DATE: Saturday, December 21, 2013
TIME: 2:00 p.m
PLACE: Room B, Ladera Lane campus
CANDIDATE: Victoria Crowninshield Drake
DISSERTATION TITLE: "One and Other—Vessel and Void: Within the Alterity of the Twin Archetype"
PROGRAM-TRACK/YEAR: PhD-K; 2005
COORDINATOR: Dr. Allen Koehn
ADVISOR: Dr. Glen Slater
EXTERNAL READER: Dr. Thomas Moore
Drake, V. (2013). One and Other—Vessel and Void: Within the Alterity of the Twin Archetype (Doctoral dissertation, Pacifica Graduate Institute, 2013)
The vocabulary of verbal and nonverbal language is primarily a meta-extension of our lived, physical experience of the three-dimensional realm that we inhabit. Our sense of self could thus be viewed as continuously pivoted in-between an intertwining matrix of reflexively co-creating perception, thought, and language. Inspired by Plato, Jung articulates his particular theory of archetypes, recruiting neoteric language to describe the universal, inherently oppositional, pan-dimensional, underlying psychic energy patterns from which symbols, images, and myth emerge. Hillman’s archetypal psychology further differentiates the psychoactive relationship between archetypes, the development of consciousness, and the individuation process by splitting into an alternate paradigm whereby psyche is viewed as multiple and adaptively reflective—recursively both “one and other,” leaning into a polyvalent perspective or plural viewpoint.
This dissertation presents a hermeneutic, theoretical inquiry that deepens into suggesting a surrogate, archetypal framework, first defined as the twin archetype that is distinctly differentiated from the archetype of the twins. As a quintessential, core archetype of duality, paradox, and relationship, the plasticity of the twin archetype is also associated with discerning the panorama of “psychological twin” versus “literal twin.” In asking for comparative grammar to cohere, “twin” here is more qualitatively embedded within a complex, occasionally overlapping array of individuation contexts and meanings, including “one and other(s),” “more than one,” “multiple,” and “recursively, simultaneously interchangeable.” The multifaceted “twin” trope is also separate, but connected to substituting interstitial ideations of “mirror,” “double,” “copy,” “projection,” “transference,” “mimesis,” and so on. This work further seeks to imagine how the allopatric nature of the twin archetype might manifest as a generative, transformative response to a felt sense of dissociation, trauma, or “soul loss.” There are no true opposites using a twin archetypal lens, only a spectrum of infinite, complementary equivalents. The twin archetype’s native domain is within and throughout the lived, ever-shifting, interpretive senses of self “in-between,” whether that be ambivalence, polarity, and perhaps, most keenly, the very verb process it-self, of integrating, expanding, channeling, and bridging awareness of those seeming conversational antinomies. Please note: Parking is available on the Ladera Lane campus. Shuttle service is not available.