A Study of Hysteria in Women

It seems that the manner in which archetypal patterns show themselves and work in the hysterical personality has failed to arouse much interest among analytical psychologists, at least as far as the literature suggests. This may be because hysteria, as a “caricature of the normal” (Jung, , p. 68). has intrigued us less than the bizarre world of the schizophrenic which presents such a challenge to the understanding and has led us into the strange places of the collective unconscious. Most of the references to hysteria seem to do little more than mention the hysterial attitude in comparison with the attitude of schizophrenics and are mainly descriptive. Already in Jung's early works, however, there are some observations on hysteria which go beyond description and are vital for our theme.

In “Association, Dream and Hysterical Symptoms” (1906), where Jung developed his theory of complexes, he wrote (p. 394):

“In hysteria, the complex has an abnormal autonomy, and leads to an active separate existence which progressively degrades and destroys the constellating power of the ego complex. A new morbid personality is then gradually created whose tendencies, judgments, and resolutions proceed entirely in the direction of the will to disease. The remainder of the normal ego is absorbed by the second personality and forced into the role of a secondary dominated complex.”

Jung then suggests that a practical method of treatment for hysteria is to introduce a “new complex” in order to free the ego from the dominance of the morbid complex. All analysts know how difficult it is to introduce anything “new”. Most interpretations are either seized upon by the morbid complex and, if need be, mutilated in order to feed the complex, or else they are dodged, disregarded, or trampled on by the subservient ego. The crucial questions arising from these observations are, what is the nature of the morbid complex in hysteria and what is the role of the dominated ego in relation to it? An answer to