archetypal essay writing

Literary Theory and Criticism

Home › Archetypal Criticism › Archetypal Criticism

Archetypal Criticism

By NASRULLAH MAMBROL on October 22, 2020 • ( 0 )

Archetypal theory and criticism, although often used synonymously with Myth theory and crticism, has a distinct history and process. The term “archetype” can be traced to Plato ( arche , “original”; typos , “form”), but the concept gained currency in twentieth-century literary theory and criticism through the work of the Swiss founder of analytical psychology, C. G. Jung (1875-1961). Jung’s Psychology of the Unconscious (1916, B. M. Hinkle’s translation of the 1911-12 Wandlungen und Symbole der Libido ) appeared in English one year after publication of the concluding volume with bibliography of the third edition of J. G. Frazer’s The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion (2 vols., 1890,3d ed., 12 vols., 1911-15). Frazer’s and Jung’s texts formed the basis of two allied but ultimately different courses of influence on literary history.

Jung most frequently used “myth” (or “mythologem”) for the narrative expression, “on the ethnological level” ( Collected 9, pt. 1: 67), of the “archetypes,” which he described as patterns of psychic energy originating in the collective unconscious and finding their “most common and most normal” manifestation in dreams (8:287). Thus criticism evolving from his work is more accurately named “archetypal” and is quite distinct from “myth” criticism.

For Jung, “archetype is an explanatory paraphrase of the Platonic eidos ” (9, pt. 1: 4), but he distinguishes his concept and use of the term from that of philosophical idealism as being more empirical and less metaphysical, though most of his “empirical” data were dreams. In addition, he modified and extended his concept over the many decades of his professional life, often insisting that “archetype” named a process, a perspective, and not a content, although this flexibility was lost through the codifying, nominalizing tendencies of his followers.

At mid-century, Canadian critic Northrop Frye (1912-91) introduced new distinctions in literary criticism between myth and archetype. For Frye, as William K. Wimsatt and Cleanth Brooks put it, “archetype, borrowed from Jung, means a primordial image, a part of the collective unconscious, the psychic residue of numberless experiences of the same kind, and thus part of the inherited response-pattern of the race” ( Literary Criticism 709). Frye frequently acknowledged his debt to Jung, accepted some of Jung’s specifically named archetypes—” persona and anima and counsellor and shadow” —and referred to his theory as Jungian criticism (Anatomy 291), a practice subsequently followed in some hand books of literary terms and histories of literary criticism, including one edited by Frye himself, which obscured crucial differences and contributed to the confusion in terminology reigning today. Frye, however, notably in Anatomy of Criticism , essentially redefined and relocated archetype on grounds that would remove him unequivocally from the ranks of “Jungian” critics by severing the connection between archetype and depth psychology: “This emphasis on impersonal content has been developed by Jung and his school, where the communicability of archetypes is accounted for by a theory of a collective unconscious—an unnecessary hypothesis in literary criticism, so far as I can judge” (m-12). Frye, then, first misinterprets Jungian theory by insisting on a Lamarckian view of genetic transmission of archetypes, which Jung explicitly rejected, and later settles on a concept of “archetype” as a literary occurrence per se, an exclusively intertextual recurring phenomenon resembling a convention (99).

Northrope Frye/Pinterest

On a general level, Jung’s and Frye’s theorizings about archetypes, however labeled, overlap, and boundaries are elusive, but in the disciplines of literature the two schools have largely ignored each other’s work. Myth criticism grew in part as a reaction to the formalism of New Criticism , while archetypal criticism based on Jung was never linked with any academic tradition and remained organically bound to its roots in depth psychology: the individual and collective psyche, dreams, and the analytic process. Further, myth critics, aligned with writers in comparative anthropology and philosophy, are said to include Frazer, Jessie Weston, Leslie Fiedler, Ernst Cassirer, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Richard Chase, Joseph Campbell, Philip Wheelwright, and Francis Fergusson. But Wheelwright, for example, barely mentions Jung ( The Burning Fountain , 1954), and he, Fergusson, and others often owe more to Sigmund Freud, Ernest Jones, Oedipus Rex, and the Oedipus complex than to anything taken from Jung. Indeed, myth criticism seems singularly unaffected by any of the archetypal theorists who have remained faithful to the origins and traditions of depth, especially analytical, psychology—James Hillman, Henri Corbin, Gilbert Durand, Rafael Lopez-Pedraza, Evangelos Christou. This article, then, treats the only form of literary theory and criticism consistent with and derived directly from the psychological principles advanced by Jung. Other forms previously labeled “Jungian” are here subsumed under the term “archetypal” because whatever their immediate specific focus, these forms operate on a set of assumptions derived from Jung and accept the depth-psychological structure posited by Jung. Further, Jung termed his own theory “analytical psychology,” as it is still known especially in Europe, but Jungian thought is more commonly referred to today in all disciplines as “archetypal psychology.”

The first systematic application of Jung’s ideas to literature was made in 1934 by Maud Bodkin in Archetypal Patterns in Poetry : “An attempt is here made to bring psychological analysis and reflection to bear upon the imaginative experience communicated by great poetry, and to examine those forms or patterns in which the universal forces of our nature there find objectification” (vii). This book established the priority of interest in the archetypal over the mythological.

The next significant development in archetypal theory that affected literary studies grew out of the effort made by U.S.-born, Zurich-trained analyst James Hillman (b. 1924) “to move beyond clinical inquiry within the consulting room of psychotherapy” to formulate archetypal theory as a multidisciplinary field ( Archetypal 1). Hillman invokes Henri Corbin (1903-78), French scholar, philosopher, and mystic known for his work on Islam, as the “second father” of archetypal psychology. As Hillman puts it, Corbin’s insight that Jung’s “mundus archetypalis” is also the “mundus imaginalis” that corresponds to the Islamic “alam al-mithl” (3) was an early move toward “a reappraisal of psychology itself as an activity of poesis” (24). Hillman also discovers archetypal precursors in Neoplatonism, Heraclitus, Plotinus, Proclus, Marsilio Ficino, and Giambattista Vico . In Re-Visioning Psychology , the published text of his 1972 Yale Terry Lectures (the same lecture series Jung gave in 1937), Hillman locates the archetypal neither “in the physiology of the brain, the structure of language, the organization of society, nor the analysis of behavior, but in the processes of imagination” (xi).

Archetypal theory then took shape principally in the multidisciplinary journal refounded by Hillman in 1970 in Zurich, Spring: An Annual of Archetypal Psychology and Jungian Thought . According to Hillman, that discourse was anticipated by Evangelos Christou’s Logos of the Soul (1963) and extended in religion (David L. Miller’s New Polytheism , 1974), philosophy (Edward Casey’s Imagining: A Phenomenological Study , 1976), mythology (Rafael Lopez-Pedraza’s Hermes and His Children , 1977), psycholinguistics (Paul Kugler’s Alchemy of Discourse: An Archetypal Approach to Language , 1982), and the theory of analysis (Patricia Berry’s Echo’s Subtle Body , 1982).

These archetypalists, focusing on the imaginal’and making central the concept that in English they call “soul,” assert their kinship with Semiotics and Structuralism but maintain an insistent focus on psychoid phenomena, which they characterize as meaningful. Their discourse is conducted in poetic language; that is, their notions of “soul-making” come from the Romantics , especially William Blake and John Keats. “By speaking of soul as a primary metaphor , rather than defining soul substantively and attempting to derive its ontological status from empirical demonstration or theological (metaphysical) argument, archetypal psychology recognizes that psychic reality is inextricably involved with rhetoric” (Hillman, Archetypal 19).

Carl Jung’s Contribution to Psychoanalytic Theory

This burgeoning theoretical movement and the generally unsatisfying nature of so much early “Jungian literary criticism” are both linked to the problematic nature of Jung’s own writing on literature, which comprises a handful of essays: “The Type Problem in Poetry,” “On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to Poetry,” “Psychology and Literature,” “ Ulysses : A Monologue,” and “Is There a Freudian Type of Poetry?” These essays reveal Jung’s lack of awareness as a reader despite his sense that they “may show how ideas that play a considerable role in my work can be applied to literary material” ( Collected 15:109^. They also attest to his self-confessed lack of interest in literature: “I feel not naturally drawn to what one calls literature, but I am strangely attracted by genuine fiction, i.e., fantastical invention” ( Letters 1:509). This explains his fascination with a text like Rider Haggard’s novel She: The History of an Adventure (1886-87), with its unmediated representation of the “anima.” As Jung himself noted: “Literary products of highly dubious merit are often of the greatest interest to the psychologist” ( Collected 15:87-88). Jung was also more preoccupied with dreams and fantasies, because he saw them as exclusively (purely) products of the unconscious, in contrast to literature, which he oddly believed, citing Joyce’s Ulysses as an example, was created “in the full light of consciousness” (15:123).

Issues of genre, period, and language were ignored or subjected to gross generalization as Jung searched for universals in texts as disparate as the fourth-century Shepherd of Hermas, the Divine Comedy, Francesco Colonna’s Hypnerotomachia Poliphili (1499), E. T. A. Hoffman’s tales, Pierre Benoit’s L’Atlantide (1919-20), and Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s “Hiawatha,” as well as works by Carl Spitteler and William Blake. But the great literary text for Jung’s life and work was Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s Faust , not because of its literary qualities but because he sensed that the drama expressed his own personal myth ( Letters 1:309-10). Further, the text offered confirmation (and poetic representation) of the only direct contribution Jung made to literary theory: a distinction between “psychological” and “visionary” texts ( Collected 15:89-90). This heuristic distinction was formed, however, solely on psychobiographical grounds: Did the text originate in, and remain principally shaped by, the author’s experience of consciousness and the personal unconscious or his or her experience at the level of the archetypal collective unconscious? And concomitantly, on which of these levels was the reader affected? Confirmation of this theory was Jung’s reading of Faust: part 1 was “psychological”; part 2, “visionary.”

Thus Jungian theory provided no clear avenue of access for those outside of psychology, and orthodox Jungians were left with little in the way of models for the psychological analysis of literature. Many fell prey to Jung’s idiosyncrasies as a reader, ranging widely and naively over genres, periods, and languages in search of the universal archetypes, while sweeping aside cultureand text-specific problems, ignoring their own role in the act of reading and basing critical evaluation solely on a text’s contribution to the advancement of the reader’s individuation process, a kind of literature-astherapy standard. This way of proceeding had the effect of putting, and keeping, archetypal criticism on the margins of academic discourse and outside the boundaries of traditional academic disciplines and departments.

Bettina Knapp’s 1984 effort at an authoritative demonstration of archetypal literary criticism exemplified this pattern. Her Jungian Approach to Literature attempts to cover the Finnish epic The Kalevala , the Persian Atar’s The Conference of the Birds , and texts by Euripides, Wolfram von Eschenbach, Michel de Montaigne, Pierre Corneille, Goethe, Novalis, Rabbi ben Simhah Nachman, and W. B. Yeats. And despite frequently perceptive readings, the work is marred by the characteristic limitless expansionism and psychological utilitarianism of her interpretive scheme.

Given this background, it is not surprising to find in a 1976 essay entitled “Jungian Psychology in Criticism: Theoretical Problems” the statement that “no purely Jungian criticism of literature has yet appeared” (Baird 22). But Jos van Meurs’s critically annotated 1988 bibliography, Jungian Literary Criticism, 1920-1980, effectively challenges this claim. Despite his deliberately selective focus on critical works written in English on literary texts that are, for the most part, also written in English, van Meurs, with the early assistance of John Kidd, has collected 902 entries, of which he identifies slightly over 80 as valid and valuable literary criticism.

While acknowledging the grave weaknesses of much Jungian writing on literature as “unsubtle and rigid application of preconceived psychological notions and schemes” resulting in “particularly ill-judged or distorted readings,” van Meurs still finds that “sensitively, flexibly and cautiously used, Jungian psychological theory may stimulate illuminating literary interpretations” (14-15). The critical annotations are astute and, given their brevity, surprisingly thorough and suggestive. Van Meurs also does a service by resurrecting successful but neglected early studies, such as Elizabeth Drew’s of T. S. Eliot (1949), and discovering value even in reductionist and impressionistic studies, such as June Singer’s of Blake. He notes that Singer’s Unholy Bible: A Psychological Interpretation of William Blake (1970), though oversimplified in its psychobiographical approach and its treatment of characters as psychological projections of the author, does make original use in a literary context of such Jungian techniques of dream interpretation as “amplification” and of such fantasy-evoking procedures as “active imagination.”

Van Meurs’s bibliography conveys the great variety of Jungian writings on literature even within one language, the increasingly recognized potential for further development and use of Jung’s ideas, and the growth in numbers of literary scholars falling under the influence of Jung. A few names form a core of writers in English (including many Canadians)—Martin Bickman, Albert Gelpi, Elliott Gose, Evelyn Hinz, Henry Murray, Barton L. St. Armand, Harold Schechter, and William Stein— though no single figure has attracted the attention of academic literary specialists, and no persistent commonalities fuse into a recognizable school critics who draw on Jung’s theories. To date, the British Journal of Analytical Psychology and the retitled American Spring: A Journal of Archetype and Culture are the best resources for archetypal criticism of literature and the arts even though only a small percentage of their published articles treat such topics.

Thus, with the archetypal theorists multiplying across disciplines on the one hand and the clinically practicing followers serving as (generally inadequate) critics on the other, archetypal literary theory and criticism flourished in two independent streams in the 1960s and 1970s. From the theorists, dissertations, articles, and books, often traditionally academic in orientation, appeared; the productions of the practitioners are chronicled and critiqued in van Meurs’s bibliography. And the 1980s saw a new, suggestive, and controversial direction in archetypal studies of literature: the feminist. With some of its advocates supported through early publication of their work in the journal Spring , feminist archetypal theory and criticism of literature and the arts emerged fullblown in three texts: Annis Pratt’s Archetypal Patterns in Women’s Fiction (1981), which self-consciously evoked and critiqued Maud Bodkin’s 1934 text; Estella Lauter’s Women as Mythmakers: Poetry and Visual Art by Twentieth Century Women (1984); and Estella Lauter and Carol Schreier Rupprecht’s Feminist Archetypal Theory: Interdisciplinary Re-Visions of Jungian Thought (1985). This last text explicitly named the movement and demonstrated its appropriation of archetypal theory for feminist ends in aesthetics, analysis, art, and religion, as well as in literature.

Feminist archetypal theory, proceeding inductively, restored Jung’s original emphasis on the fluid, dynamic nature of the archetype, drawing on earlier feminist theory as well as the work of Jungian Erich Neumann to reject absolutist, ahistorical, essentialist, and transcendentalist misinterpretations. Thus “archetype” is recognized as the “tendency to form and reform images in relation to certain kinds of repeated experience,” which may vary in individual cultures, authors, and readers (Lauter and Rupprecht 13-14). Considered according to this definition, the concept becomes a useful tool for literary analysis that explores the synthesis of the universal and the particular, seeks to define the parameters of social construction of gender, and attempts to construct theories of language, of the imaginal, and of meaning that take gender into account.

Ironically, as in the feminist revisioning of explicitly male-biased Jungian theory, the rise in the 1980s of Reader-response theory and criticism and the impetus for canon revision have begun to contribute to a revaluation of Jung as a source of literary study. New theoretical approaches appear to legitimize orthodox Jungian ways of reading, sanction Jung’s range of literary preferences from She to Faust , and support his highly affective reaction to Ulysses , which he himself identified (positively) as a “subjective confession” (i5:io9n). And new theories increasingly give credence to the requirement, historically asserted by Jungian readers, that each text elicit a personal, affective, and not “merely intellectual” response. Even French feminist Julia Kristeva has been brought to praise a Jungian contribution to feminist discourse on the maternal: recognition that the Catholic church’s change of signification in the assumption of the Virgin Mary to include her human body represented a major shift in attitude toward female corporaiity (113). In addition, many powerfully heuristic Jungian concepts, such as “synchronicity,” have yet to be tested in literary contexts.

Archetypal criticism, then, construed as that derived from Jung’s theory and practice of archetypal (analytical) psychology, is a fledgling and much misconstrued field of inquiry with significant but still unrealized potential for the study of literature and of aesthetics in general. Two publishing events at the beginning of the 1990s in the United States may signal the coming of age of this kind of archetypal criticism through its convergence with postmodern critical thought, along with a commensurate insistence on its roots in the depth psychology of Jung: the reissue of Morris Philipson’s 1963 Outline of a Jungian Aesthetic and the appearance of Karin Barnaby and Pellegrino D’Acerino’s multidisciplinary, multicultural collection of essays, C. G. Jung and the Humanities: Toward a Hermeneutics of Culture.

Myth Criticism of Northrop Frye

Bibliography James Hillman, Archetypal Psychology: A Brief Account (1983), Re-Visioning Psychology (1975); C. G. Jung, Collected Works (ed. Herbert Read, Michael Fordham, and Gerhard Adler, 20 vois., 1953-79), Letters (trans. R. F. C. Hull, 2 vois., 1973-75). James Baird, “Jungian Psychology in Criticism: Theoretical Problems,” Literary Criticism and Psychology (ed. Joseph P. Strelka, 1976); Karin Barnaby and Pellegrino D’Acerino, eds., C. G. Jung and the Humanities: Toward a Hermeneutics of Culture (1990); Martin Bickman, The Unsounded Centre: Jungian Studies in American Romanticism (1980); Maud Bodkin, Archetypal Patterns in Poetry: Psychological Studies in Imagination (1934); Northrop Frye, Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays (1957); Albert Gelpi, The Tenth Muse: The Psyche of the American Poet (1975); Naomi Goldenberg, “Archetypal Theory after Jung,” Spring (1975); Julia Kristeva, “Stabat Mater” (1977, The Kristeva Reader, ed. Toril Moi, trans. Léon S. Roudiez, 1986); Estella Lauter and Carol Schreier Rupprecht, Feminist Archetypal Theory: Interdisciplinary Re-Visions of Jungian Thought (1985); Erich Neumann, Art and the Creative Unconscious: Four Essays (trans. Ralph Manheim, 1974); Morris Philipson, Outline of a Jungian Aesthetic (1963, reprint, 1991); Annis Pratt et al., Archetypal Patterns in Women’s Fiction (1981); Jos van Meurs and John Kidd, Jungian Literary Criticism, 1920-1980: An Annotated Critical Bibliography of Works in English (with a Selection of Titles after 1980) (1988); William K. Wimsatt, Jr., and Cleanth Brooks, Literary Criticism: A Short History (1957). Source: Groden, Michael, and Martin Kreiswirth. The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994.

Archetype Essay Examples

An archetype essay explores the universal symbols and patterns that repeat across different cultures and time periods. In literature, these archetypes often manifest as characters or plot points that represent common human experiences and emotions. When deciding how to write an archetype essay, it’s essential to first identify the archetypes at play and then analyze how they contribute to the meaning of the work as a whole.

One example of an archetype is the “hero’s journey,” in which a protagonist undergoes a transformative journey or quest, facing challenges and obstacles before emerging victorious. Another example is the “wise mentor,” a character who imparts knowledge and guidance to the hero along their journey.

To write an archetype essay, begin by selecting a work of literature that contains prominent archetypes. Then, identify the specific archetypes present in the text and consider how they contribute to the meaning of the work. For example, in the classic novel “To Kill a Mockingbird,” the archetype of the “innocent” is embodied by the character of Scout, who navigates the complexities of racial injustice in her small town. This archetype reinforces the novel’s themes of prejudice, justice, and moral courage.

Overall, a successful archetype essay should demonstrate a deep understanding of the archetypes at play and how they contribute to the work’s meaning. To find a perfect archetype essay example, be sure to check this section on WritingBros.

Archetypal Analysis Of Jon Krakauer's Novel Into Thin Air

After the conclusion of Jon Krakauer’s Into Thin Air, it is somewhat difficult to say which literary theory provides the most insight into the text. Initially, the novel was analyzed from potentially four different perspectives: reader response theory, archetypal theory, feminist theory, and post-colonial theory....

The Archetypes in Young Goodman Brown

The psychological archetypes within Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Young Goodman Brown emulate how one’s social relationships can crumble as culture is imbued with judgement. The Puritan society, portrayed by the causes of goodness at its core, spurns its members to cast discernment on others, yet not on...

Young Goodman Brown Symbolism

Archetypes of Mother and Crone in the Novel Everyday Use by Alice Walker, A Worn Path' by Eudora Welty, and Mothers Tongue by Amy Tan

In the texts 'Everyday use' by Alice Walker, 'A Worn Path' by Eudora Welty, and 'Mothers Tongue' by Amy Tan, You see the at least two different Archetypes occur. The two archetypes are the mother and crone. 'Everyday use' by Alice Walker is about a...

Everyday Use
Mother Tongue

The Depth Psychology of Carl Jung and the Complexity of Carl Jung's Archetypes

When I was eight years old, I had this reoccurring dream about being in an open playing field with friends. We were in the center of the field in a bright sunny day. The weather is pleasant with an enjoyable breeze. The color of the...

Social Psychology

Analysis of The Archetypal Villain in The Odyssey

Introduction Thesis: The archetypal villain is crucial for the story to continue because the villain guides the hero to the next part of their story, the villain reveals the hero’s weaknesses and faults, and without the villain, the hero wouldn’t be a hero. The Archetypal...

The Odyssey

Stressed out with your paper?

Consider using writing assistance:

100% unique papers
3 hrs deadline option

The Tragic Downfall of Heroes: Aristotelian Tragic Hero Archetypes in The Illiad and Million Dollar Baby

Homer’s “The Iliad“ is in general a story about a war and the confusion that caused the war. The plot focuses on the development of a young man named Achilles and his journey of anger and seeking revenge after he learns of the death of...

Tragic Hero

Implementation of Business Strategies and Archetypes by Brands

Nowadays, every company in the market tries to be different than the others. According to Houraghan S. (2018) The Ultimate Guide To Brand Archetypes: Hack the Mind of Your Customers article, all of the brands can be divided into 12 archetypes, based on how they...

Marketing Strategy

Literary Hero Archetypes in Brown's Prose

Archetypes are found both covertly and overtly in most of the characters one come across in Brown’s novels. They either strongly adhere to or staunchly deviate from certain archetypes, the identification of which helps one to gain a better psychological insight and efficient character analysis....

The Darker Aspects of the Human in British Literature

British literature has long explored the complexities of the human experience, and one of its recurring themes is the archetype of evil. This archetype takes various forms, from monsters to tyrants, and serves to represent a force of chaos that threatens the stability of society....

How To Read Literature Like A Professor By Thomas C. Foster: Archetype Symbols

In Chapter 9 of How to Read Literature Like a Professor, Thomas C. Foster discusses an archetype theme of “It’s More Than Just Rain or Snow”. Foster describes the symbolism of snow as clean, stark, severe, warm, inhospitable, inviting, playful, suffocating, and filthy. The meaning...

Reading Books

Best topics on Archetype

1. Archetypal Analysis Of Jon Krakauer’s Novel Into Thin Air

2. The Archetypes in Young Goodman Brown

3. Archetypes of Mother and Crone in the Novel Everyday Use by Alice Walker, A Worn Path’ by Eudora Welty, and Mothers Tongue by Amy Tan

4. The Depth Psychology of Carl Jung and the Complexity of Carl Jung’s Archetypes

5. Analysis of The Archetypal Villain in The Odyssey

6. The Tragic Downfall of Heroes: Aristotelian Tragic Hero Archetypes in The Illiad and Million Dollar Baby

7. Implementation of Business Strategies and Archetypes by Brands

8. Literary Hero Archetypes in Brown’s Prose

9. The Darker Aspects of the Human in British Literature

10. How To Read Literature Like A Professor By Thomas C. Foster: Archetype Symbols

Confirmation Bias
Self Concept
Development
Lev Vygotsky Theory
Attachment Theory

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Definition of Archetype

Common examples and descriptions of literary archetypes, examples of archetype in shakespearean works, famous examples of archetype in popular culture.

Think you don’t know of any famous archetypes? Here are some well-known examples of archetype in popular culture:

Difference Between Archetype and Stereotype

Writing archetype.

Overall, as a literary device, archetype functions as a means of portraying characters with recurring and identifiable traits and qualities that span time and culture. This is effective for readers in that archetypes set up recognizable patterns of characterization in literary works. When a reader is able to identify an archetypal character, they can anticipate that character’s role and/or purpose in the narrative. This not only leads to expectations, but engagement as well on the part of the reader.

Establish Universal Characters

Establish contrasting characters.

Archetypes can also help writers establish contrasting characters, sometimes known as foils . In general, a literary work does not feature just one archetypal character. Since readers have an awareness of the inherent and typical characteristics of an archetype, this can create contrast against other characters in the narrative that are either archetypes themselves or not. Therefore, writers are able to create conflict and contrast between characters that are logical and recognizable for the reader.

Examples of Archetype in Literature

Example 1: nick carraway: everyman ( the great gatsby , f. scott fitzgerald).

In my younger and more vulnerable years my father gave me some advice that I’ve been turning over in my mind ever since. “Whenever you feel like criticizing any one,” he told me, “just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had.”

In this passage, Fitzgerald establishes for the reader that Nick Carraway’s character is not just the narrator of the novel , but an “everyman” archetype as well. Though Nick’s father reminds him of “advantages” that he’s had, Nick is nevertheless considered the novel’s most relatable and “average” character. Therefore, as an everyman archetype, the reader is able to identify with Nick and consequently trust his observations and narration of the events of the story . This allows Nick’s character to influence the way in which the reader engages with the novel’s characters and events, as his everyman actions and interactions become vicarious experiences for Fitzgerald’s audience as well.

Example 2: Ma Joad: Caregiver ( The Grapes of Wrath , John Steinbeck)

Her hazel eyes seemed to have experienced all possible tragedy and to have mounted pain and suffering like steps into a high calm and a superhuman understanding. She seemed to know, to accept, to welcome her position, the citadel of the family, the strong place that could not be taken. And since old Tom and the children could not know hurt or fear unless she acknowledged hurt and fear, she had practiced denying them in herself.

Example 3: Sancho Panza: Jester ( Don Quixote , Miguel de Cervantes)

The most perceptive character in a play is the fool, because the man who wishes to seem simple cannot possibly be a simpleton.

Post navigation.

English Studies

This website is dedicated to English Literature, Literary Criticism, Literary Theory, English Language and its teaching and learning.

Archetypal Criticism

Archetypal criticism is a literary theory that examines the underlying universal symbols, themes, and character archetypes found in literature across different cultures and historical periods.

Introduction to Archetypal Criticism

Table of Contents

It is rooted in the work of Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung, who proposed that these archetypes are part of the collective unconscious shared by all humans. Archetypal critics analyze texts to reveal the deeper, often mythic, layers of meaning and to explore how these archetypal elements resonate with the human experience. This approach offers insights into the enduring and cross-cultural significance of certain narrative patterns and symbols in literature.

Criticism Against Archetypal Criticism

1. overgeneralization and reductionism:.

Critics argue that archetypal literary theory tends to oversimplify complex characters and narratives by reducing them to basic, pre-defined archetypes. This oversimplification can lead to a lack of depth and nuance in the analysis done from this perspective.

2. Lack of Empirical Evidence:

One of the main criticisms against archetypal literary theory is its reliance on universal, innate symbols and patterns without substantial empirical evidence to support its claims. The theory often relies on subjective interpretations rather than concrete data.

3. Cultural and Historical Limitations:

Archetypes are often based on Western cultural and historical perspectives, not applicable or relevant to all literary works, especially those from diverse cultural backgrounds. This limitation can lead to a narrow understanding of non-Western literature.

4. Disregard for Individuality and Originality:

Critics argue that archetypal criticism tends to overlook the uniqueness and individuality of literary works and authors. By focusing on recurring patterns, the theory may neglect the specific artistic intentions and innovations of writers.

5. Ambiguous Archetypal Definitions:

The definitions of archetypes can be vague and open to multiple interpretations. This ambiguity can lead to varying analyses and potential misinterpretations of literary works, causing disagreements among scholars.

6. Incompatibility with Modern and Postmodern Literature:

Some critics assert that archetypal literary theory is better suited for analyzing traditional and classical literature rather than modern and postmodern works, which often challenge or subvert traditional archetypal patterns.

7. Neglect of Socio-Political and Historical Contexts:

Archetypal criticism may place less emphasis on the socio-political and historical contexts in which literary works are created, leading to an incomplete understanding of the complexities and influences shaping the texts.

8. Lack of Authorial Intent Consideration:

The theory may not adequately address the intentions and conscious choices of authors, as it focuses more on underlying patterns than the author’s specific creative decisions.

9. Subjective Interpretations:

Archetypal literary theory allows for subjective interpretations, which can result in varying and potentially biased analyses based on the personal beliefs and experiences of the critic.

10. Ignores Evolution of Meanings and Symbols:

Critics argue that archetypal theory can neglect the evolution of symbols and meanings across different historical periods and cultures, leading to an anachronistic analysis of certain works.

Notable Critics Against Archetypal Criticism

Criticism against archetypal criticism as a literary theory includes the following:

Roland Barthes: French literary theorist and philosopher who argued that the idea of a universal, shared set of archetypes is a myth and that meanings are created through social and cultural practices rather than innate human experiences.
Raymond Williams: Welsh cultural theorist who criticized archetypal criticism for being ahistorical, and argued that the meaning of literary works is always shaped by the social and historical context in which they were produced.
Michel Foucault: French philosopher and historian who challenged the idea of a universal, shared set of archetypes, arguing that knowledge is always shaped by power relations and historical context.
Edward Said: Palestinian-American literary critic who criticized archetypal criticism for being Eurocentric and failing to take into account the cultural traditions of non-Western societies.
Homi Bhabha: Indian cultural theorist who argued that archetypal criticism is limited by its emphasis on fixed, universal meanings, and that the meanings of literary works are always shaped by the process of cultural translation and negotiation.

Examples of Archetypal Criticism

The Hero’s Journey in The Lord of the Rings : Archetypal critics often analyze J.R.R. Tolkien’s epic fantasy series, The Lord of the Rings , through the lens of the hero’s journey archetype. Frodo’s quest to destroy the One Ring exemplifies the stages of a hero’s journey, including the call to adventure, trials and challenges, and ultimate transformation.
The Trickster Archetype in The Catcher in the Rye : In J.D. Salinger’s novel The Catcher in the Rye , the protagonist, Holden Caulfield, can be seen as embodying the trickster archetype. He challenges societal norms and engages in rebellious behavior, reflecting the trickster’s tendency to disrupt the status quo.
The Mother Archetype in Beloved : Toni Morrison’s novel Beloved explores the mother archetype through the character of Sethe, who exhibits both nurturing and destructive maternal qualities. Archetypal analysis reveals the complexity of motherhood and its impact on the characters and their lives.
The Quest for Identity in The Great Gatsby : F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby can be examined through the archetype of the quest for identity. Jay Gatsby’s relentless pursuit of the American Dream and his reinvention of himself highlight the universal theme of seeking one’s true identity and place in society.
The Heroine’s Journey in Jane Eyre : Charlotte Brontë’s novel Jane Eyre offers an example of the heroine’s journey archetype. Jane’s development from an orphaned, mistreated child to an independent and self-assertive woman follows a narrative pattern that resonates with the journey of female protagonists in many classic works of literature.

Keywords in Archetypal Criticism

Archetype: A universal symbol or motif that recurs across different cultures and time periods, representing a fundamental human experience or trait.
Collective Unconscious : A concept in Jungian psychology, referring to the inherited pool of shared experiences, memories, and symbols that all humans share and that influence our behavior and perceptions.
Myth: A traditional story or narrative that conveys deep cultural, religious, or psychological meaning through archetypal symbols and motifs.
Symbolism : The use of symbols to represent complex or abstract ideas, emotions, or themes.
Characterization : The process of creating fictional characters who embody archetypal qualities or who serve as representations of larger symbolic concepts.
Allegory : A literary work in which characters, events, or settings serve as symbolic representations of abstract ideas or moral lessons.
Journey/Quest: A recurring motif in archetypal criticism that refers to the hero’s journey, a narrative pattern in which a character embarks on a physical or spiritual journey to achieve a goal or gain knowledge.
Transformation: The process of a character undergoing a fundamental change in personality, identity, or worldview, often as a result of encountering archetypal symbols or undergoing an archetypal experience.
Mythic Criticism: A subset of archetypal criticism that focuses specifically on the analysis of mythic elements and motifs in literature.
Jungian Criticism: A school of criticism that uses the theories and concepts of Carl Jung, a prominent psychoanalyst and psychologist, to explore the archetypal and symbolic dimensions of literature.

Helping Writers Become Authors

Write your best story. Change your life. Astound the world.

Start Here!
Story Structure Database
Outlining Your Novel
Story Structure
Character Arcs
Archetypal Characters
Scene Structure
Common Writing Mistakes
Storytelling According to Marvel
K.M. Weiland Site

An Introduction to Archetypal Stories

If it works, it is true.

Walking on Water by Madeleine L’Engle (affiliate link)

Madeleine L’Engle in Walking on Water comments that:

…all true art has an iconic quality…. All artists reflect the time in which they live, but whether or not their work also has that universality which lives in any generation or culture is nothing we will know for many years…. If the artist reflects only his own culture, then his works will die with that culture. But if his works reflect the eternal and universal, they will revive.

What is an archetype? My dictionary offers three definitions:

1. A typical specimen.

2. An original model.

3. A universal or recurring symbol.

Structuring Your Novel (Amazon affiliate link)

As we discussed last week, the very shape of story itself is archetypal . Its structure, by whatever system you prefer to codify it , is a blueprint for life itself, both as a whole and in its many smaller integers. In future weeks, we’re going to be talking about some specific archetypal models (of which there are many) that you can use to discover, guide, and amplify the archetypes within your own stories. But today, let’s examine the intermediary ground— why it should be that story and archetype are so intertwined and what this means for you as a writer attempting to channel these deep patterns of human existence.

Story as Revelation

Many writers can speak to the experience of “receiving” a story. Much as Stephen King has famously described his own process, we don’t so much create our stories as we discover them. It is as if the bones, at least, are always there, and all we have to do is figure out how to dig them up. When the creation process is at its most powerful, we are “ in the zone ,” writing madly away, just hoping our fingers can move fast enough to get it all down before the inspiration fades.

Dr. Friedrich Dessauer, an atomic physicist at the turn of the 20th Century , mused that:

Man is a creature who depends entirely on revelation. In all his intellectual endeavor, he should always listen, always be intent to hear and see. He should not strive to superimpose the structure of his own mind, his systems of thought upon reality.

Proust Was a Neuroscientist by Jonah Lehrer (affiliate link)

I think Dessauer would agree with Jonathan Lehrer in Proust Was a Neuroscientist when Lehrer says:

Physics is useful for describing quarks and galaxies, neuroscience is useful for describing the brain, and art is useful for describing our actual experience.

Writers can easily attest to the delicate balance of uncovering life’s patterns as recorded in our collective story theories so that we may better tap into them, but not so that we may superimpose them where our deeper wisdom and creativity knows they do not belong.

Women Who Run With the Wolves by Clarissa Pinkola Estés (affiliate link)

In her book Women Who Run With the Wolves , a poetic exploration of the feminine journey via archetypal stories, psychologist and oral storyteller Clarissa Pinkola Estés speaks passionately to the storyteller’s (and indeed the human’s) responsibility to channel this archetypal inspiration:

Our work is to interpret this Life/Death/Life cycle, to live it as gracefully as we know how, to howl like a mad dog when we cannot—and to go on…. Although some use stories as entertainment alone, tales are, in their oldest sense, a healing art. Some are called to this healing art, and the best, to my lights, are those who have lain with the story and found all its matching parts inside themselves and at depth.

When writers first begin learning about archetypal story structure , they are often astonished (as I was) to examine their own stories and discover that these archetypes they’ve never heard of before are there already within their best stories— or waiting to be uncovered to help those stories find a truer voice.

How is it that even the most uneducated writers seem to have at least a glimmer of an understanding for these archetypes? Perhaps it is because these patterns are everywhere, and we necessarily absorb them by osmosis. Perhaps, as the depth psychologists would have it, it is because these archetypes reside in a collective unconscious. Or perhaps it is simply because as humans we resonate with the patterns of our existence and instinctively understand how to recreate them in our art.

Whatever the case, archetypal stories and characters have populated the greater archetypal mythologies of the human experience for as long as we can remember. As Willa Cather says in one of my favorite quotes ever:

There are only two or three human stories, and they go on repeating themselves as fiercely as if they never happened.

Mythological Character Archetypes

Writing Archetypal Character Arcs (affiliate link)

Most of what we specifically think of as character archetypes are found in the stories that have been mythologized, whether from history, religion, or folk and fairy tales. What we recognize as the origins for these stories and their characters are often simplistic, fantastical, and moralistic. They often repeat over and over again throughout the millennia, varied but always foundationally similar from culture to culture and era to era. Or as Estés put it:

That is the nature of archetypes… they leave an evidence, they wend their way into the stories, dreams, and ideas of mortals. There they become a universal theme, a set of instructions, dwelling who knows where, but crossing time and space to enwisen each new generation. There is a saying that stories have wings. They can fly over the Carpathian Mountains and lodge in the Urals. They then vault over to the Sierras and follow its spine over and hop to the Rockies, and so on.

The Art of Fiction by John Gardner (affiliate link)

In The Art of Fiction , writing instructor John Gardner distinguished “fables,” “yarns,” and “tales” as layers of story that move increasingly away from non-reality (i.e., fantasy) into the more nuanced and specific realms of realism. But even the hyper-realistic fiction of post-modernism rests upon the foundations of myth and its metaphors.

Psychologist James Hillman notes:

Mythology is a psychology of antiquity, psychology is a mythology of modernity.

The Hero With a Thousand Faces Joseph Campbell

When modern writers think about archetype, we are most likely to think of the now ubiquitous Hero’s Journey, made famous by Joseph Campbell’s mythological research in The Hero With a Thousand Faces and since codified by many writers (most notably Christopher Vogler in The Writer’s Journey ) as a profoundly powerful archetypal character arc. The Hero’s Journey is a deeply metaphoric structure that finds its most literal representation in fantasy—with its often black-and-white representations of good and evil, complete with dragons, resurrections, kingdoms, and wizards. But it is found over and over again in story after story, whether fantastical or realistic, proving its versatility. (However, it is not the only archetypal character arc, and not even the most important one—which is what we will be discussing in the upcoming series, featuring six primary and serial arcs, of which the Hero’s Journey is the second.)

Archetype as the Path to Powerful Stories

So why do archetypes matter? To a writer, they matter for the most obvious reason that they are stories . But more than that, they are stories that work . The very fact that these patterns have not only stuck around over the years, but in fact have proven themselves to still be meaningful should be enough to perk up the ears of any writer. After all, that’s what we’re all hoping for in our own stories, isn’t it?

Like the structure of plot and character itself, archetypes offer writers insights into modalities of deeper and more resonant fiction . The mere pattern of an archetype is not resonance in itself (as the many cookie-cutter productions of the Hero’s Journey, ad nauseum, have proved). But the archetypes offer the storyteller a glimpse into some of the deeper insights and truths of humanity.

Gardner points out:

Fiction seeks out truth. Granted, it seeks a poetic kind of truth, universals not easily translatable into moral codes. But part of our interest as we read is in learning how the world works; how the conflicts we share with the writer and all other human beings can be resolved, if at all; what values we can affirm and, in general, what the moral risks are. The writer who can’t distinguish truth from a peanut-butter sandwich can never write good fiction. What he affirms we deny, throwing away his book in indignation; or if he affirms nothing, not even our oneness in sad or comic helplessness, and insists that he’s perfectly right to do so, we confute him by closing his book.

More than that, archetypes—particularly the specific archetypal character arcs that represent the human life—have the potential to offer writers and readers alike a subconscious road map to our own initiatory journeys through life.

Creating Character Arcs

That has been my own experience with these archetypal character arcs. Merely in coming to a recognition of them (and particularly that the Hero’s Journey is one of many and where it fits within the pattern—and therefore within my own life as well as my characters’), I have personally found just as many gifts as a person as I have as a writer.

Campbell says it as well as anyone:

The tribal ceremonies of birth, initiation, marriage, burial, installation, and so forth, serve to translate the individuals’ life-crises and life-deeds into classic, impersonal forms. They disclose him to himself, not as this personality or that, but as the warrior, the bride, the widow, the priest, the chieftain; at the same time rehearsing for the rest of the community the old lesson of the archetypal stages. All participate in the ceremonial according to rank and function. The whole society becomes visible to itself as an imperishable living unit. Generations of individuals pass, like anonymous cells from a living body; but the sustaining, timeless form remains. By an enlargement of vision to embrace this super-individual, each discovers himself enhanced, enriched, supported, and magnified. His role, however unimpressive, is seen to be intrinsic to the beautiful festival-image of man—the image, potential yet necessarily inhibited within himself.

Whether we are writing about falling in love in a YA novel, fighting dragons in a fantasy, making peace with adult children in contemporary fiction, ruling a corrupt dynasty in a historical novel, or conversing with the moon in magical realism—we are all writing about our own experiences of the world and, by extension if we write well and truly enough, everyone else’s experiences as well.

The Emotional Craft of Fiction by Donald Maass

In closing, here is one last quote, this one from Donald Maass’s wonderful Emotional Craft of Fiction :

You may think you are telling your characters’ stories, but actually you are telling us ours.

Stay tuned: Next week, we will officially kick off the series on archetypal character arcs with an introduction to the six primary Positive Change Arc character archetypes we will be studying.

Wordplayers, tell me your opinions! What has been your experience reading, viewing, or writing archetypal stories? Tell me in the comments!

Go on the journey with your characters! Check out the Archetypal Character Guided Meditations .

Click the “Play” button to Listen to Audio Version (or subscribe to the Helping Writers Become Authors podcast in Apple Podcast or Amazon Music ).

Love Helping Writers Become Authors? You can now become a patron. (Huge thanks to those of you who are already part of my Patreon family !)

Sign Up Today

K.M. Weiland is the award-winning and internationally-published author of the acclaimed writing guides Outlining Your Novel , Structuring Your Novel , and Creating Character Arcs . A native of western Nebraska, she writes historical and fantasy novels and mentors authors on her award-winning website Helping Writers Become Authors.

I was writing archetypal stories before I knew the word existed or its meaning. I sometimes wish I could regain that innocence because I sometimes feel I am so self-aware of all the “theory” behind the writing it has ruined my ability to be creative. Then I think that I am only immature when it comes to writing. It’s my own fault because I never did enough of the work. I never put in my “10,000-hour rule”. Maybe 2 or 3, even 4 thousand if that. That is the dark hole I find myself in looking up at that pinhole-size of light. Then I take a breath, hit the reboot button, and start again. With the most recent story I am wiring, a nightmare theme that deals with how parents experience unimaginable acts of violence committed by their children, it’s forced me to mediate on my own experience of trauma growing up and how it has made me what I am and if I am not careful and self-aware, how might that have affected my own children. I also wonder how many archetypes I am still incorporating into my story and in being aware of them, how can I, should I, subvert them. I realize that the most important archetype I am working with here is the one of “the wounded healer” Carl Jung is quoted as saying…”a good half of every treatment that probes at all deeply consists in the doctor’s examining himself… it is his own hurt that gives a measure of his power to heal. This, and nothing else, is the meaning of the Greek myth of the wounded physician.” He was referring to Greek mythology’s, Chiron, the centaur, who was poisoned with an incurable wound by one of Hercules’s arrows. Jung mentioned the Chiron myth “wounding by one’s own arrow means, first of all, the state of introversion” It’s not ironic then that I was always more interested in Jung than in Freud. What I also liked about Jung’s psychology is his acceptable that there is danger in becoming conscious of one’s own wounds. Making one’s self vulnerable to other people’s wounds puts yourself in a position to become infected by it, but also infecting the other with your own wounds. Jung’s closest colleague, Marie Louise Von Franz, said “the wounded healer IS the archetype of the Self [our wholeness, the God within] and is at the bottom of all genuine healing procedures.” So this is the archetype I am working with in my story, since my story is sort of an ensemble cast in that I provide glimpses into how the antagonist and supporting characters are going through the same thing as the protagonist as they act out how they think is the best way to deal with the unimaginable.

I love your introspection. I’m writing a story about the PTSD of surviving an alcoholic home, and the power of the father/alcoholic in the psyche of his son. Of course, it’s persona and hard to wade into. Such a morass! I like the idea of the wounded healer. I’m in AA and that’s what AA is all about. We are all wounded healers trying to help each other. Thanks.

Thank you Frank…I think maybe it’s been taking me so long with this story is 1) how to structure it (KW, thanks for your instructional book Structuring Your Novel! It is so so so helpful) 2) my own laziness and writers block 3) the subject matter is very painful – not just in terms of autobiographical but in the research I do with respect to abusive/neglectful parents – how to make someone like this the protagonist? – as well as it manifests in people who are not coping with trauma – the notion that parents can have thoughts about regretting that they had children – or who resent their children and living with that tension that they love them too. And satisfying all the tropes of the horror genre. I’m looking for redemption for any of my characters!

My protagonist and antagonist are both in recovery which is what makes them identity with one another and makes both of them outcasts too with their community. It makes them harder to battle with one another against a “common” enemy.

I think you’re mining lots of great archetypal potential here!

I love this post. I love archetypes. I remember I was really happy and excited when I realized that the Hero’s Journey existed, and that `Star Wars’ followed it. That was not long after the first `Pirates of the Caribbean’ movie came out, and I spent a long happy while figuring out that it ALSO follows the Hero Journey, with Captain Jack Sparrow taking on the role of mentor figure. It really widened archetypes for me- the realization that an arch-typical role didn’t have to LOOK familiar. Their role is defined by their place in the story, not their trappings.

Sparrow is mentor and a trickster all at once. Very unique character in this way.

Yes, we can not only portray archetype effectively in classic ways, but also by subverting them.

Honestly, I haven’t thought about archetypal stories much, but I guess I wrote some in the past. For example, the coming-of-age story I used to work on about my character Cynthia Carson. It was a story that took place from the 1930s to the 1960s. I’m thinking of revising it in another story under a different title and storyline, at least the part of the 1960s during her young adulthood. Anyway, in the 1950s during her teen years, I had a lot of archetypes: the bully, the MVP, the popular cheerleader, the nerd, etc.) Some of these are actually in my debut novel “With You Forever’ which I mentioned during Eva’s class reunion.

And I’m sure some books I’ve read have some archetypes too, such as Mama Flora’s Family. In the story, Flora has two sons (Willie & Luke) from different fathers. Willie struggles to make ends meet and was raised without his father who was killed when he was a baby, and Luke is a successful lawyer and was raised without Flora when he was taken away after birth. The brothers clash over their differences, as Willie dropped out of school to help support his mother and cousin/sister Ruthana. Years later, Don, Willie’s oldest son gets trapped in gambling, flashy clothing, and all the other things Willie was involved in, repeating the same lifestyle, which is another form of archetype too. These are just some of my examples of writing and reading archetypal stories.

I love this premise as it is seemingly based in the real and at the same time an expression of archetype. What comes to mind when I consider a story that is plausibly based in the world as we know is, ironically, the movie Stranger Than Fiction, with Will Farrell, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Queen Latifah, Emma Thompson and Dustin Hoffman. Farrell is a character in Thompson’s novel as she writes it and he comes to be aware that he is the character. He goes to Hoffman, a literature professor who initially asks Farrell questions about himself. After answering the questions, Hoffmann reveals he has been trying to pinpoint what type of story he is in and what type of archetypal character he is. This for me shows how we are all archetypal characters in our own stories (of our own creation or someone else’s?) in our everyday lives.

Great movie for writers.

Yessss!!! Love that movie!

Brilliant start to this series, Katie. And I assume there will be a book at some point? 😉

You never know. 😉

I hope you write a book on this!

cool. I was watching a movie the other day with my family and by the midpoint I knew that the story was one of those… Ambitious protagonist who has friends and a family but lies to himself that he needs more and gets that by the first plot point, but by the midpoint starts neglecting his friends and family and becomes a jerk up until the end were he realizes that he had everything he ever needed right there in the beginning Everyone else in my family was blown away, HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT. I was just sitting back on the couch. “Idk. I guess I just saw that same thing before in a ton of other movies like The greatest showman, high school musical 2, and Sky high.

Watch it. Pretty soon they won’t want to watch movies with you anymore. 😉

Guilty… lol

My partner and I went to see “The Force Awakens” at the cinema. In the middle of the movie there was a scene in which Han and Leia were talking and Han promises to Leia that he will bring their son home.

I turned to my partner and whispered “Han’s going to die.”

My partner thought I’d seen a spoiler online.

The more you study story structure and layout, the more you’ll find yourself predicting the key events of movies. You may never be able to watch one the same way again.

Not that understanding ruins my appreciation of books and movies, but I have to stop myself from criticizing them. The bottom line is that books and movies are made for entertainment and it is a business. Writers want to make a living working at their craft. Publishers want to make money off of their investment in the writer. There is fine line crafting a story that will sell, receive enough “buzz” from critics and fans, while adding something “new” to the genre and format. But is it too much to expect as a reader or viewer that the next new book or movie we watch is crafted well enough to the sophisticated audience that it somehow breaks new ground or is there just to satisfy our need for entertainment? I watch movies and read books as throwback stories and don’t expect the creators to redefine the genre. Whether or not a story breaks new ground is something that is not know and can only be done if it can stand the test of time. But we are told that the next thing is the next “new” thing. I expect that archetypes are familiar enough to engage me or retain my interest but don’t expect too much from the creators in breaking new ground.

Yes, I think about this sometimes too—how I get bored with the “same ol” in new stories but can watch the old movies that originated the tropes over and over again.

K.M., would you list the old movies that originated the tropes? I would love to see what you mean.

Hard to make a definitive list, since both the tropes and the movies are myriad. But it’s always instructive to watch old classics– Casablanca , It’s a Wonderful Life , All About Eve , etc.–to see how they laid the groundwork for everything to follow.

If what Willa Cather says is true in one of her quotes:

Then why should we as authors bust our butts to be original? What is the point of repeating these three stories? Did I miss something in this essay?

Originality is built on top of the familiar. It’s variation on a theme. Human lives themselves are *not* original: we are all born, we all live, we all die. But the variations within our lives make them unique. Some of us are writers. Some are inventors. Some are parents. Etc.

You might enjoy these posts: https://www.helpingwritersbecomeauthors.com/?s=original

Thank you for the link. It was most enlightening and from it I have discovered (creative wise) I have done some things right in my book.

I love guitars and appreciative of finely crafted ones. I am intrigued by the concept of the perfect guitar one that is not only is easy to play physically, but is also an uninhibited extension of the guitarists’ spirit.

I also like elves, giants, and dragons and so have included them in my book.

I also like magic and have it in my book.

I’m interested in questions of morality. Is it ever Godly to kill?

I’m interested in forgiveness and redemption.

I love food and so does my protagonist.

I love the French language and names which I have also included.

I also know that most of my love loves and interests are considered no nos in today’s marketing schemes, but I feel compelled to include them anyway. To not to do so feels cowardly and dishonest.

One item I’m not passionate about is marketing which is my downfall.

This year, I will deal with it.

You can also love marketing. Just think of it as another food course.

Marketing is like liver: it’s suppose to be good for you, but the taste is nasty. I don’t like liver.

Haha. Well, you’re not alone as an author who struggles with a relationship to marketing. 😉

“‘You may think you are telling your characters’ stories, but actually you are telling us ours.'”

Don’t tell my family this. Then they’ll think that I spend all my time in my room or outside because I’m a superhero. : D

Always an appropriate alter-ego for a writer. 😉

I’m so excited by this new series! Many years ago I listened to a collection of Joseph Campbell audio tapes (yes, a long, long time ago) on Archetypes and was fascinated. Most of what I learned has probably evaporated so am keen to revisit.

Love your curiosity and compassion for the craft and for teaching, Katy. You’re brilliant – thank you.

My ears are perked!

Yes, there will be quite a few Campbell references coming up! It would be hard to discuss this subject without doing so.

The serendipitous timing of your posts astounds me. I’ve only recently begun searching out archetypes, trying to understand why they are so important. I decided some months ago to write a fairytale, (as a conscious objection to the stress that COVID has imposed on my work for the last, never-ending year) but simplifying the narrative form means that structure actually matters more. Theme matters more. I’ve known about the Hero’s Journey forever, but never examined it in detail until now. I find it very funny that you keep referencing books I’ve just discovered as I flounder, trying to figure out what I’m missing.

Maybe you can recommend some new ones to me too!

Whether lovers or heroes, sages or outlaws, jesters or commoners, the archetypes are all aspects of life and personality common to us all.

The innocent sins and his conscience awakens to lead him down the road to wisdom that renders him a sage. The commoner among us meets a beautiful woman and becomes first a lover, then a ruler of sorts as parents rule over children. That steadfast couple’s struggle to care for family and friends makes them affluent, but then thieves take success and prosperity from them, killing the husband as they do. Our steadfast wife then becomes an outlaw to and provide for her children. One of their innocent children grows into the hero who repays the thieves and restores the family’s standing. We each experience many archetypical qualities and phases throughout life.

Jung postulates that archetypes are part of a “collective unconscious” where humans share memories of universal experience. With all due respect to Mr. Jung, that seems unfounded mysticism to me. At different times we are all the innocent, the caregiver, the nobleman, the hero, the outlaw, jester, commoner, ruler, lover and sage, and it is in those aspects of being that we find our best writing. When our words drip life into any such part of ourselves as we leave on the page, that is when we bring an archetype to life and become creators (yes I know, another archetype).

Beautifully put!

I love this series, Katie. It really speaks to my interest in stories and archetypes. I read Women Who Run with the Wolves many moons ago… so good! I will have to revisit it now. Joseph Campbell and Carl Jung fascinated me in high school. Makes a lot of sense to me now thinking about how adolescence is such a time of figuring out who we are and what our stories are and will be. And understanding that we are so connected. Lots to think about.

Yes, so many good authors to explore!

I know Carl Jung said archetypes are part of a “collective unconscious” where humans share memories of universal experience. With all due respect to Mr. Jung, that seems unfounded mysticism to me. After all, the seasons of our lives take us through many of the mythical archetypes in their natural course. We begin as The Innocent and through the natural course of our mistakes and sins, our conscience awakens and so the journey to wisdom begins. This eventually leads some of us to become The Sage in our elder years. Along the way, we encounter evil that tries to wrest any success we have from us so that men can prosper without work. In the call to oppose evil, we may play the part of The Hero from time to time, and if the evil is within a governing body, we may perhaps play The Outlaw for a time as well. As we grow, we meet that man or woman we just can’t live without and marry up to settle down, becoming The Lover. As children arrive on the scene, we also spend time as The Ruler, rather like miniature versions of loving kings or queens. In raising them we understand the role of The Caregiver. I personally have been The Jester at times, haven’t we all? But I realized somewhere along the way that all people are beautiful things and powerful, ready to surprise you with how they exceed my own little life. Truly I am The Everyman. I hope I bring these to my writing, but alas, I remain unpublished. Perhaps I will never be The Artist.

You’re an Artist whether you publish or not. That’s something else I want to post on later this year (way later) after I finish this series.

I tried to post something last night and it didn’t go up right away. When it did post, I didn’t see it and it was under the name “Ja.” Sorry about that. I didn’t discover the error until tonight when I was reading through the posts. Anyway, when it didn’t initially post, I rewrote it and posted again, so since the two posts are almost the same, you may want to delete one. Thanks for telling me the first post was beautifully put by the way. I’m not sure where I made the mistake that kept it from posting correctly, but I’m sorry about that.

No problem!

Dear Ms Weiland, I love your beautifully crafted posts. And look at the marvellous comments they attract. What stimulating pages. You relate aesthetics to all kinds of writers. Thank you, Ianet Bastyan

Thanks for contributing yourself! 🙂

“Next week, we will officially kick off the series on archetypal character arcs with an introduction to the six primary Positive Change Arc character archetypes we will be studying.”

Do you think you’ll be covering Negative Change Arc archetypes at some point? I loves me some tragedy, and would love to dig into how we get from “Oedipus Rex” and “King Lear” to “Attack on Titan” and “Madoka Magica” (anime references; ask the kids).

Yes, the series will be a lengthy one that will also discuss “negative” shadow archetypes as well as “flat” or resting archetypes.

This sounds a great series. I am really looking forward to it.

Is Star Wars still revered because it got archetypes better than its imitators or just because it was more or less first on the Hero’s Journey? The beat I always think about is Han leaving- cause Harrison Ford is VERY convincing in that scene – and suddenly showing back up to save Luke. This is a great beat and I have never seen it done as effectively since. I think that is because Han shot Greedo, clearly showing he is an Outlaw only innit for himself. So I’m wondering: does this work due to careful writing, the novelty factor or because I was a kid when I saw it and was easily convinced?

A little of both, I think.

Such a fascinating discussion! I will definitely have to re-visit this post or queue up the podcast in the future 🙂 I remember my dad talking to me about archetypes when I was younger, and I like to think through them when it comes to making stories but I’ve never intentionally weaved them into my stories. I love how you talk about digging deeper and how fiction and these archetypes explore our humanity. Fantastic! 🙂

Yes, I’m sure you’re probably using them without even realizing it. There *are* many different types of archetypes. This series will only explore a few possible ones.

Not hating on your craft or anything negative, but I need to express that I’m not someone that archetypes work for. I consider all my characters their own people, regardless of how simple they seem or whether they even affect anything. Archetypes seem to box them in. But it’s mainly this one. (it may work for other stories I’d make to pass the time) A standalone fanfiction of my many characters, for lack of better word. Also, could you point me to your sources on villain motivation?

We’ve all got to find what works for us, absolutely. However, I would suggest that if you’re finding archetypes limiting, it may be because you’re interacting with them more as stereotypes.

As for antagonist motivation, you might find this post helpful: https://www.helpingwritersbecomeauthors.com/antagonists-motivations/

[…] are certain over-arching decisions to be made about your story. K.M. Weiland gives an introduction to archetypal stories, Clare Langley-Hawthorne looks at tense in a novel, and Tiffany Yates Martin demystifies the […]

[…] Here’s a link to the general overview of the ideas. To sum it up quickly, this is a sequence of six archetypes (including the Hero’s arc that is typical of a lot of stories) that can help guide characters through the major change arcs of life. It includes the negative reflections of those arcs, how the character might become twisted, and the kinds of antagonists they’ll face that are tailored to the struggles that they have. It also includes a series of flat arcs that go between each of the archetypes. Flat arcs being those where the character already knows the essential truth of the story and doesn’t need to change as much as they need to act on what they already know. […]

[…] An Introduction to Archetypal Stories […]

Write Your Best Book

Check out my latest novel!

( affiliate link )

Free E-Book

5 Secrets of Story Structure by K.M. Weiland

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Subscribe to blog posts rss, sign up for k.m. weiland’s e-letter and get a free e-book, love helping writers become authors.

Return to top of page

Scriptwriting

What is an Archetype — Definition & Examples in Storytelling

W hat is an archetype? Archetypes play an integral role in how people understand each other – but what are they? We’re going to answer that question as we define archetype, then we’ll look at some archetype examples from classic literature and film. By the end, you’ll know why archetypes are so important for storytellers – and why they might explain something innate about the human condition.

Archetype Definition

First, let’s define archetype.

Archetypes may not have been formally defined until the 20th century, but they existed far before then. Archetypes are simply patterns that connect us across time and place. We’re going to look at some archetype examples in a bit – but first let’s formally outline an archetype definition.

ARCHETYPE DEFINITION

What is an archetype.

An archetype is a pattern that connects the people of the world across time and culture. The idea of the archetype was conceived by Swiss psychoanalyst Carl Jung. In writing, archetypes are characters or symbols that are recognizable irrespective of their place or time of origin.

Iconic Archetypes

The Wise Old Man

For more on the foundation of archetypes, check out the video that asks, “What is an Archetype?” below.

What is an Archetype?

So, is an archetype simply a pattern? Well, yes and no.

It is a pattern, but it’s also something more than that. Many argue archetypes are intrinsic to human nature. Now let's look at some examples of these archetypal patterns in characters and symbols.

WHAT IS AN ARCHETYPE CHARACTER

Guide to archetypal characters .

As storytellers, we rely on archetypal characters to bridge the gap between people of different cultures. Take the hero for example: the hero is a character archetype that’s existed in stories all over the world for thousands of years.

And it existed in spite of the fact that there was little possibility that some communities were privy to the stories created by other communities. Take Gilgamesh for example – the character many historians regard as the first hero, and a direct inspiration for Joseph Campbell’s Hero’s Journey .

The Epic of Gilgamesh established a stereotypically flawed hero that subsequently influenced Egyptian mythology and other river valley civilizations, via oral tradition. But why were other “Gilgamesh-esh” characters conceived in other parts of the world irrespective of the knowledge of their origin? Largely because they were archetypical – aka universally relatable.

Through a historical lens, we can see that heroic characters were conceived by Asian, European, African, and communities irrespective of one another. The hero is actually a subset of “the leader” archetype. For more on “the leader,” check out our video essay below.

Walter White is an Example of an Archetype • Subscribe on YouTube

Other subsets of the leader character type include: the antihero and the villain. In our video essay, we argue that “conflict is drama, drama is interesting, and leaders are conflict machines.” Thus, the leader is the perfect archetypal character for communicating drama.

There are a lot of character types though. For more on this subject, check out our article on Character Archetypes Examples in Lit. & Film .

Definition of Symbolic Patterns

Guide to archetypal symbols.

Archetypes aren’t just characters, they can be symbols or situations too. Anthropologists study patterns from different places and eras, to better understand world history. On a more micro level, this video looks at how symbols can influence cognition standards.

What is an Archetype? by Casual Cognition

Essentially, archetypes can affect the world on a macro and micro level. They can also explain innate aspects of the human mind. Think about it: if a star symbol that was discovered in different cultures around the world, is it possible that alien civilizations could use the same star symbol too? Or is the symbol simply a product of human creation? It’s fascinating stuff – and useful to think about for storytellers and anthropologists.

Archetypal Uses

What is the purpose of archetypes.

These archetypal patterns are universal and repeated ideas/symbols that unite the people of the world across time and space. We often focus on things that make us different from one another – but these patterns remind us that there’s an innateness of the human condition that makes us the same.

Just take what writer/director Bong Joon-Ho had to say after he won out at the Golden Globes for Parasite :

I think we use only just one language: the cinema.

— Boog Joon-Ho

Cinema is just one medium through which we communicate the patterns that bind us together – there are dozens more. And whether you know it in the moment or not, you’re likely perpetuating archetypes everyday.

What is Characterization? →
Explaining the Mary Sue Character Trope →
How the Foil Character Type Reveals Your Protagonist →

Archetype Examples in Lit. & Movies

We briefly touched on some of the different types of archetypal patterns, but there’s a lot more to characters than what we went over here. Up next, we break down a variety of examples from literature and movies. Follow along as we examine characters in Breaking Bad , The Lord of the Rings , and more.

Up Next: Character Types Explained →

Write and produce your scripts all in one place..

Write and collaborate on your scripts FREE . Create script breakdowns, sides, schedules, storyboards, call sheets and more.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pricing & Plans
Product Updates
Featured On
StudioBinder Partners
The Ultimate Guide to Call Sheets (with FREE Call Sheet Template)
How to Break Down a Script (with FREE Script Breakdown Sheet)
The Only Shot List Template You Need — with Free Download
Managing Your Film Budget Cashflow & PO Log (Free Template)
A Better Film Crew List Template Booking Sheet
Best Storyboard Softwares (with free Storyboard Templates)
Movie Magic Scheduling
Gorilla Software
Storyboard That

A visual medium requires visual methods. Master the art of visual storytelling with our FREE video series on directing and filmmaking techniques.

We’re in a golden age of TV writing and development. More and more people are flocking to the small screen to find daily entertainment. So how can you break put from the pack and get your idea onto the small screen? We’re here to help.

Making It: From Pre-Production to Screen
The Walk and Talk in Film & TV — Writing & Shooting Tips
What is Script Writing — The Basics to Help Get You Started
Ethos, Pathos & Logos — Definition and Examples of Persuasive Advertising Techniques
How to Write a Screenplay — Step-by-Step Process
Ultimate AV Script Template to Write Better Ads [FREE AV Script Template]
0 Pinterest

Home / Essay Samples / Psychology / Behavior / Archetype

Archetype Essay Examples

The impact of carl jung’s development on the development of archetypes.

The Archetype, at first, may seem to be a concept purely derived from literature. With labels such as The Hero, The trickster, and The wise old man, archetypes may seem to be more of a plot device rather than a scientific phenomenon – yet revered...

Analysis of the Archetypes in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

Every piece of literature has an emotional meaning behind the text. Taking a look through the archetypal lens, allows the audience to interpret the meaning through a different perspective. An archetype is a collectively inherited unconscious idea, pattern of thought or image universally present in...

Three Archetypes in the Greek Myth "Prometheus and Io"

An archetype is an image, a descriptive detail, a plot pattern, or a character type that repeatedly appears in all genres of literature over all time periods and all people groups. They are found in a variety of stories, including Greek mythology classic, “Prometheus and...

Analysis of an Archetype of the Caregiver

Archetypes are cultural patterns that define specific ways of being in the world. They're stereotypes are so ingrained in pop culture that as soon as a specific character walks in the scene, everyone knows exactly how they will respond. The caregiver has been developed into...

The Meaning of the Archetype in the Fates of People

Myths are one of the aspects that contributed to the origin of the humanities. They use symbols such as archetypal that is deeply rooted in cultural perspectives that make people have a strong belief in myths. The mythological symbols have their meaning that explains the...

Manifestations of Jung’s Shadow Archetype in Potter’s Dreams

Do you have a permanent relationship with an enemy you can’t avoid him? Do you have a feeling that you should ring him and can’t stop thinking about him? Are there psychological reasons for this strange connection? This magical correlation is created by one person:...

Analysis of Shakespeare's Hamlet as an Archetype

Shakespeare's literary works are notorious for being complex in nature and with many layers of meaning hidden within characters actions, motifs, and the nature of the genre. Reality, like Shakespeare’s works but on an elevated level, is likewise very complicated and difficult to understand, because...

"On the Rainy River": Archetypal Theories in Tim O'brien's Short Story

Archetypes such as the hero’s journey, mentors, and rivers are used significantly to acquaint the reader to the story. So let's research with archetypes in the "On The Rainy River - Archetypal Essay" paper. O’Brien’s journey represents his uncertainty and the resulting voyage where he...

The Jungian Shadow Archetype in Star Wars

Carl Jung is known for his analytical psychology. He believed all people were connected by their collective unconsciousness, which is populated by archetypes. Archetypes are hidden forms and patterns which every human being experiences. Since they are hidden, it is best to look at mythology...

American Born Chinese: Archetypes and Cultural Identities in the Graphic Novel

American Born Chinese is a graphic novel written by Gene Yang that focuses on the characters Jin Wang, the Monkey King, and Chin-Kee. Throughout the story, the focus switches between these characters after each chapter. Jin has low self-esteem and cares excessively about what others...

Trying to find an excellent essay sample but no results?

Don’t waste your time and get a professional writer to help!

Literary Theory and Criticism

Archetypal Criticism

Share this:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Archetype Essay Examples

Archetypal Analysis Of Jon Krakauer's Novel Into Thin Air

The Archetypes in Young Goodman Brown

Archetypes of Mother and Crone in the Novel Everyday Use by Alice Walker, A Worn Path' by Eudora Welty, and Mothers Tongue by Amy Tan

The Depth Psychology of Carl Jung and the Complexity of Carl Jung's Archetypes

Analysis of The Archetypal Villain in The Odyssey

The Tragic Downfall of Heroes: Aristotelian Tragic Hero Archetypes in The Illiad and Million Dollar Baby

Implementation of Business Strategies and Archetypes by Brands

Literary Hero Archetypes in Brown's Prose

The Darker Aspects of the Human in British Literature

How To Read Literature Like A Professor By Thomas C. Foster: Archetype Symbols

Definition of Archetype

Difference Between Archetype and Stereotype

Establish Universal Characters

Examples of Archetype in Literature

Example 2: Ma Joad: Caregiver ( The Grapes of Wrath , John Steinbeck)

Example 3: Sancho Panza: Jester ( Don Quixote , Miguel de Cervantes)

Related posts:

Archetypal Criticism

Introduction to Archetypal Criticism

Criticism Against Archetypal Criticism

2. Lack of Empirical Evidence:

3. Cultural and Historical Limitations:

4. Disregard for Individuality and Originality:

5. Ambiguous Archetypal Definitions:

6. Incompatibility with Modern and Postmodern Literature:

7. Neglect of Socio-Political and Historical Contexts:

8. Lack of Authorial Intent Consideration:

9. Subjective Interpretations:

10. Ignores Evolution of Meanings and Symbols:

Notable Critics Against Archetypal Criticism

Examples of Archetypal Criticism

Keywords in Archetypal Criticism

Suggested Readings about Archetypal Criticism

Related posts:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Helping Writers Become Authors

An Introduction to Archetypal Stories

Story as Revelation

Mythological Character Archetypes

Archetype as the Path to Powerful Stories

Wordplayers, tell me your opinions! What has been your experience reading, viewing, or writing archetypal stories? Tell me in the comments!

Love Helping Writers Become Authors? You can now become a patron. (Huge thanks to those of you who are already part of my Patreon family !)

Sign Up Today

Related Posts

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Write Your Best Book

Check out my latest novel!

Free E-Book

Subscribe to Blog Updates

What is an Archetype — Definition & Examples in Storytelling

Archetype Definition

ARCHETYPE DEFINITION

Iconic Archetypes

What is an Archetype?

WHAT IS AN ARCHETYPE CHARACTER

Walter White is an Example of an Archetype • Subscribe on YouTube

Definition of Symbolic Patterns

What is an Archetype? by Casual Cognition

Archetypal Uses

Related Posts

Archetype Examples in Lit. & Movies

Up Next: Character Types Explained →

Leave a comment

Archetype Essay Examples

Analysis of the Archetypes in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

Three Archetypes in the Greek Myth "Prometheus and Io"

Analysis of an Archetype of the Caregiver

The Meaning of the Archetype in the Fates of People

Manifestations of Jung’s Shadow Archetype in Potter’s Dreams

Analysis of Shakespeare's Hamlet as an Archetype

"On the Rainy River": Archetypal Theories in Tim O'brien's Short Story

The Jungian Shadow Archetype in Star Wars

American Born Chinese: Archetypes and Cultural Identities in the Graphic Novel

You may also like