Archetypes

[haldir]

I'm studying Jung at the moment and I would like all you girls and guys to help me with a wee exercise.

2 things

1. What does the term "archetype" mean to you? (I DO NOT WANT DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS OR THOSE LIFTED FROM THE LITERATURE - I want what it means to you )

2. Which archetype is the most significant for you?

I'll be playing too - but no' the now (as we say in Scotland).

Go on, you know that you want to (but who's making you?)!

 

[Guest]

Ok, I'll give it a go...

1. Archetype to me means the perfect form/person/whatever, that I either admire, or even aspire to be. Much like a role model/mentor kind of thing.

2. The archetype that is most significant to me is probably me. That probably sounds bloody daft, but it's not the me I see myself as, even now, but the me I aspire and aim to be. Yes, I am me, and I can be only me, but I see myself in a certain way, especially a few years down the line. Ok, dissecting it a little more, I had the most wonderful teacher when I was at school. He taught me History through to GCSE, then Politics to 'A' level. He was always the one that grabbed me and made me believe that anything was possible. He sadly died of cancer about three years ago (he was very young, only 48), but I want to be a teacher (and am working towards being one right now) just like him. Ok, so I will never be all that he was to me, and my peers, but if I can have an impact on anyone's life, anywhere near the impact he had on mine, I will be very happy indeed. In my eyes, Mr Weaver was the "archetypal teacher". Oh, and I want to be the "archetypal Mum" too. I think I'm getting there...

 

[TheEarl]

Archetype to me means the standard of that type of thing; an object which you look at and you can just say "Yep, that's one of those."

The archetype which is most important to me is the happy person. This person has wife, kids, house, job that he loves and lots of money. Maybe he has some other things as well, but the important thing is that he's as content as a very contented thing that lives in Contentmentville.

The Earl

 

[cantdog]

Archetype to me means the standard of that type of thing; an object which you look at and you can just say "Yep, that's one of those."

I see it as a step "back" from there. When you see the absolutely typical Whatever, you see it like that because it corresponds so well to the archetype, which I see as a sort of mental OOP object made from prejudices and judgements.

"You're acting like a Grandmother," you might tell someone.

I think the Cop, the Mother, and the Buddha are the biggies for me. Each in their context.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Hello Jung Lover, whoever you are. . .

To me archetype means an original, from which copies arise.

Sort of like a prototype, only more with people than machines.

But what do I know? It's not a word that is in my everyday vocabulary.

Before I used it in formal writing, I would first want to check it out in a dictionary.



Added: In a psychological sense, I suppose that might be the first identified example of a condition, to which all others are referred.




I couldn't STAND it! I moved the 'H' in 'phsycological'.

 

[elsol]

a) An ideal example of a specific classification of things

a... Superman is the archetype for comic book heroes


b) The anti-hero

The archetype for me is Burke from the Andrew Vachsss series.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[R. Richard]

Most people responding here have focused on the positive archetype. ElSol did mention the negative archetype.

I worked for a large company and encountered what I later realized was a negative archetype. The guy was incompetent, lazy, insubordinate and a troublemaking politician. I finally managed to offload him on another project. Later I quit and joined another company. The first day I was there I recognized the archetype's twin brother (entirely different appearance, same characteristics). I fired him during my first day. Some idiot picked him up and told me: "There are other ways to deal with people you don't like rather than firing them." The idiot was right. Troublemaker got the idiot fired before top management found out that my assessment was correct and fired troublemaker again.

 

[McKenna]

1. An archtype to me is an ideal to which many aspire but few attain. It's the "ultimate", the perfect, the most ideal anything or anyone could be.

2. I'm not entirely sure this archetype has been created in my generation, but it would be a female archetype who manages to create balance between all things in her life (work, family, etc.) while maintaining not only her sense of self but time enough to cultivate it. Modern, yet with a respect for traditional values; innocent, yet passionate; feministic, but not overly so. It's a vague idea, but there you have it.

 

[impressive]

Archetype, to me, is the ideal -- the pattern for excellence/efficiency/effectiveness. (Cant's definition seems to fall closer to stereotype.)

Of significance to me would be archetypes of integrity (which are painfully few in these times) and joy (most often found in young children) and tolerance/acceptance (again, few & far between -- but seemingly more prevalent here at Lit).

 

[Salvor-Hardon]

To me an archetype is a way of explaining a thing that is difficult to explain. Its a way to hold somethign up and say "This! This is what I am talking about".

An archeteype I dearly love is Willy Wonka, that blend of genius, insanity, an undercurrent of mischief and perhaps even evil, and yet good and pleasant. A person who can work magic, but a magic that is very different from what we expect magic to be.

 

[Black Tulip]

Shoot, don't know how I could have missed this.

Apart from what I learned while studying Jung myself, archetype for me means the basic form of certain human behavior. Kind of like a template.

The important ones for me are the warrior (amazon), the healer and the teacher.

 

[haldir]

woww - great response!

and a huge "thank-you" for not being dictionary-bound.

archetype and stereotype are very close together - a point well made by Impressive.

I would argue that stereotypes develop from archetypes and arise from a basic misunderstanding of what an archetype is.

for me an archetype is not an "image" or "personification" but rather a psychological process that manifests itself, in a reasonably uniform way across cultures and across time.

The hero/questing hero archetype is probably the most accessible example of this.

McKenna - Jung would point you in the direction of the anima archetype (google Paul Watsky).

 

[sweetnpetite]

A recognized example used to name the entire category(Cinderella, Peter Pan). or sometimes a generic category title. (such as "The Whore" vs. "The Mother")

Yeah, it's pretty much the same as 'stereotype' or template- except that it's a bit deeper. It's used to *help* you understand a group of qualities- to take them all together, rather than viewing them each as if they were unrelated. It's an aid to understanding, also something recognizable- but rather than just a way to categorieze and forget about (as with stereotyping) it's a way to categorize and analize. It's like a key to a whole set of symbols and impressions. Rather than being flat like a stereotype, an archetype is multifaceded, like a 'diamond cut' jewel. (unlike Jewel the singer, who isn't all that multifaced at all, lol)

To me, I think an archetype is a tool. It's a place to begin, not a final word.

 

[McKenna]

McKenna - Jung would point you in the direction of the anima archetype (google Paul Watsky).

Thank you Haldir, I'll look in that direction.

May I ask why you're studying Jung? (If you've already answered this elsewhere on the boards, forgive me. I don't get around much! )

 

[dr_mabeuse]

An archetype is a symbol or unit of meaning that arises spontaneously from the collective unconscious without ever having to be learned. Jung believed there were certain symbols and signs that were mankind's common heritage, were passed down genetically, and which appear in all cultures. He called these "archetypes".

Thus, the idea of the maze is an archetype because stories and images involving mazes appear in all cultures and usually have the same symbolic meaning. The only way he could account for this was to posit the existence of a maze archetype in our brains that we all understand.

In some ways archetypes are the dramatic or narrative counterpart of Chomsky's theories of the innateness of the linquistic impulse. Chomsky believes that there's a "deep grammar" embedded in our brains that makes the development and acquisition of language a natural behavioral process. Jung believed that archetypal images likewise appear naturally in the human mind without having to be learned. Dreams are commonly made of archetypal images.

Furthermore, doo wacka doo yucka hula baby.

--Zoot

 

[Guest]

Zoot, I want some of whatever you're having.

 

[haldir]

thanks once again for all the responses.

Zoot - the connection between Chomsky and Jung was one that had not occured to me before, but it makes perfect sense (to me anyway).

Currently the most significant archetypes for me are the shadow, anima and warrior.

Willy Wonka is a great example of a representation of the trickster archetype, I think. Like Loki in norse mythology or hermes in classical greek mythology.

For me Darth Vader is the best modern representation of the shadow archetype.

 

[Salvor-Hardon]

thanks once again for all the responses.

Zoot - the connection between Chomsky and Jung was one that had not occured to me before, but it makes perfect sense (to me anyway).

Currently the most significant archetypes for me are the shadow, anima and warrior.

Willy Wonka is a great example of a representation of the trickster archetype, I think. Like Loki in norse mythology or hermes in classical greek mythology.

For me Darth Vader is the best modern representation of the shadow archetype.

And this is the power of the study of archetypes, seeing ancient classical and modern ideas take shapes and influence cultures or at least ideas.

I like Willy Wonka as a trickster over Loki or Hermes, because he is not good or evil. You are constantly wondering what he is up to and what are his motivations, only to gawk and not only what he does but why he does them as well.

And Darth Vader is a perfect example of shadow, as I understand anyway.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Zoot, I want some of whatever you're having.

Jungian BDSM is the only way to go.

Fave rave archetype? I'm big on the Holy Fool. I don't know how we do in the west, but in China they have all these stroes about Monkey King running all over heaven and cocking everything up.

When you get right down to it, the only response to wisdom is foolishness. Clown is King because there's nothing you can say to him. I got hooked on Tarot the first time I saw The Fool card. I knew that the Tarot had it exactly right. He sits at the absolute head of the deck.

In Zen you have the ten Ox-herding pictures, a parable of mastering the mind that also have delicious BDSM overtones. (Here's the verse that accompanies picture 5:

The whip and rope are necessary,
Else he might stray off down some dusty road.
Being well trained, he becomes naturally gentle.
Then, unfettered, he obeys his master. )

The ox-herding pictures end with #10, called "Enter the world" (in another version, this is the lovely "Both Vanished" picture):

Barefooted and naked of breast, I mingle with the people of the world.
My clothes are ragged and dust-laden, and I am ever blissful.
I use no magic to extend my life;
Now, before me, the dead trees become alive.

This is very similar to the Tarot image of the Fool at the end of his journey, stepping off a cliff into thin air, smelling a flower, blissfully unaware that an alligator lurks nearby and a dog is biting his leg.

Jung would see the same archetype in the tarot Fool and the mystic end of the ox-herding pictures.

Come on Lou, your drink's getting warm.

http://www.cs.sfu.ca/people/ResearchStaff/jamie/personal/10_Bulls/Title_Page.html

--Zoot

 

[Salvor-Hardon]

WOW!

OK I have a new endeavor to study now!

Thanks Dr. M that was truly beyond profound!

 

[McKenna]

...Being well trained, he becomes naturally gentle...

Jumping in only because this bit quoted above just seemed .... wrong.

How can something that is "trained" become "naturally gentle"?

Either something is naturally gentle, or not.



Jungian BDSM... geez Mab, maybe you should use that approach to get back that "dirty" feel to sex (re: your thread.) Mind fuck: The final frontier.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Jumping in only because this bit quoted above just seemed .... wrong.

How can something that is "trained" become "naturally gentle"?

Either something is naturally gentle, or not.

I think that's the point. It's poetry after all, and doesn't poetry often employ such types of literary tactics? [Not being much of a poet, I am certainly no expert, but I'm pretty sure that contradictions or seeingly contradictions (oxymoron) occur fairly often.]

 

[haldir]

sorry Sweet - Mckenna's right here. If something is "natural" then by definition it cannot be "trained".

according to Jung that is the point - archetypes are inherent (as pointed out by the Doc with his Chompsky parallel) - they are not learnt or socially conditioned. There is a furious debate amongst the "Jungian" community about this by the way.

Poetry does not turn truth on it's head. The essence of poetry for me is that it has the ability to take a "novel" or short-story and bring all the meaning, passion and feeling to the reader in a fraction of the number of words. Distilled humanity if you like.