Psychiatry in Little Bo Peep: Fleeced Again?

Goose's imagery -- its particular outgoing intensity and specific protocols of indeterminacy-- have been discussed again and again, but rarely have these images been integrated into the theory of consciousness which informs(and thus earn the contempt of her short storied which often referred to her poems as 'little snitches'1) her poems. Gooses's unspoken theory of consciousness is, in many ways, actually a theory of subconciousness, perhaps even undcociousness and it is up to the reader to be aware of this. It is a bifurcated theory of consciousness featuring what I l like to call the Ego and the Idiot. This theory is a manifestation of the author's self-division, a clear case of bi-textuality, an her attempts to overcome this dualism through art. Goose attempts to reconcile two bluntly opposite moral and psychological systems: The Pollyanna system of her dream landscape (predominantly Jungian), and the harsh system of reality represented by, in Goose, reality itself ("for they were all still fleeting2)

In th is respect it is critical to discuss the elaborate symbolic milieu within which Goose works, and parallel to this construction explain why neither Freudian nor Jungian explanations suffice to explain the moral stand Mother Goose takes in "Little Bo Pee." For the purposes of this paper, stupidity will be deemed an insufficient explanation.

The cornerstone of Goose's theory of consciousness rests upon her view of the individual in relationship to the social unity and social environment -- the "sheep"--- which receive consciousness from external sources. In deliberately or subliminally passing on social values to the sheep, Bo Peep- in effect cuts herself off from vase areas of deeper experience and being: In other word, from her vital self. Goose expresses the social problem clearly, plaintively, almost poetically, complaining that the sheep "(have) left their tails behind them3." The sheep, as a result, are permanently scarred and divided (sometimes into lamb chops, flank steak, and delicious roasts often served with applesauce). As a result the sheep must reject Bo Peep, society and the blunted behavioral responses they are expected to display. But society, as portrayed in this epic poem, cannot allow this self alienation as it might lead to alienation from society itself. Thus society/Bo Peep must endeavour to make the lie whole with her attempts to "tack each (tail) to its lambikin4." The sheep must run. Consciousness, in the form of Bo Peep (The diminutive affection of "little" seems inappropriate in this reading), is imposed from without. It threatens to become internalized, a psychological process as well as a social product so powerful that it destroys the role of the individual consciousness and reduces all the the role of mere "sheep."

The sheep, however, are scarcely willing to live in the deterministic, non-human (though sheep should undoubtedly be represented as something other than human, Republicans, perhaps) atmosphere of ozichsphrenia5. Goose recognizes this problem and by the end of the poem she has attempted to introduce the hope of a solution while not making clear whether she expects it to succeed. Goose reconciles the "vitalist" (Jungian) body of the sheep with the more intellectual (Freudian) tail ("tale?") in the ultimate stanza.

Goose has clearly, in "Bo Peep," declared that neither Jungian nor Freudian systems are adequate to deal with the problem of a flock divided against itself. Instead, Goose counsels us, we must join these two disparate systems into one greater system that subsumes both lesser ones. Only then will the flock (the vital) and Bo Peep (the cerebral) work together in harmony.

There is a powerful message here for all of us, if we could only perceive it!

1As noted in the controversial a

2Line 8, Stanza 2, "Little bo Peep"