[UA] Re: avatar couplets

[Matt Norwood]

The problem with avatar couples is that you have to draw the line 
somewhere: the story of the Lovers is archetypal, but so is the story of 
the Hero who fights the Monster after meeting with the Mentor and with 
the help of the Sidekick. These avatars are not bound to each other; why 
  should the Lovers be?

Avatars can play off one another, but they exist on their own. If the 
Necessary Servant and the True King get together, good for them. If the 
Executioner goes after the Martyr, everybody's happy. But each has to be 
able to exist on his own.

Matt Norwood

> I agree that there's a case for "the couple in love" and "the
> soulmates" (being the couple meant to be together), but I have
> reservations about the "couple of unrequited love". IMO the whole deal
> about unrequited love is that it isn't about two people, just the one
> obsessing about what he/she feels was "meant to be" it could be that the
> couple could be split into "the Unrequited Lover" (or somesuch) and "the
> Unattainable" (sounds a bit like the NG).



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