Friday, April 30, 2010
The Last Blog
Twas a great class, I enjoyed it thoroughly. Not much to say on the topic, but I specifically liked the topics of discussion in class - they seemed to stimulate all the students, instead of a minority of them. Everyone had something to say, and that is not usually observed in a literature class. I would take another class by Professor Sexson, but I am transferring back to University of Alaska Anchorage, and am going to miss classes like these. Hopefully, I can find another class such as this one.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
My Paper
This is my complete paper, minus works cited and all of the additions:
The Shadow Archetype
In class, we have discussed many different archetypes, but we have yet to talk about the most troubling and mysterious one of all: The Shadow. The Brothers Karamazov has a very model example of the shadow in Dmitri Karamazov. But what is it exactly that makes him a good representation of this archetype? This essay will hope to explain that, and prove that Mitya was placed into the book by Dostoyevsky not as an actual character to be critiqued and understood, but as a force of nature and human psyche that should be apparent in all of us, whether it is suppressed or accepted. I believe that Dostoyevsky wanted the reader to understand the other characters in the book (and also themselves) by first examining Dmitri, and the part of human character that he reveals as the archetype of the shadow.
First, though, one has to ask oneself what the shadow really is. Carl Gustav Jung was a 19th century Swiss psychiatrist and psychologist who developed many of the fundamental ideas upon which modern psychology is based. Among these was the definition of multiple archetypes - repeated characters either in the real world or literature. One can have multiple fractions of every archetype within them, or simply be an epitome of a single one. In any case, Jung found that the most common archetype, and one that is definitely in each of us, is the shadow. The shadow represents the darker side of oneself - “darker” being the avatar of the taboos and unacceptable behavior of the individual’s specific society. This means that the shadow differs from one individual to the next, and cannot take either corporeal or ethereal form, since it feeds off of the beholder’s societal and personal moral compass. Thus, the shadow has been described by C.G. Jung as a synonym for the subconscious, with one major difference. Whereas one’s subconscious can represent both good and evil characteristics, the shadow is the direct separation of the subconscious, and the emphasis on the darker half. The shadow also manifests itself as the wild, unbridled, and almost berserk part of our character. Only when all emotional barriers have been broken can this part of the shadow be seen. A good example of this is Enkidu in the Mesopotamian myth of Gilgamesh - where the demon-man Enkidu is the perverse reflection of the shadow, whose only aim is to destroy Gilgamesh. Nevertheless, Jung argues that all of us have a shadow within, and while most try to deny this important part of our psychological makeup and instead project it upon others, one cannot become ‘whole’ without reintroducing it into our lives and accepting ourselves for who we really are. However, as said before, most of us suppress the shadow, and it is thus the struggle between the shadow and the conscious is born. Nowhere else in literature can represent this struggle be seen in its pure, unfiltered form than in Dmitri in The Brothers Karamazov.
Dmitri is such a good personification of the shadow because he holds elements of other archetypical characters as well. Being in the military in 19th century Russia, he is seen as the hero, and has a seemingly good cause, but acts in such a way that, if you were to only look at a list of things he does, you would think that he was the devil (and all that). However, he is much too complicated of a character for this to be an adequate summary of his psyche.
Nearly every book that he is involved with, Dmitri has an innate struggle between his conscience and his inverse - that which can be called the shadow and its many forms within him. For instance, he “borrows” a large sum of rubles from Katerina, and while he has essentially stolen from her and left her for Grushenka, he feels as if he has wronged her and wishes throughout the book to pay her back, not only as a fulfillment of his debt, but also as an apology to a lost lover that his promise of marriage could not be made. However, we see in several parts in the novel that the shadow also takes a strong hold over him and directly controls his actions. An example of this can be seen when he searches for Grushenka and finds her in the Polish officer’s home. The scene ends with him locking the officer in another room and planning his marriage with Grushenka. No reasonable human being would commit such a crime to an officer of the law. In fact, the book that describes his crusade for love and justice can wholly be named after the shadow’s nearly demonic possession of this young man. Stripped of all the previously mentioned emotional barriers, Mitya does not care what happens to him, since he has already committed multiple crimes and stated that he will end his life if Grushenka is truly out of his reach. This is where the shadow took over him.
There is a good side to all of this, as it is because of his actions on that day that he realizes that living as he does is not the way that a respectable Russian citizen would carry out his life. Later, in prison, he decides to begin anew, now recognizing how erroneous he has been in his logos. Carl Gustav Jung would call Dmitri a complete and whole human being, because he has seen what he looks like in the shade of the subconscious and he has accepted his true self. Jung’s message to all of us would be to look into the shadow of the darkness, stare straight into its eye, and walk away accepting the horrible things you have seen. Whether we can do this or not is within ourselves.
The Shadow Archetype
In class, we have discussed many different archetypes, but we have yet to talk about the most troubling and mysterious one of all: The Shadow. The Brothers Karamazov has a very model example of the shadow in Dmitri Karamazov. But what is it exactly that makes him a good representation of this archetype? This essay will hope to explain that, and prove that Mitya was placed into the book by Dostoyevsky not as an actual character to be critiqued and understood, but as a force of nature and human psyche that should be apparent in all of us, whether it is suppressed or accepted. I believe that Dostoyevsky wanted the reader to understand the other characters in the book (and also themselves) by first examining Dmitri, and the part of human character that he reveals as the archetype of the shadow.
First, though, one has to ask oneself what the shadow really is. Carl Gustav Jung was a 19th century Swiss psychiatrist and psychologist who developed many of the fundamental ideas upon which modern psychology is based. Among these was the definition of multiple archetypes - repeated characters either in the real world or literature. One can have multiple fractions of every archetype within them, or simply be an epitome of a single one. In any case, Jung found that the most common archetype, and one that is definitely in each of us, is the shadow. The shadow represents the darker side of oneself - “darker” being the avatar of the taboos and unacceptable behavior of the individual’s specific society. This means that the shadow differs from one individual to the next, and cannot take either corporeal or ethereal form, since it feeds off of the beholder’s societal and personal moral compass. Thus, the shadow has been described by C.G. Jung as a synonym for the subconscious, with one major difference. Whereas one’s subconscious can represent both good and evil characteristics, the shadow is the direct separation of the subconscious, and the emphasis on the darker half. The shadow also manifests itself as the wild, unbridled, and almost berserk part of our character. Only when all emotional barriers have been broken can this part of the shadow be seen. A good example of this is Enkidu in the Mesopotamian myth of Gilgamesh - where the demon-man Enkidu is the perverse reflection of the shadow, whose only aim is to destroy Gilgamesh. Nevertheless, Jung argues that all of us have a shadow within, and while most try to deny this important part of our psychological makeup and instead project it upon others, one cannot become ‘whole’ without reintroducing it into our lives and accepting ourselves for who we really are. However, as said before, most of us suppress the shadow, and it is thus the struggle between the shadow and the conscious is born. Nowhere else in literature can represent this struggle be seen in its pure, unfiltered form than in Dmitri in The Brothers Karamazov.
Dmitri is such a good personification of the shadow because he holds elements of other archetypical characters as well. Being in the military in 19th century Russia, he is seen as the hero, and has a seemingly good cause, but acts in such a way that, if you were to only look at a list of things he does, you would think that he was the devil (and all that). However, he is much too complicated of a character for this to be an adequate summary of his psyche.
Nearly every book that he is involved with, Dmitri has an innate struggle between his conscience and his inverse - that which can be called the shadow and its many forms within him. For instance, he “borrows” a large sum of rubles from Katerina, and while he has essentially stolen from her and left her for Grushenka, he feels as if he has wronged her and wishes throughout the book to pay her back, not only as a fulfillment of his debt, but also as an apology to a lost lover that his promise of marriage could not be made. However, we see in several parts in the novel that the shadow also takes a strong hold over him and directly controls his actions. An example of this can be seen when he searches for Grushenka and finds her in the Polish officer’s home. The scene ends with him locking the officer in another room and planning his marriage with Grushenka. No reasonable human being would commit such a crime to an officer of the law. In fact, the book that describes his crusade for love and justice can wholly be named after the shadow’s nearly demonic possession of this young man. Stripped of all the previously mentioned emotional barriers, Mitya does not care what happens to him, since he has already committed multiple crimes and stated that he will end his life if Grushenka is truly out of his reach. This is where the shadow took over him.
There is a good side to all of this, as it is because of his actions on that day that he realizes that living as he does is not the way that a respectable Russian citizen would carry out his life. Later, in prison, he decides to begin anew, now recognizing how erroneous he has been in his logos. Carl Gustav Jung would call Dmitri a complete and whole human being, because he has seen what he looks like in the shade of the subconscious and he has accepted his true self. Jung’s message to all of us would be to look into the shadow of the darkness, stare straight into its eye, and walk away accepting the horrible things you have seen. Whether we can do this or not is within ourselves.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Karamazov Readings - Book XII
Book 12 plus epilogue:
Awesome ending to an awesome book. It plays out like a good Law and Order episode. The hotshot defense attorney, the seemingly broken defendant, the overwhelming circumstantial evidence, the moment of intense intrigue when Katerina shows the letter to the audience, etc.
At first, the crowd expects a guilty verdict, but the legendary Muscovite defense attorney shows that all the evidence is based on rumors, hearsay, and circumstantial grabble. In the end of the trial, the audience sides with Mitya. However, after a short span of time, the jury finds him guilty, raising hell as Dmitri is walked out of the courtroom.
A plan is hatched among our other characters to break him out, and Dmitri agrees to go along with it. The book ends on a hopeful note, when the Karamazov family is redeemed. Alyosha once again counsels Ilyusha's friends, and they chant the Karamazov family. Not because of Fyodor, but because of Alyosha. The End.
Awesome ending to an awesome book. It plays out like a good Law and Order episode. The hotshot defense attorney, the seemingly broken defendant, the overwhelming circumstantial evidence, the moment of intense intrigue when Katerina shows the letter to the audience, etc.
At first, the crowd expects a guilty verdict, but the legendary Muscovite defense attorney shows that all the evidence is based on rumors, hearsay, and circumstantial grabble. In the end of the trial, the audience sides with Mitya. However, after a short span of time, the jury finds him guilty, raising hell as Dmitri is walked out of the courtroom.
A plan is hatched among our other characters to break him out, and Dmitri agrees to go along with it. The book ends on a hopeful note, when the Karamazov family is redeemed. Alyosha once again counsels Ilyusha's friends, and they chant the Karamazov family. Not because of Fyodor, but because of Alyosha. The End.
Karamazov Readings - Book XI
Book 11:
This was an intriguing book that could have easily been taken out of an investigative novel. Alyosha is asked to snoop about Lise's wild behavior and Dmitri and Ivan's plan that Grushenka feels she is not being filled in on. Turns out, Ivan corrupted Lise with his intellectual hooplah about being hopeless and the world being against Lise, and Dmitri had been plotting with Ivan to break out, but is no longer wanting to do it.
In fact, he has given up on fighting his case anymore. In this chapter we see three characters break - mentally and physically. Dmitri basically admits to his crime, and is looking forward to repenting for it, as an act to repent for his past sins. The vitalized, brash young Dmitri is now a broken shell, no longer the confident man he once was.
Ivan breaks mentally. He visits Smerdyakov and through his 3 visits thinks that he is as much responsible for the death of his father than the real killer (Smerdyakov). He then has hallucinations, which includes the devil coming to him, and when Alyosha visits him he is basically a nervous wreck, and Alyosha is kind enough to stay with him.
The third person to break was Smerdyakov. I'd pay to find out what caused him to hang himself - he was not remorseful about his crime, and he was generally a person that had little morality or self-guilt. It is the greatest mystery in this book, in my opinion, and we will never find out the answer to why Smerdyakov killed himself.
This was an intriguing book that could have easily been taken out of an investigative novel. Alyosha is asked to snoop about Lise's wild behavior and Dmitri and Ivan's plan that Grushenka feels she is not being filled in on. Turns out, Ivan corrupted Lise with his intellectual hooplah about being hopeless and the world being against Lise, and Dmitri had been plotting with Ivan to break out, but is no longer wanting to do it.
In fact, he has given up on fighting his case anymore. In this chapter we see three characters break - mentally and physically. Dmitri basically admits to his crime, and is looking forward to repenting for it, as an act to repent for his past sins. The vitalized, brash young Dmitri is now a broken shell, no longer the confident man he once was.
Ivan breaks mentally. He visits Smerdyakov and through his 3 visits thinks that he is as much responsible for the death of his father than the real killer (Smerdyakov). He then has hallucinations, which includes the devil coming to him, and when Alyosha visits him he is basically a nervous wreck, and Alyosha is kind enough to stay with him.
The third person to break was Smerdyakov. I'd pay to find out what caused him to hang himself - he was not remorseful about his crime, and he was generally a person that had little morality or self-guilt. It is the greatest mystery in this book, in my opinion, and we will never find out the answer to why Smerdyakov killed himself.
Men and Women... and their arguments
This was a crazy one.. read if you want a laugh.
It happened a while ago, back when I didn't have a roommate (my old one got kicked out of the college due basically to being too poor). I was sitting in my room on a Wednesday after my post-workout shower, just vegetating to Sportscenter on my bed. Suddenly, I hear a slew of loud voices and obviously angry inflection. Being the curious fella that I am, I kicked the door farther open and listened in like that thing a cat does when it wants to hear something far away, leaned over and all. This is a paraphrased dialogue of what I hear:
"I can't believe you slept with Ronny at that party!" (man)
"Well at least Ronny gives me what I want!" (woman)
"You know I can't even have sex with you without getting tested" (man)
"What does that mean?" (woman)
"It means this" *slaps woman loudly*
I was like no way dude, but then I heard:
Third voice - "Yeah that was pretty good, do you want to run through it again?"
And then I realized that they were practicing for a play. Oh well.
It happened a while ago, back when I didn't have a roommate (my old one got kicked out of the college due basically to being too poor). I was sitting in my room on a Wednesday after my post-workout shower, just vegetating to Sportscenter on my bed. Suddenly, I hear a slew of loud voices and obviously angry inflection. Being the curious fella that I am, I kicked the door farther open and listened in like that thing a cat does when it wants to hear something far away, leaned over and all. This is a paraphrased dialogue of what I hear:
"I can't believe you slept with Ronny at that party!" (man)
"Well at least Ronny gives me what I want!" (woman)
"You know I can't even have sex with you without getting tested" (man)
"What does that mean?" (woman)
"It means this" *slaps woman loudly*
I was like no way dude, but then I heard:
Third voice - "Yeah that was pretty good, do you want to run through it again?"
And then I realized that they were practicing for a play. Oh well.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
My Paper Thesis
My thesis will be as such:
Dmitri is represented in the book as a person. However, to truly understand him, we must look at him not as a human being, but rather a primal force that lives within us all. How it is expressed is seen when one examines the shadow archetype, a creation of C.G. Jung.
Dmitri is represented in the book as a person. However, to truly understand him, we must look at him not as a human being, but rather a primal force that lives within us all. How it is expressed is seen when one examines the shadow archetype, a creation of C.G. Jung.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Old Karamazov Readings Pt. 9
Book 10:
This is a very sad book, but it also offers optimism. It tells the story of a mercurial friendship between Kolya and Ilyusha. These two boys became friends when Kolya saw that Ilyusha was being picked on the boys and even though he was outmatched, he always fought back. Kolya has an innate sense of fatherhood and wanted to help Ilyusha, and they became friends because of this.
However, Ilyusha is a very rebellious, and for some odd reason fed the local dog Zuchka a piece of bread with a pin inside, a trick Smerdyakov taught him. This satanic display of indifference toward innocent life is very puzzling, and it shows that the boy has been tormented for a very long time, and no longer believes in the worth of life, whether human or animal. This is shown in the fact that he stabs Kolya with a knife when they fight.
Ilyusha is dying, however, and Katerina (still upset that Dmitri beat Ilyusha's father) sends a doctor from Moscow to the house to try to help him. This is after Ilyusha and Alyosha become acquainted, and an impressive show of respect is displayed between the two, mutually. They enter the house and Ilyusha sees the dog that Kolya called Perezvon, which is actually the dog that he fed the "pinned" bread to, and Ilyusha is very happy at the fact that the dog survived.
This book ends with Kolya promising that he will visit his friend as often as he can.
This is a very sad book, but it also offers optimism. It tells the story of a mercurial friendship between Kolya and Ilyusha. These two boys became friends when Kolya saw that Ilyusha was being picked on the boys and even though he was outmatched, he always fought back. Kolya has an innate sense of fatherhood and wanted to help Ilyusha, and they became friends because of this.
However, Ilyusha is a very rebellious, and for some odd reason fed the local dog Zuchka a piece of bread with a pin inside, a trick Smerdyakov taught him. This satanic display of indifference toward innocent life is very puzzling, and it shows that the boy has been tormented for a very long time, and no longer believes in the worth of life, whether human or animal. This is shown in the fact that he stabs Kolya with a knife when they fight.
Ilyusha is dying, however, and Katerina (still upset that Dmitri beat Ilyusha's father) sends a doctor from Moscow to the house to try to help him. This is after Ilyusha and Alyosha become acquainted, and an impressive show of respect is displayed between the two, mutually. They enter the house and Ilyusha sees the dog that Kolya called Perezvon, which is actually the dog that he fed the "pinned" bread to, and Ilyusha is very happy at the fact that the dog survived.
This book ends with Kolya promising that he will visit his friend as often as he can.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)