Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Prompt 4 Response


Psychologist Carl Jung theorized that there is one “collective unconsciousness”. This is the idea that every story, memory, experience, and so on is shared by all humans in the deep under layer of the unconscious. This is why he states that archetypes and symbols are so powerful. In literature, especially when reading through an archetypal literary lens, there are certain themes and symbols that are almost universal, tales as old as time. All art reflects art, and this intertextuality, the ongoing interaction between stories (Foster 34), is what makes literature such a connective experience. Foster stating that “writing and telling belong to one big story” is quite the Jungian concept. Foster also writes in his book that “there’s only one story…stories grow out of other stories” (Foster 32, 33). Every piece of art branches out from something, all stemming from the one collective unconsciousness of memories and stories. People recognize and relate to new characters, because, the new characters in new literature reflect familiar characters in older literature. Literature is one big pot filled to the brim with stories, all thrashing to be told again and again, being made new each time.
          I absolutely agree with Foster in his premise that all literature is part of one, bigger story. This is a beautiful concept, causing literature to live on forever. Stories can never die because they are collected in memory, and reflected in new art. Stories speak to each other, the past and the present sharing a timeless dialogue. Literature is a connection, a continuous strain of thought, the great unifier of people and time. What was in the past lives on in the present.

1 comment:


  1. I enjoy the fact that you brought up Carl Jung’s theory of the collective unconscious because this is something I was recently reading about for Psychology. Connecting this with the Idea that everything is part of once large story shows that this is an idea that has been thought about on many different levels. Universal symbols are another good point you brought up. In many books the same symbols are brought up and have seemed to pass the test of time

    ReplyDelete