do introduce creative approaches is what’s necessary as we continue the project.
Part 3: The Myth
The following myth is excepted from The Golden Legend compiled around the year 1260 by the Blessed Jacobus da Varagine.
Silene in Libya was plagued by a venom-spewing dragon dwelling in a nearby pond, poisoning the countryside. To prevent it from affecting the city itself, the people offered it two sheep daily, then a man and a sheep, and finally their children and youths, chosen by lottery. One time the lot fell on the king’s daughter. The king offered all his gold and silver to have his daughter spared; the people refused. The daughter was sent out to the lake, dressed as a bride, to be fed to the dragon.
Saint George by chance arrived at the spot. The princess tried to send him away, but he vowed to remain. The dragon emerged from the pond while they were conversing. Saint George made the Sign of the Cross and charged it on horseback, seriously wounding it with his lance. He then called to the princess to throw him her girdle (zona), and he put it around the dragon’s neck. When she did so, the dragon followed the girl like a “meek beast” on a leash.
The princess and Saint George led the dragon back to the city of Silene, where it terrified the populace. Saint George offered to kill the dragon if they consented to become Christians and be baptized. Fifteen thousand men including the king of Silene converted to Christianity.
George then killed the dragon, beheading it with his sword, and the body was carted out of the city on four ox-carts. The king built a church to the Blessed Virgin Mary and Saint George on the site where the dragon died and a spring flowed from its altar with water that cured all disease.
Sidebar: At this point in the seminar, I ask the audience members to jump in and discuss what jumps out to them about the myth. Before reading on note what jumps out to you and please let me know as a response to this essay or via social media.
Part 4: Interpretation and Symbols
There are 10 concepts from psychodynamic theory that I associate with characters or images from the myth.
- Surface (ego-consciousness)
- Complexes
- Compromise formations
- Psychic energy/libido theory
- Instincts, archetypes, and the collective unconscious
- Transformation of the complex (sublimation)
- Persona and Shadow
- Anima and Animus
- Fragmentary self
- Transcendent center (the self)
These concepts speak through the following images within the myth:
- Venom-spewing dragon (complexes)
- Pond (Instincts, archetypes, and the collective unconscious )
- The people offered it two sheep daily, then a man and a sheep, and finally their children and youths, chosen by lottery (compromise formations, persona and shadow)
- The king’s daughter (Anima = soul)
- Saint George (animus = spirit )
- Saint George made the Sign of the Cross and charged it on horseback, seriously wounding it with his lance (Psychic energy / Libido, CBT /SMART Recovery)
- He then called to the princess to throw him her girdle (zona), and he put it around the dragon’s neck. When she did so, the dragon followed the girl like a “meek beast” on a leash. (Dream treatment )
- George then killed the dragon, beheading it with his sword, and the body was carted out of the city on four ox-carts (transformation of the complex)
- The king (Ego)
- Fifteen thousand men (multi egoic, fragmentary self )
- built a church to the Blessed Virgin Mary and Saint George on the site where the dragon died and a spring flowed from its altar with water that cured all disease (transcendent self )
Note, as mentioned previously there is a fundamental difference from how this material is presented in seminar format and how we’re chatting in this essay. You are reading this at some point well after we’ve shared it with you.
I bring this up because while I have notes and suggested reading material on all of the 10 concepts speaking through the myth (access them via google doc by clicking here) I’m not going to explicate all 10 in this particular essay for the sake of brevity.
However, during the seminar, a few images spoke to attendees and provoked a series of fascinating discussions. I will analyze one image further to conclude the essay.
The venom spewing dragon that is speaking in this essay as a representation of the psychological complex.
What is a complex?
- A complex is an emotionally charged group of ideas or images
- Clusters of images, internalizations, and traumatic memories = complexes
- Related to the Jungian concept of constellated complex
- Constellation = a psychologically charged moment when consciousness is about to become or is disturbed by a complex
- When a person is constellated they have taken up a position where their behavior can be expected to unfold in a predictable way
- Complex laden areas in the psyche are known as colloquially as someone’s “buttons”
- When buttons are pressed you get a reaction out of someone in short you press their buttons and constellate a complex
- For this reason, they complexes can also be understood as autonomous subpersonalities
- Exist on a spectrum of feeling slightly anxious to losing it and going over the top into complete possession
- Formally, complexes are “feeling-toned ideas” that over the years accumulate around certain archetypes, for instance “mother” and “father.”
- For a more thorough view see Review of the Complex Theory, Carl Jung (1969)
