Northrop Frye (1912-1991), a Canadian student of theology pursued his studies at Toronto University and Merton College, Oxford University. Later, he switched to the study of literature and published his first book, Fearful Symmetry: A Study of William Blake in 1947 considered a classic critical treatise. However, with the publication of Anatomy of Criticism, in 1957 he rose to become one of the most influential critics of modern times. His contribution to literature includes about twenty books on Western literature, culture, myth, archetypal theory, religion, and social thought. In 1963, he published The Fables of Identity: Studies in Poetic Mythology, from which the present essay has been taken.
Abrams and Harpham explicate that an archetype “denotes narrative designs, patterns of action, character types, themes and images that recur in a wide variety of works of literature as well as in myths, dreams and even social rituals” (18). Such repeated themes often predict the outcome of elemental and universal patterns in the human psyche whose valuable expression in a literary work induces a profound response from the cautious reader because of the shared expression of the archetypes of the psyche with the author.
Archetypal criticism owes its origin to James G Frazer’s The Golden Bough and the depth psychology of C.G. Jung who applied the term archetype to what he called “primordial images”, “the psychic residue” of repeated patterns of experience in the lives of the ancient ancestors, which he maintained survive in the “collective unconscious” of human race and are expressed in myth, religion, dreams and private fantasies as well as in works of literature. Archetypal literary criticism was initiated by Maud Bodkin’s Archetypal Patterns in Poetry (1934) and thrived especially during the 1950’s and 60’s. The important practitioners of the various modes of archetypical criticism also include G.Wilson Knight, Robert Graves, Philip Wheelwright, Richard Chase, Lesly Fiedler and Joseph Campbell. These critics reiterate the persistence of mythical patterns in literature on the premise that myths are nearer to the elemental archetype than the scheming manifestations of sophisticated writers.
In the essay “The Archetypes of Literature,” Frye critically evaluates literature within the framework of rituals and myths. The essay is divided into three parts. The first elaborates the concept of archetypal criticism. The second discusses the inductive method of textual analysis and the third, the deductive method of analysis. All these methods are categorised under structural criticism.
Just as there are several ways to interpret literature, there are different approaches to literature and one among them is the archetypal approach. The term archetype denotes an original idea or a pattern of something of which others are copies. The archetypal approach interprets a text on the basis of myths and rituals unique to a race, nation, indigenous or social group. Texts are studied, meanings are deciphered and messages are conveyed in the backdrop of myths and rituals. The impetus to the genesis and development of archetypal approach is the social anthropologist James Frazer’s The Golden Bough, which studies magic, religion and myths of different races.
Carl Jung, in his notion of “collective consciousness” states that a civilised man preserves the ideas, concepts and values of life cherished by his forefathers, and these ideas are manifested in the myths and rituals of the society or race. Writers and poets have employed myths in their works and critics analyse texts to unearth traces of “mythological patterns.” Critical analysis of this kind of a text is called archetypal criticism. An example could be T.S. Eliot’s “The Waste Land” that abounds in mythical patterns. In the present essay, Northrop Frye expounds an analysis of “mythical patterns”, which writers have used.
Symbols, images, rituals and myths, which originate from primitive myths, rituals, folk-lore and cultures are employed by writers in works, and the primitive factors lie buried in the “collective unconscious” which may otherwise be called “racial memory” of the people, says Jung. The writer, being a part of a race expresses myths, rituals, symbols and images that lie in his “unconscious” mind. Archetypal criticism uncovers such covert aspects in a text and under the reductive method of analysis, a critic progresses from the particular truth to the general one. A particular symbol or myth employed by the writer, proceeds to determine a general truth. This way, works of art are created over the years and literature is the gradual outcome of such endeavours.
A comprehensive term, archetypal criticism is the process of systematic organisation of facts to interpret a text that is preceded by conscious effort by different categories of people at every stage. Those involved in the task are the editor to “clean up” the text; a rhetorician to analyse the narrative pace; a philologist to examine diction and significance of words; and a literary social historian to inquire into the evolution of myths and rituals. Archetypal criticism ensures the efforts of all these concerned faculties to analyse of a text hence archetypal criticism is of immense significance.
The patterns are the major intrinsic aspects of a work. It has been mentioned earlier that pattern in literature refers to recurrent images, forms and words. Patterns originate from the writer’s “epiphanic moments”, which means that moments of inspiration govern the work or ideas of his work and he looks into the heart of things. Whatever is perceived by the writer is delivered as proverbs, riddles, commandments and etiological folktales, which carry the element of narrative and contribute to the writer’s output. Myths may be used either deliberately or unconsciously as forms of perception and the critic exposes the inherent archetypes and myths and expounds the patterns in the work.
Myth in Four Phases:
The narrative of a myth often centres on a figure that may be a God, a quasi-divine figure, a superhuman or a legendary character, and James Fraser and Carl Jung opine that they are pivotal to the narrative. Frye classifies myths into four categories:
- Dawn, spring and birth phase. These are myths related to the birth of a hero, his revival and resurrection, the defeat of the dark forces and death. The father and the mother, who are categorised as subordinate are introduced in the myth. These myths are the archetypes of romance and ecstatic.
- Zenith, summer and marriage or the triumphant phase. These are myths of apotheosis, which is the act of being raised to the rank of God, the almighty, and includes sacred marriage and entry into Paradise. The subordinate characters in these myths are the companion and the bride. They represent the archetypes of comedy, pastoral and idyll.
- Sunset, autumn and death phase. These myths signify the fall of a hero, a dying God, violent death, sacrifice and the hero’s isolation. The subordinate characters are the traitor and the siren. Such myths are the archetypes of tragedy and elegy.
4. Darkness, winter and desolation phase. These are myths dealing with the triumph of the destructive powers. The myths of floods, the return of chaos and the defeat of the hero are examples of this phase. The ogre and the witch are the subordinate characters and these myths are the archetypes of satire.
The myth of the quest is derived from the four types of myth and Frye explains the significance of this myth in the essay. The figure of the questing hero, who goes in search of truth occurs in all religions. The quest for the Holy Grail in T.S.Eliot’s “The Waste Land” is a famous example. The critic would have to closely examine the scriptures to locate and interpret these texts. From the analysis of the archetypes of myths, a critic can embark on the study of genres and move further down to elucidate the text in terms of myth. This is referred to as the deductive method of analysis, wherein the critic moves from the general truth, which is the myth to the elucidation of the particular truth that explains the actual reason behind the character’s behaviour in a text. In this way, a critic can analyse the formulation of a drama, a lyric or an epic from myths. Frye adds that many genres in every literature have evolved from the quest-myth. It is the duty of the critic to analyse myths and establish the integral meaning or essential message of a work.
