A critical chapter in Jung’s self-experimentation was what he termed the integration of the anima.
Toni Wolff saw this as one side of the story, as it also involved the process by which he had “introjected” her.
In 1944, apropos a dream, she noted that Jung placed undue stress on the subjective level, “because he had to realize the anima, but he thereby introjected me and took my substance.”
On January 5, 1922, Jung’s soul advised as follows:
“You should not break up a marriage, namely the marriage with me, no person should supplant me, least of all Toni. I want to rule alone.”
The following day, she added, “You must let Toni go until she has found herself and is no longer a burden to you.”
On the next day, his soul elucidated the symbolic significance of the relations between Jung, Emma Jung, and Toni Wolff in terms of Egyptian mythology.
On December 23-24, 1923, Jung had the following dream:
I am on military service. Marching with a battalion. In a wood by Ossingen.
I come across excavations at a crossroads: I meter high stone figure of a frog or a toad without a head.
Behind this sits a boy with a toad’s head.
Then the bust of a man with an anchor hammered into the region of his heart, Roman.
A second bust from around 1640, the same motif. Then mummified corpses.
Finally there comes a barouche in the style of the XVII century.
In it sits someone who is dead, but still alive. She turns her head, when I address her as “Miss”; I am aware that “Miss” is a title of nobility.
A few years later, he grasped the significance of this dream.
He noted on December 4, 1926:
I now see for the first time that the dream of 23/24 December 1923 means the death of the anima (” She does not know that she is dead.”)
This coincides with the death of my mother …. Since the death of my mother, the A. [Anima] has fallen silent. Meaningful!
He continued to note a few further dialogues with his soul, but his confrontation with the anima had effectively reached a closure at this point.
In contrast to a marriage, Toni Wolff saw her relationship with Jung as an “individual relation.”
On December 20, 1924, she noted:
“Marriage is socially, legally, psychologically accepted. Nothing new can come from there; it can only be transformed, also individually, through individual relationships. That is why the individual relationship is a symbol of the soul.”
On September 13, 1925, she noted that their relationship stood under the “sign of Philemon.”
In retrospect, she reflected on the role she played for him:
What C. has achieved now is all based on me. Through my faith, love, understanding and loyalty I have kept him and brought him out. I was his mirror, as he told me right at the beginning. / But my entire feeling, phantasy, mind, energy, responsibility worked for him. I have an effect-but I don’t have substance. I didn’t know how to “play.” I gave him his life. Now he should give me mine and be a mirror to me.
She understood this mirroring through her medial function, in the terms of the typology of the feminine that she developed:
“Through my medial side, I am like C.’s hollow form and therefore I always wanted to be filled in by him.”
Wolff was extremely dependent upon Jung during these years.
On April I0, 1926, she noted, “Had a psychological scurvy through C.’s absence. Vitamin C.”
The following day, she added a further analogy: “It is the same with me as with the Elgonyi: C . is not only vitamin. Also, when I am with him the rising sun is good, relaxing, everything destructive has gone. When I am on my own, it eats away at me.”
She repeatedly tried, but failed, to be more independent of him. She felt that his fame and success were increasingly taking him away from her and resented “his works, ideas, patients, lectures, [Emma], children.”
This was cause for bitterness: “Again some resistance, when I think how he realized all his famous ideas through the relationship with me (which he only admits occasionally) and how famous he is now, and that E. is with him instead of me, and how I can never accompany him there.”
An entry of 1937 simply states, “Ariadne on Naxos,” implicitly likening her situation to that of Ariadne, abandoned on the island of Naxos after leading Theseus through the labyrinth.
In dedicated copies of his books, Jung gave private acknowledgment of her involvement.
Her copy of Psychological Types bears the dedication:
This book, as you know, has come to me from that world which you have brought to me. Only you know out of which misery it was born and in which spirit it was written. I put it in your hands as a sign of gratitude, which I cannot express through words.
Likewise, her copy of Psychology and Alchemy (1944) bears a dedication to his “soror mystica.”
In public, he acknowledged her active role in all the phases of analytical psychology in his introduction to her collected papers. ~The Red Books, Vol. I, Page 95-97