Jungian Criticism is based off of the belief of Psychologist Carl Jung that there exists a “universal unconscious”. This idea posits that every individual has access to “A shared set of images, called archetypes, common to all people. The universal unconscious was expressed in art, literature and myth, and Jungian literary criticism focused specifically on the analysis of archetypes in literature and written mythology” (Wise).
Much of the prolific literary characters that we are most familiar with from legends, fairy tales and mythology such as Paul Bunyon, or Achilles are all examples of what Jung would classify as archetypes. Archetypes are “ancient or archaic images that derive from the collective unconscious” (Fiest). This definition is explanative and provides the individual with the idea that archetypes are something that has existed since the emergence of the cerebral human, yet it leaves the reader unaware of how exactly it can be interpreted through literature. “The archetype [in literature] is a tendency to form such representations of a motif – representations that can vary a great deal in detail without losing their basic pattern … They are indeed an instinctive trend” (Jung 58). These “Archetypical motifs” are represented as the quintessential good or bad characters, as archetypical characters never rest in a static state but instead are always at one extreme of the other. The tragic hero, first introduced by the Greeks, is one of the most recognizable archetypes. “While reading literature in Jungian literary criticism, the central character is viewed as real, while most other characters are seen as symbolic representations of aspects of the hero’s unconscious self. A woman, for example, represents the anima, the feminine side of the hero’s personality. An antagonist represents shadow” (Wise).
Dissimilar to other types of literary criticism, such as psychoanalytical criticism, where the characters each represent a part of the author’s psyche or visa-versa, the character’s in Jungian criticism all stand for parts of the protagonist’s unconscious desires or parts of the unconscious which the character has yet to access. A novel which can be easily viewed through a Jungian lens is J.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings. In this book Frodo, the protagonist, can be viewed as “real” while the rest of the characters serve as tangible facets of Frodo’s untapped unconscious. “Frodo is clearly pitted against his shadow figure, Gollum. Gollum represents all the things in Frodo’s unconscious self that Frodo has not psychologically recognized” (Wise). As Frodo first sets out on his journey to Mordor, a place of evil, he is good-hearted and pure. However, as the tale progresses and they draw nearer to Mordor, aspects of Gollum begin to manifest in Frodo and he must face the evil within himself in order to conquer the evils of middle earth.
Another type of criticism which stems directly from Jung’s work is Archetypal criticism. This type of criticism, like Jungian criticism, is rooted in psychoanalysis. Archetypal criticism saw its heyday in the 40’s and 50’s with its most prominent contributor being Northrop Frye. Frye however, disregarded much of Jung’s work noting that “It was unnecessary: since the unconscious is unknowable it cannot be studied” (Abrams 224-225). Frye instead focused mainly on the function and effect of archetypes, proposing that the context/genre in which a text is viewed is central to how it is understood. While I agree with this, I still do not believe that Frye can simply dismiss the notions of Frazer, who dealt with archetypes in archaic and modern religions and Jung “Who’s theory of the collective unconscious accounts for a considerable share of writings in archetypal literary criticism; it also pre-dates the height of archetypal literary criticism by over a decade” (Segal 4). While the three had varying views on the subject of archetypes and their relation to the environment, self, and literature, both Frazer, Frye, and Jung bring up interesting points and give the reader multiple ways of interpreting texts.
Work Cited
Fiest J, Friest G, Theories of Personality (2009), New York New York; McGraw-Hill
C. G. Jung, “Approaching the Unconscious” in C. G. Jung ed., Man and his Symbols (London 1978) p. 58
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-jungian-literary-criticism.htm
Abrams, M. H. “Archetypal Criticism.” A Glossary of Literary Terms. Fort Worth: HBJ, 1993. 223 – 225
martineng215 