Archetypes—Waif=Rapunzel=Tangled

So, quite a few years ago I bought a book called: The Complete Writer’s Guide to Heroes and Heroines. It was suggested as a must for any aspiring writer. There is also a website (this is the one for female archetypes) (just scroll down, I just read the types): http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2010/09/10/relationshipstrategies/female-archetypes-and-the-men-who-love-them/

And for male archetypes: http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2010/09/03/relationshipstrategies/is-social-dominance-a-prerequisite-for-female-attraction/

I discovered the websites recently. So, I’m definitely the Waif and the Nurturer. If I was in a book or a movie, I would be the Waif. I thought the Waif fit me extremely well. It was pretty striking. So here is my description:

The Waif
Pure, trusting, kind. Innocent, naive, susceptible. Passive, insecure, wistful. Surprises others with inner strength and fortitude. Does not fight for herself or talk back, but endures hardships until she is rescued. Drifts through life desperately seeking a real home, having been molded by a sense of isolation. An orphan, she remains uncorrupted by the cruel world. Unscrupulous men may be her undoing. Examples include: Ingrid Bergman as Ilsa in Casablanca, Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz, Cinderella, Juliet in Romeo and Juliet, Princess Buttercup in The Princess Bride, Marilyn Monroe in The Misfits. The "Waif" has been attacked by feminists, but her appeal to men is undeniable. Men can’t help themselves from wanting to rescue the "Waif", to be her knight in shining armor. Her yielding, helpless, grateful appreciation is his reward.

So, wow! I thought that was extremely me. I think that my “type” is dying out. It has totally been attacked by feminists. But interestingly, is especially appealing to men. I can attest to that! :) My other type the Nurturer is also not terribly popular. But I identified with those examples as well. But the Waif is more what I would be in a book or a movie I think and actually fits me the best in real life, today, too. I think that a modern example of this is the lost princess Rapunzel in the movie: Tangled. For a person who doesn’t like “chick flicks”, I really liked this one a lot. I did. I thought that the depiction of the mother with Classical Narcissistic Personality Disorder (of the “beauty” kind, obsessed with her appearance) was extraordinarily accurate and a courageous portrayal of what it is like to be totally unloved by one’s parent; this person is using their child. Its courage is what makes the story so good. Also, the songs really stick in your head. I don’t think Rapunzel is a Spunky kid or Free spirit. I truly believe she is the classic Waif. She is literally “stuck” in life, unable to move, locked away in a tower by the cruel and deceptive actions of others. She is very innocent and is pure. I think her courageous actions fit the Waif who often does surprise others with her incredible inner strength. The story surrounding Rapunzel is about her building on that inner strength, and reaching for the stars. I felt the image of the rising lanterns, like a shooting star, was her own symbol as she rose above her circumstances. Like the other Waifs in the above examples she is stronger than she looks once she sees through things better; like Buttercup in The Princess Bride who eventually put down her foot and let Humperdink know enough was enough, and she would marry Westley.

Eugene Fitzherbert (a.k.a. Flynn Rider) in Tangled fits the description of the “Charmer”. His description from the book is:
The Charmer
Creative, witty, smooth. Highly charismatic: fun, irresistible, unreliable. Relies on personality and wit to get ahead rather than hard work. Was born knowing how to please others. A golden boy, he may be a player or a rogue. Examples include Matthew Broderick as Ferris Bueller, Remington Steele, Count Vronsky in Anna Karenina, Petruchio in Taming of the Shrew, Leonardo DiCaprio as Jack Dawson in Titanic. The man most likely to achieve player status. Enjoys the limelight, excellent people skills, makes friends everywhere he goes. Because of his constant supply of admirers, he is irresistible to women but is unlikely to make a good LTR partner.

In the book that I have, there is another category for men; the Swashbuckler. He is a bit of that. (But it seems that category doesn’t quite exist anymore and is not on their website). The writers of the book talk about how these fictional characters can be layered with other archetypes. They can also evolve. I believe that Eugene kind’ve evolves into the Warrior at the end; ever so slightly. The Charmer is an interesting combination to the Waif. In my book, it says they teach each other in the following ways:
“The Charmer spends a lot of time wooing this woman. She is an enigma he is determined to figure out. When he realizes he has hurt her fragile heart with his games, he decides to stop. For the first time, he thinks about how his actions have harmed others and moves to correct the wrongs. The Waif becomes a little wiser about judging people and their motives. Trusting by nature and habit, she finds out that not everyone will protect her. With him, she feels secure because he understands and supports her. She learns to be more outgoing without losing her protective shield.”
An aspect of their mesh is: “Both understand the need to escape once in awhile and wonder if maybe escaping together might not be more fun. In each other, they find a partner who is willing to believe in the impossible”.

This is a very surprising and interesting combination. I think I’ve always been wary of the Charmer, because he has the potential to hurt the Waif so pervasively; it sounds just vicious. But the cuts in her might seem to be worth it in the end (for him at least). Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca was used in the book as a classic example of evolving from Lost Soul to Warrior. Eugene I think evolves ever so slightly into Warrior. I say this for at least two reasons: (1) He makes a bold and interfering rescue of Rapunzel at the end, doing something nobody seemed capable of doing (also using his “Charmer” natural cleverness) and (2) He abandons his thieving, manipulative ways at the end (to conduct himself more honorably). The Warrior is one of those extinct archetypes in today’s society. But I agree that there are men who seem to "fly under the radar" but live by ideals that seem old like “honor” and “courage”. His description:
The Warrior Tenacious, principled, passionate. Driven, controlled, remote. Focused on righting wrongs, he is the ultimate protector. Honorable and intensely loyal. Examples include Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird, Jan Schlichtmann in A Civil Action, Superman, Anakin Skywalker, Mel Gibson in Braveheart, Robin Hood. Conspicuous examples are relatively uncommon in real life, though there are many men who fit this description flying under the radar. His commitment, passion and nobility will garner him intense respect among his peers. Sexual attraction is generated via the admiration of women. He is likely to prioritize his work over everything else, including relationships.

I think another modern example of the Warrior is Jack Bauer in 24. Each of the archetypes has their good and bad. For example, the Charmer is creative, witty, and smooth, but on the other hand manipulative, irresponsible, and elusive. The Warrior is tenacious (does not give up), principled (honor, integrity), and noble. But on the other hand self-righteous, relentless, and merciless. The combination of the Warrior and the Waif is as old as time. (It’s the warrior and the princess or the Knight in shining armor and the princess /damsel in distress). “Their story is as old as time. The warrior needs to protect. The waif needs protection. He is the quintessential rescuer and this woman wants to be rescued. They compliment each other’s strengths and weaknesses. Each of them stands back and observes the world around them, unwilling to dive in unless pushed. Both are outsiders. This driving need to be saved and to save draws them together. The warrior finds out he does not always have to fight a battle to win. Her patience teaches him that sometimes doing nothing wins the day. He finds that a soft word instead of a harsh rebuke sways people to his cause. He learns to pick his battles. The waif finds herself growing in self-confidence with this man. He teaches her that being a doormat is making her unhappy and that occasionally fighting for what she believes in is a satisfying experience. His love for her gives her the courage to speak up for herself. She begins to stand firm in her beliefs”. Again, I'm re-saying a lot of things from the book. The example in the book of Warrior and Waif is of Harrison Ford and Daryl Hannah in “Blade Runner”. Another example of Warrior is John McClane in Die Hard. Btw, I think a modern example (besides Rick in Casablanca) of a Lost Soul is Dexter Morgan from Dexter. The Lost Soul and the Waif have an extraordinary compliment, too. It was interesting that they omitted the Swashbuckler from the website. Robin Hood is listed as Swashbuckler in the book, but Warrior on the website. Other noteworthy examples of Swashbuckler are Harrison Ford as and in Indiana Jones and Westley from The Princess Bride. Westley is used as a prime example of Swashbuckler with the Waif (Buttercup). However, it seems as if this category is no longer in existence! Since Robin Hood is now listed under Warrior, I assume the others are now categorized as Warriors as well. Very likely in fact. They could be layered with another such as Bad Boy, Charmer or the like. But I think they're all Warriors now. I have always seen similarity between Swashbucklers and Warriors. Actually, I always wondered about that category; I think the Swashbucklers are all really a style of Warrior. I think we’re all combinations of all of them really. Another description of the Waif, this time from the book: “The waif is the two faces of every man’s fantasy. She is both Madonna and prostitute”. Her qualities are: Pure (truly unspoiled), Trusting (child at heart), very Kind (sympathetic goes out of her way to meet someone’s need). Her flaws: Impressionable (trusting others), Passive (too submissive to designing people and then trapped by fear), Insecure (doesn’t see herself as important). So, anyways I think Rapunzel (even as depicted in Tangled) is a perfect example of this. (Although she is definitely making steps beyond the fear imposed on her by her circumstances). It was a surprising and wonderful romance between her and the Charmer Eugene Fitzherbert (Flynn Rider) who I think may slightly evolve into the Warrior at the end. (I think at the beginning he's a Swashbuckler wannabe but really a Charmer who does evolve ever so slightly into some Warrior qualities – i.e. nobility). (And Rapunzel may seem like a Free Spirit but I believe she really is a Waif at heart). Not sure if Rapunzel has evolved at the end; I think not much, (still her unspoiled self) but I think she has simply tapped into that inner strength with the help of Eugene and his developed love for her. (Ok, because he teaches her that not everyone will Protect her, I believe he nudged her into the Nurturer when she finally settles down and gets married).


Charmer Eugene with Waif Rapunzel:


Great movie. Great songs. I think my favorite aspects of the movie were (for me personally) (in no particular order):

(1) The main character reminded me of myself (artist, waif, dreamer, liked to dance etc.)
(2) The visuals were sparkling and lush
(3) The songs really retold the story and even better (fantastic lyrics and very catchy and fun to listen to)
(4) The cameleon, Pascal, was the best pet ever
(5) Lively romance.

Interestingly, I think I’ve always been attracted to the Lost Soul, but always saw the Warrior as *my man and best match (definitely most attracted); but I also liked Eugene with Rapunzel. Oh, another example of the Warrior; I just saw L.A. Confidential. (yes, first time). It was so memorable, but particularly memorable was the character of Bud White (definitely a Warrior). Anyways, that’s all for now folks!