Dear Baba,
Our friend Clarissa writes that Bluebeard is a depiction of the natural predator in each of us, that Bluebeard is the desire to be superior or have power over others, the inflated psychological entity that wants to be equal to "The Ineffable." When she writes
But maybe I experience this difference because my internal Bluebeard has been redeemed? I'm not sure how "experts" would talk about this, or if they might dismiss my interpretation altogether. But I think it's a significant question: does Bluebeard always have to die? Or could he be redeemed by his wife? or the brothers? or the family? Can we use this myth to look at how all things could be integrated? Or is the whole point of the story that some things can't belong (continue to exist) if other things are to be developed?
What if Bluebeard's wife had not promised to not open the one room? What if the story told of the wife leaving at some point? What if the wife's family had investigated Bluebeard before the wedding? What if the wife had negotiated differently w/ Bluebeard? How many elements in the story are essential to the meaning of the story? And how much of this is truly natural, (and not indicative of pathology)? And how much is universal, experienced by all humans?
Also, could we interpret all the wives in the story as being the same "youngest" (undeveloped) one that at earlier stages didn't have any "sisters" and "brothers", i.e. consciousness of the predatory and ability to conquer it.
Also, when the "youngest" seeks an elevated status by marrying Bluebeard, is she being the same as what Bluebeard first was, when he wanted equality w/ "The Ineffable"? What exactly are these entities in our psyche that are not "marry-able", that are mutually exclusive? And can "one" win? Or must both change? (One die and one be transformed.) If they are depictions of two aspects of the same entity, what actually happens to the destructive aspect? and what actually happens to the undeveloped; the undeveloped can't stay as it was either.
It's interesting that "Bluebeard" is seen as dark (or a keeper of the hidden) and the "young wife" as light (or from the world of the open). Because, really, it's Bluebeard that sees the present nature of things, and it's the young wife who is blind to the truth.
Hmmmm.... I've asked many questions and have answered none of them! Well, more to come...
Baba, do you have anything to add?
~Lucy
Our friend Clarissa writes that Bluebeard is a depiction of the natural predator in each of us, that Bluebeard is the desire to be superior or have power over others, the inflated psychological entity that wants to be equal to "The Ineffable." When she writes
"If we can understand the Bluebeard as being the internal representative of the entire myth of such an outcast, we then may also be able to comprehend the deep and inexplicable loneliness which sometimes washes over him (us) because he experiences a continuous exile from redemption."I wonder if this "inexplicable loneliness" is always so inexplicable, and is it always from experiencing "continuous exile"? I experience a deep loneliness that I identify as my yearning for deeper communion w/ God. The difference is that I can feel this yearning w/out feeling exiled, I can want this communion w/out desire for superiority. In fact, it is in my happily-knowing-I-am-a-beloved-creature-of-God that I can communion and yearn for more communing!
But maybe I experience this difference because my internal Bluebeard has been redeemed? I'm not sure how "experts" would talk about this, or if they might dismiss my interpretation altogether. But I think it's a significant question: does Bluebeard always have to die? Or could he be redeemed by his wife? or the brothers? or the family? Can we use this myth to look at how all things could be integrated? Or is the whole point of the story that some things can't belong (continue to exist) if other things are to be developed?
What if Bluebeard's wife had not promised to not open the one room? What if the story told of the wife leaving at some point? What if the wife's family had investigated Bluebeard before the wedding? What if the wife had negotiated differently w/ Bluebeard? How many elements in the story are essential to the meaning of the story? And how much of this is truly natural, (and not indicative of pathology)? And how much is universal, experienced by all humans?
Also, could we interpret all the wives in the story as being the same "youngest" (undeveloped) one that at earlier stages didn't have any "sisters" and "brothers", i.e. consciousness of the predatory and ability to conquer it.
Also, when the "youngest" seeks an elevated status by marrying Bluebeard, is she being the same as what Bluebeard first was, when he wanted equality w/ "The Ineffable"? What exactly are these entities in our psyche that are not "marry-able", that are mutually exclusive? And can "one" win? Or must both change? (One die and one be transformed.) If they are depictions of two aspects of the same entity, what actually happens to the destructive aspect? and what actually happens to the undeveloped; the undeveloped can't stay as it was either.
It's interesting that "Bluebeard" is seen as dark (or a keeper of the hidden) and the "young wife" as light (or from the world of the open). Because, really, it's Bluebeard that sees the present nature of things, and it's the young wife who is blind to the truth.
Hmmmm.... I've asked many questions and have answered none of them! Well, more to come...
Baba, do you have anything to add?
~Lucy
No comments:
Post a Comment