#bear archetype | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

blackjack-15 · 4 months

Note

Hi I just got through reading all of your liveblogging posts about The Bear! It was a delight to read all of your real-time predictions that ended up coming true, you really had this show’s number from the jump lol. Do you have any predictions for next season? Most fans think Carm and Syd are headed for an explosive confrontation, but are any other storylines, scenes, character beats, etc. that you think we might see?

This is super nice of you, anon! thank you so much for following my chaotic ramblings XD and hey it's a lot easier to know what might happen in the show when they've got such competent writers/directors! tho they surprised me a fair number of times (i don't think i'll be over the interplay/intercuts of claire, carmy, and syd at the end of 2X07/start of 2X08 any time soon), which keeps things fun

as far as predictions for next season...i think it's hard to say without having the first five minutes of S3 in front of me (they do such a good job setting up the tone and conflicts of the season in the first little bit of S1 and S2!), but i've got

a couple things i'm pretty sure about:

-more REM songs (only thing i'm 100% positive on)

-more kitchen/cooking time for our mains, especially carmy. last season's renovations + cliche john hughes nonsense kept him mostly out of the kitchen from ep 3 on, and i'm 99% sure he'll be back with a knife in hand come S3

-nat giving birth to a girl (i'd love it but am not solid on predicting she'd be named some derivative of 'mary' (or a name meaning 'victory', such as nicole), given the berzatto family prayer).

i know the temptation for her to have a boy named after michael is strong b/c it's TV, but this series (rightly, in my mind) tends away from Lionizing the Dead simply b/c they're dead, and after spending S2 breaking down mikey (and showing mikey and nat's relationship, which like ever berzatto relationship wasn't super healthy), i'm hopeful and trusting the writers to avoid this. it wouldn't make me hate the show or anything, but it would honestly disappoint me unless done in a way (i honestly can't think of what way) that would make it okay. plus pete kinda screams girldad to me, and seeing carmy and richie with a little niece would be incredibly precious

-sydcarmy dustup of some kind, but i doubt it'll be as explosive as we've seen in the past, mostly b/c syd was stressed but exhilarated by success at friends & family and b/c i think carmy's (lack of) mental health will be brought up in relation to it

-solidifying of a secondary staff at the bear to let our regulars breathe a bit and have the bear feel like a real, functioning kitchen, not a mom and pop greasy spoon -- this started at the end of s2 but it needs to continue

-cicero setting the tone of the first few months of The Bear (and probably his commentary on carmy's relationships) -- we're not out of the realm of Complete and Utter Failure yet, lads, and the money is gonna come due -- whether by the guise of Friendly Uncle Jimmy visiting with Nat, or the mask of Cicero the Loan Shark coming out in full force

-art storyline with carmy figuring out what will replace the awful painting (i'm going to guess it'll be something of his design, but it'll at least be something he feels represents him, given the comments last season)

-major theme of carmy figuring out what he wants vs what others want for him. him analyzing his relationship with claire by himself -- or, my preference, talking it out with Tina, who he seems to be able to open up to pretty well -- is part of this

things that have to happen but i have no idea how/to what resolution:

-carmy and richie addressing the "donna" fight/comment. it's gonna be multi-ep (neither one is great at complimenting the other to their face and tend to do it behind the other's back, but richie is especially bad at it), and it's gonna hurt.

-pete spilling the beans to Someone (not nat but not sure who) about donna being at f&f

-resident claire's poor little hurt feelings from trespassing into the kitchen and eavesdropping on then leaving carmy in the middle of a really, really bad attack (yes i'm phrasing it that way because it's true <3)

-something about tiff's upcoming wedding (marcus getting contracted/recommended to make dessert for it would be painful but oh so crunchy)

-carmy meets syd's dad. he's proud of her and her success and you know he's gonna want to meet her business partner

nebulous predictions:

-ebra's storyline with him carving out a niche at the sandwich window getting screentime

-tina coming more into her own and maybe getting a designated storyline (about what? no idea)

-more gary nonsense. man lives the wildest life and we see almost none of it

-carmy working through what cooking means to him and what it means in relation to the bear/the berzattos/sydney

-nat's water breaks/she goes into labor at the bear. not sure the baby will actually be born there (i'd guess probably not on the whole), but the process will Begin there

-syd distraction/love interest storyline. not even her dating particularly, just her attention being Split and having the shoe be on the other foot for carmy as they navigate what being business partners means outside the kitchen

-fak time. he's a little uncertain, a little wandering in the restaurant, and he was a major...antagonistic force, let's say? in S2. his place in the world of the bear needs clarification and harmony, and his identity needs solidity and sureness

things that aren't impossible/improbable but would be a Little Treat for Me specifically:

-chef jess being invited to the bear by richie (let the man have people outside the bear and his kid/ex! garrett may come too i'll allow it)

-the return of louie my beloved (helping out at the sandwich window? he makes a good foil to Young Carmy, so i would like to see him more -- carmy in Full Mentorship would be a thing to see, and it would be a being-better-than-mikey-was-to-him thing as well. it's narratively crunchy and provides lots of room for growth, but can be done in ways that don't involve louie, so that's why it's here)

-syd's best meal + comment about being a regular at The Beef coming back. do i think they eventually will? yes. am i aware that my desire for them is prolly stronger than it narratively should be be predicted? also yes. could this easily be combined with carmy meeting syd's dad? yes and i will break the sound barrier

-carmy drawing a dish syd comes up with. a hand-drawn menu for the bear would be Incredible, and syd's face looking at a sistine-chapel-style drawing of a dish she came up with? tremendous, chef

thing that i want to be brought up more than Anything but don't predict it'll be touched (at least directly):

-carmy yelling for syd during his attack in the walk-in (i'm sorry you can't have the man yelling "MARCUS GET ME SYD. GET ME SYD" and expect me not to want it on a billboard

that got long, sorry anon, but there we go -- 4am rambling off-the-cuff about S3...only months to go, hopefully....

#the bear #anti claire bear #asked and answered #sorry this is like a novella but i can't keep my mouth shut! y'all know how it goes #syd x carmy #i refer to her as 'resident claire' because 1) no surname and 2) referring to her place in the bear universe as a Type rather than a person #she's not claire a fleshed out character; she's the resident claire; the archetype that is a vehicle for conflict + growth #also because i am as catty as the day is long and i can be! been in fandom too many decades not to call it as i see it #that and it's her job title so like it works but it works in so many different ways #it's like poetry it rhymes dot jpeg #i might be way off base but i'm p sure i'm at least on the field

19 notes · View notes

dailycharacteroption · 2 months

Text

Instinctive Metaphysicist (Starfinder Archetype)

(art by dendysetiady on DeviantArt)

When Pathfinder tapped into a few disparate elements of D&D 3.5’s Psychic Handbook in order to bring psychic magic into their setting, they mostly took the names of certain classic spells and pretty much dropped the rest, eschewing the crystals and pseudoscience in favor of actual historic looks into mentalism and claims of psychic phenomena.

One of the things they brought up was mindscapes, metaphorical psychic landscapes that translate the inner workings of a living mind into a form that the mortal mind can understand, and more importantly, can be described in exciting ways for the players.

Now, while the binary mindscapes associated with psychic duels had pretty clearly laid out rules for how they work, the more in-depth personal mindscapes are rather… rules-lite, shall we say? On the one hand this is good because it means that the GM has leeway to do whatever here. On the other, it’s extremely frustrating since the mindscape chapter did a poor job of inspiring what you MIGHT do with such things. Healing someone’s mind by fighting painful memories or outside influence, extracting information with a literal mind-heist, or damaging a mental construct representing some psychic power in an enemy are all fine and dandy ideas. It’s a pity that the game doesn’t really give you an upper limit on what you can actually do to a person with a single casting of mindscape door.

In essence, exactly what you can do with mindscapes is left wholly in the GM’s hands, making someone’s mind into basically a weird sort of dungeon where you often have to get in and find a way out of someone’s mind, especially if they know you’re digging around. This also means that your GM is going to be in a lot of pain if you cast that spell a lot on people that are not who you’re meant to dive into in the story.

So with that in mind, I had hoped that the Starfinder delve into mindscapes would be a bit more detailed, but instead I was disappointed still, partially because of today’s subject.

Now with that preamble out of the way, I present our subject, the Instinctive Metaphysicist!

As the name suggests, this archetype refers to a person who, due to exposure to them, knows their way around mindscapes in ways that many others do not. They may not even be particularly potent psychics, but they have a knack for navigating and utilizing mindscapes in their work, though some of the more powerful can manifest constructs of their imagination into reality.

Despite my dislike of how some abilities of this archetype are handled, this archetype has a sort of… ancient mystic vibe to it which I do appreciate, like some wizened elder who was never formally trained but has a deeply insightful understanding of the mind from decades of practice.

It’s also notable that this archetype is heavily associated with (but not exclusive to) uplifted bears due to their psychic abilities and yearning for a cultural identity, which has given rise to the “Endless Forest”, which is either a collective mindscape of their people, or perhaps a recurring framing device for personal mind palaces that they create, depending on how you look at it.

When taking a longer rest, these psychonauts can retreat into themselves to recover much faster than others, and even use this reclusion to fight off mental effects, though they become insensate while their thoughts are deep within their own heads.

The more powerful among them can flex their minds to bring forth objects or illusions from their minds into reality for a short while, ranging from small physical objects to complex illusions and later even full illusionary environments.

Finally, they can also attempt to pull a foe into a binary mindscape to duel them, allowing them to fight directly with the foe in the landscape of the mind. However, the rules for this are much less robust than Pathfinder’s psychic duels, and is confusingly worded.

While the rest of the archetype is fine, the fact that the final ability is basically instigate psychic duel, a 1st level spell in Pathfinder, is annoying to me, especially since this is the only officially printed way for characters to do so in Starfinder without conversion or homebrewing. Beyond that, however, the archetype is simple enough, and being able to create illusionary terrain or temporary objects can be useful in the right situations. As such, you can mostly build your character as normal with these abilities to supplement it. I can see both spellcasters with a psychic bent taking it, as well as those of a less mystical persuasion having a knack for mindscapes.

Even without having any abilities that directly affect mindscapes, this archetype does make for an intriguing ability set. One has to imagine that these characters often contemplate what the nature of reality and imagination are. Some may seek to understand the cosmos more, while others may dream of being the masters of their own mental reality.

What began as an exercise in meditation and autohypnosis has warped into something stranger as ascetic guru Palani’s “Rock by the Sea” has evolved into a collective mindscape of his many fans and followers. Completely out of his depth, the charlatan seeks to develop this into a cult, but in truth, he is not the real cause of this psychic construct, and he certainly isn’t its master.

Kogress of the 40th battalion will never pick up a doshko again, not after the horrors he witnessed. The old vesk would love nothing more than to move on from those times, but those horrors will not let him be, or rather, his subconcious mind will not, projecting the memories of that battlefield into a hellscape that surrounds him whenever he grows stressed.

The xararians, a human-like species ruled by a mageocracy that fears religion and technology as threats to their absolute power, have long held the wider galaxy in grim contempt as they try to keep their people isolated. However, a new threat to the regime grows from within, as more and more people are touched by what could be called a contagious dream, one that offers freedom and equality.

#starfinder #archetype #instinctive metaphysicist #vesk #uplifted bear #xararian #starfinder 23 Hive of Minds

9 notes · View notes

poelya · 16 days

Text

team "poe and han are alike but not like that (fanon arrogant playboy stereotype)"

#sorry I read that han solo 2016 comic and god han has this little soliloquy about the stars and the freedom he finds in them and it's.#the same exact sentiment poe expresses in age of resistance.#It makes sense tho Poe was - snorts - conceptualized to be the st's han #they've been clear about that since tfa which I find mildly hysterical. besties you accidentally knocked Leia's archetype in there too #but still.#and free fall goes hard on the han/qira parallels #altho I maintain that zorii does more to prove poe is more leia than anything. oh ur ex is a smuggler who acts like she doesn't care but #actually does?? and isn't as selfish as she likes to claim?#yeah that's what I thought you'd say you adopted organa you (fond)#anyway.#nym speaks #unrebloggable bc I'd rather. [Remembers suicide jokes are bad for ur mental health] shower w a bear than this break containment

8 notes · View notes

dent-de-leon · 1 month

Text

widomauk and Lucien/Caleb fairytale romance but with swan lake motifs. Caleb losing Molly, and then being so easily charmed when his Circus Man suddenly appears again, even as he's hit with the creeping sense of dread that something about this person he used to love feels so terribly wrong. Is this anything--

#I think about how caleb always saw mollymauk in lucien even after lucien tried so hard to fool him into believing the other was truly gone #how lucien refers to the empire kids as 'your caleb and beauregard' to molly and gloats that he's going to take them with him #caleb widogast #lucien tavelle #the way lucien claims to hate the nein even as he cant bear to let them go. molly's love twisted into a kind of possessiveness and #desperation for conneciton #anyway #the circus man and magician all work so well with fairytales archetypes to me

7 notes · View notes

mariocki · 11 months

Text

Simon Templar meets his match in the shape of Roger Delgado, as Peruvian police chief Captain Rodriguez in The Saint: Locate and Destroy (5.12, ITC, 1966)

#fave spotting #roger delgado #the master #delgado!master #the saint #locate and destroy #itc #1966 #classic doctor who #most policeman characters in the saint fall into one of two archetypes: they're either competent but deeply suspicious of Simon by #reputation‚ if not downright vindictive‚ or they're bungling fools who Simon gives the run around and generally makes idiots of #the longest serving of course being Ivor Dean's Chief Inspector Teal‚ who sort of bridges between the types (he's generally good at his job #but his grudge for Simon clouds his judgement and often leads to embarrassment)#Roger actually gets to play a fairly different type of cop: he's both clearly a good‚ honest man but bears Simon no real ill will and #actually gently nudges him in the right direction. i mean it helps that the villain of the story is a nazi war criminal (even Teal would #side with Simon for that i suspect) but it is a nicely gentle performance compared to many of the other guest cops. unable to act himself #because of the power wealth and influence of the villain‚ you can tell Roger really wants Simon to succeed; indeed‚ even after finding him #in a highly compromising position after a gunfight‚ the captain gives Simon a whole day before he has to leave the country #also it's worth noting that this guest spot is like.. universally better than Roger's previous episode (the dreaded 1.10 The Golden Journey #aka The Episode We Don't Talk About)

31 notes · View notes

shoyoist · 6 months

Text

omfg 😭

#₊˚ପ⊹ soliloquy .ᐟ‍#i saw that post going around #the one about “which character would you remove from a show for a petty reason”#and like listen #i fucking despise the character trope: “boo hoo i have such big dreams but i was born powerless in a place full of powerful people 🥺🥺”#“but then One Fateful Day i became the CHOSEN ONE”#“and hence began my journey to becoming the MOST POWERFUL OF ALL TIME!!”#genuinely i HATE that entire character archetype #and i was about to say with my full chest that i want deku completely wiped off the face of earth #because he's a trademark for that type of character yk and i HATE him so fucking much #but i realized just in time that the op loves deku 😭#and now that would be rude of me if i said his name in the tags to that post #so i'll say it here 😭😭#for a more petty reason i also want him gone because i want uraraka for myself </3 #i cannot bear to watch her resigned to her fate of being the male protag's love interest/his wife at the end of the series #like my pretty girl you deserve so much more than that #perhaps if they don't end up together i will allow him to live #unless and until them?? i want him GONE

10 notes · View notes

ragewrites · 5 months

Text

pair of hounds named Comes-Back and Should Know Better. pair of hounds named Conscious Choice and Unconditional. pair of hounds named Run to You and Six Hundred Kilometers.

#concepts #i was thinking about those ridiculous protestant / puritan names and also guard dog archetypes and—yeah. yeahhh #six hundred kilometers is a true one actually. years ago my grand-aunt had this one dog—Dima. he'd gotten old and then during routine #the vet tech found a cancerous tumour in his bowels. she couldn't bear to watch him die so #in his endless wisdom my eldest uncle decided they should drive the dog very far away from home; make him comfortable; leave him there.#so they did. so they drove out a little over six hundred kilometers #because within a 300~350km RANGE around us they were sure he'd be able to find his way back #since he'd been going around w her everywhere his whole life #well. what do you know? Dima came back.#looking dirty and exhausted but the good boy made his way back #he lived longer than they thought he would too—for about one more year. died quietly with his head in her lap.#i'm very fine about this story obviously : )

9 notes · View notes

swinging-stars-from-satellites · 2 years

Text

Victor Hugo’s Four Archetypes: analysis & overview

Victor Hugo’s 1862 novel Les Misérables is a portrait of humanity in early-mid 19th century France. Through visceral depictions of life amidst the middle and lower classes, poverty and mistreatment, Hugo paints a distinct yet widely applicable and truthful image of what it means to be alive in the world, both as an individual and in relationship and community with others. Though Les Misérables (here on referred to as “Les Mis”) is a fiction novel and the characters therein are not real people, the way Hugo writes about them is extremely true to life and offers insightful understanding of human nature and different personalities. Most notably in this context are four character types that Hugo uses to introduce a secondary set of characters halfway through the novel.

Les Mis contains a great many characters, as it is a novel that spans several decades and locations. The primary protagonist is, of course, Jean Valjean, the escaped convict with a heart of gold. Largely, the story overall follows Valjean throughout his life and growth and struggles. Around the halfway point of the book, however, we are introduced to Les Amis de l’ABC — the Friends of the ABC, a small group of college students of the middle and lower class who have a desire for revolution and change. They wish to follow in the footsteps of the previous great French Revolution of 1789 and the more recent July Revolution in 1830. Their idealism later leads to the sparking of 1832’s June Rebellion — a real historical event, which in fact was what initially prompted Victor Hugo to write Les Misérables — and the deaths of all but one member of their number. They are named, in their introductory chapter, as “a Group Which Barely Missed Becoming Historic” in a pre-emptive reference to the futility and destruction of their hopeful efforts.

In introducing these characters, Hugo also brings into play a set of very vivid descriptions for them. He takes time to introduce each individual member of the group, and in doing so also points out four key players. These four characters, as Hugo presents them to his readers, hold the archetypal placements that this writer will be exploring in this essay. They are, in introduction, the Chief, the Guide, the Center, and the Skeptic. These four delineations of character types describe both the personalities and the narrative functions of the characters that fit them, both the original characters in Les Mis and characters throughout other books, films, and other media.

The first of these archetypal characters in Les Mis is Enjolras, the leader of Les Amis de l’ABC and true spark that lights the students’ revolution. As such, Hugo takes an extra length of time to fully describe him, appearance and attitude. Enjolras is described as full of youthful vigor, with golden hair and face so beautiful as to be almost feminine. He is fiery, yet cold — his passionate fervor for his cause contrasted with the chilly, detached way he often interacts with those around him. Though not all of this is relevant to discussion of archetypes, quite a lot of it remains important, as this character is the basis of reference for the archetype of the Chief.

Enjolras was a charming young man, capable of being terrible. […] A pontifical and warlike nature, a singular thing in a youth. He was an officiating priest and a man of war; from the immediate point of view, a soldier of the democracy; above the contemporary movement, the priest of the ideal. […] He had but one passion — the right; but one thought — to overthrow the obstacle. […] He was the marble lover of liberty. His speech was harshly inspired, and had the thrill of a hymn. He was subject to unexpected outbursts of soul. (Hugo, Les Misérables, pp 575-576. Tr. Isabel Hapgood.)

The Chief, as a character in this narrative, is the fiercely goal-oriented leader. The key points, both for Enjolras himself within Les Mis and for the generalization of the personality of the Chief, are these: “[Enjolras] was a charming young man, capable of being terrible,” and “He was the marble lover of liberty”. These two lines, brief in comparison to much of Hugo’s writing, give a more concise picture of the personality traits of the Chief: they are intent on their cause, the things they believe in, to the point of becoming ruthless if brought to it. They can be someone who seems above, strange, outside of normal relational interactions. Their dedication to their chosen cause can give them an air of coldness or distance, the “marble” that Hugo describes Enjolras as.

There is, of course, much more to a person than simply those aspects of dedication and distance; even within Les Mis, Enjolras becomes must more humanized and grounded over the course of the time readers are given to learn more about him. However, he is the original Chief character type: goal-driven, passionate, unpredictable in his actions but still utterly predictable in his beliefs. The Chief is someone who can be easily understood with an understanding of what cause they have given themselves to.their dedication and fervor is singleminded; other things may often become trivial to them in lieu of giving their whole self over to their mission.

Beside the Chief, bolstering them and balancing them with beliefs just as strong, but more softly held, is the Guide. In Les Mis, steadying and standing amongst the others in this role, is Combeferre.

By the side of Enjolras, who represented the logic of the Revolution, Combeferre represented its philosophy. Between the logic of the Revolution and its philosophy, there exists this difference — that its logic may end in war, whereas its philosophy can end only in peace. […] He [Combeferre] was less lofty, but broader [than Enjolras]. He desires to pour into all minds the extensive principles of general ideas. He said, “Revolution, but civilization.”; and around the mountain peak he opened out a vast view of the blue sky. […] He loved the word “citizen,” but he preferred the word “man”. He […] affirmed nothing, not even miracles; denied nothing, not even ghosts; […] Enjolras was a chief, Combeferre was a guide. One would have liked to fight under the one and to march behind the other. (Hugo, Les Misérables, pp 576-577. Tr. Isabel Hapgood.)

The Guide, often a counterpart to the Chief, reflects belief in a more grounded way; they are far more compassionate and connected to their fellow man. The Guide is willing to fight, if need be, but would rather affect change via the individual man as opposed to in battle. The description of Combeferre, “Around the mountain peak he opened out a vast view of the blue sky,” is essential; the Guide, by their nature, wishes to offer the views of their beliefs to others, to give a chance to see the world differently and to show them the way the world could, no matter what the world currently looks like. The Chief is by nature a visionary, but the Guide may be more so in that their fight is more that of ideaologies than with other people. Their fight is not with those who oppose them so much as it is for humanity in general. The Guide is a softer side to the Chief; this is why often these two character types operate as a pair.

The next personality type is called the Center — a relational cornerstone, or centerpiece as their title implies. In the case of Les Amis de l’ABC, this is Courfeyrac.

Courfeyrac had, in fact, that animation of youth that might be called the beaute du diable of the mind. Later on, this disappears like the playfulness of the kitten, and all this grace ends. […] This sort of wit is transmitted from generation to generation. […] Courfeyrac was a honorable fellow […] [He was] a paladin. Enjolras was the chief, Combeferre was the guide, Courfeyrac was the center. The others gave more light, he shed more warmth; the truth is, that he possessed all the qualities of a center, roundness and radiance. (Hugo, Les Misérables, p 580. Tr. Isabel Hapgood.)

Hugo’s introduction to Courfeyrac hinges largely on comparing him to a character who had come and gone chapters earlier. Felix Tholomyes was described with a cheerful, attractive personality that draws people to him. However, Tholomyes was a cheat and a scoundrel, whereas Courfeyrac, though similar in personality and aura, is “An honorable fellow… a paladin”. Courfeyrac is the Center, the warm, friendly glue that holds the group together.

The Center is defined well by their title: they are the one who most everyone is drawn to, who has individual relationships but binds them all to each other all the same. Because of their warmth and welcoming, the Center rallies a group together by virtue of friendliness. A paladin is “A defender or advocate of a noble cause; a defender of faith” (American Heritage dictionary, 5th edition). The Center’s noble nature acts as an interpersonal glue holding those around them close both to the Center themselves, and to each other. They are a unifying force.

The fourth archetype that Hugo frames out in Les Mis is the Skeptic. The Skeptic is something of a wild card, an opposing force who nonetheless attaches themselves to those they may disagree with. In Les Mis, this character type is represented by Grantaire, a cynical drunkard.

Among all these glowing hearts and thoroughly convinced minds, there was one skeptic. How came he here? Bu juxtaposition. […] Grantaire was a man who took good care not to believe in anything. […] Skepticism, that caries* of intelligence, had not left him a single whole idea. He lived with irony. This was his axiom: “There is but one certainty, my full glass.” He sneered at all devotion in all parties.[…] However, this skeptic had one fanaticism. This fanaticism was neither a dogma, not an idea, nor an art, nor a science; it was a man; Enjolras. […] To whom did this anarchical scoffer unite himself in this phalanx of absolute minds? To the most absolute. In what manner had Enjolras subjugated him? By his ideas? No. By his character. A phenomenon which is often observable. A skeptic who adheres to a believer is as simple as the law of complimentary colors. That which we lack attracts us. No one loves the light like the blind man. The dwarf adores the drum major. The toad always has his eyes fixed on heaven. Why? In order to watch the bird in its flight. […] He admired his opposite by instinct. […] He was, himself, moreover, composed of two elements, which were, to all appearance, incompatible. He was ironical and cordial. His indifference loved. His mind could get along without belief, but his heart could not get along without friendship. A profound contradiction; for an affection is a conviction. […] …he was the obverse of Enjolras. (Hugo, Les Misérables, pp 583-584. Tr. Isabel Hapgood.)

*Caries: Ulceration of bone; a process which bone disintegrates and is carried away piecemeal, as distinguished from necrosis, in which it dies in masses. (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 5th edition)

The Skeptic, as a character type, is a cynic, a fatalist. They are often, as Hugo’s original text says, found in juxtaposition — not only in the way they challenge and counterbalance others, but also within themselves. The Skeptic is, as Hugo says of Grantaire in regards to Enjolras, the verso of the Chief: they are the flipside, if, instead of how the Chief dedicates themself to their cause and beliefs, they dedicate themself with equal force to the pursuit of a lack of belief. This, the interest of holding no belief, is incongruously a cause in and of itself. They are the opposite of the Chief, of believers, but strangely similar — Hugo refers to Grantaire as “Enjolras’ one true satellite”. The Skeptic’s perspective on the world tends to be darker, more pessimistic — what they themselves might call “realistic,” if asked — but they are likely to surround themselves with those bright, radiant people whose faith soars. “A skeptic who adheres to a believer is as simple as the law of complimentary colors” — they mirror the faith of others, in a warped way, with their insistence on disbelief; they have a need to be surrounded by those with differing views simply because they require someone to bolster them.

By nature of their skepticism, they are drawn to true believers. They challenge and are challenged all the same, and that is what fuels them. Surprisingly, considering their opposition and argumentative attitude, the Skeptic often brings a kind of balance to their narrative. Not all Skeptics are as viciously cynical, however — the character type is simply one with the pessimistic, differing views that offset them from most others. They hold onto their claimed skepticism as tightly as the Chief holds to their mission or cause, though this determination often leads into a kind of faith of their own; they believe they need no belief, but human nature in Creation dictates that they still do, and this often becomes a kind of relentless devotion not to a belief or a quest, but to one individual person. If a Skeptic type gives their loyalty (devotion) to someone, it is absolute and complete, and can sometimes be almost obsessive.

The key affect of these four archetypes is that, unlike other archetyping formats, they are focused on how characters interact with the world and with others, differing from the way Jung’s 12 types are solely based in the individual themself. Hugo’s archetypes deal far more in interpersonal relations than do most other systems. Though likely not intended as a metric for external literary analysis, these four archetypes are a much more relational perspective on what makes a character who they are; you understand a character not only by their personality traits, but also in how they interact with those around them. Hugo, writing so intimately about human nature and how relationships and interactions shape individuals and the world, understood this, and that is the key of why these core descriptions of characters doomed to tragedy function so well as a reference point for other analysis.

One can also apply these archetypes to other characters within Hugo’s masterpiece itself: Jean Valjean fits into the traits of the Guide; Cossette is a Center — in fact, she is the Center of the entire novel as a whole, the one that, over the course of decades, incidentally brings every other character into alignment at the climax they were meant to reach. Inspector Javert, in his relentless mission of merciless justice, may initially seem a Skeptic, but rather fits the criteria of the Chief. Marius Pontmercy, despite his hopeful idealism in the midst of struggles and depression, is more a Skeptic than he originally seems; his personality is pessimistic by default and he seems rather adrift, but when he discovers a personal quest to give himself to, and when he falls in love, the dedication is indeed obsessive and complete. In contrast, Eponine Thenardier, desperate for friendship and someone to care for her, fills the role of both Skeptic and Guide — complete dedication to Marius, the only person who’s shown her much kindness, and longing and hope for a better life and world; she yearns for that clear blue sky opened around the mountaintop.

As an example from another series, one might look to C.S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia. The four Pevensie siblings fulfill each of the narrative roles and personality types of these four archetypes. Peter, though the High King of Narnia, would be a Guide type character; the Chief in this case is, somewhat surprisingly, more likely to be Susan, who can be overly wrapped up in personal goals. Lucy is, of course, the Center — undoubtedly, she is the one who binds them together the most. Edmund is something of the Skeptic, though he certainly develops away from the negative aspects of that attitude.

Other examples include Rapunzel and Eugene from Disney’s 2010 animated film Tangled, with Rapunzel as a Center, though as her development unfolds she begins to become more of a Chief as well, while still maintaining her softness and radiance. Eugene, for his part, begins as a full Skeptic, but over time grows more into parts of a Guide. In Avatar: The Last Airbender, Aang is a Center; Katara is a Chief; Sokka is the most like the Guide, with traits of a Skeptic as well; Zuko is also a Chief — which is part of his friction with Katara throughout his redemption arc — while Toph is a more abrasive, unlikely Center. Another interesting example of these archetypes in other media is Scully and Mulder from The X-Files — though their dynamic is clearly and textually that of a skeptic and believer, their character types are not that of the Skeptic and the Chief; Scully, despite her persistent skepticism, fulfills the narrative role (though not all of the personality traits) of the Center, and Mulder’s relentless quest for the truth is tinged with a deep compassion that tends more toward the Guide than the Chief.

In overview, the four archetypes taken from Les Mis are: the Chief, whose fierce passion for their beliefs and goals can lead them to be cold or inadvertently unkind to others as they pursue what they have dedicated themself to; the Guide, whose beliefs are as firm as the Chief’s but who is a softer touch, with more compassion and interest for the sake of humanity as opposed to ideals; the Center, a bright, friendly type who binds together those around them with their radiant kindness and interest; and the Skeptic, whose cynicism and opposition is the very thing that ties them to those they argue with, and whose loyalty is not to a cause, but to a person or people.

As with any attempt to separate people — real or fictional — into categories, these archetypes are fallible and characters can fit criteria of more than one, or can develop and change. There is a common need, or desire, to compare and contrast characters with similar personalities, however, and this writer is of the opinion that the four archetypes that Victor Hugo incidentally brings forth in Les Misérables are extremely useful. These four categories of character type function to describe either the personalities of the characters who fit them, or their narrative roles, and sometimes both, and can be applied not only to Victor Hugo’s characters but also to those from other books, films, and other media. Because they are more based in how characters interact, they give a different perspective than do archetypes that are focused more on the internal workings of individual characters, and thus offer an interesting, somewhat unique approach to character and story analysis

#i wrote a simplified version of this as a tumblr post MONTHS ago which actually functioned as the initial draft of this #but I've been meaning to share this for a while i just thought about it again bc i was talking about these archetypes re: the bear fx #like... all of this is very nuanced ofc but this is just the basic idea of what i mean when i talk about ''Hugolian archetypes''#anyway #Lu rambles #Lu writes #les miserables #les mis #the brick #victor hugo #meta finding tag #literary analysis #idk what else to tag this lol nshxnsjdnc

77 notes · View notes