Shadowed Reality or the 'Prometheus-complex' -Analytical Psychotherapy Afte

Journal of Analytical Psychology, 2005, 50, 521–537

0021–8774/2005/5004/521 © 2005, The Society of Analytical Psychology

Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Shadowed reality or the ‘Prometheus-complex’: analytical psychotherapy after political imprisonment and persecution

Reinhild Hölter, Berlin

Abstract: Traumatic experiences of violence like those that were brought about by thecommunist regime of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR) are still presentas if they happened yesterday, causing severe disadvantages in everyday life even afterall those years. Consequently, in cases of extreme traumatization induced by politicalimprisonment, persecution and applied psychological methods of disintegration, regres-sive processes take place which corrode the ego. The breakdown of cathexis, i.e., thefailure of empathic connection at the time of the trauma, is the strongest characteristicof severe traumatization. As a result of this destruction for the traumatized there is aninability to keep upright an inner empathic, emotional connection.

As we try to grasp, from a Jungian point of view, the psychodynamics of severetraumatization, we can speak of a powerful pathogenous complex, which I call the‘Prometheus-complex’. Gustav Bovensiepen speaks of this complex as a sub-network,a limited fragment of the matrix of all internalized experiences, consisting of internalworking models, feelings and patterns of anticipation which interact mutually. Thehuman being, captured in such isolation and paralysis of the mind, can find himself ‘inthe therapist’ on a mental level.

Key words: complex theory, defensive organization, political persecution, psychictorture, symbolization, trauma, trauma-complex.

The collapse of communist rule in Eastern Europe has opened new opportunitiesfor individual and social development. At the same time we are able to see moreclearly how life under dictatorial circumstances has shaped people, especiallythose who—because of their political nonconformity—have been subject torepressive measures of the state. According to official estimations, in EastGermany from 1945 until 1989 more than 300,000 people were imprisonedbecause of political motives. In addition to these, there is the multitude ofpeople who were subject to spying and tracking methods because they got intothe sights of the Staatssicherheit (GDR State Security, also known as Stasi) onflimsy grounds. Especially for these cases, the Staatssicherheit developedan ‘operative psychology’, in which know-how from psychiatry, personality

522 Reinhild Hölter

diagnosis, developmental psychology, psychotherapy and neighbouringsciences were gathered to generate directly applicable subtle methods ofmanipulation and disintegration of the individual. ‘Operative psychology’ wasalso used in the recruitment of state security personnel, but it particularlyaimed at undermining the activities of dissidents and was kept strictly confi-dential. Action plans were developed for groups and individuals with the aimof creating distrust between the group members and to systematically discreditthe reputation and public renown of the individual, to bring about profes-sional and social failure, to attack the self-confidence of the targeted person.The main goal was to trigger panic and consternation and in the end todestroy the personality of the individual. Also during political imprisonment,the know-how of ‘operative psychology’ became the basis for the subtle andhighly effective treatment of the detainee. It is not hard to imagine that theconsequences for the individual can be painfully felt up to the present time.

As a private analyst as well as in my work for a counselling centre for thepolitically traumatized of the GDR-dictatorship in Berlin, I was able to gathermuch knowledge about the methods and long-term effects of psychologicalterror. Traumatic experiences of violence, often dating back twenty to thirtyyears, are still present as if they happened yesterday, and continue to bea severe handicap in the individual’s everyday life.

I would now like to give you some concrete insights into the situation of thepolitical detainees in the GDR as well as an outline of the psychologicaltorture methods and their consequences, before I go into the psychodynamicprocesses involved from a Jungian point of view.

If in the years following World War II, brutal physical abuse of the prisonerswas common in the territory under Soviet military control and in the earlyGDR, this treatment was abandoned in the following years in favour of thesilent methods of the MFS (State Security Office), which expressed themselvesin continually refined psychological measures of disintegration.

Particularly during the initial period of detention awaiting trial, the causingof insecurity and disorientation brought about severe psychic breakdowns.Not only were the prisoners left in the dark about the duration of imprison-ment, but the sophisticated interrogations that went on hour and hour werealso interlaced with false rumours about relatives and friends, as well as withfalse witnesses and extortion to destroy confidence in existing relationships.Children of the imprisoned were put in state institutions or given to adoptiveparents loyal to the party. The methods of deprivation used, such as totalisolation in a bare cell for days or weeks, as well as alternating de-stimulationand over-stimulation (i.e., deprivation of sleep caused by burning neon lightsday and night with checks every ten minutes by the prison guard opening thepeephole), left prisoners with a feeling of total despair.

Following this isolation prisoners were grouped together with other detain-ees, often with strategically positioned cell-informers. These people weremostly fellow prisoners who were forced to spy on their cellmates, taking

Analytical psychotherapy, political imprisonment and persecution 523

advantage of their desire to communicate. A wide range of behaviour wasfound here, from almost amicable inquiry and confidential exchange tomenace and violence. Thus over a period of weeks, months, and sometimesyears, prisoners were kept in the uttermost uncertain, terrifying situation,without a chance of verifying reality, which led to many of those involvedbeing in a continual state of confusion. To illustrate this I would like topresent to you the following case study.

The patient, at the age of nineteen, was arrested in the winter of 1979 inCzechoslovakia after an unsuccessful attempt to flee to the West.

Patient: ‘I had to lie down on my belly in the snow, blindfolded with handcuffson my back. After that, I was put in prison without a chance to washmyself or eat. My hands were cuffed at the head of the bed; additionallyguards with machine guns watched over me. The cell had no heatingand I felt miserably cold’.

After almost three weeks of detention he was taken to Leipzig on an approxi-mately eight-hour journey in a specially constructed van.

Patient: ‘The interior of the van was divided into several single cells. The cell,dark and airless, was just big enough to sit in. I could not move.Besides that, I was handcuffed. We had a longer stay in Dresden,where I wasn’t allowed out. On arrival in Leipzig, I was immediatelysubjected to an interrogation by the Staatssicherheit that was to lastall night’.

The patient was sentenced to two years and ten months in prison. He had toserve one year and four months of this sentence. Following the trial he wastransferred to a penal institution where he was detained with common criminals.

Patient: ‘I landed in the homosexual wing. In a cell with twenty-eight inmates,twenty-six of them were gay. Bunk on bunk, all very close, and everynight the corresponding noises’.

When the patient refused to do his assigned job because of the appalling workingconditions (working without protective clothes or other protection with toxicsubstances like lead or asbestos), he was put in solitary confinement:

Patient: ‘I had to undress and was put into a tiny, damp dungeon. The floorwas wet, I was not allowed to sit and had to stand upright all the time.From 11 pm till 9 am the next morning I had to stand upright in thedark, cold dungeon. The backaches became unbearable. After that Iwas taken to a solitary cell. I was ordered to work but I refused andwas put back in the dungeon for hours. I was dead tired; to keep meawake I was beaten in the kidney with a club by the guard. After that itwas prison again. This was repeated several times’.


The solitary detention continued for three weeks. Several months later thepatient was freed by the West German authorities.

The sole supporting figure during political custody was the interrogator,who perfidiously took advantage of the hunger for communication that wasdescribed by many a prisoner, deliberately invoked and intensified by methodsof deprivation. Some carefully calculated favours done by the interrogatormade him seem sympathetic and nurtured hopes in the detainee, but theirexclusive aim was to promote his readiness to testify. The behaviour of theinterrogator could abruptly change, arbitrarily and unfathomably for the pris-oner. All of a sudden the ‘good’ could turn to ‘bad’. Abandoned by everyone,left alone in agony and despair, the intimidator (in this case the interrogator)turns into the representative of the early omnipotent and existence-securing‘other’. These regressive processes produce an early image of object-relationship,connected with total dependency, so that ‘also the adult victim tragicallyexperiences in the perpetrator the sole source of narcissistic supply’ (Hirsch1997, p. 105).

Forced by the loss of interior and exterior, temporal and environmentalorientation, the ego of the traumatized person continuously loses the power toresist the unfathomable, the unnameable, the overwhelming. Jochen Peichldescribes this state:

The vital, libidinal, sensuous cathexis, that is coming from the outside, the narcissis-tic gratification by others, breaks down: The human being, feebled in his ego andseverely threatened, experiences feelings of depersonalization and derealization; heceases to sense himself, he begins to dissolve and to become groundless.

(Peichl 2001, p. 4)

Another patient, who was released into the GDR after being imprisonedon charges of attempting to escape at the age of sixteen, describes his then-stigmatized existence:

My life was meaningless. No one wanted to be seen with me. I had no friends, myparents dissociated from me. A suicide attempt failed. I had to arrange with life. Mydream to become a doctor fell to pieces. I was marked as an anti-social, hostileperson and was avoided by everyone. I quitted my education. I was a third-classhuman being. I tried to keep my history a secret, even much later, until after I mar-ried, I never spoke about it. I was afraid my wife would leave me if I did.

The consequences of severe traumatization

But what is it that happens to the memories of things suffered, asks WernerSeifert, and remarks: ‘the sudden and compelling penetrations of the past inreality creates gaps in the biography of the affected person, small deaths beforethe final end of his life. Continuity is experiencing a leap. In isolation lifeimpoverishes, dries out and becomes desolate’ (Seifert 1998, p. 258). In every-day life nothing is taken for granted anymore. It is the very personal small


gestures of everyday experience that are deranged. The writer Jürgen Fuchswrites in his Daily Notes:

The terrible thing is notdoing time in a celland being interrogatedit’s after thatwhen you are standing before a tree againor drinking a bottle of beerand you want to feel happyreally happylike beforethen it is.

(Fuchs 1979, p. 10)

Usually after the release from prison there is a period free of symptoms. The reliefover the freedom regained is immense and often just as intense is the attempt tosuppress the things that happened and to lead a ‘normal’ life. Disorders caused bytrauma can occur after years of latency, the post-traumatic disease then emergingin connection with events that reactivate the original trauma.

The effects of severe traumatization can be divided into three phases: theacute situation of distress; the chronic response to the traumatic event; and theindividual adaptation to the chronically symptomatic state of PTSD (Post-traumatic Stress Disorder) (van der Kolk, p. 143). I do not want to go intofurther diagnostic classifications here, but I would like to expose the typicalsymptoms after extreme traumatizations: intruding and irritating thoughts andmemories about the trauma (intrusions, nightmares, flashbacks) and theavoidance of trauma-associated stimuli; a lack of or loss of self-regulation, i.e.long-term difficulties when it comes to regulating aggression, fear and sexualimpulses or overwhelming sadness. In addition, difficulties at processingstimuli, anhedonia, dissociation, self-destructive behaviour as an attempt atself-regulation, drug abuse, somatic disorders and chronic changes of personalitywith changes of self-perception, a significant distrust of others, chronicfeelings of guilt and shame as well as a tendency to revictimize and to victimizeothers. Krystal (2001) has coined the term ‘affect regression’. As an after-effectof traumatization, the overwhelming affects evade inner control; they becomeglobal and therefore undifferentiated. They evade symbolization and thusbecome de-verbalized. They are perceived as if they were of a physical nature,i.e., they are re-somatized. The ability to recognize specific emotions thatcould serve as a reference for action goes astray. As another effect of traumati-zation, Krystal describes the incapability of creating semantic constructs toidentify somatic states.

The inability to verbally express experience has a neurobiological equivalent.It has been verified that, due to the overwhelming arousal upon traumatization,the encoding of experience is limited in a special way. The use of linguisticneuronal pathways is reduced, that of senso-motoric neuronal pathways


increased. (The Broca region as the centre of speech does not function duringextreme arousal). The isolated traumatic reality cannot be processed symbol-ically, but is conserved as an accumulation of sensory fragments, as videos,slides or inner tapes. From these originate the non-symbolized, inflexibleactivation stimuli that are beyond wilful control and are automaticallyactivated by triggers (flashback). Van der Kolk (1996/2000) speaks of adistinctive ‘trauma-memory’. The inner core of a traumatic experience canalmost always be precisely remembered, although it can bring distortions indetail. The psyche acts in a dissociable way, in accordance with the modernperception of a network structure of the brain. C.G. Jung already broughtup the issue that unconscious processes do not necessarily need a subject(a steering ego): ‘I recall to the mind all those absurdities caused by complexes,which one can observe with all desirable accuracy during the associationexperiment’ (Jung 1946, para. 200f; Huber 1998).

The idea of complex theory and its development

For a psychodynamic understanding of severe traumatizations I would like touse the complex theory of C.G. Jung. This is one of the possible constructs(I am also thinking of object relations theory) which enable us to discusspsychodynamics. In the field of dissociative disorders, to which severe trauma-tizations belong, this in my opinion is the most convincing theory.

I would like to make some introductory remarks about the complex theory first.C.G. Jung defines complexes as

splintered psychic parts of the personality, groups of psychic contents, which haveseparated themselves from consciousness, functioning uncontrolled and autono-mous, leading a special life in the dark sphere of the unconscious, from where theyare able to hinder and promote conscious operations at any time.

(see Jacoby 1998)

Jung emphasizes that complexes are caused by emotions. The nucleus of thecomplex is archetypal and has a constellating power. Accordingly, typical ofthe complex are the lack of corrigibility, the automatism and the self-enhancementthrough mythological-archaic amplifications (Dieckmann 1991). Within anappropriate interior or exterior situation, a virulent complex functions like analien object in the sphere of consciousness and withdraws energy from it.Complexes are not necessarily caused by trauma, they only bear witness to theexistence of something irreconcilable and controversial. These are psychiccontents, that are not yet connected with the ego-complex. Depending ontheir energetic charge, complexes are important nodal points of the inner lifeand accordingly not necessarily negative. ‘The stronger the emotions and theirconnected field of associated meaning, the stronger the complex, the moreother psychic parts, in particular the ego-complex, are driven back’ (Kast1998, p. 299).


In recent years the complex theory has undergone systematic development.The developmental psychological perspective, according to which the childalready organizes and internalizes earliest patterns of experience with hissupporting figures, thereby forming complexes, has to be emphasized. In hisstructural description of the complexes, Dieckmann already refers to the factthat, next to archetypal elements, very early personal experiences also areincluded in the core of the complex. Kast and Jacoby emphasize the greataffinity of the idea of the complex with Stern’s idea of the RIGs (Representa-tions of Interactions that have been Generalized). According to Stern theseRIGs emerge out of all interactions of the infant with its mother and theydepict an anticipation of behaviour and a pre-verbal representation. ‘RIGsarise from the immediate impression of manifold authentic experiences, andthey integrate the different attributes of action, awareness and feeling of thecore-self to an entity’ (Stern 1985/1993, p. 144). By RIGs, Stern means ‘flex-ible structures, which represent a median of several authentic episodes andform a prototype, which represents them all’ (Jacoby 1998, p. 86). Dependingon the tone of feeling these are integrated into the dynamic of the complexes.

Jean Knox has similar thoughts, primarily in connection to Bowlby’s attach-ment theory. Bowlby emphasizes the universal human need to create closeemotional attachments. Thus stable attachment patterns emerge which havethe function of feeling regulation. They represent intrapsychic working modelsas mental schemes. These working models contain early interpersonal experi-ences of the infant; they are image schemes that a human being creates of hisattachment figures and contain the bundled expectations regarding the behaviourof a certain individual with regard to the self (Bowlby 1991, p. 78;Bovensiepen 2004, p. 34). Like the RIGs, the working models intrapsychicallyorganize the perception of the experiences in relationships and store them inthe implicit memory. Knox points to the practicability of these ideas for theunderstanding of Jungian complex theory and stresses: ‘If archetypes can bedescribed in information-processing terms as image schemas, complexeswould seem to have many of the information-processing features of internalworking models’ (Knox 2003, p. 102).

Nowadays it is assumed that these complexes are linked together amongthemselves, such that one can speak of a matrix, of networks or landscapes ofcomplexes. According to recent research, those emotions seem to play animportant part as a linking dynamic that organize the inner representations ofrelational experiences along innate patterns of organization or archetypaldesigns.

The constellation of the ‘Prometheus-complex’ as a consequence of severetraumatization

As we try to grasp, from a Jungian point of view, the psychodynamics ofsevere traumatization, we can speak of a powerful pathogenic complex,


which I would like to call ‘Prometheus-complex’. By naming the pathogenictrauma-complex ‘Prometheus-complex’, I would like to expose the multi-layered dramatic occurrence of relationships, which is expressed in the myth.The archetypal theme constellates the complex and furthermore shows theforce of the emotions that are involved in severe traumatization. Not only thethreat of death is of crucial importance to the development of the trauma-complex, but the complete story of the myth. The myth sketches the end of the‘golden era’ in which gods, human beings and animals still lived in harmony,as Zeus dethrones his father Chronos and seizes absolute power on Olympus.Zeus demands to be worshipped by the humans, which causes Prometheus totake their side and to revolt against the tyranny. As Zeus withholds fire, thuspreventing humans from cooking their meals, Prometheus secretly steals firefrom the sun and takes it to the humans. However, the punishment of Zeus isdreadful. He sends the maiden Pandora to the humans, with a box containingevery evil of mankind. Prometheus is bound with unbreakable chains to therocks of the Caucasus Mountains, over a horrible abyss. According to Aeschylushe is then thrown into a deep abyss and remains there for ten thousand years.After that Prometheus is allowed to re-emerge and, still bound to a stone, isdelivered to an eagle which assaults him every day and pecks at his bleedingliver. Zeus wants to force a testimony from Prometheus, since he knows inwhat way the rule of Zeus will end. Yet Prometheus persistently keeps silent,despite endless agony. The torment of the prisoner has to last forever or atleast for a period of thirty thousand years. After many years Hercules hasmercy on the prisoner, bends his bow and kills the eagle with his arrow. Hetakes Prometheus with him and leaves the centaur Chiron in his place. A dealis made with Zeus whereby the hitherto immortal Chiron dies instead ofPrometheus. But Prometheus henceforth has to wear an iron ring, with a rockof the Caucasus attached to it, allowing Zeus to boast that his enemy is stillincarcerated in the Caucasian Mountains. The myth also implies the furtherconsequence of the complex: Prometheus does not get rid of the Caucasianstone, he remains chained to the ring (Kevényi 1992).

In my interpretation I would like to join with the dynamic understanding ofthe complex, as postulated by Gustav Bovensiepen. He speaks of the complex asa sub-network, a limited fragment of the matrix of all internalized experiences,consisting of interior working models, feelings and patterns of anticipationwhich interact mutually.

Viewed like that, perhaps it is reasonable not to look at complexes as mental images,but as dynamic, dissociated splinter psyches, that contain conscious and unconsciousimages and fantasies about certain modes of relationship and are characterized by aseries of similar experienced feeling-tones.

(Bovensiepen 2004, p. 43)

Let us return to the ‘Prometheus-complex’. Prometheus, the ‘fore-thinker’,revolts against suppression. He steals the fire. In many explanations, the fire


stands for the sparkle of the mind that is just as unabdicatable for humanculture as is the spirit of contradiction. Punishment, imprisonment and torturefollow as a consequence. The parallel to the political prisoners is evident.Prometheus refuses to cooperate, he does not reveal his knowledge. Because ofthat he is chained to the Caucasian rock, over a yawning abyss. Bound incomplete isolation he has to suffer horrible torture. In his interpretation of thePrometheus-myth, Jörg Rasche refers to Aeschylus, where Prometheus is thrustto the bottom of the earth together with the rock. It is a ‘gloomy grave madeof stone’, which keeps him imprisoned for ten thousand years. It is the arche-typal image of petrifaction, of turning to stone, which describes the defences ofdissociation and total isolation of feeling. Everything emotional or alive is cutoff and has to move for inner rigidity and coldness. ‘Living-dead’ is the poignantname Ferenczi (1933) gave to this state. The experience of subjective helpless-ness in the face of inescapable and inevitable danger and the surrender to it,changes the state of affect to that of a catatonoid reaction, a sort of trance-state, anaesthetizing the physical and psychic agony to a sort of blind obedienceand increasing dissociative phenomena. Until Prometheus is allowed to emergefrom his state of being buried alive, ten thousand endless years pass. In a Jungianor more specifically ‘Fordhamian’ sense, this illustrates the attack on the pri-mary self and the breaking into pieces of temporal continuity. The experienc-ing of time as a fundamental condition of mankind is archetypally determined.Time cannot be experienced in a state of cosy satisfaction, but only in theanticipation, the urge for satisfaction through the reliability of a good object.The confidence in the presence and the reliability of good objects and theanticipation of interpersonal empathy are profoundly shaken by the trauma.Not only has the primordial trust been severely undermined, the experiencingof continuity is also affected, the otherwise ubiquitous current of past, presentand future breaks off. The ‘hole’ in the experiencing of time reflects the forcedemptiness, the hole in the ego-structure. During the traumatic situation time isrunning in slow motion. The subjective experiencing of time is distorted andsolidified. The behaviour of the individual in extreme traumatization causedby political imprisonment, persecution and applied psychological methods ofdisintegration is characterized by basic self-preservation—in the end, the mostelementary needs are the ruling principles of life, i.e., of survival. The ego ofthe tortured person is attacked from two sides: by uncontrollable stimuli fromthe outside that threaten to flood him, from the inside because of the reactiva-tion of infantile fears, which the ego cannot reliably distinguish from reality.Torture measures of deprivation that disable the sense of temporal and spacialorientation considerably aggravate the situation.

Consequently, regressive processes take place, which destructively dissolvethe ego in this context; the intrapsychic communication between the self andthe good inner objects breaks down, the inner good object remains silent,which causes agonizing loneliness and utter despair. As a protection againstnarcissistic discharge, the powerful persecutor is introjected, taken into the


interior world of the psyche, where it continues to act destructively as an alienobject in the self, strengthening the experience of worthlessness. Or to put itanother way: the internal working models, the anticipation and imaginationpatterns of the early experience of relationships, are distorted and damaged.Accordingly, also, the reflective function (Dennett 1978, 1987), which devel-ops on the basis of early experiences of interaction, ‘the ability, to recognizebehaviour as meaningful and to shape it actively on this basis’ (Fonagy & Target2003, p. 33) is also impaired. The development of the reflective self-function,which enables the individual to plan his own behaviour and actions and thusimplies a vision of the future, promotes the ability to differentiate betweeninterior and exterior reality and forms the basis for interpersonal communication’(Fonagy 2003, p. 17). How lasting the effects of a damaged reflective self-function are, can be seen in the utterances of the traumatized, who even afterdecades still suffer from feelings of meaninglessness and seem to be confrontedwith a shadowed future. The ability ‘to be aware of the conscious and uncon-scious behaviour of one’s own and of others’ is called mentalization (ibid.,p. 205). Dissociative mechanisms, that fragment unbearable situations intoparts to relieve the horror, also attack the mentalization and detach mentalcontents, which normally are combined into a whole and strengthen self-coherence. ‘The individual has feelings and thoughts, but isn’t able to classifythem as feelings or thoughts. Without the ability of reflection the normalmeaning of experience becomes lost. Experiences of the self exist in no man’sland, apart from other aspects of mental functioning’ (ibid., p. 181).

If the matrix of the earliest relational experiences falls apart, it is evidentthat no operation of symbolization can take place. From a Jungian point ofview it shows that the transcendent function is damaged, for this is the psycho-logical function that is responsible for the creation of symbols. Thus it is notpossible to create a functioning psychological interior space, which wouldallow the construction of structured contexts of meaning. In the therapeuticprocess, to which I will return in detail later, this loss is mirrored in the attackon the reasoning of the analyst, who has problems preserving space for hisown thought. It is difficult for the analyst to take up a third position in orderto develop symbolic activity. In his book, The Inner World of Trauma, DonaldKalsched (1996) emphasizes the important role of the self-care system, formedby dissociative defences. According to Kalsched the trauma causes a divisionof consciousness, one part of the personality regressing to an infantile, vulner-able state, while the other part progresses to a false omnipotent adaptation tothe outside world. According to Kalsched this is an archetypal process, inwhich the omnipotent persecutory part attacks and encapsulates the vulner-able part, silencing it with the aim of keeping it safe from further attacks fromthe outside and thus protecting it. This total defence of the self, on the onehand, is rescue; on the other hand, after the end of the acute traumatization, itturns into a principal defence against any spontaneous expression of the self inthe world.


In the myth of Prometheus the archaic defence also finds its expression.Prometheus does not stay petrified, but emerges again, although he is chainedto the rock and exposed to repeated attacks by the eagle. The physical painsaves him from petrification—pain as an expression of being alive. So thereappears another—perversely structured—defence pattern in the behaviour ofPrometheus: he endures the torture that the eagle, as a henchman of power,inflicts upon him. However, the liver grows again and again at night. In thisway he is able to omnipotently withstand the attacks, apparently undoingthem in the night. But after his liberation he still has to wear an iron ring towhich a Caucasian rock is connected.

Kalsched emphasizes another important function of the archetypal trauma-defence, in that he does not solely see it as avoidance behaviour, but also asactive construction in the form of narrative. Therefore a form of narrative iscreated in phantasy with the purpose of creating a positive idea of identity andpersonal worth in a situation of total dependency. Jean Knox (2003) under-stands this as a process of image construction, functioning like an internalworking model.

A clinical case

Imprisoned in the 1980s, Mr B. was able to withstand the interrogations bythe Staatssicherheit for a long time. The psychological breakdown appeared asa delusional decompensation, in which he succeeded, by creating a ‘doublereality’, to hide his delusion from others. During imprisonment he behavedadaptively and quietly; secretly he imagined himself as chosen by God to fulfila secret mission in prison that made it necessary to talk to others on a non-verbal level, to communicate from soul to soul. Thus, he heard what he wastold, but he was convinced that people wanted to tell him somethingcompletely different on the level of thoughts; he just had to try to interpret thesigns in the right way to understand. The whole thing developed into asignificant system of delusion.

Colours, numbers and letters got a two-fold meaning. Mr. B was extra-ordinarily proud to be the only person entrusted with this secret mission.Simultaneously, he completely retreated because he feared to be called alunatic, if other people would notice his strange behaviour. His immenseworry was that as a ‘bearer of secrets’ he would not be transferred to theWest any more. This delusional system stayed after he was bought out by theFederal Republic of Germany. His marriage broke into pieces; he failedprofessionally. At the time he first visited the counselling centre, he sufferedfrom social isolation; the delusional symptoms had already dissolved.Nevertheless, today he is barely capable of reading a book, because the realcontent is blurred, and he still catches himself in the attempt to read themeaning between the lines. During the therapeutic treatment, lasting for fiveyears (once a week), Mr. B. has regained much freedom and is a working


professional again. But he still sketches very precisely, how even today, hesometimes attempts to slide into the other sphere, which is very much aconcern for him:

I am afraid of success. If I become aware that the other has less knowledge thanI have, then to not hurt him I go to the other sphere, because everyone is equal there.Or, if I hurt someone, I try to balance it in the other sphere, from soul to soul so tospeak.

He states further:

Whenever I notice that I am sliding into this sphere, I immediately withdraw myselffrom the other, because I fear that it might show on my face.

Mr. B. is able to speak about this very precisely, but he is imperceivable to meon the affective level, I am not able to emotionally sense him, but do sense thefascination of this sphere, when I bounce off from the omnipotent idea thatguards his emotional life. This sphere saves him from his own aggressiveimpulses or when he fears the persecutory vengeance of the other. It offers himcompensation, without getting dangerously near to the other. In his breakingoff contact, his isolation and delusional decompensation, the damage, but alsothe creative act of salvation of Mr. B., becomes evident. His tragic dilemmacaused by experiencing brute violence during imprisonment comes down to aparadox: to survive, ‘I have to partly destroy myself’.

Consequences for treatment

Due to the dissociative processes during traumatization and afterwards, intime multiple internal working models develop, which can unexpectedly beactivated and alternated (Knox 2003), and thus cause unsteadiness of thepersonality. Triggering stimuli (sounds, smells) activate flashbacks with theircorresponding defences. The multi-layered functioning of the complex revealsitself primarily in the forming of relationships. It is a characteristic feature ofthe treatment of severely traumatized people that they tend to break offcontact in the therapeutic process. The fear that everything good could bedestroyed again, has dug itself deep into their consciousness and leads to anattitude of distrust, often in connection to social withdrawal and isolation.The inner reality has experienced a ‘before’ and an ‘after’ and nothing will belike it was before. Traumatized people live a shadowed life overcast by apowerfully charged complex, which swallows everything that comes near withtremendous gravitational force. There are no temporal coherence and continuity,and even worse, no coherent meaning and no future. The intrusive recurrenceof the traumatic experience cannot be relieved by meaning. On the level ofemotional discharge and its overwhelming, in other words, of the primary feel-ing (Chiozza 1999; cf. Varvin 2000), the persecuted and traumatized personstill lives in the world of the trauma, in the detention cell, in the interrogation


room. The patients feel as if they were immured in an inner prison,condemned to live a life in the cold and in isolation, separated from all thingsalive. Chained at the edge of an abyss in a Promethean manner, time seems tostand still. Although the former detainees are able to talk about many detailsof their experiences during imprisonment, the therapist has the feeling thatsomething is being kept back. Kept back for instance are humiliating feelingsof shame and guilt that are deeply concealed, that are too intimidating to beverbalized. That which cannot be verbalized is presented through action.

Often the pathological perpetrator-victim relationship is staged in the begin-ning of the therapeutic process. The unconscious pattern of anticipation (theinternal working model) can be described as follows: if I confide in someone,I will be deceived and betrayed. I am at the mercy of the other and in the endI am alone. The defence processes that are at work during traumatizationremain in effect in therapy. Although the patient appears to be cooperative,the therapeutic process stagnates. In these dead-end situations the patient haslong since withdrawn from communication. Often the narcissistic, and there-fore salvational gain from this withdrawal, can only be sensed in countertrans-ference when the therapist pokes against this impenetrable fortress, which, likea mighty triumphant victor, prevents any penetration. In this inner prison thesalvational omnipotent image can survive, the omnipotence can continue toexist beyond verification. Anything is allowed that preserves the patient fromhaving to feel the extremely shameful impotence of being at the mercy ofothers. According to Kalsched this is typical of the archaic trauma-defence, inwhich the vulnerable part capable of engaging in relationships is being encap-sulated and silenced by the omnipotent part to protect it from renewedattacks.

So the persistence of this ‘psychic retreat’ (Steiner 1993) is by no means apassive event. By way of a scenic representation, the analyst is ‘fitted’ into thisretreat, he is locked up in chains and impeded in his freedom of movement.Related to the concrete process of the therapy this means: the patient trieshard, he comes regularly and on time and he speaks about his experiences inprison. He causes the analyst to completely take his side, the side of the goodvictim. In this process the analyst does not notice for a long time that nochange is taking place and that the therapeutic process is stagnating. Uncon-sciously this suits the analyst, who participates in the act, thus spared from theviolent attacks of the patient’s anger, and also from his agonizing, dreadfulfeelings. This is where the attack on the reasoning of the analyst becomesapparent; he isn’t able to preserve his space for thought, nor to developsymbolic activity, much like the traumatized person, whose symbolic functionis impaired. To the patient, the analyst is someone he values and would like tokeep, but over whom he triumphs as well and whom he tries to destroy. Achange for the better can only happen on condition that the therapist analyses thetherapy and his countertransference feelings and regains his symbolic attitudethrough the restoration of his own interior space. The countertransference


feelings of meaninglessness provide an impression of the torn relationaland explanatory connections of the severely traumatized individual. In theactive and empathic exchange between analyst and patient and in theframework of transference/countertransference processes, a matrix consistingof relational experiences develops in the sense of a supporting container/contained-relationship, which allows the transcendent function to develop(Bovensiepen 2002). Symbols are the processing places of the complexes.Therefore it is necessary during the therapeutic sessions to confront the oftenoverwhelming emotions, and to examine which conscious and unconsciousactivities, fantasies and images are related to them. Made available toconsciousness through its symbolic processing, the patient’s experience isextricated from trauma-conditioned speechlessness and put into words, so thatit becomes possible to work through those experiences.

In the therapeutic process, the stagnation also mirrors the inner drama ofparalysis. The absence of movement in the retreat embodies this timelesssituation, flashbacks demonstrate that time does not pass. Also the future isnot really imaginable, or at best it is imaginable in an overshadowed form, asan imminent catastrophe, that is bound to happen some day. The savingomnipotent gain of this loss of temporal reference lies in the overcoming ofmortality.

In the myth Prometheus is saved because Chiron is prepared to die in hisplace. Chiron, being equipped with a non-healing wound, personifies sorrow,death and compassion. He is considered to be the creator of medical sciencebecause of his attempts at soothing pain. For the therapy of the traumatized,we can say that liberation from the trauma, from prison, can only be attainedthrough the acceptance of the finiteness, through the mourning over thingssuffered, over the time that is lost, over lost chances.

Complexes do not work in an isolated way, but they are mutually intercon-nected. If an extremely charged, powerful complex is generated because of asevere traumatization, it has strong consequences for pre-existing complexes.Thus the positive mother complex changes itself because of the distortion oreven rupture of earliest relational experiences by the overwhelming catas-trophe, in so far as the bearing moment of maternity cannot be experiencedanymore. Very often severely traumatized persons develop a strong authoritycomplex, which even years after leads them to leave employments because thesituation of professional subordination recalls old, unbearable feelings ofbeing at the mercy of others. Suffered injustice, combined with massive humili-ations and ‘cut-off’ future prospects, often lead to a distinct envy complexaccompanied by strong feelings of grudge and resentment. The understandablyintense wish to take revenge on the person that has hurt oneself, often cannotbe expressed, either because these excessive impulses arouse the fear of retaliation,or because fantasies concerning the realization of the wishes lead to intensefeelings of guilt. The fear of their own destructive hate leads to a situationin which revenge can be neither openly put into action nor given up


completely—a vicious circle, in which open violence is prevented, but in whichalso the inner grudge, that saturates everything, leads to an endless revenge. Inthe therapeutic process the defensive dynamic of the complexes appears in theform of a collusive division (Kast 1998)—due to projective processes, theanalyst is seen as perpetrator, who is incapable of reconciliation. The onlything the therapist can do is to understand this manipulative transference andendure it—and survive these attacks (i.e., the shutdown of the analyst)—untilthe patient—if therapy is successful—starts to question this transference untilhe, besides admitting his own perpetratory input, is able to give up omnipotentcontrol. Becoming aware of his hatred and of his ‘guilt’ and the correspondingemergence of the wish for destruction of the object is a prerequisite for thereconciliatory impulses to be sensed, and the grief over things lost and painfulsuffering be permitted.

TRANSLATIONS OF ABSTRACT

Des vécus traumatiques de violence comme ceux qui ont eu lieu dans le régime commu-niste de l’ancienne république démocratique allemande (GDR) sont encore présentscomme s’ils étaient arrivés hier, causant des handicaps sévères dans la vie de tous lesjours même après toutes ces années. Ceci montre qu’ont eu lieu chez les personnesayant vécu une traumatisation extrème à la suite d’un emprisonnement politique, depersécutions et d’une utilisation sur eux de méthodes psychologiques visant à la desin-tégration, des processus régressifs qui ont attaqué le moi. L’effondrement catharctique,l’absence de connection empathique au moment du traumatisme sont les points les pluscaractéristiques d’une sévère traumatisation. Parce qu’il y a eu destruction de ce qui esttraumatisé il y a une incapacité à garder une connection interne émotionnelle et empa-thique.

Si nous cherchons à concevoir, d’un point de vue jungien, les dynamiques de trauma-tisation sévère, nous pouvons parler d’un complexe pathogène puissant, que j’appelle le‘complexe de Prométhée’. Gustav Bovensiepen parle de ce complexe comme d’un sous-réseau, un fragment limité de la matrice de toutes les expériences internalisées, consti-tué de modèles, affects et shémas d’anticipation qui interagissent les uns avec les autres.L’être humain enfermé dans un tel isolement et une telle paralysie de son esprit peut seretrouver ‘dans le thérapeute’ au niveau mental.

Traumatische Gewalterlebnisse, wie sie von der DDR-Diktatur verursacht wurden, sindoft noch so präsent wie zum Zeitpunkt des Geschehens, was zu massiven Behinderun-gen im täglichen Leben führt, auch wenn das Ereignis 20 oder 30 Jahre zurückliegt. Beidiesen Extremtraumatisierungen durch politische Haft, Verfolgung und gezielte psy-chische Zersetzungmaßnahmen finden regressive Prozesse statt die in diesem Kontextdestruktiv ich-auflösend sind. Der Besetzungsabzug bzw. das Scheitern der empathis-chen Verbindung zur Zeit des Traumas ist das stärkste Merkmal schwerer Traumatisie-rung. Die Folge dieser Auslöschung ist die Unfähigkeit, eine empathische Beziehung zusich selbst aufrecht zu erhalten.


Aus jungianischer Sicht können wir von einem mächtigen pathogenen Komplexsprechen, den ich den ‘Prometheus-Komplex’ nennen möchte., da dieses archetypischeThema die Wucht der Emotionen zeigt, die mit einer schweren Traumatisierung einher-gehen. Ich möchte mich hier dem dynamischen Komplexverständnis anschließen, wie esvon Gustav Bovensiepen postuliert wird. Bovensiepen spricht von dem Komplex als einSub-Netzwerk, einen begrenzten Ausschnitt, aus der Matrix aller verinnerlichten Erfa-hrungen, bestehend aus inneren Arbeitsmodellen, Affekten und Erwartungsmustern.Dem in der seelischen Isolation und Erstarrung gefangenen Menschen muß die Mögli-chkeit gegeben werden, sich in geistiger Hinsicht im Therapeuten zu finden und diesbeinhaltet ebenso die ganze Bandbreite der Symbolisierungs- und Mentalisierungsakti-vität des Therapeuten.

Le esperienze traumatiche di violenza come quelle determinate dal regime comunistadella prima Repubblica Democratica Tedesca (GDR) sono ancora presenti come fos-sero accadute ieri e nonostante tutti questi anni continuano a causare gravi svantagginella vita di tutti i giorni. Di conseguenza, in caso di traumi gravissimi indotti dalla pri-gionia politica, dalla persecuzione e dall’applicazione di metodi psicologici di disinte-grazione, si verificano processi regressivi che corrodono l’Io. Il collasso della catechesi,cioè la caduta delle connessioni empatiche al momento del trauma, rappresenta lacaratteristica più forte di un grave trauma. Il risultato di questa distruzione è l’incapa-cità da parte di chi è stato traumatizzato di mantenere una intima connessione emotivaed empatica.

Mentre cerchiamo di comprendere, da un punto di vista junghiano, la psicodinamicadei traumi gravi, possiamo parlare di un potente complesso patogeno, che io chiamo ‘ilcomplesso di Prometeo’. Gustav Bovensiepen parla di questo complesso come di unarete sotterranea, un frammento limitato della matrice di tutte le esperienze interioriz-zate, che consistono di modelli operativi interni, di sentimenti e di aspettative che inte-ragiscono reciprocamente. L’essere umano intrappolato in un tale isolamento e in unatale paralisi della mente, può trovare se stesso ‘nel terapeuta’ ad un livello mentale.

Experiencias traumáticas como aquellas que resultaron del régimen comunista de laantigua República Democrática Germana están todavía presentes como si hubiesenocurrido ayer, causando severas desventajas en la vida cotidiana incluso después detodos esos años. Consecuentemente, en casos de trauma extremo inducido por encarce-lamiento político, persecución y métodos psicológicos aplicados de desintegración,procesos regresivos tienen lugar que corroan el ego. La interrupción del cathexis, esdecir, la falta de la conexión empática a la hora del trauma, es la característica másfuerte del trauma severo. Como resultado de esta destrucción para el traumatizadoexiste la inhabilidad de mantener estable una empatía interna, una conexión emocional.

Mientras intentamos agarrar, desde un punto de vista Jungiano, la psicodinámica deltrauma severo, podemos hablar de un poderoso complejo pathogenous, al cual llamo‘Complejo-Prometheus’. Gustav Bovensiepen habla de este complejo como una sub-red,un fragmento limitado de la matriz de toda experiencia interna, consistiendo de modelosinternos de trabajo, sensaciones y patrones de anticipación que trabajan mutuamente.El ser humano, capturado en tal aislamiento y paralisis de la mente, puede encontrarsea si mismo ‘en el terapeuta’ a un nivel mental.


References

Behnke, K. & Fuchs, J. (1995). Zersetzung der Seele. Hamburg: Rotbuch-Verlag.Bowlby, J. (1991). Verlust. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Taschenbuch-Verlag.Bovensiepen, G. (2002). ‘Symbolische Einstellung und Reverie als eine Grundlage der

psychotherapeutischen Behandlungstechnik’ (‘Symbolic attitude and reverie asa basis for psychotherapeutic treatment techniques’). Analytische Psychologie, 33, 2,97–117.

—— (2004). ‘Bindung – Dissoziation – Netzwerk’ (‘Attachment – Dissociation –Network’). Analytische Psychologie, 35, 1, 31–50.

Chiozza, L. (1999). ‘Body, affect and language’. Neuro-Psychoanalysis, 1, 111–124.Dennett, D. (1978). Brainstorms: Philosophical Essays on Mind and Psychology.

Montgomery, VT: Bradford Books/Hassocks, Sussex: Harvester.—— (1987). The International Stance. Cambridge, Mass: Bradford Books/MIT Press.Dieckmann, H. (1991). Komplexe. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Ferenczi, S. (1933). Sprachverwirrung zwischen den Erwachsenen und dem Kind; in:

Schriften zur Psychoanalyse. Vol. II. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer, 303–13.Fonagy, P. & Target, M. (2003). Frühe Bindung und Psychische Entwicklung. ‘Gießen:

Psychosozial-Verlag.Fordham, M. (1972). ‘Primäres Selbst, primärer Narzißmus und verwandte Theorien’.

Analytische Psychologie, 3, 189–206.Fuchs, J. (1979). Tagesnotizen. Gedichte. Hamburg: Rotbuch-Verlag.Hirsch, M. (1997). ‘Vernachlässigung, Mißhandlung, Mißbrauch im Rahmen einer

psychoanalytischen Traumatologie’. In Sexueller Mißbrauch, Mißhandlung,Vernachlässigung, eds. U. T. Egle, S.O. Hoffmann, P. Joraschky. Stuttgart:Schattauer, 103–116.

Huber, R. (1998). ‘Borderline-Struktur und die Dissoziabilität der Psyche’. AnalytischePsychologie, 29, 159–85.

Jacoby, M. (1998). Grundformen seelischer Austauschprozesse. Zürich: Walter Verlag.Jung, C. G. (1946). ‘Theoretische Überlegungen zum Wesen des Psychischen’. CW 8.Kalsched, D. (1996). The Inner World of Trauma. Archetypal Defenses of the Personal

Spirit. Hove & New York: Brunner-Routledge.Kast, V. (1998). ‘Komplextheorie gerstern und heute’. Analytische Psychologie, 29,

296–316.Kerényi, K. (1992). Die Mythologie der Griechen. Vol. I. München, dtv, 1992, 164–75.Kolk, B. van der (1996/2000). Traumatic Stress. London: Guildford Press; Paderborn:

Jungfermann Verlag.Knox, J. (2003). Archetype, Attachment, Analysis. Hove & New York: Brunner-Routledge.Krystal, H. (2001). ‘Trauma und Affekte’. In Die Gegenwart der Psychoanalyse – die

Psychoanalyse der Gegenwart, eds. W. Bohleber, S. Drews. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta,197-207.

Peichl, J. (2001). ‘Verschlossene Räume – traumatische Gefühle’. Psychotraumatologie,2, 1–24.

Seifert, W. (1998). ‘Über das Weiterleben nach dem Tode’. In Die Vergangenheit läßt unsnicht los. Erweiterte Berichte der gleichnamigen Tagung. Hamburg: Rotbuch-Verlag.

Steiner, J. (1993). Orte des seelischen Rückzugs. Pathologische Organisationen beiPsychotischen, Neurotischen und Borderline-Patienten. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1998.

Stern, D. (1985/1993). The Interpersonnel World of the Infant. New York: BasicBooks. (Die Lebenserfahrung des Säuglings. Stuttgart: Klett-Kotta).

Varvin, S. (2000). ‘Die gegenwärtige Vergangenheit. Extreme Traumatisierung undPsychotherapie’. Psyche, 54, 895–930.

Documents

Shadowed Reality or the 'Prometheus-complex' -Analytical Psychotherapy Afte