At 11:17 PM 10/12/95 -0400, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>I would like to know what happened to everyone, too. I had been looking
>forward to reading the mail from this list and am disappointed that it has
>been so quiet.
>And I have a question about another topic: Jungian archetypes.
>Recently in a psych class after hearing a lecture on Roman archetypes, I
>inquired whether the descendents of non-Romanized Celts would have the Roman
>archetypes or Celtic archetypes. The instructor answered that there actually
>weren't any Celtic archetypes. Does that mean Jungian psychology would not
>apply to descendents of non-Romanized Celts --or does it once again represent
>a bias against The Barbarians.
>What do you think? Is anyone out there?
David (Shauna's husband speaks):
My understanding, from my long ago college days applying the Jungian
theory of archetypes to literary analysis, is that the archetypes were
universal. They appeared in all human cultures because they are rooted in
the deepest reaches of the individual, not any particular culture. They're
just part of being human, whether you're Celtic, Roman, or Californian <G>!
What does anyone else think?