/lit/ - Literature

>>4659809
Cleverly disguised attention whore thread.

This thread is now about how the term "archetype" as applied to the Jungian collective unconscious, translates into the notion of a "stock character" in English.

In many ways, the stock character came before the Jungian archetype, in the sense that Jung drew upon such creations as he studied world culture and myth, but the term "archetype" did not come into common use before Jung (or at least I don't think it did?). Moreover, *after* Freudian and Jungian psychoanalysis began to take hold in Western culture, it seems to me that the notion of a stock character took on an extra spiritual dimension. Before this, a stock character was a tool of the entertainer's trade: a building block from which to construct a conflict, but there was no expectation that a person could draw conclusions about the human condition from, say, Pierrot in the comedia del'arte, or from Bottom in A Midsummer Night's Dream. After Jung, on the other hand, such characters take on a venerable appearance. They become symbolic. And consequently, analysis of such older works takes on a considerably more metaphorical and culture-dependent tone.

I present this idea tentatively, as I'm afraid I haven't done a lot of research on the subject, and mostly came up with it just now, but I'd be really interested if anyone else has any input.

>>3593886

>Have you tried automatic writing?
>automatic writing
>writing

Lord of the Rings

how about you

GET
THE
FUCK
OUT

anyhow folks, thanks for your time.

I'll call it a night over here, maybe try rewriting it tomorrow while taking your comments in mind. Thanks

>>799366
the ending is a wat moment


just accept the god-tier experience and immersion as the reason why you read the book.

>>683363

Apparently you do if you bothered posting that on this thread. You sound kind of mad.

bumping. i need it too

>>591627
figure it out

philosopher-boi

1. Paradise Lost
2. Atlas Shrugged
3. The Aeneid
4. The Divine Comedy
5. Crime and Punishment