"A new vision" (Part 2)

*For a better understanding, please first read the Part 1.

Archetypes

 

Essentially, an Archetype is a classic model of conduct. In turn, the archetypes are characters that play a social role in the scenario in which are inserted, so, enclose characteristics that allow them to change the reality for other characters, for better or for worse. 

Archetypes are characterized by not suffer great changes; because frequently its qualities are quite developed. Contrary to stereotypes, do not create fixed ideas about a group, given that archetypes constitute only a mold of personal characteristics that are not related to cultural, physical, ethnically, religiously, sexual or social aspect. In turn, an archetype is a classification comprising several characters.

Archetypes form a legacy of narrative tradition from its origins, and given their enormous significance, persist to the present day, either by plagiarism or Intertextuality. For example, have the archetype of 'wise man': A character whose knowledge and dedication will help someone else, achieve a significant spiritual growth. Within this group we could include Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings, by J. R. R. Tolkien (1954), Albus Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone by J. K. Rowling (1997) and Merlin, the wizard of the Arthurian Legend. All of them function as mentors who bring to the progress of Frodo, Harry Potter and King Arthur, respectively. However, Gandalf is sarcastic and vigorous; Dumbledore is polite and very fatherly, as Merlin is enigmatic and somewhat eccentric. As you can see, it's the same model that secretes in different personalities.

 

Human Kinds

 

Human Kinds are characters that respond to a recognizable social situation, which guides their actions. There’s not an unbreakable classification, because do not endanger the peculiarities of each character's individual personality, even when the social stage makes them common among them. For example, in Les Miserables by Victor Hugo (1862) we advise as many characters of the story -Fontine, Cossette, Gavroche and Jean Valjean- are inserted in an indifferent and unfair society in that it trying to survive; doing so each in their own way, either through the sacrifice, the rebellion, the cunning or goodness, respectively. In conclusion, it can be said that these four characters respond to the same "Human Kind".

 

Human Kinds are a resource highly implemented in the works of Tennessee Williams. Both Amanda Wingfield in The Glass Menagerie (1944), Blanche DuBois in A streetcar named Desire (1947) as Margaret Pollitt in Cat on a hot tin roof (1955), are women tormented by the snubs of men and their families, to which Amanda becoming a totalitarian and manipulative mother, Blanche reacts leaving sink by the humiliations of his brother-in-law, and Margaret with selflessness toward her husband.

A third and final example is the ‘Hero’, the human type par excellence: A man who holds different virtues (whether physical, intellectual or personal) that frees their similar from injustices. In this sense, we have Goku in the manga Dragon Ball, by Akira Toriyama (1984-1995), whose ingenuity and physical strength allow you to constantly save Earth from imminent destruction. Also, Atticus Finch in the film To Kill a Mockingbird by Robert Mulligan (1961), is a lawyer whose suspicion and honor lead him to release to Tom Robinson go to jail following a false accusation motivated by racism. And thirdly, and following the same line, could cite Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar, protagonist of Myo Çid, who faced insults and retrieves an honorable status, both for him and for his people.

Conclusion

Beyond of correct or incorrect is the fact that the writers implemented any of these classifications in the narrative (especially in terms of stereotypes), or how these paradigms limited or enhance the notion of "originality", the truth is that all these models charge certain influence in our vision of society.

Now that you have a new vision of "what" each image and "how" the media perpetuated them over time, is the responsibility of each have criticality to the information that we receive in this way, it’s possible to maintain a healthy distance between what we 'know' and what 'we believe to know'.

Also, remember that a character can play different roles at the same time: A prototype, a stereotype and a human kind, for example. Not necessary only one.

Experience isn’t transmissible and while we take into account that the narrative in the media is only fiction, we have clear these characters help us motivate our own view of "true culture" and to have certain notions of what it could be false or true, more, they should not constitute an infallible knowledge base. That basis is the personal contact with the culture you want to discover.

Bibliography

*The bibliography is cited into Spanish, because this is the languague of the consulted editions.

(1) Herrero, Juan: "La teoría de los estereotipos". Revista Espéculo, N°32 (Madrid, junio 2006).

(2) Díaz, Emérita; Alvarado, Rosalía; Córdova, Conrado: Literatura I - Narrativa Universal. Dirección Académica del Colegio de Bachilleres del Estado de Sonora (Estado de Sonora, México, 2006).

(3) Scheiner, Steven Jay: 1001 Películas que debes ver antes de morir. Ediciones Quintessence Ltda. (Londres, 2003).

(4) Tajfel, Henri: Grupos Humanos y Categorías Sociales. Ediciones Universidad de Cambridge (Cambridge, 1981).

(5) Allport, Gordon: La naturaleza de la Personalidad: Los papeles selectivos. Editorial Greenwood (Westport, Connecticut, 1975).