[–] Naught405 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The family as the allegory of the nation is an extremely old device, even the bible uses it. The family is also a microcosm of the state, in most conservative traditions (this is where the argument giving women the vote divides the family comes from). think about the roll of mother in the story...

In other words the reason he did it was so you could more easily extrapolate his story's specifics into generalities about Czarist Russia.

[–] thewebofslime 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The Book of Mormon has the same facsimiles in the story in regards to the family of Joseph Smith Jr, specifically regarding his brothers. Nephi = Joseph Smith, etc, etc.

We write what we know.

[–] gazillions 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

According to Jung one would fit the definition of thinking, another intuition; sensation and feeling the other two. Of course there's infinite variation and subheadings, but the necessity of a satisfactory life means keeping all those components in some kind of balance.

The archetypes are of course everywhere and contribute to long lasting art and literature because we recognize the template in the work.

Jung was not an atheist.

[–] Diogenes_The_Cynic [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

You're throwing Jung in here, but its Hindu too. The idea that there are 4 classes of men, and that the archetypes are inescapable. That idea is certainly in the book.

[–] gazillions 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Of course it's Hindu. It's all humans. Jung isn't a religion.

[–] hangry 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I'm not sure why he wrote it that way, but the father in the story is a reprobate and no king.

[–] Diogenes_The_Cynic [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

That just justifies the regicide. Society made the man learn to kill, and he did it to a person who deserved it. How could that be wrong?

Now I don't think that the reaction the author is trying to forward, but I can't easily see another.