When I was very young, I saw a very powerful picture by Aubrey Beardsley of Salome, who is holding the head of John the Baptist while a pair of shoes is seen just behind her. At the time, I formed a very powerful association between taking off shoes, on the one hand, and the emasculation of John the Baptist through his symbolic decapitation. Salome, for me, came to represent the terrifying power of women. For a young boy, this was certainly an overwhelming encounter, especially considering that I was struggling to be an individual and not get drowned in emotions such as desire. To this day, I tend to feel quite overwhelmed when I see this picture.
An entire blog could be written about Aubrey Beardsley’s imagination and paintings, and it’s been done in other contexts. But I want to concentrate on how the image of the shoes in the background powerfully contributed to an anxiety I had about wearing socks and taking off shoes.
To summarize, I would like to describe the main themes and complexes:
- Shoes off is the symbolic emasculation: the “undoing” of my boy ego is symbolized in the removal of shoes, which often felt vulnerable and humiliating as a child.
- Socks represent a disowned aspect of myself which felt “forbidden” to me (not allowed: you are becoming a man now, you must leave behind the world of softness). However, in a contradictory way, it also represents the threat of woman’s power over me..
One can dwell endlessly on the psychoanalysis of this early childhood life event, but the point is not to indulge in analysis. The point is to understand where to go with this information.
The first form of therapy from this distressing event is to recognize that this was a distressing childhood experience and now I am adult: I need not be imprisoned by it anymore. In fact, there are ways to reverse the traumatizing influence of these themes. The first is to recognize that a woman’s power and identity is not a threat to my own identity. I am okay, regardless of how powerful a woman is. It’s important to practice recognizing that a woman’s power, strength and abilities can be celebrated without the sense that my identity is threatened by it. In other words, I am okay; if anything, the only part that is threatened is my identification with a rigid sense of what it means to be a boy which I had internalized as a young child. So it’s important to stop associating images of women with their shoes off as a threat to my being. If anything, it is a challenge to a false sense of being or identity.
The second form of therapy is to resist the sexual connotations of socks. It’s to recognize that this sexualisation begins when a part of me becomes disowned and then returns as an object of desire. Any time I suppress something, it comes back to me in the form of desire. So I need to go back and reintegrate that disowned experience in a nonsexual way that does not pose it as a desire. This is why confronting the desire face on and talking through it is the only way to make it less powerful and a source of vexation.
Is it important to go into the details and study Aubrey Beardsley’s paintings as a way of unlocking the erotic aspects of them? No, I don’t necessarily see the point of that, because sometimes it re-triggers anxiety rather than helping to resolve the initial anxiety that “splits” people into male and female aspects. If anything, the work that needs to be done is to reinforce the sense that “You are okay; your true sense of being is not threatened by this image. There is no need to sexualize it.”




