Huxley, Lawrence, Jung, Gross

Aldous Huxley’s evolution as a novelist may be described as the succession of three distinct phases. First, one finds the group of the early novels. They are bright and amusing, but also sharply satirical at times, and they express that growing dissatisfaction with our civilized world which comes to a climax at the end of Those Barren Leaves, with Calamy’s decision to live a hermit’s life of meditation on the mountains. Then, Huxley falls for a time under the influence of D. H. Lawrence; and this second phase, important as it is (since it includes Huxley’s most famous novel, Point Counter Point, published in 1928) must nevertheless be seen as a deviation from his natural course. So Huxley, after becoming disenchanted with Lawrence, returns to the point where he had left the path, and the third phase begins, with Eyeless in Gaza and Anthony Beavis’s gradual evolution towards mysticism.

…

The second phase, “the Lawrencian interlude”, deals with Huxley’s endorsement of Carl Jung’s description of psychological types, and with its implications. Jung’s typology was of value to Huxley not merely as a theory, but also as a contribution to his fiction: for, in Point Counter Point, he derived from it some of the elements that form the theme of the novel, and also command the ‘counterpointing’ of the characters, the elaboration of significant pattern of similarities and contrasts between them. Rampion, who stands for D. H. Lawrence in the novel, is of course included in the scheme, and this may help us to see him in the right perspective: as a positive character, an image of completeness and harmony (which also owes something to Jung’s theory of the complementarity of the functions) – but also as belonging to a definite type, and limited by it, both as a person and in the theories he develops. This, of course, leads us to the question of Lawrence’s influence on Huxley. Briefly stated, my argument is that this influence is not something that was first passively received and later discarded. The real process was more complex. Huxley had always been interested in, and was becoming more seriously concerned about, the modern phenomenon of the dissociation of personality: the lack of any unifying principle, the various forms of one-sided development, the over-specialization of individuals. When he discovered Lawrence, what he found was primarily a practical answer to his problem, an example of balanced personality (hence, the character of Rampion). He also re-assembled some of Lawrence’s main ideas to form a consistent and largely personal doctrine which led to the unorthodox Lawrencian climax of Do What Tou Will in 1929, but was soon after rejected. The study of Huxley’s successive reactions to Lawrence can give us a valuable insight into the nature of his spiritual crisis in the thirties, and into the reasons for his later conversion.

Aldous Huxley and D. H. Lawrence: An Attempt at Intellectual Sympathy (Pierre Vitoux)

The stress that Lawrence places on the healing nature of the sexual experience, evident in many of his novels, but perhaps most clearly in The Man Who Died, and his emphasis on the relationships between men and women can be traced to Gross influence.
…
Psychological Types also shows Jung’s debt to Gross. In chapter six, “The Type Problem of Psychopathology, ” Jung discusses Gross’ two types. He calls the type with broad, shallow consciousness the extravert, and the one with deep, narrow consciousness the introvert. Jung praises Gross’ work highly in this chapter. Of the extravert Jung says: “Gross deserves full credit for being the first to set up a simple and consistent hypothesis to account for this type”, hereby acknowledging the originality of Gross’ work. Jung disagrees with Gross, however, about the importance of sexuality to the introvert. He also disagrees with Gross about the kind of person needed in his day. Gross thought that the extravert was needed to build civilizations, while in times of high culture, like his own, the introvert was more important. Jung believes that both types are necessary in each period since the world needs both culture and civilization, both the abstract ideas of the introvert and the practical achievements of the extravert. He concludes by saying that his views coincide substantially with those of Gross: “Even my terms ‘extraversion’ and ‘introversion’ are justified in the light of his conceptions”. Although the preparatory work for Psychological Types was completed between 1913 and 1917, the book was published first in 1921. Even at this stage, after his complete break with Gross, Jung respects Gross’ ideas.

Anarchy and Eros: Otto Gross’ impact on German Expressionist Writers (Jennifer E. Michaels)

Lawrence exaggerated the importance of sex because he was excessively influenced by his mother; he over-emphasized women because he was still a child and was unable to integrate himself in the world.

C.G. Jung and Herman Hesse: A Record of Two Friendships (Miguel Serrano, Frank MacShane)

Martin Green quotes a letter from Jung in which he blames his lapse with a patient, Sabina Spielrein, on his former patient Otto Gross, with whom he had transference and countertransference problems. Under the influence of Gross, he preached polygamy at her and praised her independent spirit in having an affair with him. The event had a seriously damaging effect on the psychoanalytic movement. If Gross could influence Jung for the worst, he could surely, if only indirectly, have influenced Lawrence?

Where D.H. Lawrence was Wrong about Woman (David Holbrook)

Lawrence exagerava a importância do sexo pois queria a liberação social e psicológica através de sua literatura. Lawrence, como bom homem de excessos, dava valor excessivo à sexualidade assim como dava valor excessivo à tudo que lhe interessava, não sei se Jung fez tal afirmação considerando apenas a fase inglesa de Lawrence, mas quando posteriormente ele começou a viajar pelo mundo, os seus livros, além da sexualidade, passaram a assimilar aspectos culturais e míticos numa veia nietzschiana/junguiana, embora muitas vezes levasse a coisa de forma literal demais (o mesmo problema ocorrido com Hitler, rá!). É exatamente por esse excesso de tudo que Lawrence foi tão adaptado por Ken Russell. Fellini é outro excessivo notoriamente fã de Jung, mas a opulência mamária em seus filmes também reflete uma grande preocupação sexual – Federico é italiano, vindo de uma cultura machista e eternamente subjugada pela figura materna, mesmo assim Otto e Mezzo é incrivelmente junguiano. O Huxley nessa história? É o equilíbrio e a visão, simples assim, da mesma forma que Jung acabou por se desvencilhar da influência de Gross (e ambos da de Freud), Huxley se desvencilhou da de Lawrence, este e Gross como anarquistas sexuais pensavam que a liberação sexual completa nos levaria à cura numa utopia sem neurose e histeria, Huxley previu que o futuro pertencia ao sexo banalizado como de fato ocorreu, ou seja, as pessoas ainda não conseguem tratar o sexo como algo normal e natural, ou você vê sites na internet com pessoas comendo macarronada na mesma proporção com que existem sites de gente trepando?

Nota: Frieda Lawrence? Aparentemente era ainda mais Anarco-Ottogrossiana. Literalmente. Assim como sua irmã (e cunhada de Lawrence, claro) que inclusive foi mãe de um filho de Gross. E se procurar, até Alma Mahler e Franz Werfel entram nesse angu. Otto Gross foi um pequeno demônio que plantava o caos ao redor e que ajudou a girar muitas rodas, completamente sensacional, brilhante e provavelmente um dos gênios mais esquecidos do século XX, como sempre.

Related Articles

• Prophet of our present – JG Ballard
• 24 Frames: Os Demônios (The Devils, Ken Russell, 1971)
• Huxley – Jung – White
• Post-Jungian perspectives on archetypes of individuation in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and Island
• Reading The Red Book: How C.G. Jung Salvaged His Soul
• Outras Obras Russell-Lawrenceanas
• O Arco-Íris (The Rainbow, 1989)