Creative Partnership

Johanna Herzog-Dürck, 1963

New Realization

What are the underlying anthropological forces driving today’s transformation of the erotic relationship? What powers are reshaping the psychological and interpersonal dynamics between the sexes, and how can we come to terms with them?

I have chosen the term „creative partnership“; admittedly, it describes a goal and a sense of purpose—a collection of hopeful signs—rather than a state of affairs that is already widely realized. However, one central factor now seems beyond doubt, and it is here that we must focus our attention: the fact of the inexorably growing realization¹ of woman.² This is a genuinely new examination by woman herself of all the countless contradictory interpretations imposed upon her by man throughout history, for the purpose of not only discovering but also activating the mental and spiritual potentials inherent to her—forces that, until now, remained largely latent. Woman is asking herself what womanhood³ truly is to its fullest, what purpose she herself wishes to give it, and what calling it has to fulfill in the world. At the heart of this growing realization is neither biological function nor merely the female „role“ as dictated by tradition and social structures. Instead, it is the potentialities of womanhood itself and its relationship to manhood.

In its ontological depth, the relationship between man and woman can only ever be defined by one thing: love. Yet, in the reality of human experience, love exists in infinite gradations of clarity and in various ways that lovers relate to one another. Love can certainly connect two people where one is the embraced and the other the embracing, one the guided and the other the guiding, one the sheltered and the other the sheltering. Until now, a defining characteristic of this bond was man’s greater degree of consciousness and woman’s relative lack of it. Now, however, through the new realization of woman, a new form is emerging which we call creative partnership. When love is rooted in the continuous self-discovery and self-actualization of both partners—when it represents a unique response to the fundamental conditions of being human and a mutual maturing through the encounter with the „Thou“ of the other—then we speak of creative partnership. It is a circulus, but a circulus salutis—a circle of healing. It rests on an ever deepening acceptance of oneself which, in turn, allows for an ever deepening acceptance of the other within an ever expanding space. When love is a response to the conditions of our humanhood, such that the woman’s response allows the man to grow, and the man’s response allows the woman to grow, that is creative partnership. We are speaking of a „dialectical“ maturing of two people, not merely a subjective adaptation of two individuals to one another. It is a process drawn from the primordial ground of a transcendent whole, transforming both participants throughout their lives until death. Creative partnership is therefore a journey that can reach no final conclusion—no point at which one partner will have fully „determined“ the other. It is an encounter that, by its very nature, grows dynamically deeper and takes place entirely in „the open.“

What, then, does the reality of modern interpersonal relationships show us? It reveals a failing of community on an unprecedented scale, and specifically, a frightening crisis in the partnership between man and woman. A look at divorce statistics is sufficient proof. Psychotherapists, of course, encounters this struggle and failure firsthand. They deal with the sickness of partnership in the trenches—with the rupture between human beings where abysses of hate and despair open up, and the dark side of „radical evil“ seems to reveal itself. Loneliness, isolation, and a lovelessness that manifests as an inability to love or a refusal to be loved; an incapacity for devotion and fidelity; the compulsion to turn the other into an object—all these spiritual ailments dominate interpersonal relationships today, particularly between men and women. Most striking is the lack of commitment—the cool, detached egoism with which erotic connections are formed and then discarded.

Psychotherapists, who seek not only to heal the individual but to understand the wider context, must continuously question what is behind this disturbing facet of our era. It seems clear that a major factor is precisely the growing realization of woman and her departure from centuries-old bonds, traditions, and value systems. Apparently, we are seeing the old rule of life in action: that the new, the more refined, the „higher“ can only emerge through a period of darkness, a stage of danger, tension, and life-threatening ambivalence.

Forms of Flight

Let us consider the dangers that this growth into a more self-conscious womanhood brings for woman herself, and naturally, for man as well.

First, there is the woman who, vaguely intuiting the maturing and transformative „dual“ sense of this development, counters it with a hubristic „me-only“. Driven by a constant need to prove her superiority, she looks for every opportunity to elevate herself above her partner. She misunderstands her womanhood as a cult of the ego, leading to a state of constant demanding that shifts in content from one situation to the next. These are women who do not bring their talent for creative partnership into the service of truth, but let it stagnate into the intellectual presumptuousness of knowing-better and an often harsh, sometimes lonesomely intoxicating, „tragic“ sense of aplomb. „Acceptance“ is a fundamental and deeply productive act of human existence—the acceptance of divine immanence within the human condition, as well as of the ultimate mystery of the human Thou. When people cannot accept the basic condition of time, for instance, they will constantly be at odds with their partner’s aging.

In these women, we find a hidden rebellion against this productive „acceptance.“ The male partner is frustrated by a loveless criticism that attacks not just his mistakes, but his very being. Through the accurate but merciless highlighting of his flaws, she marks him in every situation as a failure. Despite their intelligence, these women do not realize how much they actually create the man they castigate or subtly ironize and ridicule—stifling and killing off his positive potentialities. They would never admit to a fault or a mistake—an act that would allow trust to return—they would never „learn,“ as this would topple them from their self-made throne of infallibility. The inevitable „scenes“ in such a partnership never lead to a liberating catharsis or a joyful new beginning; at best, there is a surly peace bought by the partner’s submission. Despite her potential richness, this woman is like a lake where every inch of the shore has been sold off. She does not grasp that she is driving the man into a state of homelessness and emotional isolation that borders on despair. Fortunate are the men who at least have a sanctuary in the world—a laboratory, a science, or a desk (where they can perhaps write an abstract work about—„woman“ or „love.“)

From an existential perspective, such a partnership represents the culpable „loss of a dimension“—precisely because a new dimension could have been gained (cf. Paul Tillich: The Lost Dimension). The sacred in the world is not only not beheld, heard, or longed for; it is barred by a spiritual killing—a killing of the heart, of trust, and of hope. It goes without saying that children raised under such a closed sky experience fear and desolation, learning to lie and living with the bitter taste of tristesse.

Let us now look at an opposite type of female development: the woman who hears the inner call to self-realization but lacks the courage to follow it. She possesses the internal energy to unfold her womanhood independently, yet she remains „below her level.“ One might say she is unconsciously choosing to remain unconscious. (She may be weighed down by patriarchal ideals. However, the magic of the magna mater ruling in the depths must always be taken into account; cf. Erich Neumann: Zur Psychologie des Weiblichen.) Time and again, she flees from the challenges of growth, retreating into obedience or the safety of convention. In the erotic-moral realm, for instance, she might let introjected religious rules decide for her. She often turns her partner into a father figure instead of accepting the full depth of sexual polarity. She remains the eternal daughter—charming and beautiful, perhaps, but profoundly dependent on the opinions of others, on every man and every woman in society, her church, or her institution. She is unable to form her own conscience or to act out of her own responsibility (which, after all, would mean obeying God more than man, and thus becoming oneself).

Often, these women—as if in opposition to their own confinedness—have highly developed intellects, yet it is usually a narrow, specialized intelligence focused on achievements in „masculine“ fields (as if such a thing existed!) like technology or science. It is as if they are trying to use these achievements to buy their way out of the personal task of realizing their womanhood in its full sense. In their core female self, they remain in a state of infantile, sleeping beauty-like slumber. The unrest and dissatisfaction that come from refusing their true vital human calling eventually take their revenge on the partner. He is expected to do what she should do for herself: break through the thorns and kill the dragon holding the maiden prisoner. But in this environment, the man is increasingly unable to do so, and so here too, a potential circulus salutis becomes a circulus vitiosus. Instead of taking the path of self-development, the woman begins to control the man’s freedom—through suffocating jealousy, demanding helplessness, or childlike moods that eventually cause only boredom. Aggression simmers on both sides. If the first type of woman drives the man into emotional homelessness, this type pulls him into the dream-like captivity of an anxious, small-minded subjectivity.

Just as the creative realization of woman can go astray, the existential failures of the male partner can also block mutual growth. We can only touch on these briefly, as we are simply highlighting a few characteristic traits from a complex spiritual reality. When faced with a courageous, maturing woman, a man might fail through spiritual inertia. He no longer „answers“ her with his whole being because he find her tiring, too much work; he detaches and looks for an easier, more comfortable partner. As hurtful as it may be for the woman, infidelity is actually always a complex situation for which she, too, bears a share of the responsibility. Or perhaps the man cannot let go of a patriarchal paternalism towards the woman, manifesting as abrupt sensitivities or resentment; he cannot tolerate a mature partner who acts as a vital pole to himself. Then it will be he who makes excessive demands on her to prove her ultimate inferiority, cruelly—even sometimes sadistically—making her feel defeat. We should also mention the highly sensitive, idiosyncratic „aesthete“ who will accept only the woman’s spiritual-aesthetic blossom. He can accept her as a fascinating experience or a subtle pleasure, but shrinks back from womanhood' deep connection with nature (often a precursor to homosexuality). Usually, an unresolved mother-bond is at the heart of this. This man, too, prevents the living encounter that is creative partnership.

The Potential of Our Current Situation

Having looked at the failures, conflicts, the stagnations and ruptures in love and courage that hinder creative partnership, we should conclude by asking what the deeper meaning of this development might be in terms of anthropological historicity. Looking forward, what value does it hold, this crisis-laden transition of woman maturing toward a conscious confrontation with herself and toward an independent interpretation of her womanhood? It is no secret that the one-sided male mentality has led humanity to the brink of self-destruction. But we must look deeper than that. Two points seem especially significant. The woman who no longer faithfully looks to man as her leader, but sees his vulnerability clearly, is now able to come to his rescue in an entirely new way—out of a female spirit that has found its independence. At the risk of being misunderstood, she can become the chance for the sacred to come shining in the world once more, and in a completely new sense. The ossification into technical thinking, the detachment from life in a blind craze for success, the demonic rule of the machine, and the spiritual blindness of the atomic age with its idols of power and destruction—they instill in humans fear and depression, the terrible void of faithlessness and emptiness of heart, the gruesome disgust of existence with itself. The female spirit, however, remains closer to the source; it is still filled with a fundamental trust in life. Man needs the creative partner; he needs the woman who „works through“ death, guilt, evil, and time in her own womanly way—one who remains undaunted through all daunting, and has found her „nevertheless“ that can offer not just new insight, but joy and hope, and faith in humanity itself. It is not that „the eternal feminine doth draw us upward.“⁴—not at all. But the luminous and undaunted female spirit may lead us to discover new springs where only desertification loomed.

The second aspect points towards the future. The fate of humanity depends on whether we can build an age of peace. This will be the greatest experiment in history: whether we can establish peace not just as the absence of war (which would eventually destroy us from within), but positively through creating and prevailing in new ways of interpersonal coexistence. That this will be made possible precisely through the creative partnership of the sexes—through love as creative partnership—seems like an undeniable and hopeful outlook to me.

---

• ← Next post
• Previous Post →