The Davadic Archetype

I happened upon Peter Pan while trying to convince a group of youths that it has an objective meaning. And while reading Peter Pan's sequels, I came across something very strange. There was mention of a "David", who was, as the author put it, a Moralist. And of course David and he were always making stories, and perpetually having this exchange of ideas... What was funny was that it could have come out of one of my stories. I've come independently to the "David" theme in my writing, and it's interesting to me that someone else has, too.

So... why do two completely different authors, two authors from different centuries, even, come to the same, prevailing idea? That there is this person named "David" who has a share in our work. And of course, this Author resisted David--- they were his stories, not David's. Who is David? Why do two people come to this very same archetype, latent deep in the subconscious mind?

I had deleted two essays, and I mean to put them both here. There was another phenomena that was quite similar. After reading Seamus Heaney's version of Beowulf, I had written my own version of Beowulf. And, I did what the 9th century author did, I infused Pagan Mythology with Christian Mythology, and then read four cantos of Paradise Lost, and saw, almost eerily, we both we writing the same tradition. His were shape shifting Demons, mine were shape shifting elves using alien technology---both were demonic entities, which, in both, must actually be fought.

So, this is two times the state of fact came, that I was independently coming upon things that other authors have touched upon at different times, in different ways... David being one of them, and of course Paradise Lost's mythology, which lined up perfectly with mine.

So, I believe this is proof of communication. Which, proves that ideas---I'm not sure why this had to be proved, but apparently it does need proved---actually occur beyond that of the most visceral levels. The fact that I could write something like Hail Britannica, come upon this Davidic Archetype, create Elves---and this is all after reading works of literature like Bulfinch's Mythology, Wordsworth, Beowulf, Edith Hamilton's Mythology, Plato, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, a lot of the Bible, literature like Jane Austen or Leo Tolstoy, etc. etc. etc. I came upon independently two ideas independently reached by other authors.

So... there's other things going on here, too, but the real issue is that when I confronted a bunch of young women on Peter Pan's meaning---expressly stated at the first few lines of the novel even---they became disgruntled. They denied that there could be a meaning, and they believed that it was all theory. Right... but how am I communicating ideas I've never entertained independently of having entertained the ideas in their purest form? Simply put, how am I writing about the same things as authors I've never actually read? And that's a question, that no matter what it proves communication. Even the most absurd theory would have to admit there is some kind of communication happening, on a level deeper than the rudimentary one we often associate communication with.

And, foremost, why David? It's interesting that David even comes up in Barrie's writing, and in my own fixed beliefs I had believed there was someone named "David" writing my work. And I realized, at the most rudimentary level, there was. David, in Christian Theology---because you can't use Mythology here---is the Messiah Conqueror. He is the coming Christ. He is the Shepherd. And in Ecclesiastes, it has something here to even say: "The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd."

So, what it proves is wisdom... universal ideas latent in the human psyche even. Jung would call them Archetypes, I'd call it wisdom. Universal ideas prevalent in writing, and David---when you've gotten to be a storyteller---might just be the Gatekeeper of the stories. You write for Christ. And of course, the author here might be resisting that call, which he says "David is a Moralist". He gives a story, which involves a creative memory---and here I begin to outline, that the story written by Barrie here, the Peter Pan sequel, is not canonical to the actual myth of Peter Pan. It's rather, schizophrenic in its delivery, and maybe the reason why is because it didn't get approved by the gatekeeper, David. Maybe when someone builds a life in stories, they begin to see---if it's truly wisdom---a pattern that must be followed, otherwise the story fails and otherwise looks ridiculous. And often I've found this many times.

And we come to the Romantic Poets, often calling themselves prophets, who wrote in styles we'd assume were period. But, I'm writing in this style without having learned it. I don't know how I'm doing it... I really don't actually. I had thought maybe I was plagiarizing, but I had never read anything like Paradise Lost to plagiarize. I did have a dream, once, of Hail Britannica, and it frightened me because I didn't understand what the dream meant. And I had dealt with obscure dreams---which lent to some of my stories---and it's often a wonder to me how this can be the case. Because I don't really recall any kind of reason to have these dreams---there is one obscure memory, and a prayer only to Jesus attached to it---but other than that, there is no reason for me to doubt the dreams' authenticity. So... it's scary to me how this works. But, somehow my stories are communicated to me. And I believe they are given by One Shepherd. If they are truly wise. And that gatekeeper is David, whom we should give the glory to, as in Christ Jesus, Messiah who comes to Conquer. And there is a latent angst in me... it's strange. I don't believe the stories are mine... I believe they are David's. I believe Barrie's stories are also David's, because they are wise. And I think when we rebel against David---or Christ---we tend to lose the authentic ownership of our craft. We begin to question them--- which is often what writers do at some point. I remember Ray Bradbury in an interview saying that he questioned his own words and wordings---maybe because he, in a sense, was trying to wrestle with the ownership of them. Bradbury became a Christian---or rather, always was despite some protest---and I think the ownership of these stories belongs to Christ, like all other things. If we are to be successful, we have to offer the story to Christ, or really anything for that matter.

And the fact that people are coming to these notions independently of me, suggests something rather odd and haunting. That is there are prevailing ideas outside of us, and forces outside of our own comprehension.

Barrie, J. M.. Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens. Project Guttenberg. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/26998/26998-h/26998-h.htm. 2/13/22. Web.