Unconscious expression — and its cognate designation, symbolic composition — occupies a pivotal position across the depth-psychology corpus, functioning simultaneously as a descriptive phenomenon, a clinical datum, and a theoretical crux. Jung provides the most architecturally developed account: the unconscious asserts itself through images, symptoms, slips, moods, and above all through the symbolic life of art and dream, each constituting an autonomous statement from psychic strata beyond ego-control. Freud’s foundational distinction between latent dream-thoughts and their manifest ‘transcript’ into another mode of expression establishes the basic grammar of the problem — the unconscious does not speak directly but translates itself through displacement, condensation, and symbol-formation. James approaches the same territory via automatisms and subliminal uprushes that flood ordinary consciousness with impulses whose origin the subject cannot identify. Hillman extends the inquiry into somatic symptoms, arguing that wounds carry archetypal significance and require symbolic rather than merely diagnostic attention. Chodorow’s editorial apparatus for active imagination reveals how embodied media — dance, drawing, drama, music — serve as vehicles through which the unconscious composes and discloses itself. The central tension running through the corpus is whether unconscious expression is primarily a compensatory corrective (Jung’s teleological reading) or a residue of repression (Freud’s archaeological reading). Both positions converge, however, on the irreducibility of the symbolic register as the unconscious’s native tongue.