I have been requested by Stage 32 Head of Community Ashley Smith to comment here based on my marketing experiences at major studios, mainly Disney. When I was there they were fervent about scientifically analyzing a film's potential by scrutenizing via focus groups and test audiences the target demographics of the potential consumer. For the screenwriter I know this can be disconcerting when plying your creative muse. And this was before A.I. came into 'the picture' doing the same thing. But there are broad generalities a writer should know about Jungian archetypes -- universal patterns of behavior proposed by psychiatrist Carl Jung. There are many who scoff at these. But I have seen they can be proven time and again by watching youtube and Patreon fan reaction videos to hit movies and shows. Blasphemous to say men and women differ in their perception of characters? Watchng women react to such films as Forrest Gump, the Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter the character trait they most admire is loyalty. This suggests that mens' nature by default (primordial need to propogate the species) is to 'sow ones oats' as often as possible ... an intrinsic nature to be fought against. In Forrest Gump, women fans openly cry at Forrest's blind devotion to Jenny no matter how often she leaves him on her self-destructive path. Brought to flowing tears by Sam's loyalty to Frodo: "I can't carry it for you (the ring) but i can carry you!" "Loyalty" is obviously a universally-cherished character trait. Who didn't tear up in Toy Story 3 when Andy, albeit reluctantly, gives up his beloved Woody doll to Bonnie? Sacrifice for the greater good universal. And universal archetypes such as underdogs succeeding beyond all odds ... Star Wars anyone? Hobbits? So I do suggest studying fan reaction videos to hit films and shows to catch patterns of Jungian archetypes for both men, women and universal that wring out emotions. There are 12 human archetypes as defined by Jung you can look up just to keep in the back of your head while writing. A useful tool without overanalyzing your stories market potential.
Screenwriting : Incorporating Jungian Archetypes in Story by Paul Norman Rich
Other topics in Screenwriting:
Check out Trending Discussions
Register / Log In
2 people like this
Thanks for the idea, Paul Norman Rich! After reading your post, I started thinking about my scripts, and I realized almost all of them are underdog stories.
2 people like this
Great article and very informative.
4 people like this
I think all writers should have an understanding of basic psycholgy and Jung is a good place to start.
1 person likes this
Jung is the GOAT.
2 people like this
I wouldn't go that far Erin. Interesting Freud and Jung were friends for a long time until a bitter falling out. Jung felt their were universal traits in humans imbued by nature and Freud was more nurture than nature focusing on personal interactiion with other humans primarily the libido. Certainly in writing characters the libido, sexual or not, plays a role. Re: my initial post on Jungian archetypes he does not directly label "loyalty" as an archetype but it is intertwined. People go to the movies and watch shows to escape their own realities and often fixate on certain emotions. Life in general isn't fair which is why the majority of audiences root for fairness they don't find in their own lives. Oh to have a super power like Marvel heroes to even the score! Or to be a Jedi Knight! That falls into Jung's "hero" archetype.
2 people like this
Well, you're only Jung once.
1 person likes this
I'm not a fan of Freud, so I'll rephrase: Jung is MY GOAT (lol). I've read MAN AND HIS SYMBOLS and MEMORIES, DREAMS, REFLECTIONS, and, of course, I love how he influenced Joseph Campbell. :) Tell me what else I should read, you guys!
Is there a specific resource you recommend, Rebecca James? I'll pull a card every few weeks for myself, so I have a very basic/limited knowledge. Would love to know how you use this in your writing. :)
1 person likes this
Here is an issue I have with creating a story that has characters motivated by archetype (Jungian in this case). If the nature of a person is inate, then they are predictably reacting to the environment (re: osbstacle) they confront. Simple, and shallow.
I much rather have the character defined by the circumstance where I have placed them; or rather, see their true-self emerge. This level of reveal makes the character more relatable in a story: the viewer (or reader) is front and center seeing the person develop. I find that more intimate.
1 person likes this
Exactly Robert Franklin Godwin the Third. Imagine that name being called at the Academy Awards! That's why we go to the movies. To see characters react to circumstances whether physical or confrontational.. As a writer I'm always thinking how the reader / viewer would like the character react then so often as we follow them, react in a totally unpredictable way to the delight or dismay of the viewer. Sad fewer no longer 'go to the movies' now, attendance on the decline.
3 people like this
So my thought—take it for what it's worth—is that archetypes are just a framework, and it’s up to the writer to breathe life into them, ensuring they’re not shallow or predictable.
We all love the hero archetype, but that doesn’t mean the hero is their highest and greatest self at the start of the story. Ideally, the story starts with their weaknesses, and the challenges they face lead them to self-actualization.
Luke Skywalker and Katniss Everdeen are both heroes, but neither are cookie-cutter characters. They’re acting and reacting based on their innate traits and personal histories (among other things), and even surprising us along the way. And Haymitch as a mentor figure? That was kind of brilliant.
So yes, I think we all connect to these “standard archetypes,” but any writer worth their salt is going to put in the work to make them complex. It’s not a “one-size-fits-all” endeavor; otherwise, we’d all be telling the same story. :)
2 people like this
Agree completely Erin. In the film Forrest Gump, Forrest doesn't grow as a character but is the basis ultimately for Jenny's growth. Yes, archetypes are a framework. I find video fan reactions online to creative content a valuable tool because the good ones express exactly what they're feeling as an audience as the story weaves its web. What they like, dislike and when they're overwhelmed with emotion with unfiltered comments like "Die you (expletive)" or "I got goosebumps" or "I love him/her" or any number of guesses as to what the character should or should not do.