A Terrible Love of War

Rating:
Summary: James Hillman goes to war....
Review: Archetypal psychology has lacked an exploration of war and its deeper dimensions. This clearly written book not only fills the breach, it invites the reader to look into the heart of war: into the destruction, the religious fascination, and even the love that permeate warfare. Topics under discussion include the media role in aggression; accounts spoken and written by soldiers under fire; the mythic structures behind the American fascination with guns; and what psychology and philosophy have had to say about one of the oldest human pastimes--all in sparkling prose and flavored with anecdotes and examples.

To Christian readers I would recommend considering Hillman's view that Christianity has been martial from the start as a challenge to examine the relationship between the Christian emphasis on love and innocence and its long institutional history of intolerance and brutality. Is warfare endemic to Christianity? Are Christians who reject warfare exceptions to an almost universal aggressiveness? Must Christianity be a religion of missionaries who think they know better than the peoples they seek to convert? These are some of the questions raised by Hillman's study.

Hillman also brings new emphasis to a heavily underrated factor in American aggression: hypocrisy. How is it that we select as leaders (and do adults really need leaders to begin with? Indigenous cultures got on fine with wise elders and mentors) the most insincere and immature among us? Why is it (as Aaron Kipnis puts it) an old boy's club instead of a gathering of wise old men? What does it do to us, these deceptive speeches and these Orwellian justifications (war for peace; "democracy" from the top down; "pre-emptions" that precede nothing but endless cycles of violence)? And from the therapist's point of view: how does living in a nation addicted to unending warfare and cheap, finger-pointing patriotism impact the work we do with our clients?

Hillman's archetypalizing of warfare by bringing it home to the altar of Mars is an elegant move, but for me it always raises the concern: are we eternalizing something that ought to be analyzed as a cultural institution? In a book I'm preparing for publication (The Tears of Llorona; look for it here at Amazon.com around late July or early August 2004) I cite recent research by archeologist R. Brian Ferguson that the evidence for organized warfare only goes back as far as organized civilization. Hillman is correct to dwell on the archetypal aspects--a "ta'wil" move of bringing something back to its ultimate foundations--and while he never makes this a "war is inevitable" justification for armed aggression, I'm wondering if the social-economic-cultural aspect, which he's clearly aware of, needs more mention.

In a recent discussion at the Pacifica Graduate Institute, Hillman told me about how it was to visit the Civil War battlefields he mentions in his book. I was moved to see how deeply he felt about what for him is not a merely academic or intellectual interest. "The blood of our brothers cries out from the land," he said, and although he agreed with my phrasing it as "the return of the historically repressed," he did the subject much dearer justice by cohering so closely to the experience as it struck him.

Rating:
Summary: James Hillman goes to war....
Review: Archetypal psychology has lacked an exploration of war and its deeper dimensions. This clearly written book not only fills the breach, it invites the reader to look into the heart of war: into the destruction, the religious fascination, and even the love that permeate warfare. Topics under discussion include the media role in aggression; accounts spoken and written by soldiers under fire; the mythic structures behind the American fascination with guns; and what psychology and philosophy have had to say about one of the oldest human pastimes--all in sparkling prose and flavored with anecdotes and examples.

To Christian readers I would recommend considering Hillman's view that Christianity has been martial from the start as a challenge to examine the relationship between the Christian emphasis on love and innocence and its long institutional history of intolerance and brutality. Is warfare endemic to Christianity? Are Christians who reject warfare exceptions to an almost universal aggressiveness? Must Christianity be a religion of missionaries who think they know better than the peoples they seek to convert? These are some of the questions raised by Hillman's study.

Hillman also brings new emphasis to a heavily underrated factor in American aggression: hypocrisy. How is it that we select as leaders (and do adults really need leaders to begin with? Indigenous cultures got on fine with wise elders and mentors) the most insincere and immature among us? Why is it (as Aaron Kipnis puts it) an old boy's club instead of a gathering of wise old men? What does it do to us, these deceptive speeches and these Orwellian justifications (war for peace; "democracy" from the top down; "pre-emptions" that precede nothing but endless cycles of violence)? And from the therapist's point of view: how does living in a nation addicted to unending warfare and cheap, finger-pointing patriotism impact the work we do with our clients?

Hillman's archetypalizing of warfare by bringing it home to the altar of Mars an elegant move, but for me it always raises the concern: are we eternalizing something that ought to be analyzed as a cultural institution? In a book I'm preparing for publication (The Tears of Llorona) I cite recent research by archeologist R. Brain Ferguson that the evidence for organized warfare only goes back as far as organized civilization. Hillman is correct to dwell on the archetypal aspects--a "ta'wil" move of bringing something back to its ultimate foundations--and while he never makes this a "war is inevitable" justification for armed aggression, I'm wondering if the social-economic-cultural aspect, which he's clearly aware of, needs more mention.

In a recent discussion at the Pacifica Graduate Institute, Hillman told me about how it was to visit the Civil War battlefields he mentions in his book. I was moved to see how deeply he felt about what for him is not a merely academic or intellectual interest. "The blood of our brothers cries out from the land," he said, and although he agreed with my phrasing it as "the return of the historically repressed," he did the subject much dearer justice by cohering so closely to the experience as it struck him.

Rating:
Summary: The best Hillman on War and Love
Review: Hillman has written a great book. In my opinion it outperforms "The soul's code". Great job!

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant
Review: Hillman shows formidable scholarship as he takes the reader through a tour of western civilization in terms of man's propensity for aggression against his own species. This book will not persuade those who dogmatically insist that man is essentially a loving creature, but it will prove to many readers that violence is as much a part of human nature as kindness. War is mankind's ineluctable destiny.

Rating:
Summary: One sided attack on Christianity
Review: I work as a therapist. In my work I have been positively influenced by the Jungian tradition, including James Hillman & Thomas Moore. I read this book hoping to gain a deeper understand the archetypal foundations of war. However I struggled to stay with Hillman. I struggled to stay with the details the horrors of war included in the book. War sickens me. I will not watch violent films or violent television. I struggle to watch war and acts of terrorism on the news. I already know. Enough is enough. My stuff... I know, but if you're like me; avoid this book. I also struggled to stay with Hillman because I am positively influenced by the inner core of Christianity. (I am also deeply critical of much of what passes for Christianity and often struggle to describe myself as Christian because of the stereotypes now associated with the word 'Christian'.) I believe that beneath the religious and cultural externals that adorn the Christian faith there exists a path; this path (eventually) leads to a unitive experience of the Divine and at the same time a grounded experience of becoming truly human. The Christ experience. One of the normal fruits of walking this path is a commitment to peace and justice: because, those who suffer in war, on both sides, are our brothers and sisters. I thus relate to the Christian contemplative tradition. For me this books great flaw is its unbalanced criticism of Christianity. On one hand Hillman rightly points out the way that sections of (cultural)Christianity have engaged in acts of war. He also rightly points to scripture's such as 'God is a God of war' that have been used to justify war. I would agree with these criticisms. However Hillman's criticism of Christianity is one sided. He assumes 'We are all psychologically Christian.' I would agree that the Western psyche is profoundly influenced by Christianity, but to me there is a world of difference between this unconscious influence and a person consciously attempting to live in the spirit of Christ. Those who are consciously attempting to live this way are usually committed peacemakers. (Take Thomas Merton and Desmond Tutu as two examples among many) Hillman ignores; both the actual teachings of Jesus regarding peace and the huge influence Christians have made, and continue to make, in the struggle to bring peace and justice. He seems to assume that all Christians are fundamentalist. They are not. It seems to me that Hillman himself is taking a fundimentalistic stance in his attack on Christianity. He becomes one sided, biased, narrow, strident. To me this is the major flaw in this book. I have given it two stars. It gets two for the way it has provoked me to think. It loses three for its simplistic bias.

Rating:
Summary: A victorious battle of words
Review: In "A Terrible Love of War", Hillman examines war in a manner analogous to a psychologist working to understand the pathological behaviour of a person in depth therapy. This approach takes us on a engaging and extremely challenging journey into the archetype of war. On the way we meet famous men of battle, we rediscover the Greek gods Ares and Aphrodite (Mars and Venus), we catch a transferential glimpse at Hillman the man in some autobiographical "confessions", and finally come face to face with the war monger within the sacrificial lamb of God. It's confronting because Hillman makes no attempt to "explain" war, but leads us instead to understand it and the dark role it plays in our psyches, individually and collectively. It's a book that will reward careful and considered reading. I'm sure you will revel in his rhetoric, see the myth in his madness, and most of all, admire Hillman's unique approach to this most challenging subject, as I have.

Rating:
Summary: A victorious battle of words
Review: In "A Terrible Love of War", Hillman examines war in a manner analogous to a psychologist working to understand the pathological behaviour of a person in depth therapy. This approach takes us on a engaging and extremely challenging journey into the archetype of war. On the way we meet famous men of battle, we rediscover the Greek gods Ares and Aphrodite (Mars and Venus), we catch a transferential glimpse at Hillman the man in some autobiographical "confessions", and finally come face to face with the war monger within the sacrificial lamb of God. It's confronting because Hillman makes no attempt to "explain" war, but leads us instead to understand it and the dark role it plays in our psyches, individually and collectively. It's a book that will reward careful and considered reading. I'm sure you will revel in his rhetoric, see the myth in his madness, and most of all, admire Hillman's unique approach to this most challenging subject, as I have.