Scan barcode
moonwitch's review
challenging
reflective
fast-paced
4.0
Content Warnings
Definitely examined through a Christian lens.
jtisreading's review
3.0
Worth the quick read, but only because it takes just a few hours to read the entire book, it's a decent introduction to The Shadow, but many other books take a much deeper and more evaluative form. Johnson excels in creating amorphous abstract thought that allows growth within self-thinking and helps in conjunction with his Inner Work.
superdilettante's review
3.0
I kept starting and stopping this very short book because every time RJ referred to the obvious lessons of religion, or God, or referred to some kind of bias about male or female behavior, I got exasperated. "It's the NINETIES, my good man, just where are your modern sensibilities?" I would think, and toss the book carelessly aside. Yet despite all of his rather patriarchal ideas about archetypes, there are still wisdoms about the dark side (read: the parts of us we'd rather not acknowledge, and it's ok to leave sin out of the conversation) to be gleaned here.
jennus's review
4.0
Oh, these Jungians. What are they ever talking about. But also how it speaks to me!
wybie's review against another edition
2.0
Religious
This was so heavily based around religion it was not enjoyable for me. A couple stories from mythology, lots of talk about god and Jesus, a chapter about love relationships and the book as a whole did not really make sense.
This was so heavily based around religion it was not enjoyable for me. A couple stories from mythology, lots of talk about god and Jesus, a chapter about love relationships and the book as a whole did not really make sense.
alyjay's review
2.0
There were some good tidbits, but I found it lacking in actionable content, and unfortunately including quite a bit of ethnocentrism.
jaybull's review against another edition
2.0
While I did get a greater understanding of the shadow I really got sick of the Christian framework. It was kind of cool to understand the role the church plays in helping people integrate and look at their shadow but after a while it got tiresome and more than a little bit boring. Clearly I wasn't the target demographic for this preachy little tome.
Also, the author does not understand the difference between romantic love and infatuation. Anyone who uses Tristan and Isolde for their example (and boy was that horse dead when the author finished beating it) are to be trusted about as much as a teenager using Romeo and Juliet for example. Telling people that falling in love is just us putting ourselves on others shows a real lack of understanding of romantic love, which is based on fully understanding the other person, not infatuation where you just put all the things you want on the other person whether it fits or not. Does this author have bad luck with relationships to throw so much garbage at them or is he just clueless? Oh, wait, I don't actually care.
Over all I learned a little bit but was mostly annoyed at the book's many assumptions and overly condescending tone.
Also, the author does not understand the difference between romantic love and infatuation. Anyone who uses Tristan and Isolde for their example (and boy was that horse dead when the author finished beating it) are to be trusted about as much as a teenager using Romeo and Juliet for example. Telling people that falling in love is just us putting ourselves on others shows a real lack of understanding of romantic love, which is based on fully understanding the other person, not infatuation where you just put all the things you want on the other person whether it fits or not. Does this author have bad luck with relationships to throw so much garbage at them or is he just clueless? Oh, wait, I don't actually care.
Over all I learned a little bit but was mostly annoyed at the book's many assumptions and overly condescending tone.