What do you think about archetypes?

[Daniel Hetberg]

So, what's your opinion on archetypes, and their role in SFF literature? The probably most common story is the hero's journey in some incarnation, are you bothered by that, or do you think it's comforting, or that it just is the most accessible story, the monomyth?

Have you ever ventured into the literature dealing with these concepts, like Campbell's "The Hero with a thousand faces" or "Mythic structure for writers" by Vogler? Did you find the experience useful, or just too theoretical? Does it help you structure stories or grapple with difficult bits?

I personally read Campbell a while ago, and found it quite insightful, although I'm not a full blown preacher on his behalf. Had the mainstream-follow-up by Vogler delivered to my place the day before yesterday, and reading that now. It's a somewhat hands-on approach, as in, what basic character types are present in almost every story, what functions do they have and what are their variations? Makes a nice read, although I'm not sure if I will let that influence my writing.

 

[Simon Kind]

I think architypes are useful guides, after all they have been present in story telling for hundreds if not thousands of years. Funnily enough I've started to use tarot cards as a way to structure my work and introduce characters, sub-plots etc, quite a handy way to get out of a fix! The use of architypes in stories, no matter how experimental, is inevitable and so reading up on the theory can only help. Just another tool in the arsenal.

Below is an extract from Wikipedia about architypes and literature:

Archetypes often appear in many forms of literature. Many archetypes in literature have their roots in mythology. A model for Neo, the nearly godlike hero of The Matrix, can be found in the Ancient Sumerian character, Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh's friend, Enkidu, is the archetypal sidekick character (powerful but uncivilized), which is paralleled by Robin Hood's Little John, Sundance from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, and Chewbacca in Star Wars. This is not to imply that the film directors borrowed directly from an Ancient Sumerian epic poem, but, rather, these archetypes are perpetuated as a typecasting, repeated again and again as characters in a story. Indeed, these remain part of our cultural memory and may be rooted in a collective unconscious, as Jung described it.
William Shakespeare is known for popularizing many archetypal characters that hold great social import such as Hamlet, the self-doubting hero and the initiation archetype with the three stages of separation, transformation, and return; Falstaff, the bawdy, rotund comic knight; Romeo and Juliet, the ill-fated ("star-crossed") lovers; Richard II, the hero who dies with honor; and many others. Although Shakespeare based many of his characters on existing archetypes from fables and myths (e.g., Romeo and Juliet on Tristan and Isolde), Shakespeare's characters stand out as original by their contrast against a complex, social literary landscape. For instance, in The Tempest, Shakespeare borrowed from a manuscript by William Strachey that detailed an actual shipwreck of the Virginia-bound 17th-century English sailing vessel Sea Venture in 1609 on the islands of Bermuda. Shakespeare also borrowed heavily from a speech by Medea in Ovid's Metamorphoses in writing Prospero's renunciative speech; nevertheless, the unique combination of these elements in the character of Prospero created a new archetype, that of the sage magician as a carefully plotting hero, quite distinct from the wizard-as-advisor archetype of Merlin or Gandalf (both of which may be derived from priesthood authority archetypes from the Bible such as Noah, Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Elijah, etc).
Certain common methods of character depiction employed in dramatic performance rely on the pre-existence of literary archetypes. Stock characters used in theatre or film are based on highly generic literary archetypes. A pastiche is an imitation of an archetype or prototype in order to pay homage to the original creator.

 

[Sapheron]

I've never read them, but I might someday. Achetypes... well, I guess I avoid them as well as I can, but then, that's my trademark; being different. Obviously, someone's done everything at least twice before, but that doesn't mean we don't try for more unusual things.

In many cases, of course, they are needed. You can't make a classic good v evil tale without a dark lord and a noble warrior hero, after all. They are, therefore, unavoidable. Anyway, as long as they're given an odd few quirks of their own you barely notice the achetypicality. I mean, compare Aragorn to Harry Potter. Basically, both are the noble hero of good, since birth up against the dark side and always just about coming out on top. A lot of similarities. Yet one is good and one is not, at the end of the day. It isn't the archetype that matters, it's how you write about them.

 

[Culhwch]

I read Vogler's The Hero's Journey, is that the one you're reading, Daniel? It was geared more towards screenwriting, but I did find it interesting. Whether or not I have assimilated any of it into my writing is questionable.

I certainly think archetypes have their place in writing, if only as a jumping off point. They certainly help in the initial construction of a character. In my experience, usually I have an idea of the type of character I want, which is more often than not a basic popular archetype, and then I'll build on that, adding to it, taking from it, twisting it in some way to make it my own. I honestly think it's hard to escape from archetypes - even those who think they are being blindingly original would probably find with a little digging that they have fallen into one or another classic archetype. We read, we watch films and TV. We don't live in a vacuum. They're gonna work their way into our subconscious - and our writing - no matter what.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I read the Campbell books a long time ago. They did, at one time, have a tremendous effect on my writing, but only in terms of themes and symbolism. Probably they still do, but after all this time I've assimilated them more, and it would be harder for me to sort them out from among all the other influences.

I believe that it's dangerous to put a character into a story because they are an archetype, since it can lead to some very flat and uninspired writing, but left to themselves they do tend to sneak in on their own. And as Culhwch says, sometimes they're better disguised than others.

But they're archetypes for a reason. After all these thousands of years, some of them are still bouncing off the walls in our subconscious minds just waiting for a chance to get out for a reason. They exist because they're meaningful.

 

[Daniel Hetberg]

I think one mustn't confuse archetypes with stereotypes, or even typical figures. Archetypes aren't even necessarily tied to a specific person in a narrative, for example several people can "slip on the mask of the mentor" (Vogler) archetype in the course of a story.

However, it is an "archetypal scene" to have the hero be instructed by a Mentor before he goes off into the really dangerous parts of his journey. Campbell goes into great detail what sort of scenes you will often find in a certain order... I'll write more about that later.

 

[ice.monkey]

I've read Vogler's The Hero's Journey. Although it was slanted towards screen-writing it has definite use in any story telling. I think that archetypes appear far more in F than SF writing. F writing lends itself more to mythological story telling and, thereby, more to the use of archetypes.

I find that being aware of these archetypes is very useful. Personally I take them into account when writing, but try to avoid the cliche use of them. As Vogler himself points out the archetypes don't have to be separate individuals, but can be aspects of one character. So 'the mentor' could be the cliche old, wise man, but could just as easily be a mother, or even a book!

I think their use can make a story resonate more with the average reader. I don't think that there's any doubt that the use of archetypes can be found in many good stories and so readers will have become accustomed to them, even if not consciously aware of it.You can use this to your advantage.

Like all this kind of information, the use of archetypes isn't compulsory, but having knowledge of them gives you another tool in your writer's repertoire.