[UA] Archetypes

[Michael D. Mearls 97]

--- James Alan Gardner wrote:
People seem to be talking as if archetypes are fixed at the moment
that someone ascends.  I don't see it that way.  Long ago, for
example, people ascended into slots like the Mother, the Warrior,
the Trickster, and so on...but all those concepts have changed
with time.  The collective unconscious's image of a Mother today
is different from what it was in the 1950's and *very* different
from what it was thousands of years ago.
--- end of quote ---

This is brings up an interesting question: Does the general conception of an
archetype change, allowing a Godwalker who better fits the consciousness to
displace the old clergy member, or does the Godwalker ascend and then change
the world's mass conscious?

I think archetypes needs to tie in to very basic, cross cultural ideas. The
trappings of 1990s motherhood may be different than 1550s motherhood, but the
essential characteristics are still the same. Think of the blacklash against
working mothers, and the general trend towards blaming parents for pushing too
many responsibilities away from themselves and on to schools. Even if the
reality changes, the ideal remains. I always figured that the best way to get
ideas for archetypes was to watch TV, since it provides a good view of what
people (in the US at least) see as the typical mother-warrior-war-whatever.

Getting back to my first question, since UA is most definitely human-centric,
I'd say that humankind decides who best depicts an archetype, be it a Godwalker
or whoever is in the clergy. The key is, though, that changes in the conception
of an archetype would have to be pervasive over time and cultures.

- M.


_______________________________________________
UA mailing list
UA at lists.uchicago.edu
http://lists.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua