Annotation 3

Summary.
While the Hero and the Mentor are arguably the most important or central archetypes, a good story cannot contain just those two. Most good stories will contain a variety of archetypes and they typically fall into these categories, Threshold Guardian, Herald, Shapeshifter, Shadow, Ally and Trickster. All of these archetypes hold certain roles for the dramatic element of the story, but are also meant to represent some human psychological element as well. For example, the shadow who dramatically is typically the villain or enemy of a story may be meant to psychologically represent a repressed pain or weakness of the hero. Lastly, as is true with the Hero and Mentor, these archetypes are often simply masks, that the same character may where during their journey.
Reaction
There is not too much of a new reaction to this when compared to the overview of archetypes. They do make sense, especially these ones that Vogler points out. A consistent point that he falls back on, that I feel is very important is comparing the archetypes and various parts of a story with our human element and ourselves. I am going to guess at this point, simply because of the repetitiveness of this point that it may be one of the more important aspects of story writing. The story and its characters must be “human” in nature.
Reflection.
As we read the book, he points our very good examples that clearly follow the points he is making, however, when we look at class readings this is not so. For example, in Indian Camp, these various archetypes are not so easy to spot. Certainly some of them are there, such as Hero and Mentor, however The Shadow and Shapeshifter on the other hand do not seem to be present. They probably are, but obviously only visible to the trained eye.
Questions
1.) Can a story have multiple examples of all archetypes?
2.) I really wished the Volgler would connect these archetypes with non-fiction or more analytical pieces.