作者：Richard Dare

引言

前面，我曾谈到若干传统游戏设计语言没有加以解释的游戏要素。我谈到这样的观点，对很多玩家来说，潜在幻想是吸引他们体验游戏的主要因素，玩家和游戏存在复杂的想象关系。把握这一关系及了解游戏为什么、如何唤起这类幻想和体验将彻底改变我们对游戏的看法及具体设计方式。要实现这一目标，我们需要能够诠释这些体验，将其同游戏设计联系起来。心理学似乎就是个显而易见的框架，这是我首个瞄准的内容，但我逐渐发现通过心理学诠释前面描述的体验类型存在若干基本问题。（请点击此处阅读本系列第1、3、4部分）

最初研究这一领域，我是希望找到简单的心理学原理，将其运用至电子游戏的思考中。相反，我从中发现各种意识形态间存在不可逾越的鸿沟，这一分歧在以想象和主观体验为核心的心理学中更加明显。这一分歧的一方是认知、行为主义和生物心理学学派，他们的理论和研究主要局限在理智元素，这可以通过科学方法进行客观验证。另一方是心理动力和人本主义心理学，主要围绕个人主观体验，着眼于现象哲学：在任何观察中，我们必须从主观体验切入，这是我们的唯一观察视角。

问题是，虽然客观视角在提供行为模式和描述明确概念（游戏邦注：例如认知和记忆）方面非常有效，但在经历、意识和身份之类的第一人称现象领域则就没那么奏效。就这点而言，这一理念的拥护者或将自己限制在非主管视角，或坚持极端理念：意识和主观经历属于次级现象或幻觉，不代表观察现实的准确语境。

现象第一人称视角也存在类似问题。虽然这是很多心理疗法的成功框架，是文学和文化分析的必要元素，但它无法在第三人称视角的理论中找到客观科学基础。

就如心理学家William Glassman所述，“我们似乎经常被迫在非科学的心理学和非心理学的科学中进行选择！”（Glassman，2000）在分析想象方面，我们被迫选择前者，至少直到我们拥有结合第一和第三人称分析方法的理论，因为之前我们论述的经历和整个游戏体验概念主要基于第一人称体验语境（游戏邦注：第一人称和第三人称存在客观视角和主观视角之差；而第一人称本身又有不同视角：将精神看做社会或语言概念和认为精神基于基本遗传心理学结构的荣格观点。这里我们需要进行双重结合，首先是承认普遍心理学结构的第一人称视角和承认基于这些结构的主观、文化和语境材料的第一人称视角；其次是结合第三人称客观视角和第一人称主管视角）。

确定具体立场后，我们就面临第二个问题：寻找诠释这些经历的系列概念。第一人称领域就是众多相互联系及冲突方法，从深度心理学到文化研究和后结构主义。所有这些视角都同样有效，没有一个视角能够容纳所有的第一人称经历。这意味着我们所说的第一人称经历都只是种阐释，而非原委再现，只是其中一个视角。

探索电子游戏及其所唤起的体验最有趣、最有效的视角是，荣格深度心理学。虽然这在学术界颇具争议，但荣格心理学对人文科学及许多美工、作家和电影制作人产生重要影响。它的理念非常适合电子游戏，它提供众多概念，让我们能够探索玩家和游戏、设计师和游戏间的复杂关系。它还彻底改变我们对于题材、暴力及体验过程的看法。荣格心理学是个复杂的多层面学科，我们只能在此短文中进行粗略介绍。引言旨在说明它同游戏设计的关系，向读者提供把握相关设计概念的必要知识。首先就来探究玩耍和幻想心理学，这是构成游戏体验的基础元素。

幻想、玩耍和映射

玩耍一直都被视作是人类，甚至是动物的基本属性。心理学家和教育学家将玩耍看作是天然的学习方式。通过玩耍，人类自然锻造出生命的必要生物和心理机能，从狩猎、物质生存，到社会合作和文化参与。从认知层面来看，玩耍促进我们对世界的认知。通过有趣实验玩弄物体和构思，我们逐步了解物质世界和自身的位置。

但玩耍的作用不仅体现在促进我们适应周围事物或开发合理技能。玩耍方面的杰出理论家Johann Huizinger表示，这是很多艺术和戏剧形式背后的促进因素。他还表示，玩耍并非毫无意义的练习或是工作的对立面，它是社会幸福感的必要组成要素（Poole，2000；Rheingold，1991）。

虽然玩耍的教育和社会意义众所周知，被广泛接受，但内向型玩耍、幻想及纯粹的假装扮演活动则就不那么被认同。这多半是由于我们文化的外向型偏好或佛洛伊德的著名观点：幻想是逃避现实的退化方式。但在Jungian psychology看来，幻想和其他思考方式一样重要，而且是健康心理发展的必要条件。Jung表示，就和外向玩耍促使个体适应和了解外部世界一样，内向玩耍或幻想能够让个体适应自己的内在世界。在幻想的故事、人物和景观中，个体会接触到自身以符号形式呈现的性格元素（Stevens，1999）。

这并不是说外向和内向玩耍互相排斥。我相信很多读者都还记得和玩具或其他物体玩耍，赋予它们同实际功能毫无关系的含义的经历。通过将自己的想象影射到物体，个体赋予它新的个人含义。这让他能够通过符号物体将自己的内在幻想游戏具体化。因此棍棒变成枪支，泰迪熊变成令人慰藉的朋友，系列模块精灵变成险恶的敌人。影射被玩耍理疗师这样运用：不懂说话或能够自觉把握自身情感的孩子通常会通过玩具、内在过程、冲突和反应在故事和玩耍主题中的目标表现个人问题。

Final Fantasy from games.kitguru.net

游戏是想象空间

我觉得映射概念从一定程度上呈现玩家在电子游戏的沉溺程度。通过有意识或下意识地识别不同游戏角色、故事和过程，玩家能够发现个人问题、目标及理想，同时融入文化传递给他们的内容。这并不意味着玩家只会发现游戏的可控制角色，而是说明整个游戏变成某种意义上的“想象空间”，其中的敌人、主题、风景、道具和过程都反映特定的虚构焦点。例如，两个对立角色或政治团体的相互作用也许代表着内在冲突。一个令人满意的联盟，例如在RPG游戏中，神秘或危险角色加入玩家的党派代表着不同特性角色的内在冲突得到解决。当然，将游戏中的所有元素看作是想象的映射是个最佳设计方案。由于多数游戏都有固定过程和情节主线，他们不一定都和玩家的关注点存在联系。但随着游戏复杂性和自由度的提高，它们将能够适应不同体验风格和个人目标，映射玩家个性的内在动态模式。将游戏看作想象空间的观点听起来有些非同寻常，但它和古希腊剧院的表现形式存在有趣的相似之处。

当古希腊人民到剧院时，他们并非想要收获适度娱乐或观看当前出于消遣目的的无足轻重内容。他们希望得到精神发泄，发泄深层次的情感，这在希腊人看来，是理智和灵魂的净化。精神发泄的关键在于模仿，消除怀疑，同戏剧角色产生共鸣，内化戏剧内容，换而言之，就是从个人想象层面同戏剧建立联系（Rheingold，1991）。在希腊人看来，精神发泄是应对生死话题的健康方式，这个词汇被心理学保存至今不无道理，主要用于描述同解决内在困境相关的情感。这类精神发泄也会出现在我们的精神想象空间中，当事件同玩家产生某种程度的共鸣时，例如两个之前相互对立的角色变得团结起来或是克服某复杂障碍（游戏邦注：虽然这通常表现出不同强度）。

另一相似之处体现在德国杰出小说家及诺贝尔奖获得者Hermann Hesse的作品中。在小说《荒原狼》中，Hesse挖掘文学表现的可能性空间，“自我是个多层面的实体”。他还建议读者，“不要将创作内容中的角色当作独立存在，而应该是多个层面和元素的高度统一。”（Hesse，1927）

但什么是我们映射至游戏中的精神的多个层面及元素？我们能否概述出可被运用至游戏设计中的通俗概念，或者它们因个体而异？个体的内在关注点如何同史诗及游戏和幻想中的尘世主题建立起联系及保持一致？要回答这些问题，我们需要转向荣格的心理玄学，也就是他的想象图谱。

原型和集体潜意识

很多读者都对于无意识或潜意识（包含所有无意识要素的心智状态）概念非常熟悉。这包括记忆、忘却的经历、下意识知觉及习惯倾向（如能够在无需思考的情况下驾驶汽车）。多数潜意识论述都将其当作一个白板，或是撰写个人生活经历的白板。这一观点促使很多人做出这一结论，所有思想都截然不同，或者个性完全是由社会和环境塑造。和没有将生物学考虑在内一样（所有大脑都共享同个基本机制），这一观点没有得到卡尔·荣格的认同，他投入9年时间研究精神分裂症患者脑中的错觉和幻觉。

在研究梦境、幻想及病人的错觉时，荣格发现，其中包含很多和病人生活经历毫无关系的影像和观念。这些可以被视作是无意义的精神失调，但他还发现，这些影像和观念与全球各地的神话和宗教符号非常相似。就如精神病学家Anthony Stevens所述，“荣格收集众多资料证明，这一通用符号更多不是源自个人经历或文化传播，而是来自人类大脑的结构及人类普遍无意识心智的基本要素”（Stevens，1999）。荣格将此基本要素称作集体潜意识。

在集体潜意识中，荣格假定原型的存在。这些都是和上述通用符号相关的基本心理模式。就如荣格所述，“原型概念源自重复观察，例如，世界文学的神话和童话故事包含随处可见的图案。我们在个人生活的幻想、梦境、妄想和错觉中看到过相同画面。这些典型图案就是我所谓的原型构思”（Storr，1998）。虽然荣格的原型假设颇具争议，但有些思想家认为，这能够将这类第三人称观念从第一人称视角描述成认知科学的认知纲要及进化心理学的进化心理机制；虽然我们尚不清楚这里延续多少原型模式，传递多少文化要素（Glassman， 2000；Stevens，1998）。

通常出现在神话、梦境和幻想当中的典型原型概念包含主角、毁灭性怪兽、明智老人、父亲、母亲、梦中情人、有用的动物和危险的敌人。其中还包含若干原型过程，如英雄探索，坠入地狱，攻击神龙，性结合，太阳的升降，生和死。这些原型构思都代表着心智的普遍要素和过程，能够唤起强烈的情感冲击。

这并不是说原型就是个虚构图像或存在。虚构图像和梦境及幻想中的画面都是原型的表现或象征。原型本身是没有实质内容的内在心理模式，它们呈现的是相关的真实生活画面。例如，有人心中也许会存在成为数字朋客黑客，摧毁邪恶公司的系统的英雄幻想，有人也许会存在在世界杯中胜出的幻想。虽然具体幻想内容各不相同，黑客和足球粉丝的幻想者的个性也许大相径庭，但其幻想和建立情感联系的基本方式则完全一致。二者都描绘特殊个体的英雄式胜利（游戏邦注：这是古老的普遍主题），二者都有类似的关联情感；征服、个人优势、自信和胜利情感。在两个个体中，主角原型都发挥作用，但其表达方式因个性和背景而异。这些都是简单例子，主要是为了体现原型的“虚拟”形式特性，其呈现同个体现实生活相关的画面。通过探索不同幻想部分的相关情感和态度，我们可以发现更多，有时甚至会发现某些非英雄式的画面。

除以虚构存在及梦境和幻想形式存在，原型还能够被外部世界的画面和人类激活。两个典型例子就是梦中情人和女性意像&男性意像。你是否曾在看到某位异性时（或在现实生活中，或在想象中），心中充满超越本能的强烈情感；感觉他/她就是“那一位”？此人有种魔力，当你凝视她的脸庞时，你的灵魂就会激动难耐，满怀憧憬。他也许就像是你所需要的任何物件；当你靠近他时，内心充满欣喜，当你离开时，就会感到深深的绝望。

若你作为男性，看到能够带来这种感觉的女性，那你就遇到荣格心理学所谓的女性意像。荣格表示，每个男人的灵魂深处都有个女神，即女性意像。她出现在自己的梦中，通常是个向导，是个美丽的神奇存在，有时也会是危险的“魔鬼”。通常她会被无意识地影射到某位真实女性身上，赋予此真实女性神奇特性，将此真实女性模糊化。有时这类影射会带来永恒的爱情，有时此真实女性会打破这一影射没，令男士意识到她并非自己心中所想的样子，会觉得她“变了”，离她而去，转而寻找自己的公主女性意像，另一可能激发他内心爱恋的女性。

在荣格心理学中，男性意像是指女性精神中的对应男性形象。在梦境和幻想中，他也许会被视作英雄，有时是流氓。男性意像的另一标记是野蛮、类似于动物的男性（游戏邦注：就如童话故事《美女与野兽》所塑造的形象）。同样，女性常常也会把自己的男性意像投射到真实男性身上，这有时会带来稳定的情感，有时则会带来麻烦，若男性意像影射让她们未能认清现实。这些例子充分说明影射和原型的重要性。他们不是纯粹的抽象概念或构思，而是精神的基本力量。

这里有个和电子游戏相关的例子。想象一个胆怯的小男孩，害怕冒险，有些过度依赖父母。有天他看了一个描绘英勇冒险的卡通。男孩在期间感受到强烈的情感共鸣，每周会观看一次，开始进行基于此体验的想象游戏，将自己设想成电视主角或分享同样的冒险活动。他想象自己在遇到困境或睡前，或独自处于黑夜之中时，将最喜爱的角色召集到身旁。渐渐地，通过父母的支持和理解，小男孩变得越来越自信，越来越独立。

这个电视节目激活小男孩的英雄原型。当需要勇气和强烈认同感时，这个原型经常在梦境和幻想中出现。孩子的英雄式游戏是这一原型模式的表达，这会逐步变成他们成长的一部分，通过征服依赖和恐惧之龙，小孩对父母不再有那么强的情感依赖性，开始萌生更强烈的认同感。在这个例子中，虽然小孩最初存在模糊的不安，会生成包含英雄意像的梦境，但电视节目赋予他模仿和联系的具体形象。由于它们和内在原型存在高度相似性，电视节目的画面变得越来越具情感共鸣效果，让男孩的意识中形成无意识的自我认同和勇气。通过幻想和游戏，孩子最终将电视呈现的主角原型要素融入其有意识的个性中。英雄和英雄探险在电子游戏中无处不在，通常和普遍观念相反，而且不只局限于童年问题。我随后会详细论述这些原型及它们同电子游戏的关系。

把握荣格心理学的四大重要原型：影子、女性意像、男性意像和自我。这些主要意像通常会出现在许多梦境、幻想和电子游戏中，以各种符号形式存在。在很多个体中，影子最先出现在梦境和幻想生活中，是个性发展的不变因素（Jung，1964）。

影子

影子通常是出现在梦境和幻想中的危险敌人，代表未知或遭到抑制的潜意识，之所以遭到抑制主要是因为脑中意识所采取的态度。换而言之，影子是我们的“黑暗面”，会腐蚀其他原型，这主要取决于我们同它们的关系。一个简单例子是，刻板商人梦见危险的无政府主义者或波希米亚人闯进他的办公室，制造事端。荣格理论对于这一梦境的诠释是，波希米亚人代表无意识的创造性人才或有利于当事人、但因当事人的态度而处在有意识个性之外的生活态度。这并不意味着做梦者抛弃所有东西，变成波希米亚人，而是表示他应该尝试在生活中融入些许创造性和自发行为，及其有意识个性认为具有威胁性的品质。

影子经常被映射至其他问题上。也许此商人在碰到自由奔放的创意人士时会心生不满，会将它们同各种罪恶联系起来。若他了解自己的梦境，以此做出改变，他随后也许会梦到更少危险或者甚至是友好的波希米亚人，能够找到它们的现实对照物。

但自由奔放的波希米亚人会梦见自己同危险的刻板商人发生冲突，这映射出令他觉得不快的品质，但也许会令他受益匪浅，例如理想组织和思考。分析影子是个道德责任，它迫使我们面对不被自己接受的东西，通常会映射至其他问题上，将这些看作是种族主义和同性恋恐惧症。分析影子就是处理个人层面的善恶问题。

荣格的影子理论和Other概念相似，这一概念出现在文化研究中，旨在说明特定文化能够代表其他不同文化。就如Ziauddin Sardar描述的，“最常见的Other代表就是黑暗面，个人的二元对立：我们文明，他们野蛮；殖民主义者认真刻苦，原住民懒惰。”（Sardar和Van Loon，1999）

虽然影子通常表现出威胁性，但它也呈现出做梦者觉得正面但自己不具备的品质。有人也许会梦到好友和引人注目的同性陌生人，他们呈现出做梦者颇为欣赏的品质，但他们害怕将此融入自己的有意识生活中。

我们也许会想要植入整个影子或对其进行排斥，但这都缺乏可能性。个人存在的基本事实（游戏邦注：个体是这样，而非那样，个体认同某些事，不认同另一些事）示意自我和影子的基本对立——自我和影子，我和你，善与恶。个体的任务是把握自己的影子，了解它所代表的个人信息，尽自己所能，然后就所无法做到的进行让步。

影子在电子游戏中无处不在，以敌人、危险角色或概念形式存在。玩家也许会选择描述破坏特定秩序的敌人，能够反映自己和影子关系的游戏作品。设计师也许还会设计反映自己内在关注点的敌人和过程。谈及游戏的原型形象时，我会回过头来谈论这一重要话题。

女性意像和男性意像

就如我们前面谈到的，女性意像和男性意像是男性和女性各自的异性原型。正如性吸引背后的生物规则，荣格表示，这里也存在相关的心理规则。荣格谈到男性和女性意像，“男性的整体个性是以女性作为先决条件，包括外貌和精神方面。他的组织方式从一开始就调整至女性层面”（Stevens，1999）。女性也以类似方式调整至男性视角。但女性意像和男性意像的角色远超越普遍意识中的盲目性本能。男性对于女性及女性对于男性的意义和这一发展过程的心智及阶段存在密切关系。

根据荣格心理学，梦境和幻想的女性意像和男性意像是个体同其潜意识关系的再现。换而言之，男性会通过女性角色感受自己的潜意识，而女性则会以男性视角感受自己的无意识。女性意像通常以了解未知领域的巫婆或女巫师形象存在，例如无意识精神或但丁“Paradiso”中Beatrice之类的向导（Jung，1964）。女性意像也以爱人或同伴形象出现，在梦中通常表现为同潜意识的良好关系。她有时是有待拯救的公主，就如很多童话故事和游戏中的形象。被野兽监视代表着这样的心智态度：阻止自己同女性意像或女性建立良好关系，她必须被足以对抗此生物的强壮英雄拯救。

女性意像也有消极或黑暗元素。她也许是以倾国倾城样貌出现，就像虚拟汽笛一样，以魔法歌曲吸引男性走向灭亡，或以危险巫婆形象出现，代表以消极态度看待女性意像和潜意识，遇到缺乏力量和鉴别力的潜意识的危险。女性意像还会和男性眼中的女性化品质和态度联系起来，通过女性意像，他能够结合和理解这些有价值的品质。

男性意像通常以富有吸引力的英雄形象出现，有时是聪明的精神向导。和女性意像与男性眼中的女性品质存在联系一样，男性意像与女性感知的男性品质存在联系，例如英雄气概和理性。通过男性意像，女性可以将这些积极的品质植入自己的个性中。男性意像也有消极元素，会以流氓或罪犯形象出现。有时他会以野兽形象呈现，映射出野蛮、未驯服及无法结合的男性意像，或是对待男性及其关系的消极态度。梦到这类野兽的女性首先会感到害怕，但通过男性意像，他将被转变成更引人注目的人类形体。《美女与野兽》的故事就是这一过程的反映（Jung，1964）。

就如我之前描述的，女性意像和男性意像可以映射到真实男性和女性身上，有时会带来各种危险的癖好和误解。通过下意识将女性意像和男性意像同特定异性个体绑定，个体能够高效将自己的潜意识同它们等同起来，要求其表现要符合潜意识。这并不是说女性意像和男性意像完全呈现消极效果，当映射背后的真实人类能够被接受和理解时，这也是获得个人成长的工具。

女性意像经常出现在这样的游戏中：女性被玩家拯救，有时是作为同伴。鲜有游戏会描绘女性同其男性意像之间的关系。但有些游戏，如《最终幻想》系列就在此表现突出，给予玩家众多供其控制的男性和女性角色。在男性玩家看来，女性角色能够代表他的女性意像，例如《最终幻想VIII》中的Rinoa；Squall能够代表女性玩家的男性意像。SquareSoft通过基于两种视角描述他们的关系做到这点。玩家也许会选择能够反映他们同自身女性意像或男性意像之间关系的游戏，而设计师则会设计能够反映出自身关系的角色和故事。

自我

荣格将自我称作“原型的原型”（Stevens，1999）。它代表完整的心智，包含有意识和无意识元素。在荣格心理学中，自我是心智的内在核心。它通常以圆圈、九宫格或方格形式呈现在梦境、幻想和神话故事中；通常是四位一体，例如“宇宙的四个角落”，四个方向或圆圈的四个部分。对于男性做梦者来说，这也许表现为聪明的老头子，或是女性眼中的聪明老妇人，或者也许是伟大的国王或王后。有时这会表现为神圣或有魔法的孩子。通常在神话故事中，自我都表现为“宇宙人”或女性，代表完整的个体。在游戏中，这有时会表现为游戏世界中最强大的原则。在RPG游戏中，这有时表现为四种元素、空间中心的魔法宝石或生命之树。在其他游戏中，这也许具体为时空统一体、基本基因代码、国家或是任何在游戏中代表强大力量的元素。

自我有时也通过提供帮助的动物形式呈现，它们会在童话故事中出现，旨在给主人公提供建议和帮助。很多这类动物会在游戏中出现（游戏邦注：例如《塞尔达64》中Link的猫头鹰同伴，《最终幻想》游戏中的moogles）。这些生物出乎意料，通常坚不可摧，但有些情况下却很容易受伤害，握有能够抵抗其他敌人的自然智慧，能够让它们跳脱红尘世界。它们通常被描绘成强大力量的仆人，初期的自我会引导挣扎的主人公朝自己的命运迈进。

自我也是治愈和团结的原型，通常会出现在我们同内心冲突抗争的梦境和幻想中。孩子陷入家庭离婚风波或困境的画面通常会包含圆形图案，代表自我企图将些许团结和治愈元素带入孩子破碎的内心世界（Stevens，1999）。这种自我的治愈和团结特点会出现在游戏中，通常力场和能量盾牌都会呈现圆形或球形样式的亮光。

但自我也有阴暗面；作为荣格心智中最强大的力量，自我的负面通常会由终极邪恶力量来呈现。结合这两个元素映射出意识和潜意识，光和暗的突出对立。

这四种原型都是潜意识的主要力量，通常会被映射到外部世界的物体上，包括游戏。就如上述例子所述，很多游戏都包含这些原型符号，或通过社会惯例和重复，或通过设计师的想象，他们可能自发在此幻想中生成这些符号。但开发者不能只是将原型图像放入游戏中，声称它们属于“荣格学派”。我们需要清楚这些原型如何同个体和他的心理发展建立联系，为什么个体产生此幻想，而不是其他幻想。

原型和个体

原型和集体潜意识都属于荣格理论中的术语，是低层面的潜意识心智，他们的模型塑造上述图层。但正如我们看到的，出现在梦境和幻想中的原型是个人生活中的画面。我们还发现原型会根据我们同其之间的关系呈现积极或消极画面。换而言之，它们会被我们的现实经历及有意识态度影响。在荣格精神模式中，我们和原型的关系（游戏邦注：这会决定它们的呈现方式）由个人和文化潜意识决定。

上述集体潜意识出现在个人和文化潜意识中。文化潜意识包含所处社会赋予个体的所有无意识假设。有些作者不采用文化潜意识的说法，因为严格说起来，所有这些经历都和个人体验融会贯通，但我决定将它们拆开，因为这提供文化研究的切入点，而文化研究是在游戏中运用原型图像所要涉及的必要学科。个人潜意识和本章开头所述的传统无意识观念相似。它包含我们的所有记忆、忘却的经历、下意识知觉和习惯倾向。它还包含我们的情结。

塑造我们和原型之间关系的个人潜意识的基本单元就是情结。我相信很多人都很熟悉情结一词，因为它常被用于形容各种各样的心理问题，但鲜少人会关注所谓的情结是什么或者它如何形成。当原型被激活时，它会收集同情境或激活者相关的概念画面和体验。这些围绕原型的体验、情感和概念是种情结。心理学家Anthony Stevens给出一个很好的例子，孩子脑中母亲原型的激活。根据荣格心理学，每个孩子都有内在预期的母亲形象。这个原型会在孩子遇到和内在预期形象相似的妈妈角色时而被激活。有时此妈妈形象是生母，有时则是养母、阿姨或姐姐。关于妈妈形象的情感和体验构成一种情结，主要围绕原型的情感核心（Stevens，1999）。

形成情结非常正常，但它们通常会让人因此遭罪。Anthony Stevens列举一个具体例子。Stevens描述一位童年受控于残暴父亲的女子。这位女子的父亲原型只受到部分激活，他的父亲情结主要围绕专制独裁原型，慈爱、给予保护的父亲原型依然处于无意识状态。Stevens继续描述到，此女子一直被强凌弱的男子吸引，但同时她一直憧憬着有男子能够给予她关爱和安全感。据Stevens表示，此女子的幻想和行为表明，他期待有人能够激活他潜意识里的父亲原型（Stevens，1999）。这一例子不仅说明父母不当抚育的负面结果，同时也表明，原型处于完整状态，它们包含父亲角色、母亲角色、英雄形象、自我的各种要素，只要被激活，它们就会显现出来，变成有意识内容。完整形式的原型在神话中通常被描述成Mother Earth或Gaia之类的形象；Zeus之类的终极父亲形象，Odysseus之类的终极英雄形象。

我们和原型的关系及我们的情结内容也是由我们生长的文化及我们作为社会成员的潜意识假设所塑造的。一个例子就是宣扬和鼓励英雄不会显露情感的社会。这些同何谓英雄的社会观念密切联系的情感和形象代表一种文化情结，由于多数人都存在这种情结，因此会传递给其情结由此形象构成的社会的其他成员。这些多数人都持有的文化情结常被映射到其他人身上，进而影响社会的运作方式。就如社会学家和文化评论家所说的那样，这非常有害。但这样的情结无法通过革命进行推翻；和个人情结一样，它们需要治愈和转换。

应对情结元素，将潜意识元素植入有意识个性中的渐进过程构成荣格心理发展理论的个性化过程。和某些单着眼于社会适应的发展理论不同，个性化过程描述的是提高自我意识、成熟度及自我实现的终身个人过程。个性化是精神的自然过程，发生在个人生活背景下，但它可能被惨痛经历、有害情结或看待潜意识的错误态度所阻碍。个性化始于童年自我意识和自我认同的觉醒，会贯穿于整个生活当中，进行逐步整合，逐步意识到出现在个体梦境和映射中的潜意识元素。个性化过程的终点就是同自我及代表个体完整精神世界的整个原型建立良好关系。

总结

情结，例如女子同残暴父亲形象作斗争，寻找对应慈爱形象都构成她梦境和幻想内在剧情的角色、主题和要素，它们被映射至外部世界中。因此，我们可以做出这样的假设，玩家同特定电子游戏角色和主题所达成的情感共鸣源自玩家当前心理状态的映射。

游戏采用互动模式让玩家能够跳脱被动映射或戏院和文学的模仿，自觉进行幻想。因此前面描述的女子也许会被这样的游戏所吸引：将暴君描绘成敌人，以拯救或发现有爱心的男性角色。这类型的游戏是否能够让她得到心理治疗有待进一步探讨，但通过在游戏中看到自己的内心顾虑和问题解决方案，通过出于互动性需要做出关于内心状态的决策，女子在此得到能够给予她一定帮助的系列想法和画面。至少，这款游戏及其挑战和女子的经历关联密切。

通过查看反映潜意识原型的画面，在某些情况下，玩家能够推进自己的个人发展。当潜意识模型映射至某形象时，个体收获的情感共鸣有效说明，特定游戏角色和主题为什么如此受欢迎，以及为什么某些玩家喜欢打扮成自己喜欢的角色，或花时间绘制它们，或撰写粉丝小说。玩家喜欢的角色时是其内心未被激活的潜在原型化身。通过体验，绘制图像，玩家试图将角色呈现的原型要素植入自己的有意识个性中。

解决内在冲突，整合潜意识元素的过程对于游戏来说，有点像是特殊主题内容，但这一过程如今表现在许多游戏中，因为它以英雄关卡的形式植入虚构和神话故事中。

游戏邦注：原文发布于2004年9月8日，文章叙述以当时为背景。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Games and the Imagination Part II

By Richard Dare

Introduction

In part one of Games and the Imagination I discussed some of the aspects of gaming that remain unaccounted for by the conventional language of games design. I explored the idea that for many gamers an underlying fantasy is the primary factor in attracting them to a game, and that there is a complex imaginative relationship between a player and a game. Understanding this relationship and why and how games evoke such fantasies and experiences could revolutionise the way we think about games and how we design them. To do this, we need a framework that we can use to interpret these experiences and relate them to games design. Psychology seems like an obvious framework and it was the first to which I turned, but as I discovered there were fundamental problems in using psychology to interpret the kinds of experiences described in part one.

When I began to study this area I had initially hoped to find straightforward psychological theories that I could apply to my thinking in video games. Instead I found an unbridgeable chasm dividing one ideology from another, a division running deep within psychology with imagination and subjective experience at its heart. On one side of this divide lie the schools of cognitive, behaviourist and biological psychology, their theories and research being limited to the aspects of the mind that can be verified objectively using scientific methods. On the other side lie the psychodynamic and humanist psychologies, concerned mainly with personal subjective experience and basing their work on the philosophy of phenomenology, which states that in any investigation we must start with our subjective experience, it being the only viewpoint open to us with any certainty.

The problem is, that while the objective (or “third person”) viewpoint has been extremely successful in providing models of behaviour and in describing explicit concepts such as learning and memory, it has had less success in the first-person, phenomenological realms of experience, consciousness and identity. As such, its proponents either limit their work to the non-subjective or take the extreme view that consciousness and subjective experience are secondary phenomena or completely illusory and do not represent an accurate context from which to view reality.

The phenomenological, first person viewpoint has a similar problem. Although it has been successful as a framework for a large number of psychotherapies and as an essential component in literary and cultural analysis, it has had difficulty finding an objective, scientific base in the theories offered by the third person perspective.

As psychologist William Glassman puts it (after D.N Robinson) “..it seems we are forced to choose between a psychology which is not scientific, and a science which is not psychology!” (Glassman, 2000). In approaching the imagination we are forced to choose the former, at least until we have a theory that successfully unites the first and third person approaches, since the experiences described in part one and indeed the whole idea of game playing lie within the context of first person experience1.

Having decided on which side of the border we are on, we now have the second problem of finding a set of concepts to interpret these experiences. The first person realm is a vast sea of interconnecting and conflicting approaches, from depth psychology to cultural studies and post-structuralism. All of these perspectives are equally valid and no single viewpoint can encompass the entirety of first person experience (Of course, if you accept the postmodern critique of science, then the third person view is in no better position). This means that anything we say about first person experience will be an interpretation, not an explanation, one viewpoint amongst many others.

One of the most interesting and useful viewpoints that we can use to explore video games and the experiences they evoke is that of Jungian depth psychology. Although it is controversial in academic circles2, Jungian psychology has been a great influence on the humanities and on many artists, writers and film-makers. Its concepts seem to fit video games like a glove, offering us a set of ideas that we can use to explore the complex relationship between a player and a game, and indeed between a designer and a game. It could also radically change the way we look at genre, violence and the process of playing amongst other things. Jungian psychology is a complex and multifaceted subject and I can only give the barest introduction to it in such a short article. This brief introduction is only intended to show how it relates to games design, and to give the reader the knowledge necessary for understanding the design concepts that can be derived from it. Readers wanting a deeper understanding of Jungian psychology are directed to the books listed in the bibliography. Lets start off by exploring the psychology of play and fantasy, subjects that underlie every aspect of game playing.

Fantasy, Play and Projection

Play has long been recognised as a fundamental part of human, even animal nature. Psychologists and educationalists see play as being a natural form of learning. Through play, nature trains the biological and psychological functions necessary for life, from hunting and physical survival, to social co-operation and cultural participation. On a cognitive level, play encourages the development of our concepts about the world. By toying with objects and ideas through playful experimentation we develop an understanding of the physical world and our place within it.

But there is more to play than just encouraging adaptation to our surroundings or the development of rational skills. The great theorist of play Johann Huizinger believed that it was the basis of all forms of ritual and represented the foundational impulse behind many forms of art and drama. He also maintained that far from being a wasteful exercise or the antithesis of work, play was essential to the well-being of society (Poole, 2000; Rheingold, 1991).

Although the educational and social aspects of play are widely known and accepted, introverted play, fantasy and pure make-believe are less well regarded. This may be due to the extroverted bias of our culture or to Freud’s popular notion that fantasy represents a regressive means of escaping from reality. But according to Jungian psychology, fantasy is just as important as any other kind of thinking and in fact, is essential to healthy psychological growth. Just as extroverted play orientates the individual to the outside world and helps him comprehend it, introverted play or fantasy, according to Jung, orientates the individual to his inner world. In the stories, figures and landscapes of fantasy, an individual plays with different elements of his own personality rendered in symbolic form (Stevens, 1999).

This is not to say that extroverted and introverted play are mutually exclusive. I’m sure many readers will remember playing with toys or other objects and investing them with a meaning quite unrelated to their actual function. By projecting his imagination (often unconsciously) onto an object, an individual gives it a new and personal meaning. This allows him to concretise his inner fantasy play by representing it with symbolic objects. Thus a stick becomes a gun, a teddy bear becomes a comforting friend and a collection of blocky sprites becomes a menacing foe. Projection is used in this way by play therapists, who know that a child, who may not be able to verbalise or consciously understand her feelings, will often enact personal issues through toys, with inner processes, conflicts and goals mirrored symbolically in the stories and themes of play.

The Game as Imagination Space

I think that the concept of projection goes some way in describing how a person becomes immersed in a video game. Through identifying consciously or subconsciously with the different characters, narratives and processes in a game, the player is able to explore personal issues, goals and ideals, as well as participate in those transmitted to her by her culture. This doesn’t just mean that a player will identify solely with a game’s controllable characters, it means that the game as a whole will act as a kind of “imagination space” with enemies, themes, landscapes, items and processes all reflecting a particular imaginative concern. The interplay of two opposing characters or political groups for example, may symbolise an inner conflict. A satisfying union, such as the moment in an RPG when a particularly enigmatic or dangerous character joins the player’s party may symbolise the resolution of an inner conflict represented by the characters differing natures. Of course seeing everything in a game as a projection of the imagination is a best case scenario. Since most games have fixed processes and plotlines, they won’t all relate to the concerns of every player. But as games increase in complexity and freedom, they will be able to accommodate many different playing styles and personal goals, mirroring the inner dynamics of the players personality. This idea of a game as an imagination space may sound unusual but it has an interesting historical parallel in the form of ancient Greek theatre.

When a citizen of ancient Greece went to the theatre, he didn’t go to be mildly amused or to view the kind of lightweight nonsense that passes for entertainment today. He went there to experience catharsis, a release of deep feeling that to the Greeks was related to the purification of the senses and the soul. The key to catharsis was mimesis, a combination of the suspension of disbelief, the ability to empathise with the characters on-stage and the ability to internalise the drama as it was performed, In other words, to relate to the drama on a personal, imaginative level (Rheingold, 1991). To the Greeks, catharsis was a healthy way of dealing with the great themes of life and death, and it’s not for nothing that the term is retained by psychology today, to describe the release of emotion related to the resolution of an internal difficulty. Such catharsis may also occur within our digital imagination space, when an event occurs of particular resonance to the gamer, such as the union of two formerly opposing characters or the surmounting of a difficult obstacle, though often at differing levels of intensity.

Another parallel is found in the work of the great German novelist and Nobel laureate Hermann Hesse. In his novel Steppenwolf, Hesse explores the possibility of literature representing “..the ego as a manifold entity.” He also advises the reader, “not to regard the characters of such a creation as separate beings, but as the various facets and aspects of a higher unity” (Hesse, 1927).

But what are the various facets and aspects of the psyche that we project onto a game? Can we say anything general about them that we could use in game design or are they utterly unique in every person? And how do the inner concerns of an individual relate to and identify with the epic and often otherworldly themes found in games and fantasy? To answer these questions we need to turn to Jung’s metapsychology, that is, his map of the imagination.

The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious

Many readers will be familiar with the notion of the unconscious or subconscious mind, that aspect of the psyche that contains all that consciousness is unaware of. This includes such things as memories, forgotten experiences, subliminal perceptions and habitual tendencies such as the ability to drive a car without thinking about it. Most popular formulations of the unconscious regard it as a tabula rasa, or a blank slate upon which a person’s experiences are written as he or she goes through life. This view leads many to the conclusion that all minds are utterly different, or that the personality is entirely constructed by society and circumstance. As well as failing to take biology into account, with the fact that all brains share the same basic mechanisms, this idea failed to impress Carl Jung, who for nine years had conducted a study of the delusions and hallucinations experienced by sufferers of schizophrenia.

Jung noticed, when studying the dreams, fantasies and delusions of his patients, that many of them contained images and ideas that could not be related to a patient’s life history. They could, of course, be explained away as meaningless mental irregularities, but he also noticed that these images and ideas were very similar to ones found in mythical and religious symbolism from all over the world. As psychiatrist Anthony Stevens explains, “Jung gathered a wealth of evidence which persuaded him that this universal symbolism was due less to individual experience or cultural dissemination than to the structure of the human brain and to a fundamental component of the unconscious psyche which was shared by all humankind” (Stevens, 1999). Jung called this fundamental component the collective unconscious.

Within the collective unconscious, Jung posited the existence of archetypes. These are fundamental psychological patterns that relate to the universal symbols described above. As Jung explains,”The concept of the archetype.. is derived from the repeated observation that, for instance, the myths and fairy tales of world literature contain motifs which crop up everywhere. We meet these same motifs in the fantasies, dreams, deliria and delusions of individuals living today..These typical images and associations are what I call archetypal ideas” (Storr, 1998). Although Jung’s archetypal hypothesis is controversial2, some thinkers believe that it might represent a first-person view of such third-person concepts as the cognitive schemata of cognitive science and the evolved psychological mechanisms of evolutionary psychology; although it is not yet clear how much of an archetypal pattern is inherited and how much is culturally transmitted (Glassman, 2000; Stevens,1998).

Typical archetypal ideas that often appear in myths, dreams and fantasies include, the hero, the devouring monster, the wise old man or woman, the father, the mother, the “dream woman” the “dream man”, helpful animals and the dangerous enemy. There are also archetypal processes such as the heroic quest, the descent into the underworld, the slaying of a dragon, sexual union, the rising and setting of the sun, birth and death. These archetypal ideas symbolise the universal components and processes of the psyche and can often evoke a strong emotional impact.

This is not to say that an archetype is a mythical image or being. Mythical images, along with those found in dreams and fantasies are representations, or symbols of the archetypes. Archetypes themselves are innate psychological patterns with no content of their own, that take on the appearance of real life images that relate to them in some way. For example, one person may have heroic fantasies of being a cyberpunk hacker, bringing down the systems of evil corporations and another may have fantasies of scoring the winning goal in the World Cup. Although the content of these fantasies are different, and the personalities of the wannabe hacker and the football fan may be utterly divergent, the basic form of their fantasies and the emotions associated with them are the same. Both examples depict the heroic triumph of a special individual, a universal theme of great antiquity, and both have similar related emotions; the feelings of mastery, personal strength, self-confidence and victory. In both individuals the hero archetype is at work, but it is expressed in different ways depending on their respective personalities and backgrounds. These are simplistic examples, just to illustrate the nature of the archetypes as “virtual” patterns that take on the image of things that are related to them in a person’s life. Much more could be discovered by exploring feelings and attitudes relating to different parts of a fantasy, sometimes revealing things that may be other than heroic.

As well as appearing as the imaginary beings and landscapes of dreams and fantasies, archetypes can be activated by images and people in the outside world. Two powerful examples are the “dream man” or “dream woman”, the anima and animus. Have you ever seen a person of the opposite sex, either in real life or an image, and being struck with an overwhelming emotion beyond mere instinct; a feeling that he or she is “the one?” This person has a magical, eternal quality, and when contemplating her face, your soul aches with an almost spiritual longing. He may appear to you as everything you have ever needed; when you are near him you are lost in rapture, when you are apart, you fall into a pit of darkest despair.

If, as a man, you have seen this woman, then you have met what Jungian psychology calls your anima, or soul-image. According to Jung, every man carries within his psyche the image of a woman, the anima. She appears to him in dreams, often as a guide, often as a magical being of almost painful beauty, sometimes as a dangerous seductress. Often she is projected, quite unconsciously, onto a real woman, investing this woman with her magical qualities, commonly obscuring the real woman underneath. Sometimes such projections can lead to lasting love, sometimes, when the real woman breaks through the projection and the man realises that she is not who he thought she was, he may accuse her of having “changed”, leave her, and go off in search of his anima princess, another woman who by chance embodies his inner love.

The animus is Jung’s term for the corresponding male image within a woman’s psyche. In dreams and fantasies he may be seen as a hero, sometimes as a rogue. Another symbol of the animus is as a brutal, animal-like male, as found in the fairy tale, Beauty and the Beast. Again, women often see their animus in real men, sometimes leading to a stable relationship when the real man underneath is understood, and sometimes causing great difficulties when the animus projection blinds her to reality. These examples show the power of projection, and also the power of the archetypes. They are not to be regarded as mere abstract concepts or ideas, they are the fundamental forces of the psyche.

Here’s another example, of great relevance to video games. Imagine a timid young boy, fearful of risk and somewhat overdependant on his parents. One day he sees a cartoon depicting heroic adventures. The boy feels a great emotional resonance when watching the show, watches it every week and starts playing imaginary games based upon it, seeing himself as his television hero or sharing the same adventures. He might imaginatively summon his favourite characters to himself when he encounters difficult situations or before sleep, when he is alone in the darkness of night. Gradually, and with parental support and understanding the boy becomes more confident and independent.

This TV show has activated the boy’s hero archetype. This archetype often comes to the fore in dreams and fantasies whenever courage and strong self-identity are needed. The heroic games of children are expressions of this archetypal pattern that will arise quite naturally as part of their development, through conquering the dragons of dependence and fear, a child becomes less emotionally reliant on his parents and begins to build a stronger sense of identity. In this example, although the child may have had vague feelings of unease surrounding his initial situation, and may have had dreams containing heroic imagery, the TV show gave him concrete images that he could relate to and emulate. Through their similarity to the inner archetype, the images of the TV show become emotionally resonant symbols of it and make the unconscious qualities of self identity and courage known to the conscious mind. Through fantasy and play the child will eventually integrate the aspects of the hero archetype represented by the TV show into his conscious personality. The hero and the heroic quest are found almost universally in video games, and contrary to popular belief, are not limited to childhood concerns. I will explore these archetypes and their relevance to video games in more detail later.

The four most important archetypes, essential to any understanding of Jungian psychology are the shadow, anima, animus and self. These primary archetypes generally appear in most dreams and fantasies and in many video games, under various symbolic guises. In many individuals, the shadow is the first one to appear in dream and fantasy life and is a constant factor in the development of personality (Jung, 1964).

The Shadow

The shadow often (but not always) appears in dreams and fantasies as a threatening enemy representing the aspects of the unconscious mind that are unknown or repressed because of the attitude of the conscious mind towards them. In other words, the shadow is our “dark side” and will taint other archetypes depending on our relationship with them. A simplistic example is the straight laced business man who dreams of threatening anarchists or bohemians storming into his office and causing a scene. A Jungian interpretation of this dream would be that the bohemians symbolise an unconscious creative talent, or attitude towards life that could be useful to the dreamer but remains outside the conscious personality because of his attitude towards it. This doesn’t mean that the dreamer should drop everything and become a bohemian, it means that he should try and integrate a little more creativity and spontaneity (or whatever he associates with bohemians) into his life, qualities that for whatever reason his conscious personality finds threatening.

The shadow is often projected onto others. Perhaps our business man may be moved to rage whenever he encounters free-spirited creative individuals and will associate them with all kinds of evils. If he understands his dream and acts upon it, he may later dream of less threatening or even friendly bohemians, and will probably develop a more tolerant understanding of their real life counterparts.

A person who sees himself as a free-spirited bohemian however, may dream or fantasise about having conflicts with threatening straight laced business men, reflecting qualities that he consciously finds unpleasant, but may be useful to him, such as the ability to organise and think rationally. Working with the shadow is a real moral responsibility as it forces us to confront what we do not accept in ourselves and often project onto others, sustaining such problems as racism and homophobia. To deal with the shadow is to deal with the ancient problem of good and evil on a personal level.

Jung’s shadow is pretty much the same as the notion of the Other, which is found in cultural studies and describes the way one culture represents those different from it. As Ziauddin Sardar describes it, “The most common representation of the Other is as the darker side, the binary opposite of oneself: we are civilised, they are barbaric; the colonialists are hard-working, the natives are lazy..” (Sardar and Van Loon, 1999).

Although the shadow often appears threatening, it may also represent qualities that the dreamer finds positive, but does not attribute to himself. A person might dream of a friend or compelling stranger of the same sex who displays qualities that the dreamer finds admirable, but is afraid of integrating into conscious life.

People might try to integrate the entire shadow or fight it off at every turn, but this is impossible. The basic facts of individual existence, that a person is one thing and not another, that a person says yes to some things and no to others, implies the basic opposition of ego and shadow, me and you, good and evil. The task of the individual is to develop an understanding of their shadow and what it tells them about themselves, to integrate what they can and negotiate with what they cannot.

The shadow appears almost universally in video games, as every enemy and every threatening character or idea. A gamer might choose games that depict the destruction of a certain order of enemy, reflecting his own relationship with his shadow. A designer may also create enemies and processes that reflect his own inner concerns. I`ll return to this important subject when I discuss using archetypal images in games.

The Anima and Animus

As we saw earlier, the anima and animus are the contrasexual archetypes within men and women respectively. Just as there is a biological imperative behind sexual attraction, Jung maintained that there was also a related psychological imperative. Jung said of man and the anima, “..the whole nature of man presupposes woman, both physically and spiritually. His system is tuned to woman from the start” (Stevens, 1999). And woman is tuned to man in much the same way3. But the roles of the anima and animus go beyond blind sexual instinct as it is popularly perceived. The meaning of man to woman, and of woman to man relate closely to every aspect of the psyche and to every stage of its development.

According to Jungian psychology, the anima and animus, when they appear in dreams and fantasies are personifications of the relationship of an individual with his or her unconscious. In other words, a man will experience his unconscious as feminine, and a woman will experience hers as masculine. The anima often appears as a witch or as a magical woman with knowledge of deep and unfathomable realms, i.e. the unconscious mind, or as a guide such as Beatrice in Dante’s Paradiso (Jung, 1964). The anima also appears as a lover or companion, reflecting in dreams a successful relationship with the unconscious. She may sometimes appear as a princess to be rescued, as in many fairy tales and games. Guarded by a beast symbolising some attitude of the psyche that prevents a good relationship with the anima or with women, she must be saved by a hero strong enough to stand up to such a creature and not be devoured.

The anima also has a negative or shadow aspect. She may appear as a femme fatale, like the mythical sirens luring men to their doom with their magical songs, or as a dangerous witch, symbolising both a negative attitude towards the anima and the unconscious, and the danger of encountering the unconscious without strength and discrimination. The anima is also tied up with all the qualities and attitudes that a man regards as feminine and by working with the anima, he can integrate and understand such valuable qualities.

The animus, the male image within a woman, often appears as an attractive heroic figure, sometimes as a wise spiritual guide. Just as the anima relates to feminine qualities in a man, the animus relates to perceived masculine qualities within a woman, such as heroic courage and rationality. By working with the animus, a woman can integrate these positive qualities into her personality. The animus also has a negative aspect and can appear as a rogue or criminal. Sometimes he appears as a beast, reflecting a wild, untamed and unintegrated animus, or a negative attitude towards masculinity and her relation to it. A woman dreaming of such a beast may be fearful at first, but as she works with the animus, he will be transformed into more attractive human forms. The story of Beauty and the Beast is a reflection of this process (Jung, 1964).

As I described earlier, the anima and animus can be projected on to real men and women, sometimes causing all kinds of dangerous obsessions and misunderstandings. By subconsciously tying up their anima or animus with a person of the opposite sex, an individual effectively identifies them with his own unconscious and requires their presence and their compliance to engage with it. This is not to say that anima and animus projection is entirely negative, it can be a tool of personal growth when recognised, and when the real man or woman behind the projection is accepted and understood.

The anima often appears in games as a woman to be rescued by the player, sometimes as a companion. There are few games depicting the relationship between a woman and her animus. But some games, such as the Final Fantasy series do a good job by giving the player a large number of male and female characters to control. To a male player a female character can symbolise his anima, such as Rinoa from FFVIII; Squall could symbolise the animus of a female player. Squaresoft make this work by depicting their relationship from both perspectives. Gamers might choose games with themes that reflect their own relationship with their anima or animus, and designers might create characters and stories that reflect theirs.

The Self

Jung referred to the self as the “archetype of archetypes” (Stevens, 1999). It represents the totality of the psyche, both consciousness and unconsciousness and all that they contain. To Jungian psychology, the self is the innermost nucleus of the psyche. It is often symbolised in dreams, fantasies and mythology as a circle, mandala or square; as a quaternity, such as the “four corners of the universe” the four directions or a circle divided into four. It may appear personified as a wise old man to a male dreamer, or as a wise old woman to a female, or perhaps as a great king or queen. Sometimes it appears as a divine or magical child. Generally in myths, the self is symbolised by the “cosmic man” or woman, representing the totality of the individual. In games it is sometimes represented by the most powerful principle in the game’s world. In RPG’s it may be symbolised by the four elements, a magical jewel in the centre of the world or the tree of life. In other games it may be represented by such things as the space-time continuum, the fundamental genetic code, a nation state or by anything that symbolises the greatest power in a game.

The self is also symbolised by the helpful animals that often turn up in fairy tales to advise and assist the hero. Many of these animals appear in games, such as Link’s owl companion in Zelda 64, or the moogles in the Final Fantasy games. These creatures, unpredictable, often indestructible, but somehow vulnerable, possess a natural wisdom that defies any enemy and lifts them from the mundane world. They are often represented as servants of a great power, depicting the early appearance of the self as it guides the struggling hero towards his destiny.

The self is also an archetype of healing and unity, and will often arise in the dreams and fantasies of people struggling with inner conflicts. The drawings of children who are in the midst of divorce or family difficulties often contain circular motifs, symbolising the attempt of the self to bring some unity and healing to a child’s fragmenting inner world (Stevens, 1999). This healing and unifying aspect of the self can turn up in games, with the almost universal representation of force fields and energy shields as circular or spherical zones of light.

But the self also has a shadow side; as the most powerful force in the Jungian psyche, the shadow of the self is often symbolised by an ultimate evil. Taken together these two aspects reflects the great polarities of consciousness and unconsciousness, light and darkness.

These four archetypes are the main forces within the unconscious and are often projected on to objects in the outside world, including games. As one can see from the examples given, many games already contain symbols of these archetypes, either through social convention and repetition or through the imagination of the designer, who might spontaneously produce such symbols in a fantasy. But developers cannot simply put an archetypal image in a game and claim that they are being “Jungian”. We need to understand how the archetypes relate to the individual and to his psychological development, and why he has one fantasy rather than another.

The Archetypes and the Individual

The archetypes and the collective unconscious are in Jungian terms, the lowest level of the unconscious psyche, their patterns shaping the layers above. But as we have seen, the archetypes appear in dreams and fantasies as images from personal life. We have also seen that archetypes appear as positive or negative images depending on our relationship to them. In other words, they are coloured by the experiences we have in life and by our conscious attitude towards them. In Jung’s model of the psyche, our relationship with the archetypes that determine how they appear to us is shaped by the personal and cultural unconscious.

Above the collective unconscious lies the personal and cultural unconscious. The cultural unconscious contains all the unconscious assumptions given to an individual by the society he or she grows up in. Some writers do not refer to a cultural unconscious, as strictly speaking, all these experiences are mixed up with personal ones, but I will separate them as it allows an entry point for cultural studies, which as I will show, is an essential subject when using archetypal images in games. The personal unconscious is similar to the traditional view of the unconscious mind described at the start of this section. It contains all our memories, forgotten experiences, subliminal perceptions and habitual tendencies. It also contains our complexes.

The basic units of the personal unconscious that shape our relationship with the archetypes are the complexes. I’m sure many are familiar with the term complex, as it has entered popular use as a term describing all manner of psychological problems, but few are aware of what a complex actually is or how it arises. When an archetype is activated it gathers to itself ideas images and experiences associated with the situation or person that activated it. This bundle of experiences, emotions and ideas surrounding an archetype is a complex. A good example, given by psychiatrist Anthony Stevens, is the activation of the mother archetype in a child. According to Jungian psychology, every child is born with an innate expectancy of a mother figure, the archetype of the mother. This archetype becomes active when the child experiences a woman whose behaviour is similar to the child’s innate expectation of a mother. Sometimes this woman may be the birth mother, sometimes it may be a foster parent, aunt or older sister. The emotions and experiences associated with this mother figure form a complex, surrounding the archetype’s emotional core (Stevens, 1999).

The forming of complexes is completely normal, but they often cause suffering. An example of this is given by Anthony Stevens. Stevens described a woman whose childhood had been dominated by a brutal, tyrannical father. This woman’s father archetype was activated only partially and only the law-giving, authoritarian aspects of the father archetype were built into her father complex, with the loving and protecting aspects of the paternal archetype remaining unconscious. Stevens continued to describe how this woman kept being drawn to bullying men, but at the same time she had an unfulfilled longing for a man who would give her love and protection. According to Stevens, this woman’s dreams fantasies and behaviour showed that she longed for someone to activate and fulfil the unconscious aspects of her father archetype (Stevens, 1999). As well as demonstrating the harm done by bad parenting, this example also shows that archetypes are complete, that they contain every aspect of fatherhood, motherhood, herohood and selfhood, and that once activated, they seek completion and conscious realisation. The archetypes in their total form are often symbolised in world mythology as figures such as Mother Earth or Gaia; as ultimate father figures such as Zeus, and as ultimate heroes such as Odysseus.

Our relation to the archetypes and the content of our complexes is also shaped by the culture we grow up in and the unconscious assumptions that we pick up as a member of society. An example is a society that promotes and encourages the view that a hero never shows his feelings. These emotions and images bound up with a particular society’s view of what makes a hero represent a kind of cultural complex, since it is held by a large number of people, and will be transmitted to members of that society whose own complexes are formed by such images. These cultural complexes, held by large numbers of people, are often projected on to others and often affect the way a society functions. They can be harmful as sociologists and cultural critics have shown. But such complexes cannot be argued with, reasoned with or overthrown by revolution; like personal complexes, which in fact they are, they require healing and transformation.

The gradual process of working through complexes and integrating unconscious contents into the conscious personality form Jung’s theory of psychological development, the individuation process. Unlike some theories of development that focus on social adaptation alone, the process of individuation describes a life long and personal process of increasing self awareness, maturity and self realisation. Individuation is a natural process of the psyche, occurring the background of one’s life, but it can be arrested by traumatic experiences, harmful complexes or a faulty attitude towards the unconscious. Individuation begins with the awakening of self consciousness and self identity in a child, and continues through the whole of life with the gradual integration and conscious understanding of the unconscious material that appears to an individual in their dreams fantasies and projections. The culmination of individuation is a successful relationship with the self, the archetype of wholeness that represents the totality of the individual psyche.

Conclusion

Complexes, such as a woman’s struggle against a tyrannical father figure and her search for his loving counterpart form the characters, themes and set-pieces of the inner dramas that are enacted in dreams and fantasies and projected on to the outside world. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the emotional resonance that a player associates with certain video game characters and themes derives from a projection of the players current psychological situation.

The fact that games are interactive allows a player to go beyond the passive projection or mimesis of theatre and literature, and to consciously take part in their fantasy. Thus the woman described earlier might be particularly drawn to a game that depicted a tyrant as an enemy and the rescue or discovery of a loving male figure as a goal. Whether such a game could help her therapeutically is debatable, but by seeing her inner concern and the path to its resolution within a game, and by being forced by its interactivity to make decisions regarding her inner situation, the woman is given a concrete set of ideas and images that might help her in some way. At the very least, this game and its challenges will be very relevant and involving to this particular woman.

By seeing images that reflect unconscious archetypal potential, a gamer may in some cases be assisted in his personal development. The emotional resonance experienced when unconscious archetypal potential is projected onto an image may account for the popularity of certain game characters and themes, and give a reason why some gamers like dressing up as their favourite character, or spend time drawing them or writing fan fiction. A gamers favourite character is a symbol or a reflection of unactivated archetypal potential. By playing the game, drawing pictures etc. the gamer is trying to integrate the aspects of the archetype represented by the character into his or her conscious personality.

The process of resolving inner conflicts and integrating unconscious material may sound like very unusual subjects for a game, but this process is reflected in many games already, because it is symbolised in myths and fairy tales as the heroic quest. In part three of Games and the Imagination, The Game as Quest, I will explore the heroic quest and show how it operates as a symbol of the development of consciousness and identity. I will also show that far from being the preserve of RPG or adventure games, the heroic quest and the individuation process appear in the majority of genres, in a large number of games.

Notes

1: Selecting a first person viewpoint from which to interpret the imaginative relationship between a player and a game is fraught with difficulties. As we have seen there is a schism between the third person, objective viewpoint, and the first person, subjective viewpoint. Within the first person viewpoint there is a further schism; between a perspective that regards the psyche as a social or linguistic construct (the tabula rasa view described earlier) and the Jungian viewpoint that states that the psyche is based on fundamental inherited psychological structures. Most schools of aesthetic or cultural criticism focus on the former, because it has a strong base in linguistics and semiotics which are ideal tools for understanding structures of cultural meaning. This viewpoint has already been successfully applied to video games (Poole, 2000) and I regard it as highly important. But I maintain that any attempt to understand video games must include personal psychology and address the issue of personal meaning, and that any personal psychology that claims that the psyche is a tabula rasa is incomplete, as overwhelming third person research will attest. The relationship between a player and a game is a complex one, and any “playability theory” must encompass cognitive, personal (in the sense of something having a unique resonance and meaning to an individual) and cultural domains.

What is needed is a dual integration; firstly between a first person psychology that admits the existence of universal (i.e. inherited) psychological structures, and a first person psychology that admits the intersubjective, cultural and contextual nature of the material based on those structures; and secondly, an integration of the third person objective viewpoint and the first person subjective viewpoint. The first integration is a conceptual matter, the second is known by consciousness researchers as the “Hard Problem.” Until such an integration takes place, anything said about the psychology of video games, and indeed the psychology of anything, will be limited and provisional.

2: Jungian psychology is controversial in academic psychology because it is a first person theory, and like all first person theories it cannot find a sound base in third person research. It is controversial in first person academic fields such as cultural studies, because it claims that the psyche is not a total social construction and because Jung’s complex, heavyweight writings have often been misunderstood. As it occupies a middle ground between the first and third person realms, it is in a difficult philosophical position, but as I stated in the note above, the only way for psychology to go forwards is to embrace an integrative approach, and Jung’s ideas may provide a stepping stone towards that.

3: The description of the anima and animus, as the female “image” within a male and the male “image” within a female is not to make any judgement regarding homosexuality, it is just the common description used by Jungian writers for ease of understanding. Since the archetypes are psychological and emotional patterns with no content of their own, they are not innate images of men or women, but the feelings and ideas associated with them. Therefore, the anima “feeling” of a homosexual man, that is, the feeling of a desirable, or perhaps dangerous “other” will be symbolised by a male image or projected onto a man.（Source：gamedev）