Healing the Wounds of the Patriarchy: Symbolism of Grimms’ The Blue Light, part 1

Colleen Szabo
12 min readJun 2, 2024

--

Artist Bell Edwardes

According to Wikipedia, the Grimm brothers’ The Blue Light falls into the category of collected oral tradition featuring a character who finds a magical object that provides a supernatural helper. Hans Christian Andersen’s more well known The Tinder Box is likely based on The Blue Light. Here is a link to a site where TBL can be read, as well as an audio recording of the same.

This article is a symbolic interpretation of the story, my personal mix of Jungian- based alchemical metaphor. Mine is not the only angle of interp; symbolism is the opposite of linear, therefore it has no one answer. Rather, it’s wholistic and multifaceted, and part of the fun is that nobody has the last word. Our symbolic lexicons are based on experience in large part, so they can only be as universal as human experience. This is both my disclaimer, and my encouragement to folks to feel their own way into this delightful mode of operation.

Note that if anyone wants to talk about symbols, as I am doing here, language is involved. Yet, as this quote claims, language cannot ADEQUATELY express, in other words define, symbolic information. That is because symbolism is not processed by the intellectual mind, but rather on another more wholistic level of consciousness.

Many tales in the Grimm brothers’ collections follow a pattern that makes symbolic interpretation easy; they begin by stating the situation they are about to offer wisdom upon. Like the well known Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Rapunzel and more (interesting these all have female protagonists, is it not?), this story is one of human transformation, symbolically encoded. These transformational/alchemical tales carry hidden wisdom on the great lessons of humanity; lessons about faith, true courage, spirituality, true humility, compassion, integrity, discernment, and much more.

So in order to make it possible to identify the teaching, the opening lines describe what aspect of human experience the story is going to address. The Blue Light begins thus:

A soldier had served the King faithfully for many years, but when the war came to an end could serve no longer because of the many wounds he had received. The King said to him “You may return to your home, I need you no longer, and you will not receive any more money for he only receives wages who renders me service for them.”

A soldier, the soldier archetype, is someone who takes orders from a higher authority, upon pain of punishment. For that reason he/she famously does not think for themselves overmuch- and/or will not act upon any contrary thoughts. No insult intended here, for I know that there are lots of folks in military service who have personal agency. This story originated in a culture where a soldier was not what we would call a warrior. The two are currently being conflated in American culture at large, as it seems a lot more awesome in general to be a warrior. And indeed, it’s possible to be a warrior internally, while following the dictates of the military hierarchy or washing the dishes.

Another idea on the subject

I’m going to say that a warrior is one who has highly developed skills and a certain amount of personal power, as in the Westernized concept of knights or ninjas. With the word ‘soldier’ we are talking here more along the lines of obedient cannon fodder. Having spawned 3 men (as spawn they were technically boys, but boys are men in the making) I have had some years to think about the military and to absorb some information on its archetypes I would otherwise have patently avoided.

Sounds good! Couldn’t have put it better actually. Training is conditioning.

Now, one of the reasons that there are often kings and queens in these “fairy tales” is because they address the subject of authority, hopefully to encourage exploration of inner authority. Inner authority is the state of trusting one’s own thoughts, feelings, values, emotions, beliefs, and more, and of acting in accordance. Soldiers commit murder and assorted heinous crimes upon order from military authorities. They do so not always from the joy of murdering “the enemy”, but because they said they would or are otherwise legally bound, as in a military draft, and also because the government is providing their livelihood.

War is a socially organized forum in which murder, rape, and robbery are condoned, among other behaviors. Whether you are a fan of war or not, such actions many soldiers would never commit under their own inspiration/authority. Outside of the military they would be judged as criminal, for one thing. But it’s okay of a military authority orders you to kill. It actually makes you a hero. In any case, the overweening situation this teaching tale addresses is outer authority vs. inner authority.

Typical self-sacrificing military rhetoric that we might imagine as describing in part the the story’s adjective “faithfully”. Such self sacrifice comes in handy in places but is dysfunctional when generally applied to life. Some people live in such an internal state of emergency/war that this behavior, on their part or on the part of another, makes sense as a lifestyle. For example, this could be the feeling and thinking of a person who is codependent in an abusive relationship. Many folks who have had intimate committed relationships recognize this credo as something that has come up temporarily, at least.

Currently there is a lot of self-help noise about loving oneself. Self authority and self love go hand in hand. A person with little to no self authority ends up living their life for someone, or something, else. They need outside input to tell them what to do; often what to say (let’s talk about the stuff we heard on the news), what to care about (money, education, job security, physical appearance, sports team affiliations, etc. etc.), what to think (political and social rhetoric, religious institutions, and other affiliations).

The corporate-based largely White and white collar 9–5 existence is currently much an assumed norm in Euro-western society, as is obvious from its ubiquitous representation in the entertainment media. This is one current iteration of life as unthinking hive member/soldier, often cast in contrast to those “in power”; the rich and famous, those who have socioeconomic status and agency/external authority (King). The white collar often takes orders from on high that bear little to no meaning in their lives.

Archetypally masculine (not necessarily male) hierarchical structure demands that the worker often sublimate their own ideas of what to do, what to believe, what to care about. Otherwise how would we function in this unconscious, soldier-like manner? We need the worker bees to implement authority’s plans. The toxic patriarchy is founded on hierarchy. If a worker bee comes up with a useful creative idea, it’s typically appropriated by the employers, for several reasons. The grabbing of valuable resources in patriarchal society is expected, because patriarchal authority implies ownership.

It begins, perhaps, when ownership of children is implied by fatherhood in the patriarchy. Though my society is very busy ordering and maintaining laws, beliefs, and practices in regards to ownership, the metaphysical truth about ownership is we own nothing, in particular other beings. For beings are more than material- that’s simple logic.

Of course there are other socioeconomic models besides the white collar in my culture, but they look worse; agricultural workers, retail/service industry drones, caretakers, etc., who spend their lives at the bottom of the heap just making ends meet- or not. They occasionally make it into the entertainment industry, yet they are the boulders that support the peak of the hierarchical mountain.

The famous quote… if we don’t own our children then by association nobody can own anybody.

I have belabored the socioeconomic point enough. The sketch is intended to explain the story’s relevance; how we, many many of us, might find ourselves in the very same position as this soldier, with his “many wounds”. The soldier’s tragic revelation concerning his utter dispensability within a hypercompetitive society may occur at any time in our lives, and is the wound that breaks many of us, in particular those of the “faithful” (read “caring”, read “give a s**t”) ilk. The king here represents the toxic patriarchy, with its using and abusing attitudes, milking the worker bees for all they are worth.

Whether it’s the office worker whose creative idea is stolen, whose physical health is ruined by sitting in front of a computer all day, whether it’s folks who can’t afford health care, or it’s the fact we are all aware of that old people are basically just detritus in our hypercompetitive society, this soldier reminds us that those who give their best in service to their “employers” may one day discover they have cast pearls before swine.

When “the war is over”, when we exit the dysfunctional socioeconomic battlefield for whatever reason, it’s time to develop an inner, healthy self authority. For the rule is with our reclamation, that “as within, so without”. If we had not been somehow railroaded into living our lives as servant or even slave to a toxic masculine culture, we might have retained our inner authority and said “No way!” to the option of serving that Foolish King, that selfish dude or dudette (men are not the only promulgators of the toxic patriarchy). It’s the “Suppose they gave a war and nobody came?” idea.

However, we tend to learn the norm; that’s what a society is, a collection of norms. And working for “the man” is a norm. Our society at large functions on conditioning that starts very early in our childhood, and it’s a materialistic/outer focused one that discourages the development of inner authority, of self love and self understanding, that might lead us to discern when we are being treated like trash, when our days are soulless and devoid of any intrinsic worth.

So all that is what the story is about.

The soldier doesn’t know what to do. He

…walked the whole day, until in the evening he entered a forest.

Hidden, yup

In case you didn’t notice, this is a common behavior in the old transformational tales, this walking away from trouble and entering the forest. It signifies a movement into the inner experience, that which is alive and unconditioned, that which is natural, that which is largely unknown to the conditioned conscious mind. Inner experiencing is essential to the development of self authority, for inner authority is a state maintained by ourselves and our consciousness alone. ‘Author’ means “originator, promoter”. Social authority is different. It’s created and maintained by social structures alone, such as monetary systems, right?

In the forest, our soldier hits some pay dirt, for

When darkness came on, he saw a light, which he went up to, and came to a house wherein lived a witch.

In these stories, night is the stage for understanding the inner realms and the dark side, that which has been closeted away from our waking consciousness. This darkness can signify a dark night of the soul experience, too; depression, anxiety, illness, that results from this soldier’s traumas (wounds) and the devastating realization that according to his society’s value system, he has little to no intrinsic worth. Lasting, independent worth must be found within.

Our protagonist is lured by a light, which tells us that he is actually looking for a “light in the darkness”. Light has different symbolic angles but because it’s in the darkness this is inner light; the soul, the spirit, truth, clarity, deeper understanding, and all that good stuff that shows us our value beyond culture and conditioning. It is that light which will connect us to our inner authority. It’s the mystical glow that has been blotted by the blaring light of our constant attention to the outer world and its demands.

The witch is also a common feature in these tales. Her appearance signals the introduction of the metaphysical, for that’s what separates the witches from the norm, in my culture. She can take many forms, play many roles, of course, but we can begin by interpreting this witch as a powerful inner feminine aspect (anima in Jungian terms) of the soldier’s that has been hidden, shadowed. She is a female archetype, meaning her powers are of the sort that we commonly attribute to our feminine side.

Interesting. From a Reddit conversation on Jung’s work

Feminine attributes this witch is obviously embodying include interiority, going within . She embodies the dark (black, the void, death, etc. are yin, feminine; light, the day, unnatural human behaviors, and vitality are usually yang). Dark is not only that which has been rejected by the masculine day, but is also the creative void from which all manifestation proceeds.

She represents the natural order of Gaia, as witches tend to do. Wisdom in these old tales is often represented by (frequently older) women who live in forests, “witches”, because wisdom on Earth is in large part naturally taught by the cyclical developmental processes and behaviors that order all life on the planet. Wisdom is found in the elements, the plants, the animals, and the ways in which they grow, learn, and relate to self, to others, and to the whole.

What a funny old etching!

The soldier asks her for some food and drink and a place to sleep.

“Oho!” she answered, “who gives anything to a runaway soldier? Yet I will be compassionate, and take you in, if you will do what I wish.” “What do you wish?” said the soldier. “That you shall dig all around my garden for me, tomorrow.”

She calls him a “runaway soldier”; here we see that the tale allows as how it might refer to someone who has actually defected from the cultural norms of the toxic patriarchy at any age. Lots of adolescents and young adults do thusly, repulsed by how the maw of the socioeconomic system uses and abuses. They are then possibly shunned, disapproved of, by those who believe in the importance of social norms: “Who gives anything to a runaway soldier?” If you’re not willing to play the toxic patriarchal game like the rest of us, you don’t deserve anything. The society, the socioeconomic system, will not support you. On common example is that whatever your skills and experience, you won’t likely get certain employment without a higher educational degree.

We see that this inner witch figure (which can, of course, be encountered in the outer world) is compassionate. Compassion, a connecting emotion, is both archetypally feminine, and a quality required for self authority. Compassion for self and other is the cornerstone of self love, for one thing. If we treat ourselves with the same lack of compassion typical in a toxically hypercompetitive society, we will throw some part of ourselves under the bus on the regular; we will internalize outer disapproval and negative judgment.

The toxic patriarchy use-and-abuse, constant judgement, excessive objectivity, greed, and power-over hierarchical mindset requires a lack of compassion. Since objectivity, the opposite of compassion, is archetypally masculine, only the Wise King is a compassionate ruler, for the Wise King has integrated his feminine side. When we integrate our masculine and feminine sides, we cease being one trick ponies. We can see the wise use of objectivity and compassion. One size does not fit all. This king is obviously the foolish sort.

For the sake of interpretation, we can imagine this obnoxious king as an inner figure of the soldier’s, a figure representing the way he learned to treat himself. The story then describes the soldier’s inner king/inner authority’s transformation- from the self-abusing conditioning his culture taught him, to the Wise King, a man who can combine authority and compassion, who values more than the bottom line, who knows the ineffable and intrinsic worth of a human life.

Here in the dark forest with a powerful feminine wisdom figure, is where we start the journey from being internally (and possibly externally) bashed around and belittled in a dysfunctional society, to a life of inner authority and love.

--

--