Marie-Louise von Franz and the liberation of the heart

Remo F. Roth, Ph.D

Though C.G. Jung wrote (in Psycholgical Types) that the feeling function is as rational as is the
thinking function, not too many people live this. The feeling function tells you yes or no; good or
bad; right or wrong (!). If one begins to trust the feeling function, one does not need too much
intellectual deduction anymore. One feels whether something is right or wrong. Feeling decisions
are the counterpart to logical deduction. Of course, one can also feel wrongly, as one can think
wrongly. It needs some training to learn whether a feeling is ok or not. I sense this in the region of
the heart (on the back; anahata Chakra?). There the instance lives that tells you when you feel
wrongly. It is also a corporeal reaction (of the vegetative or subtle body). For example, I experience
some sort of a cramp in the back. When I sense this I know that some complex or so disturbs my
feeling function. Then I have to listen to this cramp. It can tell me, what exactly is wrong. To do this
I use Body-Centered Imagination. I enter the subtle body and in the state of a "dimmeded
consciousness" (vegetative ego) concentrate on the heart. Then images come out of this region. By
translating them into a verbal language I can perhaps find out, what complex it is. For example:
When I am too much in ambition, this complex disturbs my feeling function. Then, for example an
image comes, in which a man gets a beat on his head. This way I realize that I have to beat my
ambition, my will (which is always power). Then I feel liberated.
A further thing that Marie-Louise von Franz tells us in the interview is that we should live our
emotions and not suppress them. She did this with me and with others. Since she was a thinking
type, her feelings/emotions were very archaic. However, she had the courage to live them. For
example, when I said something that did not fit in Jung's theory, she sometimes was "at the
ceiling" (as we say in German). She shouted and shouted and shouted. Since my feeling function is
relatively strong, I was not hurt. I just listened to her shouting, and especially did not fall into the
trap to "prove" the contrary with some intellectual "sh..." (Animus/Anima problem) I listened to her
argument, and then I went home. In many cases these outbrakes of rage had the effect that my
creativity was incredibly improved. I was able to have new thoughts and sometimes wrote a whole
(short) manuscript.
Pauli did it the other way round. When she shouted, he tried to show her with his sharp intellect that
she was wrong. This is why they did not remain friends. But nevertheless it seems that they fell in
love to each other for a short while
For a long time listening to my feeling function was not so habitual. Since I was educated in our
intellectual society where the argument that I don't feel alike has no worth (see Marie-Louise
von Franz's interview about the liberation of the heart) I repressed the feeling function. I found
back to it with the help of people with a double-bind (Gregory Bateson).When some people opened
their mouth to tell me something nice I felt/sensed the contrary emotion coming out of their belly,
namely hate. I began to undestand what double-bind means. Then I learned to listen to my belly
(belly brain; Michael Gershon). My intestines began to twist, distort. Sometimes I really had to
puke with this sensation in my belly. Today, I sense this protective sensation already in the
beginning of the discussion with such people. I ran away. I learned that it is a flight reaction that
protects me from such horrible people The funny thing is that I learned all that with people in the
Zurich Jung Institute
I did not have any experience with double-bound people. I studied economics and math. Then, I
worked as one of the first system's engineers of Europe (in 1964 or so). When I did my work not
well enough, my bosses "cited" me into their office. There they also shouted; and they were right.
If, however, I did a good job, they applauded. They were not in the double-bind neurosis. They
expressed their emotions and working in this way was pleasure.

But then I decided to enter the psychological realm. Since I was very naive, I thought that the
people there have solved such problems. However, I had to realize that I had never experienced so
much double-bind as in such institutes Today we know that such institutes attrack such people.
The heavier case of double-bind happens in borderline cases. And it seems that some institutions are
full of them (at least as B. Spillmann writes in her book C.G. Jung - Zerrissen zwischen Mythos und
Wirklichkeit (2010).
And now the trouble comes: Sometimes Jung describes the Anima as the feeling function (Hillmann
showes that he has more than 200 different definitions of the Anima in his work). Thus, am I the
Anima, or some sort of an Animus-Anima? Realizing this contradiction in Jung's Anima concept
was the first instance to doubt it. Does a feeling type have an Anima. Is he/she the Anima? One
contradiction after the other!
What I still have to learn is to puke such double-bound people into their face Perhaps I will learn
it when I am 70 years old (next year) ;-)
Thus, IMO, the "liberation of the heart" begins in the dirt. In stercore invenitur (in the dirt we find
it; namely the gold).
The last few months I worked with a woman who grew up in such a sh..y Christian atmosphere
(Salavation Army). She was nicer than nice; always!, also when she was hurt. She provoked me to
shout, as did Marie-Louise von Franz. And what happened: She began to realize that she must also
shout. Thus, we shouted to each other and this was funny, I can tell you. Then she dreamed that
she had been liberated from a (Nazi) concentration camp (she is a Jewess). She was liberated from
her cage of always beeing nice.
However, such a behaviour requires that a man (masculine being) has developed his feeling
function. This means that even in shouting he still feels the other person. If he has not developed his
feeling function, he becomes identical with his Anima (in one of Jung's definitions): He becomes
moodily and tries to hurt the woman with his horrible archaic Anima.H shoots his poisoned arrows
into her back. Not really a gentlemen-like reaction. Of course nothing else poisons a relationship
more than such a behaviour.
Thus, a woman of today is not only free to live her sexuality in her own way (as Marie-Louise von
Franz says in her interview; another subject that would be interesting to discuss), but, and even
more, free to live her emotions. It seems however that men of today are not really educated to
behave in the right way in such situations.
However, also women of the 21st century have to learn their lesson. Especially in Latin countries
they sometimes are identical with their emotions. They do not have emotions, the emotions have
them. They have to learn to be emotional and not forget their positive feelings towards a partner.
This is the great but difficult task.
On April 28, 1986, Chernobyl burnt already, I did however not yet know this, I wrote in a letter to
Marie-Louise von Franz about the idea that we have to replace (outer) motion by (inner) movement.
[In German we have the same term for movement and motion: "Bewegung." Thus we can say: "We
have the task to find back from the "usseren (outer) Bewegung" to the "inneren (inner)
Bewegung." This means that when we introject the "Bewegung," we become able to let us
psychically move anew. When I met Marie-Louise personally later, I saw that this idea of the return
to the inner movement moved her incredibly. She immediately realized that with this sentence I had
hit the core of the solution.
In the Unus Mundus Forum Ryan wrote:
I now see what you are saying. Though, I would guess that Jung managed to bridge this
split at least partially by openly including Toni Wolff in his life with Emma. Though, i
can't imagine what Emma went through. (perhaps that is why she worked on the Grail?)
2

Remo:
I do not know yet if he really bridged this split [in his love life and thus in the Eros] ...
Sure, with the concept of the Anima (that he had projected on his lovers] he had found
some sort of a solution, but I guess that this was -- at least for me as a feeling/intuition
type -- too cold a solution. I always felt that something is too one-sided with Active
Imagination, which he "invented" during this time.
Further, I experienced all these Jungian women as very cold (especially all these
lesbians in relationship to me as a man). The great exception was Marie-Louise von
Franz, who accepted her inferior feeling and lived it. This led to some heavy eruptions
because of my (a little heretical, seen from Jungian psychology) thoughts. But these
eruptions led to many of my creative insights, and this is why I don't want to miss them.
Today, all these "therapy witches" are much too much in a collective, supposed positive
feeling called empathy, since they think (!) a therapist should behave like this. The
shadow of this too conventional behaviour is then the unconscious witch, which
suddenly breaks through, or one feels the (horrible for a feeling type) double-bind: The
head expresses a positive feeling, but the belly tells you exactly the contrary. Thanks
god that in such situation I always felt my guts cramping and the sensation of puke.
Ryan:
I never followed the personal 'rumblings' of Jung's personal life that closely. It seems
they are always brought up to discredit him or knock him down a bit.
Remo:
This is exactly why I try to deal with the archetypal or even psychophysical background
that was constellated in Jung's life at the beginning of the 20th century. I am not
interested in all this gossip, but try to understand why he was forced to behave like this.
Since when one is unconsciously possessed by an archetype, one cannot behave in
another way than the archetype. In his case it was the archetype of the [Hermetic
alchemical] Holy Wedding, of which Jung was completely unconscios, and to this
archetype belongs necessarily (as much as I see) the illegitime relationship and the
illegitime child Sabina Spielrein, Maria Moltzer, Toni Wolff.
Quote: (Out of my [unpublished] ms about the archetypes constellated in Jung from
1895 [(Sances with his cousin Helly] to 1928 [Golden Flower]): In the following
section I will show the chronology of the development of Carl Jungs and Sabina
Spielreins erotic adventure and interpret the symbolism shown in it. The result will be a
diagnosis of its depth psychological or even psychophysical background described in a
scientific language of today. Once again I would like to stress that I limit myself on the
archetypal respectively psychophysical aspect of this tragedy, and do not enter the
personal, especially the ethical aspect of the behaviour of Jung as well as of Spielrein.
Further, I let the question open whether they had a sexual relationship or not.
It is important to quote what Zwi Lothane, a Jew, had wrote, who had studied much
more letters between Spielrein and Jung than Carotenuto:
As Zwi Lothane shows in the epilogue of the revised and enlarged edition of
Carotenutos book [Sabina Spielrein, Tagebuch und Briefe, Die Frau zwischen Jung und
Freud, ed. Traute Hensch, Psychosozial Verlag, Giessen, 2003, pp. 249-279] states,
3

there is not one real proof for a sexual relationship between Spielrein and Jung. In this
way, he relativizes the statements of Carotenuto and others. See especially p. 250.
Further, Lothane states that after June 1st, 1905, when she left the psychiatric clinic, no
psychoanalytical setting between the two existed anymore. Looked at the love story out
of this view, we can postulate that it was in fact a personal tragedy between the two
psychoanalysts [and not an abuse of the psychanalytical setting].
Today, I would say that living Eros is something very delicate. Marie-Louise von Franz in the
interview above: "Today, a woman [and also a man; RFR] can life her sexual life in the way she
likes."
It is too easy just to hide behind moral laws. In MDR Jung writes about the difference between
collective moral and individual ethics. Suffering this conflict is the real thing! He had surely
suffered of the "menage trois".
It seems however that making love with Toni Wolf was necessary for Carl Jung for the developing
of his further ideas. Before he decided to have a sexual relationship with her he swam in the lake
and had a cramp. He almost drowned. Then he promised to take her as a lover (+/- 1914).
These are situations, in which a moral law does not help at all. It even can bring death to you. One
has to decice on the level of individual ethics. This is much more difficult than just follow the Ten
Commandments. Too many people preach water and drink wine (as we say in German).
Thus, I guess we should not judge Carl Jung with the help of too many moral prejudices, since he
was forced by what he later called the Self to do many things which most people would call crazy or
immoral. He had to try, and in MDR he says that he had to go 1000 detours. Only in this way he had
found his real life, the individuation process he had to live.
The situation with Sabina Spielrein was much more complicated. There it seems that he had cut off
the relationship to her, also because of Bourgois' collective moral. Three times Emma liked to
divorce him. See D. Bair.
I am sure that Marie-louise von Franz thought alike. She never had moral prejudices re living the
Eros. We always were able to talk about all this in a very open, refreshing and nonprejudiced way.
I liked further that Marie-louise von Franz did not live the double-bind, which is so much
widespread in psychoanalysis. This is why she had the courage to live her inferior feelings. This is
one of the big differences between her and all these "therapy witches." Since she had the same type
as Jung (thinking/intuition), the same "personal equation," she experienced Jung's typology exactly
as he described it in Psychological Types.
According to Spillmann (see above) such "transference clique behaviour" is present in most
psychoanalytical institutes, in Jungians and Freudians. As the outer representative of the Institute
she surely had many connections with other institutes, and thus knows what she is writing about.
Thus, I believe her
Living the true Eros would mean to scrutinize such transference. Otherwise one "loves" and hates,
but cannot come to a objective judgement of the situation from a little distance. This is what
happens too much in psychoanalytical circles
This is also what happens with C.G. Jung. Also in these FaceBook groups dealing with C.G. Jung,
Marie-louise von Franz and Wolfgang Pauli The unconscious Anima and/or the Animus distort
the meaning of what people write One becomes moody and/or dogmatic. Such behaviour is the
death of such threads/groups/discussions.

Optional Neurosis in C.G. Jung's and Marie-louise von Franz's view, Part 1:
Very many people do not have what Carl Jung calls an individuation process. They just live and are
lucky in going on in repressing, in being split without any consequences. As long as this split is no
problem for them, it is really no problem and they do not need any psychologist, psychiatrist or
psychotherapist.
Carl Jung distinguished between a "normal" neurosis and a so-called optional neurosis [in German
it is "fakultative Neurose", i.e., facultative neurosis, which is IMO a much better expression]. I
deeply doubt the possibility of healing a normal neurosis with the help of Jung's psychological
means. However, it is a great tool for people with a facultative neurosis.
Optional Neurosis in C.G. Jung's and Marie-louise von Franz's view, Part 2:
Jung writes of the latter (MDR, p. 166-7):
Among the so-called neurotics of our day there are a good many who in other ages
would not have been neurotic -- that is, divided against themselves. If they had lived in a
period and in a milieu in which man was still linked by myth with the world of the
ancestors, and thus with nature truly experienced and not merely seen from outside, they
would have been spared this division within themselves.
I am speaking of those who cannot tolerate the loss of myth and who can neither find a
way to a merely exterior world, to the world as seen by science, nor rest satisfied with
an intellectual juggling with words, which has nothing whatsoever to do with wisdom.
These victims of the psychic dichotomy of our time are merely optional [facultative]
neurotics; their apparent morbidity drops away the moment the gulf between the ego
and the unconscious is closed.
These "facultative neurotics" have a deeply religious problem (in its original meaning). Therefore
finding a relationship with the deepest roots of the collective unconscious is vitally important to
them. IMO, these roots have a lot to do with its yin aspect, with what I call the Eros Self.

Optional Neurosis in C.G. Jung's and Marie-louise von Franz's view, Part 3:
Carl Jung continues:
"The doctor who has felt this dichotomy to the depths of his being will also be able to
reach a better understanding of the unconscious psychic processes, and will be saved
from the danger of inflation to which the psychologist is prone.
The doctor who does not know from his own experience the numinosity of the
archetypes will scarcely be able to escape their negative effect when he encounters it in
his practice. He will tend to over- or underestimate it, since he possesses only an
intellectual point of view but no empirical criterion. This is where those perilous
5

aberrations begin, the first of which is the attempt to dominate everything by the
intellect."
Exactly this is the point. I do not believe anymore that too many Jungians have really experienced
the numinosity of the archetypes. They have an intellectual idea of them but did never touch them
with their soul. Thus the "perilous aberrations".

Optional Neurosis in C.G. Jung's and Marie-louise von Franz's view, Part 4:
Then the master as also Marie-Louise von Franz did critizises his followers directly:
This serves the secret purpose of placing both doctor and patient at a safe distance from
the archetypal effect and thus from real experience, and of substituting for psychic
reality an apparently secure, artificial, but merely two-dimensional conceptual world in
which the reality of life is well covered up by so-called clear concepts. Experience is
stripped of its substance, and instead mere names are substituted, which are henceforth
put in the place of reality.
And then:
"No one has any obligations to a concept; that is what is so agreeable about
conceptuality -- it promises protection from experience. The spirit does not dwell on
concepts, but in deeds and in facts. Words butter no parsnips; nevertheless, this futile
procedure is repeated ad infinitum.

Optional Neurosis in C.G. Jung's and Marie-louise von Franz's view, Part 5:
Then he becomes very caustic:
In my experience, therefore, the most difficult as well as the most ungrateful patients,
apart from habitual liars, are the so-called intellectuals. With them, one hand never
knows what the other hand is doing. They cultivate a 'compartment psychology.'
Anything can be settled by an intellect that is not subject to the control of felling and
yet the intellectual still suffers from a neurosis if feeling is undeveloped.
These statements are of course not only true for "patients", but also for "doctors", because in
Jungian Institutes the patients become "doctors."

The main criticism of Marie-Louise von Franz was:

1. "The Jung Institute does not follow Jung anymore."
2. "Jungians do not interpret dreams in a correct way anymore."
To a correct dream interpretation see:
http://unus-mundus.fr/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=52&p=186&hilit=invasion+woodman#p186
6

And here Jung's criticism on his followers:

There was once a queer old man who lived in a cave, where he had sought refuge from
the noise of the villages. He was reputed to be a sorcerer, and therefore he had disciples
who hoped to learn the art of sorcery from him. But he himself was not thinking of any
such thing. He was only seeking to know what it was that he did not know, but which, he
felt certain, was always happening. After meditating for a very long time on that which
is beyond meditation, he saw no other way of escape from his predicament than to take
a piece of red chalk and draw all kinds of diagrams on the walls of his cave, in order to
find out what that which he did not know might look like. After many attempts he hit on
the circle. 'That's right,' he felt, 'and now for a quadrangle inside it! which made it
better still. His disciples were curious; but all they could make out was that the old man
was up to something, and they would have given anything to know what he was doing.
But when they asked him: 'What are you doing here?' he made no reply. Then they
discovered the diagrams on the wall and said: 'That is it!' and they all imitated the
diagram. But in so doing they turned the whole process upside down, without noticing
it: they anticipated the result in the hope of making the process repeat itself which had
led to the result. This is how it happened then and how it still happens today.
Carl G. Jung, CW 9/I, 233
Since they are not looking for their own (!) lonely individuation process, they will die out and
Jungianism will end in the grave
Dieckmann, a writer and psychoanalyst calls this mentality "Mandala decorated ivory tower."
I must say that I prefer my "primitive tower," my little flat where in a very lonely way I am writing
on my manuscripts
And I feel that also in this group there are some people who look for and have found their own
individuation process.
One of the most horrible mistakes one can make is to develop a strict method of doing
psychoanalysis. This was at least the idea of Marie-Louise von Franz. She always said to me: Remo,
you have to find your own way. When I began to work with physically sick people she said: You see,
with these people you have to turn around the whole process. You have to begin at the end. These
people have deeply archetypal dreams. Thus the occupation with the collective unconscious comes
first. Then, perhaps, you can deal with their Shadow and Anima. If you turn the whole thing around,
you are correct.
Association versus "Reflection" about a Dream:
http://unus-mundus.fr/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=126&p=2192&hilit=association+reflection
+dream#p2192
In dealing with the difference between transformation processes, the archetypal background of
Neoplatonic science, and transmutation processes, the archetypal background of Hermetic science, I
came back to the process 2 above [see http://unus-mundus.fr/viewtopic.php?
f=20&t=126&p=2192&hilit=association+reflection+dream#p2192 ].
Carl Jungs postulated a causal theory of depth psychology, in which the transformation
of inner spirit-psyche (objective psychic energy) is observable (dreams). In this way we
get more knowledge about our Shadow and Anima aspects.This is why the negentropy of
7

conscious inner spirit-psyche (conscious objective psychic energy = knowlege of the

ego) is increased, higher order is created in our mind.
This statement contains a discrepance, since on the one hand it is a causal theory (the
dream compensates, ie reacts on the conscious situation), and on the other I assume
that with the help of the interpretation, ie by the cognition of the meaning, the
negentropy of the inner spirit-psyche is increased.
The discrepance is solved if we emphasize the way Carl Jung interpreted dreams (and
how I learned it from Marie-Louise von Franz): Dream > associations > interpretation.
A real association is in fact an increase of the negentropy of the conscious inner spiritpsyche, ie a transmutation, an "inner quantum leap." When the meaning of the dream
suddenly breaks through, this increase of the negentropy respectively this transmutation
has incarnated into the consciousness. Thus, also a dream interpretation according to
Carl Jung's and Marie-Louise von Franz' method is in fact an increase of negentropy.
We call this the insight in the meaning of the dream. The latter is always a deeply
moving experience, an experience we feel with the help of the introverted feeling
function.
If, however, one "reflects" about a dream thinking replaces the association phase ,
as it is obviously usual in modern Jungian circles, one does not get an increased
negentropy, a transmutation in the spirit-psyche, a deeper meaning. One just replaces
an X by an Y, as for example in the statement: "The elephant is a theriomorphic aspect
of the Self." Nothing new is really created. We can go on with the bear, the tiger, the
turtle, and all the other animals. They all are theriomorphic aspects of the Self.
This is why it is so important to follow the association process, as I showed it in http://unusmundus.fr/viewtopic.php?p=186&highlight#186

It was one of Marie-Louise von Franz's deepest concerns to show people this specific way of dream
interpretation that C.G. Jung developed. Today, I am convinced that a good association is acausally
related to the dream contents with which one associates. To do this, one has to consciously abandon
the dream. One should treat it with the method of the world association test C.G. Jung developed.
Write the contents which move you most (feeling function!) on a sheet of paper and try to find the
first, the most spontaneous associations. Then suddenly, in a second acausal event, the meaning
arises and comes into your mind a creative dream interpretation happens, in which something
really new is created (as the effect of the spontaneous, i.e., acausal association and interpretation). It
is a real incarnation act that happens in your conscious mind.

Distortion of the Psychological Functions:

I have seen during the last years that a new science must have in mind what Carl Jung called the
"personal equation." He introduced it as a means in depth psychology with the help of which
everyone can realize that every theory is onesided. For example Carl Jung's depth psychology is
insofar onesided as it is created by what he called an thinking/intuitition type. Such a scientist is on
8

the one hand very speculative, and on the other he represses (first) his feeling and sensation
function.
The contrary of such an intuitive thinking type is the feeling/sensation type. It seems that Carl
Jung's wife, Emma Jung-Rauschenbach, was such a type. This means also that she lived his "other
side" and like this Carl Jung was never forced to really develop his sensation and feelings. IMO, it
was this onesidedness, which was responsable for the fact that his depth psychology remained
Neoplatonic. [The latter means that the good spirit/psyche must be extracted from (evil) matter,
which means also the development of what I call the Logos ego (conscious spirit-psyche) instead of
what I call today the Eros ego.]
My typology is intuition/feeling. We can imagine that such a type develops, if at all, a different
theory than Jung's. The natural development of such a type is however to become an artist. This is
what I did when I learned autodidacticaly sculpturing and playing some music instruments (and
become a song writer).
However, because of my severe disease and a resulting handicap (since then I'm limping) in the
early childhood, I was not able to become an artist. Since I am handicapped, I had to develop my
thinking and thus to study something. I did not exactly know what, thus I decided to do general
studies (like the universal scholars of the middle ages). Only much later I realized that also
Wolfgang Pauli had such a background (of course much broader than mine).
This "distortion" is why as an intuition/feeling type I am able to write in a scientific language.
Further, my mathematical studies helped me to learn to think more or less consistently. However, I
can only think what I am interested in. This is a typical handicap of a feeling type. I was very
astonished when I realized during my studies at the universities that there are people who can also
think about things they detest completely. I could never, since my feeling function rebels
immediately.
Thus, one very important aspect of my specific individuation process was and still is to bring
together all the four functions that Carl Jung described in his early book Psychological Types. This
is a specific trouble of people who suffer a so-called "distortion neurosis" (C.G. Jung). But, as
Marie-Louise von Franz shows in her book "Lectures on Jung's Typology, Part 1: The Inferior
Function," if they realize their distortion, they immediately switch back into their main function,
have however already well developed the other functions. They use all the four functions very
easily.
For typological remarks above see Marie-Louise von Franz: On Jungs Typology The Inferior
Function.
Marie-Louise von Franz in "Lectures on Jung's Typology, Part 1: The Inferior Function, p. 3-4:
Some people have trouble in finding out their own type, which is very often due to the
fact that they are distorted types. This is not a very frequent occurrence, but it does
happen in cases where someone would naturally have become a feeling type or an
intuitive, but was forced by the surrounding atmosphere to develop another function.
Suppose a boy is born a feeling type in an intellectually ambitioous family. His
surroundings will exert pressure upon him to become an intellectual, and his original
predisposition as a feeling type will be thwarted or despised. Usually, in such case, he is
unable to become a thinking type: that would be on step too far. But he might well
develop sensation and intuition, one of the auxiliary functions, so as to be relatively
better adapted to his surroundings: his main function is simply 'out' in the milieu in
which he grows up.
9

Distorted types have advantages and disadvantages. The disadvantage is that from the
very beginning they cannot develop their main disposition: they therefore remain a bit
below the mark they would have reached had they developed in the one-sided way. On
the other hand, they have been forced ahead of time into doing something which in the
second half of life they would have had to do anyway. In analysis one can very often
help people switch back to the original type, and they are then able to pick up the other
function very quickly and reach a developed stage, for the original disposition is a help
in that direction. They are like fish which can now return happily to the water.
This happend to me, since I am disabled. Career advisers said to me: Since you are disabled you
cannot learn an intelligent profession; you must study. [Yes, this happened in 1959 or so in
Switzerland ;-)
Marie-Louise von Franz said to me: You are somewhere between feeling and intuition. She realized
my distortion and I owe her my having found back to my true typology.
Without knowing my true typology, I began to become a musician (feeling function) and song
writer, and a sculpturer (sensation function). In this way I created for example my stone "Sulamith":

Also the creation of my mandala "Mr. Red has married Mrs. White" has to do with my interest in
arts. I loved to create with the help of geometric tools like the compass and the straightedge. This is
why I studied first engineering.

Only when my feelings are with the subject, I can think relatively well and write my theoretical
books. However, in my profession as a healer I use much more my feeling and my intuition
function; besides what I call the vegetative sensation function, the function that is related to the
"inner aspect of the body", the subtle body.
This is how I mostly experienced Marie-Louise von Franz, in a deeply introverted state.

Marie-Louise von Franz

The grave of Barbara Hannah and

Marie-Louise von Franz
10

Marie-Louise von Franz with Nibby in Ksnacht.

Courtesy of Marie-Anne von Franz

Laura, the successor of Nibby loved me so much! And I loved her. She always ran to me full of joy
when I entered the door at Kuesnacht. She looked so ugly. And this I liked. Laura even liked to
make love with me ;-) True!
As a peasant boy I love animals, especially dogs and toads; and so did Marie-Louise.
The von Franz family as refugees in Rheineck, Eastern Switzerland:

The von Franz family in Rheineck, ca 1928.

Courtesy of Marie-Anne von Franz
11

As a half-Austrian I was able to understand Marie-Louise von Franz since we had the same roots.
Austrians were not esteemed in Switzerland in these times (an in my youth). Swiss people always
made "Austrian jokes." By this, marginalize them as idiots Also Pauli was such an "idiot." Since
he was a Jew the Swiss government twice refused his naturalization. Then, in 1945, when he
received the Nobel award, it could not happen fast enough Switzerland! [One part of it; the
snobs :-(
The Swiss Government, parts of it very Nazi-friendly, did not naturalize him (because he was
Jewish) though he was in danger to be deported to a concentration camp. Under dramatic
circumstances, together with his wife he flew to Princeton, USA. He and his wife took one of the
last trains from Zurich to Marseille, France and then to Spain and Lissabon (Lisboa, Portugal) [This
is perhaps why I like Lisboa so much]. There they took one of the last vessels to the US. This was
Pauli's reality in Switzerland of 1940 [See letter 31P in Atom and Archetype]. Since his wife was a
communist he was in a really great danger. The appeasement of the Swiss Government. Shame to it,
for ever!
But thanks God (or better: the Goddess) Hitler was not interested in the nuclear bomb since its
construction was only possible because of the discoveries of Jews; Einstein especially And, as
you perhaps know, Hitler was completely possessed by Black Magic (and projected it into the
Jews).
Pauli and Einstein, however, refused to participate with constuction of the bomb.
http://paulijungunusmundus.eu/MarieLouseVonFranzMarieAnneVonFranzMotherVonFranz.jpg
Right above: already the critical mind that is living in her eyes
Marie-Louise once said to me: It needs eight generations to really be integrated in a country. 250
years! I think that I will not mangage this anymore during this life. She neither did. And thus
Zurichberg women (and Zurichberg people, the bourgoisie of Zurich in general) hated her
incredibly. Jalousy, envy, etc. Austrian jokes :-(
Here is MLvF's "Tower" in Bollingen: http://paulijungunusmundus.eu/
MarieLouiseVonFranzTowerBollingen.jpg
Once in the early ninties I visited Marie-Louise in her "Tower". She sat on the table. During our talk
she was eating. Then Barbara Hannah came down from the second floor. She stopped in the middle
of the staircase, perplexed She shouted: My goodness [very British, she was] you are eating
yourself, without any help...? And you are even able to cut the meet ?
Only then I was able to realize that our talk (and my presence?) had given her so much energy that
she was able to eat without any help. This is perhaps why she continued our relationship almost up
until the end. She was extremely intersted in the topics I wrote above.
As I wrote in another place, before, in 1989, we had a horrible battle about the Seal of Solomon.
After she had supported my writings very much (she even had proposed to write a Foreword to "I
Cercatori di Dio") she suddenly changed her mind and did not accept my thoughts anymore (I
possess a letter of her as a proof). Though she had also written about the Swiss Saint Nicholas von
Flue's "Radbild," the wheel image with its double-triadic structure in her book about him (it is very
similar to the Seal of Solomon). Then she did some Active Imagination and then she was able to
write the Foreword. In it she accepts that besides the quaternity, Jung's and her God-image, there is
the Seal of Solomon the heart Chakra (See cover of "Return I"). It seems that the "radiation" of
the Seal had changed her mind.
12

About the idea of a biography

The biographer will have a hard work to do. As long as there are too many people who are still in
what one calls a "transference dependency" they cannot talk objectively about Marie-Louise von
Franz. They idealize, as they do with C.G. Jung, and cannot see the real human behind their
transference projections. If the biographer cannot see this, it is an impossible work.
How this happens today in the Zurich Jung Institute Brigitte Spillmann, the former president of the
Institute (from 1997 to 2007), describes in her book C.G. Jung, Zerrissen zwischen Mythos und
Wirklichkeit. ber die Folgen persnlicher und kollektiver Spaltungen im tiefenpsychologischen
Erbe, Psychosozial Verlag, Giessen, Germany, 2010
I know that Marie-Louise von Franz was very realistic about her. She knew that she was a human
being with all her flaws. However, she had analyzed her Shadow very deeply. For example she had
found out that her Shadow was a peasant's woman (she was brought up in a very Bourgois family).
[What I already realized when I saw her first.] This is why she was able to live this Shadow
consciously. Sometimes she was very rude; she told me some "nice jokes", for example jokes that
one cannot talk about in "better circles." And then she laughed about her rude jokes. She wrote
about Jung, how he was able to laugh in this way. And she learned to live this Bourgeois Shadow in
the same way. (As I did and do.)
All this has to do with living the Eros, the relationships, in a conscious way. To do so, one has
however first to analyze the Shadow [and the Anima in men who always distorts one's own and the
thoughts of others. Seems also to happen here sometimes :-( ]
Once an American woman came for an interview about Marie-Louise von Franz. She liked to write
a biography on Marie-Louise von Franz. I presented the material I am writing now about in this and
in other fb groups. After a while I got the chapter about Marie-Louise von Franz. No word about the
(perhaps) 100 statements I had given to her. It seems that she was very disappointed. Then she
changed the topic. She wrote a dissertation with the title "The Archetype of the Disciple" What
did I write above? " Transference dependency.
Sad Lisa
She hangs her head and cries on my shirt.
She must be hurt very badly.
Tell me what's making you sadly?
Open your door, don't hide in the dark.
You're lost in the dark, you can trust me.
'Cause you know that's how it must be.
Lisa Lisa, sad Lisa Lisa.
Her eyes like windows, tricklin' rain
Upon her pain getting deeper.
Though my love wants to relieve her.
13

She walks alone from wall to wall.

Lost in a hall, she can't hear me.
Though I know she likes to be near me.
Lisa Lisa, sad Lisa Lisa.
She sits in a corner by the door.
There must be more I can tell her.
If she really wants me to help her.
I'll do what I can to show her the way.
And maybe one day I will free her.
Though I know no one can see her.
Lisa Lisa, sad Lisa Lisa.
When I worked with deeply depressed and even with psychotic humans I began to sing and play to
them Cat Steven's songs. My favorite was Sad Lisa.
I once told this Marie-Louise von Franz. The result was surprising! She shouted at me as if I had
done a devil's deed.
But I went on singing, since I saw that it was good for these humans.
Only today I see the background of our conflict: Marie-Louise von Franz, Freud and Jung and all
psychoanalysts: With the help of the verbal dealing with the "unconscious" during the
psychoanalytical procedure they try to liberate the good spirit out of evil matter (repressed
instincts).
Carl Jung's synchronicity theory and the preconscious knowledge of the collective
unconscious are however Hermetic. Thus, as W. Pauli saw first, Jung's theory is based
on a contradiction. It is causal as well as acausal. This conflict neither Jung nor MLvF
were able to solve during their earthly life.
I however am a Hermetic "alchemist." I try to experience the miracle. This one cannot
with the help of the Logos, we need the Eros. For example by singing songs.
God's turd not purified:
I got Ronald Haymans biography A Life of Jung in the library, since I like to inform me a little more
about his relationship with Sabina Spielrein.
But the first section I read by chance is about his vision of God's turd. P. 439 Hayman writes:
The auntifiers
[RFR: The original term by Jung is "die Tantifizierung", meaning that his explanations for MDR are
now (in 1960) falsified in the style of the old aunts; exactly the people I experiences at the so-called
C.G. Jung Institute ... -- except Marie-Louise von Franz]
also felt entitled to tamper damagingly with his language. ... One of the turning points in his
life he calls it the key to everthing occurred when he was eleven. In the dictated material, he
14

turns at least seven times to the dream or vision of the shitting God ... Talking to Jaff in March
1957 ... he said God shat on the cathedral and the turd was so enormous that the roof collapsed
under its weight. That was how he worded it ... but the wording was changed when she [Jaff] and
members of the family joined forced to eliminate the most offensive of his indiscretions. But it
would have been out of character for him to sidestep into such cirumlocutions as
God sits on His golden throne, high above the world and from under the throne an
enormous turd falls upon the sparkling new roof, shatters it, and breaks the walls of the
cathedral asunder.
as it is written in MDR.
Perhaps with this example one can understand how Carl Jung was falsified tampered, as Hayman
says. The original tone I experienced with Marie-Louise von Franz, who is also tampered now.
However, as Hayman writes (p. 3):
In the descriptions of Jung, the word peasant and natural keep recurring because he
seemed so completely natural, and he had a kind of peasant-like instinct with a highly
cultivated mind.
Deirdre Bair called this "auntification" the "Zrichberg Pelzmntel" behaviour, circumscribing with
this term the bourgeois behaviour of all these rich but instinctless people of the better quarters of
Zrich.

Carl Jung's Turd:

When I read first the biography by Deirdre Bair, I for the first time saw that there are so-called
"Protocols", the original "MDR", in the direct and unflattering language of Carl Jung. But they were
falsified "auntified" as Carl Jung said.
Further, his disciples liked to cancel the "weird" passages and mostly they succeeded. Bair writes
for example p. 613:
There was one point, however, on which all those who meddled with Jung's text were
united: that he must delete a long, rambling account of his two visits to Ravenna
because they were factually incorrect. Jung could not be persuaded even by Cary, who
told him that to include it would make him look 'crazy.'
'That settles it,' Jung shouted. 'The chapter stays in. I want the book to look crazy!'
Thus, we have to wait until the "Protocols" are published to learn the truth about the real Jung
who wrote so scientifically but talked like a real Swiss peasant.
To understand all this, it is perhaps important to show a little the situation in Switzerland. In the east
of the country, the region of the Lake of Constance (Canton Thurgau), Saint Gall and also
Schaffhouse (Rhinefalls), where Carl Jung grew up, people are much more direct than in Zurich.
I'm coming myself from the Lake of Constance, thus I know what I'm talking of. This directness
helps people very much not to be too sneaky, and this way they live much more honest
relationships. It is exactly the contrary to the Zrichberg Pelzmntel atmosphere.
This was at least true when I grew up. Today it is perhaps a little different.
This directness and honesty was also what Marie-Louise von Franz appreciated in the region of her
"Tower" in Bollingen, Saint Gall near the one of Jung. There were not so many snakes there.
15

Thus, there is a great danger that also MLvF will be "auntified." This is why I am writing all this.
One should know the whole truth
When we once talked about theological metaphysics, she said:
God is surely not an old man (God father) and/or a young man (Jesus Christ) and/or a
dove (The Holy Ghost).
Such statements belong to the violation of epistemological principles, or expressed in Marie-Louise
von Franz' ironic words: People who talk this way have had tea with God Himself. This is why they
know all this.
What she liked to say: The difference between CGJ and theologists is the fact that he speaks of God
as an inner experience (and in this way becomes a modern mystic). He always talked about the
God-image that we can only experience in our inside. This is empirical language, and not
theological metaphysics. The Christian mystics had the same problem with the dogmatic priests.
You're a God -- F*** Like One:
This is a motto of the hippies Marie-Louise von Franz quotes it in her Jung biography. This is
why (and also because of personal experiences I had with her) I know that she is with us in this
discussion.
In my big crisis in '73 I dreamt a repeating dream:
The white Goddess came to me in my bed and said: "Come down with your head to my
c***." I immediately knew that she asked me to make 69
This was then I was 29 a big shock.
In 2006, in the ms about Jung's time from 1895 (Sance with his cousin Helly) to 1928 ("Golden
Flower") I wrote about the "turd creation" of Sabina Spielrein; she was convinced that she created
and incarnated new "children" herself (withouth the help of a man) and thus was very fascinated by
her turds. I began to realize that this so-called delusion meant that in her the archetype of the selffertilization of the Goddess was constellated; th Goddess liked to create out of herself, without the
sperm of a man, since she has an own procreation organ in herself. The piss means the same thing,
perhaps a little more fluid. It is what I call today the acausal inner quantum leap, a creation
phenomenon of the World Soul that we can observe in ourselves. It is the counter-creation principle
to the one of the Christian God and since She is a natural woman, she tries to express this
situation with the help of natural means.
I had to learn that the Goddess talks about all this with the help of these worlds: F***, sh**, pi**,
fart and so on.
The difference to our usual way of expressing these natural things in an aggressive way (what I
never understood!) is however that when She talks about all this, she means
A HOLY F***, A HOLY SH**, A HOLY FART, A HOLY PISS
It seems that in this way natural things come DEIFIED back to us humans.
This seems to be the DEIFICATION OF THE BODY AND ITS NATURAL FUNCTIONS (a topic
of Hermetic alchemy)
16

It seems further that we have only the chance to accept this HOLYNESS of s***ing, f***ing,
pissing and f***ing in this CRAZY way or to get really CRAZY.
It's a pity that Marie-Louise von Franz is not able anymore to hear this. Or perhaps she can: Based
on other experiences I know that in the Beyond she listens to my words, and laughes, and laughes,
and laughes. She likes my idea, derivated from Hermetic alchemy, that the woman can procreate
and incarnate herself, without the help of a man (the Logos principle). It is the acausal icarnation
that we ape now with artificial fission.
And after having made love with my parter, the Goddess, the World Soul, the anima mundi sends us
almost incredible dreams about the creation and recreation of the world and the universe.
Believe it or not!
This is modern Hermeticism and Marie-Louise von Franz likes it, I am sure.
In this way Eros comes back into our world. On the personal and on the collective level (World
Soul). We are back to "the recreation of the Eros principle," Marie-Louise talked of in one of her
last articles she wrote, an article in which she wrote about the restitution of the Eros priniple in our
world
With this remark I end my comments on the real Marie-Louise von Franz.

Remo F. Roth, Ph.D

http://paulijungunusmundus.eu/

17