Himanshi Parmar : Theory of Archetypes

Hello, I am Himanshi Parmar, student of MK Bhavnagar University. This blog i have written in a response of Thinking Activity, Which is a Part of my academic Work. Which we get after each unit. In this blog, i am going to discuss some important questions related To Theory of Archetypes.

[Q-1] What is archetypal criticism? What does the archetypal critic do?

Word archetypes is Consist two words, Arche means beginning and Typos means Imprint, this both words are taken from Greek language. Read More about it. (Click here)

Archetypal criticism is a theory of analyzing text by focusing on it's themes, story outline, setting/ scenes, Characters, weather, narrative, symbols etc. Basically it is a one kind of technique of criticism. By focusing on this kind of symbols, we find the reason that why we are able to relate our feeling, emotions, and sense to one particular image, or scene. Archetypal story, images, settings, scenes are help readers / audience to understand anxiety, fear, belief, myths and struggle.

[Q-2] What is Frye trying prove by giving an analogy of 'physics of nature' and 'Criticism to literature'?

By giving analogy of Physics of nature ans criticism to literature, Northrop Frye, try to prove that, people can not mention directly what they are studying or doing. But it is hidden behind the curtain of subject. And for this he gave two examples, first of physics of nature. According to him, the students who are studying physics are basically studying nature in it. But they never say that they are studying nature. But say physics. Similarly he gave second example of Criticism to literature, students of literature generally learning how to criticize literature. But for that, they used to say that they are studying literature, instead of saying that they are criticising the literature.

[Q-3] share your views of criticism as an organized body of knowledge. Mention relation of literature with history and philosophy.

History and philosophy both are rotted in ancient time. For example literary works come out from Myths, and myths are related with history. So we can say that history and philosophy both are the support system of literature. Also there is some kind of criticism which gave idea of text, and by that reader can understand the pattern of text, but they make no sense of historical background of that, and gave no information about how the pattern emerge. Which is problematic. But archetypal criticism explore the idea of history of text which helps to understand the text and it's pattern more clearly.

[Q-4] Briefly explain inductive method with illustrations of Shakespeare's Hamlet's gravedigger's scene.

Archetypal criticism's Structure consists three parts. Concept of criticism, inductive method, and diductive method. Inductive method is like moving from particular to general. This we find by example of grave Digger's scene in Shakespeare's Hamlet. The setting in that scene is in grave yard, and it is dark night. Which ultimately gave signs of something wrong will going to happen in future or something bad news will reveal soon.and soon we will find about the death of Ophelia. Which proved our archetypal criticism true.

Another thing is when someone died, people become sad or mourn for them. That is a general reaction, but in Hamlet Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are singing a song. Which again against general idea but we can say by archetypal criticism that, same work for long day creat lack of emotions for that work.

Third significance of that scene is we find both the grave diggers, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are talking with each other. And subject of their talk reflect real situation and problems of that time in which the drama was written. So again it moves from particular to general.

[Q-5] Briefly explain diductive method with reference to an analogy to music, painting, rhythm and pattern. Give example of outcome of diductive method.

Diductive method move from general to particular. Here we understand it by two examples, 1) Music and 2) Painting. Some art move in time like music, other are presented in space, just like painting. And in both music and painting, we find similar pattern, pattern is recurrence. Music move in time. As we see if any song is of four minutes, then it is necessary to listen it for four minutes because otherwise the entire story will not get clear. So it takes time. While painting are presented in space. We can able to see any painting in within a second. But its all about space that how huge it is. So this examples give idea that literature move either in a time or in a space.

[Q-6] Refer to the Indian seasonal grid if you can please read small Gujarati or Hindi or English poem from the archetypal approach ad apply Indian seasonal grid in the interpretation.

Here is a Indian calendar of Indian seasonal grid. With the English, gujrati month names. Here, i am going to refer one poem by Robert frost entitled as 'Nothing gold can stay'in context of Indian seasonal grid and archetypal criticism.

Nature’s first green is gold,

Her hardest hue to hold.

Her early leaf’s a flower;

But only so an hour.

Then leaf subsides to leaf.

So Eden sank to grief,

So dawn goes down to day.

Nothing gold can stay.

Here, the poem is indirectly references Autumn season, according to Archetypal criticism, Scheme of autumn is tragedy. Here also we find grief and pessimistic voice in poem. In archetypal criticism, mythical connection is one important part of it.here robert frost took reference of Paradise lost of Milton. And gave a reference of Eden's Garden. By giving metaphor of Eden, frost told about lose if innocence.along with this he references nature to say that nothing can last forever. Which we come to know by last lines Nothing gold can stay. Which reference Perisher world. Lines like Then leaf subsides to leaf, is directly references to Autumn as we know that leafs fall down in autumn, and new leafs are grow in place of it. And according to archetypal criticism autumn is a season of tragedy and grif. Which here in poem, it is true, because the main tone of the poem is ultimately pessimistic and Griffy.

So it is my understanding about archetypal criticism. I hope my blog will be helpful to you. Happy Learning!