THE PARABLE OF THE ANIMUS: THE PRINCE WITH THE SAD EYES
Abstract
In The Prince with the Sad Eyes, the short story that we will here interpret as a parable in the context of Jung’s theory of archetypes, Andrić shows a woman torn between her real and idealized partner, and her suffering as a consequence of a lack of discernment in the matters of the heart, a lack of self-knowledge, and most of all, the influences of the archetypes of the collective unconscious—the animus and the shadow.
Andrić thematizes projection as a psychological mechanism of falling in love, which rules interpersonal relationships in other contexts, too. Through this woman’s infatuation with the prince, Andrić sheds light on phenomena that take place between men and women every day: projecting, expecting, and disappointment experienced as betrayal. One cannot live with the animus, the archetypal figure responsible for falling in love: once a relationship becomes reality (sexuality is here a metonymic replacement for the whole of their real life, the reality of a relationship) all projections start disappearing and in most cases, are replaced with their negative counterpart, as archetypes are essentially dual in meaning.
In a parable about the permanent misunderstanding between sexes in the process of falling in love, Andrić uses biblical signals (the tree of knowledge, miraculous healing, the genre of the parable) to point to the wrongness of the depicted world, that is the imaginary heaven, pursued in the wrong way and in the wrong place.
References
Андрић 1997, 14: Иво Андрић, „Кнез са тужним очима“, Кућа на осами, Сабрана дела, књига 14, Београд, Просвета, 110–112.
Бијелић 2016: Дивна Бијелић, Семиотика кратке форме у прози Ива Андрића, Докторска дисертација брањена на Филозофском факултету Универзитета у Новом Саду. Доступно на: https://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/handle/123456789/11442
Гаулер 2000: David B. Gowler, What are they saying about the parables?, New York: Paulist Press.
Дуршлак 1980: А. Durchlag, Toward a Poetic of Parable, University of California, Berkley. PhD. Dissertation.
Јолес 1978: Andre Jolles, Jednostavni oblici, Zagreb: Studentski centar Sveučilišta u Zagrebu.
Jунг 1977, 2: K. G. Jung, O psihologiji nesvesnog, Odabrana dela K. G. Junga, knjiga druga, Novi Sad: Matica srpska.
Јунг 1977, 4: K. G. Jung, Psihološke rasprave, Odabrana dela K. G. Junga, knjiga četvrta, Novi Sad: Matica srpska.
Јунг 2018: K. G. Jung. Aion. Podgorica: Narodna knjiga, Beograd: Miba books.
Купер 2004: Dž. K. Kuper. Ilustrovana enciklopedija tradicionalnih simbola. Beograd: Nolit.
Поповић 2010: Tanja Popović, Rečnik književnih termina, Beograd: Logos Art: Edicija.
Свето писмо Старога и Новога завјета. Београд: Британско и инострано библијско друштво, 1995.
Сенфорд 2020: Džon Senford. Nevidljivi partneri: kako anima i animus u svakome od nas utiču na naše partnerske odnose. Novi Sad: Psihopolis institut.
Требјешанин 2011: Ž. Trebješanin, Rečnik Jungovih pojmova i simbola, Beograd: Zavod za udžbenike, HESPERIAedu.
Фрај 1965: Northrop Frye. “Allegory”. Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, ed. Preminger, New York: Princeton University Press.
Стамболић 1986: Miloš Stambolić (ur). Rečnik književnih termina. Beograd: Nolit, Institut za književnost i umetnost.
Џонсон 1983: Robert A. Jonson. WE: Understanding the Psychology of Romantic Love. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
Шевалије/Гербран 2009: Žan Ševalije, Alen Gerbran, Rečnik simbola, Novi Sad: Stylos art.
Шторх 2011: Maja Štorh. Ćežnja jake žene za jakim muškarcem. Beograd: Zavod za udžbenike.