Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Jungian Perspective on Prospero/Shakespeare


I am currently taking a class on C. G. Jung and Popular Culture from Dr. Suzanne Lundquist and while researching for my Shakespeare paper I realized a connection between Jungian theory and an article I found on The Tempest.

I posted the abstract from an article by William Benzon last week. In that article he argues ways that Shakespeare's works (specifically The Tempest) provide insight into the psyche of William Shakespeare himself. Jung was a psychoanalyst and much of his theory deals with the idea of individuation - or the need to come to wholeness as individuals and as cultures. Jung sees the psyche as a conscious-unconscious whole made up of opposite characteristics with a compensatory relationship. With that in mind I read this in Benzon's article:

“Prospero is a reflection of the fact that, by this time in his life, Shakespeare had, within himself, significantly transcended the division of experience into male and female.  He had, at last, become comfortable with feminine aspects of himself.” (from, “At the Edge of the Modern, or Why is Prospero Shakespeare’s Greatest Creation?” by William L. Benzon, Published in: Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems 21(3): 259-279., 1998)

 That brought to mind this selection from Jolande Jacobi's book on Jungian theory:

“Only a few of the very greatest artists are able to broaden and develop their personality and their work in equal degree. Only a very few have the strength to carry the work within and the work without to like perfection.” (from, “The Psychology of C. G. Jung,” p. 26, by Jolande Jocobi, Yale University Press, 1973)

You'd have some pretty good ground to stand on in arguing that Shakespeare is one of the "very greatest artists" so I think Benzon's claim lines up pretty nicely with this piece of Jungian theory. Psychoanalysis has kind of become passé in literary criticism but seems to be alive and well within popular culture so I hope to make an interesting connection here with the continuing relevance of Shakespeare's writing.

In an effort to gather "social proof" for this specific idea I want to do a couple things locally. First, I plan on discussing the idea with Dr. Lundquist. Second, a couple of our classmates are also in Lundquist's class with me so I want to bounce the idea off of them as well. After that I intend to reach beyond BYU's campus through some of the options Dr. Burton provided in his post.

4 comments:

  1. Dr. Lundquist got me interested in Jung a year ago as well. I think that even if you want to keep the analysis textual instead of focusing on the author, you could very well find the masculine and feminine qualities within Prospero and other characters.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's true, good idea. Thanks Kayla!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I took a class from Dr. Lundquist last semester and found a pretty good book in the library on Jungian theory.I can give you the title if you would like it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh man, I am sorry Jacob! I posted on your wall, but it looks like I may have missed a step and therefore my previous post does not show.

    What I wrote to you was that I found a wonderful contact at The University of Winthrop who's main focus is on Jungian Theory and Shakespeare. Gold!

    Below is a bit of his bio and a link that gives full email and phone details. I hope it helps with your research!

    http://www.winthrop.edu/cas/faculty/default.aspx?id=13790

    His chief interests are Shakespeare, Spenser, Milton, Elizabethan literature, world literature, psychological criticism, Jungian studies, and Christian literary criticism. His publications include Spenser's Underworld in the 1590 "Faerie Queene," A Jungian Study of Shakespeare: The Visionary Mode, and approximately 20 articles on British and American literature as well as pedagogy.

    ReplyDelete