Maybe 'detail' is the wrong word. Specificsmay be better. What I'm talking about are the specific characteristics that are brought to an archetype by the writer. Vader and Indiana are surely, anyway, 'imitations' of older archetypes. And that's my point: Vader and Indiana are characters who have been created using specific characteristics, but they're based on archetypal figures. The combination of the archetype and the specific character creates not only memorable but resonant characters.

What do you mean by "characteristics ", personality traits from archetypes mixed and matched ?

Do you have any proof of this so I can see what you mean ?

I'm looking at this from a writer's point of view.
So, to give an example:
I want a 'baddie' in my novel. The archetypal devil or demon. So I think about the kinds of energies that would involve - eg death, destruction, tyranny, sadism, evil,etc. Then I think about how my character thinks, looks, smells, moves, speaks etc. I try to find characteristics that really evoke evil, for me. The combination of my own imagination and vocabulary, together with the energy of the archetype I've chosen, will (hopefully) result in an original 'baddie'.
Maybe I'm being over-simplistic?
To draw an analogy: we are all humans, and share human characteristics - eg we think, reflect,live and die etc. That's our archetypal humanity. Then each of us has specific characteristics that make us unique - eg our way of speaking, moving, expressing ourselves. So as characters we're a mixture of the archetypal and the specific and unique.
That's the best I can put it!
Susiex

I'm looking at this from a writer's point of view. So, to give an example: I want a 'baddie' in my novel. The archetypal devil or demon. So I think about the kinds of energies that would involve - eg death, destruction, tyranny, sadism, evil,etc.

Bu thats its - your just imitating still " would involve " your already conforming to the traits that the image of the demon give you .

Then I think about how my character thinks, looks, smells, moves, speaks etc.

It wouldnt matter if you made him into china cup that spoke in arabic and rode magic carpet I still think the fact your using a demon as template means it will be just that .

Its not the same as Vader or Indiana which are almost new unique archetypes with themselves with unique looks that appear original and not just an anomalie.

I try to find characteristics that really evoke evil, for me. The combination of my own imagination and vocabulary, together with the energy of the archetype I've chosen, will (hopefully) result in an original 'baddie'. Maybe I'm being over-simplistic?

Well theres problems there if your only experince of evil is through certain channels , again to me it means you just run risk of duplicating something you've read or seen.

Everyone expects evil to be really evil too , I dont think the word lends itself to being something half hearted or having a mean streak .

The other problems is whether, you as person are gifted enough and have enough knowledge to re-interpt evil in a new way that is not just another type of evili.e. the same type everyone has hears and knows

What is evil to you maybe not be that evil to someone serving a life sentence .

To draw an analogy: we are all humans, and share human characteristics - eg we think, reflect,live and die etc. That's our archetypal humanity.

And aliens and other creatures dont do that ?


If I was to find an archetype for humans above any other creature on the planet its our ability for free will , to choose , change adapt and create.

Then each of us has specific characteristics that make us unique - eg our way of speaking, moving, expressing ourselves. So as characters we're a mixture of the archetypal and the specific and unique. That's the best I can put it! Susiex

No , to me this isnt the same at all, archetypes are powerful examples of " certain " traits that are universally recognized.

If you saw a man with tache a beret perhaps a stripy top talking in French youd have a universal symbol for the artist.

Most folk are not specifics like that at all but a mish mash of inconsistencies here and there, I do not see anything unique at about most people at all in fact the opposite.

If you look at audibles on yahoo messenger you see some suprisingly good examples of archetypes there.

The girl ,that matt lucas potrays in little britain is one popular example.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this! Good luck with your research.
Susiex

Thats ok.

I just feel theres more to it.

I mean Prof Snape was great character in many ways far more interesting the Vader but he did not have the same impact IMO.

Hes not a symbol like Vader..

Its not the same as Vader or Indiana which are almost new unique archetypes with themselves with unique looks that appear original and not just an anomalie.

Indiana Jones maybe an Iconic character, but he is hardly original. There have been many explorer/adventurer-type characters over the decades n fiction, based on real life Victorian explorers - who were the original formats for these characters.

ndiana Jones maybe an Iconic character, but he is hardly original. There have been many explorer/adventurer-type characters over the decades n fiction, based on real life Victorian explorers - who were the original formats for these characters.

Just becuse they were based on real life examples does not make them an archetype, the fact there was so many as you say and it took Indy to become the Standard Bearer just lends even more credentials to my argument.

It didnt take other authors crappy renditions of this archetype to make the likes of G Lucas or Spileberg aware they had system and they knew how to use it- and it was little deeper than I think most realise.

Lucas was best friends with Josepth Campbell- nuff said.

Lucas was best friends with Joseph Campbell

True, but I was talking about Spielberg's Indiana Jones, not Lucas's Star Wars.

<Added>

and it was little deeper than I think most realise.

Agreed, however, I think you have confused an Iconic figure with an Archtype.
Vader is Iconic and most probably Archetype, where as Indiana is Iconic, but not Archetype - for the reasons previously stated.
Although that is purely semantics and not really a point worth making except that I was a little bored today so I thought I would, and as you say, "nuff said".

<Added>

Just musing here, but I suspect that the chances of someone creating another Archetype figure these days are practically zero, whereas one should strive in one's writing to create an iconic figure. But there are a lot of traps for the unwary: eg. Harry Potter - there is nothing new in having a boy hero with special powers, but any writer attempting to create new fictional character with similar traits/scenes to the HP books will always be accused of being derivative because the first thing any potential reader will think of is Harry Potter.

<Added>

More musing, but i was thinking about Susie's point about female versions of Iconic characters.
Indiana Jones has Lara Croft, but the closest I could come to Vader was the Borg Queen - not a particularly neat fit since the Queen still uses her sexuality to control the 'hive', whereas Vader is practically asexual.

<Added>

Data alludes to his archetype Pinochio, but is there a female version of either iconic characher?

True, but I was talking about Spielberg's Indiana Jones, not Lucas's Star Wars. <Added> and it was little deeper than I think most realise. Agreed, however, I think you have confused an Iconic figure with an Archtype. Vader is Iconic and most probably Archetype, where as Indiana is Iconic, but not Archetype - for the reasons previously stated. Although that is purely semantics and not really a point worth making except that I was a little bored today so I thought I would, and as you say, "nuff said".

Im not disagreeing , Indy I agree is not really iconic probably because he appears too human for a start .

Yoda for example is another character that is borderline , I know hes meant to be sage but he looks / acts so different that you could make a case.

There are not to many intergalatic sages that come to mind and aside from Vader not to many supreme or overlord type bad guys.

Isnt this a determining factor in their status ?

<Added>

Just musing here, but I suspect that the chances of someone creating another Archetype figure these days are practically zero, whereas one should strive in one's writing to create an iconic figure. But there are a lot of traps for the unwary: eg. Harry Potter - there is nothing new in having a boy hero with special powers, but any writer attempting to create new fictional character with similar traits/scenes to the HP books will always be accused of being derivative because the first thing any potential reader will think of is Harry Potter.

Thats the trouble once a certain image has been defined its like an actor typecast in role , a apoint I previously made.

I didnt think Harry potter was an archetype or really that iconic , in fact none of the characters in the story really came over to me as being that symbolic .

Voldermont in some ways drew parrallels to Anakin / Vader but he was rotten to start with like Damian in Omen - just born evil.

<Added>

More musing, but i was thinking about Susie's point about female versions of Iconic characters. Indiana Jones has Lara Croft, but the closest I could come to Vader was the Borg Queen - not a particularly neat fit since the Queen still uses her sexuality to control the 'hive', whereas Vader is practically asexual.

Ive never thought much about a female Vader ,how that would translate I mean Vader or Anakin was not the atypical male sterotype to start with , so what makes you think a female Vader would be a femme fatale or Lilith sort ?

I like the idea though



<Added>

Data alludes to his archetype Pinochio, but is there a female version of either iconic characher?

I doubt it , most archetypes seem male orintated but my story telling lore is not that extensive have you done any research yourself ?



Happy Hogomanay !!

most archetypes seem male orintated

There are plenty of female archetypes: The Crone, The Mother, The Goddess, the Amazon, the Wise Woman, etc.
Susiex

lara croft was a very popular video gaming celebrity a few years back but she has nothing on Mario .

I cant think of one example of potrayed woman archetype thats up there with the Vaders though can you ?

Thats what I meant theres nothing to really rival the Jones's etc

Buffy ?