I was surprised to read you like Trump, ‘like I’d like an eccentric and crazy rich uncle with good instincts and a big heart.’ Surprised because so few people I know are prepared to say any thing positive about Trump. It was really a breath of fresh air. Even though you also said the feelings don’t matter as much as the principle (that we are all connected?). Perhaps it’s because we are all connected that the feelings also matter, both/and rather than either/or.
I also like some things about Trump, and I find it crippling to come up against the hatred that some express towards him. The polarisation that is endemic now builds a wall, or attempts to, that is unscalable, or appears to be. That divisiveness which is trying to keep people separate rather than bring them together, or let them recognise their togetherness, is what is tearing the world apart, or appears to be. Thank you for having the courage to reach a hand over that wall.
Thanks Anna, I always want to write a whole post back instead of a line. But thank you. There's a lot of hand reaching and voice risking to be done and I'm with you in it.
Nicely said, Anna and good on ya for noticing and applauding Andrew’s authenticity in sharing his feelings toward Trump.
From my perspective, I try to keep things simple. And from there, Trump’s just another human, with all the seeming contradictions that often entails.
I think the elevation of public figures into archetypal representations is not an incorrect perception of them, it’s also dangerous. I include both making a public figure a Shadow/Demon and making one a Light/Angel.
I heard recently that either Jung or Hillman said to be very mindful not to identify with archetypes, to try to be them, and I think this goes for putting others in those roles, too.
I think it’s much healthier to reflect on how public figures remind us of people in our lives or as a generic eccentric uncle type like Andrew did.
But yes, speaking/writing in such a way risks alienating or angering those who are engaging with that public figure as an archetype. The human mind is endlessly fascinating!
Oh, hey Andrew, see you can write a whole post in a Comment! LOL
"write a whole post in a Comment!" Ha! You proved that true. I sometimes don't respond at length to a comment thinking it's their comment and deserves its own space. I don't have the right answer or an improvement on it.
Re: your substance . . . Yes indeed! The mind / consciousness can hardly help but categorize experience and others into (arche)types. But if we're governed by them, trouble abounds . . . but only every time!
I was surprised to read you like Trump, ‘like I’d like an eccentric and crazy rich uncle with good instincts and a big heart.’ Surprised because so few people I know are prepared to say any thing positive about Trump. It was really a breath of fresh air. Even though you also said the feelings don’t matter as much as the principle (that we are all connected?). Perhaps it’s because we are all connected that the feelings also matter, both/and rather than either/or.
I also like some things about Trump, and I find it crippling to come up against the hatred that some express towards him. The polarisation that is endemic now builds a wall, or attempts to, that is unscalable, or appears to be. That divisiveness which is trying to keep people separate rather than bring them together, or let them recognise their togetherness, is what is tearing the world apart, or appears to be. Thank you for having the courage to reach a hand over that wall.
Thanks Anna, I always want to write a whole post back instead of a line. But thank you. There's a lot of hand reaching and voice risking to be done and I'm with you in it.
Nicely said, Anna and good on ya for noticing and applauding Andrew’s authenticity in sharing his feelings toward Trump.
From my perspective, I try to keep things simple. And from there, Trump’s just another human, with all the seeming contradictions that often entails.
I think the elevation of public figures into archetypal representations is not an incorrect perception of them, it’s also dangerous. I include both making a public figure a Shadow/Demon and making one a Light/Angel.
I heard recently that either Jung or Hillman said to be very mindful not to identify with archetypes, to try to be them, and I think this goes for putting others in those roles, too.
I think it’s much healthier to reflect on how public figures remind us of people in our lives or as a generic eccentric uncle type like Andrew did.
But yes, speaking/writing in such a way risks alienating or angering those who are engaging with that public figure as an archetype. The human mind is endlessly fascinating!
Oh, hey Andrew, see you can write a whole post in a Comment! LOL
"write a whole post in a Comment!" Ha! You proved that true. I sometimes don't respond at length to a comment thinking it's their comment and deserves its own space. I don't have the right answer or an improvement on it.
Re: your substance . . . Yes indeed! The mind / consciousness can hardly help but categorize experience and others into (arche)types. But if we're governed by them, trouble abounds . . . but only every time!
Thanks for your thoughtful perspective, Andrew.