THE RELEVENCE OF ARCHETYPES 

 

 

“Good art could be understood as a joining of the material and the spiritual, the specific and the universal, or the individual and humanity.” -Otto Ranck-

 

To be able to experience an archetype we have to distance from self. As archetypes are stills from an accumalation of data interpreted by the collective subconsiousness. We are unable to subconsiously be an archetype. This paradox aligns with the dramaturgical enigma on stage, was it real?

 

Archetypes are a powerfull tool to mimic humanity but is certainly not human. If i want performers to become reflections of there own inner workings they have to be destilled too two dimensional characters. That is why I base my archetypes on personal insights of my performers. They come to a genuine realisation and then use it to look at themselves from a distence, and create an archetype that symbolises a part of there intrinsic self. The problem lies in the metapisical understanding of self. I belief self can only be interpreted because of the body. (matter vs. Idea )  

Therefor a strong archetype should be embodied, not written nor painted. Dance in its most arbitrary form is mastery of the sences to create beauty. A skill to manouvre the compleet body into shapes that reflect our poëtic nature. If the body is not examined thoroughly and with compleet focus on revealing its mystery, we fail to create mystery around the performing qualitys of the dancer. Dancing has become a relic of the art-world and soon wil be discarded as such. Wouldn’t it be rockn’roll to reanimate the dancer, and try to find a meaningfull place for him/her in society during these trying times.

 

Value, is the core concept of modern times. Can we turn dance into a valuable asset, if so make people re-align with the cultural and physical importance of dance.

I for one belief that our highest achievements as humans is not economy or prosperaty. It is awareness. How we as humans where capable of grasping concepts about self and how there own thoughts came to think about themselfs thinking. 

This gave us the opportuninty to tune in to the colective strugle of individuaity.

When in truth we can only subconsiously feel one another, without our ego strugeling.

Why stop now? 

 

I know that the totality of the body is capable of interpreting the collective subconsiousnes way better then our intelect can. Our intelect is merely one of the benefits we can use to become aware. Jung created archetypes to reflect basic clusters of identity to use as a methodical solution to categorise the human psyche.

He didn’t fully embody it. What happens if we can train ourselfs to first feel the body moving as an archetype and then consiously react with our psyche accordingly?

We open the field of probability and create a direct telephone line between body and mind, without the interference of ego. Just observe, and take a note to self

 

Installing new archetypal movement to categories human response might benefit us all.

 

​

​