Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

When Caroline Myss announced she was going back to her work on Archetypes, I was excited as I thought SACRED CONTRACTS was among her best books, but it needed a bit more practical application. However, my excitement turned to disappointment in the first few pages of ARCHETYPES because she doesn't tread much new ground and makes it amazingly clear that this book is meant for "today's woman." Myss focuses on ten archetypes she sees in contemporary society and how today's woman can work with them to experience her power in full. What's amusing to me is that she doesn't address the 4 major archetypes she says we're all born with: The Child, The Prostitute, The Saboteur, and The Victim. In fact, they receive just a few sentences in the back of the book alongside other archetypes in a glossary that's by no means comprehensive. To me, this is the "lightest" self-help book Myss has written and it's clear that she's going for one core audience: middle aged women who seem disenfranchised with their own lives and don't know what to do even after 25 years of Oprah telling them EXACTLY what to do. Myss offers little to men, often devoting a few paragraphs to the male equivalent of the archetype described; however, I disagree with a few of her assessments. She says the male equivalent of the Fashionista is The Gentlemen, who is more of a "leading man" as opposed to being a "flash in the pan." Really? Seriously? Given most of her male audience is made up of gay men, she ought to know better. True, males are just as much Fashionistas, Divas and Tastemakers as women. But many of them are more than just "flashes in the pan. " The top designers for the female form are men. If you're all about image, today's woman, please remember WHO designed those clothes and that perfume for you: men. Her definition of the Gentleman is also a tad dated. If Myss thinks we need to go back to the age where men should always buy women dinner or stand every time a woman comes to the table, she needs to get out of the house more and stop watching Robert Young or Ricky Ricardo and get a high definition television because those days are long gone. It's just the reality of the world we're in (though Myss would likely say things were better back then...a time when women made significantly less money, had fewer opportunities and most of these gestures of chivalry were there to reinforce the fact that women NEEDED to be taken care of. Something today's woman would object to in many ways). My point is that her assessments are sometimes off base and out of touch with modern times and that Myss offers nothing of value. In her chapter on The Caregiver, the male equivalent gets just three sentences where she says "men are as able and willing to care for others as women are." Really? That's news? True, fewer men may earn a living by being caregivers, but, to me, she's discounting priests, doctors, guidance counselors, Big Brothers and a whole assortment of male figures who would have been worth a mention. She also makes a sweeping generalization regarding women in the art world that also seems dated and even suspect in its accuracy. To boil down women's achievements solely to just a few women--such as Georgia O'Keefe--in the visual arts implies that Myss hasn't paid attention to what's happening in art since the 70's. What about Frida Kahlo, Ash Lethal or even Yoko Ono? What about photographers like Annie Lebowitz? Myss writes there are only a handful of women who have achieved "anything like the prominence of their male counterparts." O'Keefe may be one of the few who are a household name, but if you are engaged in the arts community, a tremendous amount of women have made great strides. While they may not be household names, it doesn't diminish their works. And, by the way, on whose terms is Myss speaking of? Public recognition? Money earned? Awards granted? These are all external validations. Myss cannot have her assessment both ways. Don't tell others real power ultimately comes from within but still say too bad you haven't come a long way, baby. Myss doesn't even bother to address the film/television or literary world as artists or creatives as well, giving the female gender a huge short shrift as she describes the Artist archetype. Streisand, Streep, Bigelow, Lucille Ball, Carol Burnett, Mirren, Alice Walker, J.K. Rowling, and the pioneer named Cher! These are all great examples of creatives who embody the Artist Archetype who have all made significant and indelible contributions to the world. Nowhere does she mention them. If you're going to write a book about Archetypal patterns and those who channel them well, certainly these names stand out. Again, there's a lack of depth and thought here when Myss explains her concepts. However, the book does have some minor virtues. The one aspect of the book that ALMOST makes it worth the purchase (I can't encourage anyone to spend money on this because it's truly her worst effort ever) is the advice she gives and the questions she poses for the reader to reflect on. In that regard, Myss sort of delivers. For a novice who has never delved into this study before, Myss' questions surrounding one's loss of power are excellent for understanding your inner world. I also appreciate her mention of grace throughout the book as there are good lessons on how to find it on a daily basis. Bottom line: she covers this ground far better in her earlier works so before you spend the money here, go buy anything published before this! By the time I finished the book, I felt that it was just a fair surface read. I also questioned whether or not she wrote the book as her typical fluid style is missing. It's as if she dictated the book and forgot to add the flourishes in the final edits. Knowing the CDs she's produced and her previous work on archetypes, I think Myss would have served the public better by placing the information online and embed an Archetypal Encyclopedia on a website so folks recognize that there are more than 12 archetypes and that we play many patterns as part of our calling versus using some to serve a specific motivation. What I find most peculiar is that this book coincides with the launch of someone else's website (there's a link to a test you can take) on archetypes; my sense is that Myss' work serves as a commercial for the site, leading the reader to sign up right away for more information and products (the url is on the book's cover). I think she lent her name to this work and never edited it or she had a bit too much cabernet when she did and thought "well, that's done." It will be interesting to see how well the book does because some of the more substantial work on archetypes relates to one's astrological chart and how the planetary forces move through our houses as we evolve. In Sacred Contracts, Myss spends a lot more time explaining how the Archetypes play into our life's purpose and the consequences of missing out on the guidance we receive by not following our true path. She also beautifully walks you through the four common archetypes that play a major role in our lives. I think readers looking for substance are best advised to get THAT book first and then move on to Jung's work on Archetypes or check out Richard Tarnas' Cosmos and Psyche. You walk away from those books truly full and the potential for true wisdom runs high when you work with those texts. This book appears to be one for the masses--particularly of the female persuasion with a shallow and 120 character approach to learning. If you're a male or someone who prefers depth and want more than the casual throw away observation, Archetypes is the literary equivalent of Stevia. It's okay but you won't get any dense literary calories. This is not a rigorous teaching from which you would leave with a true understanding of the archetypal nature of humanity, much less your own self. For that, you need to go deeper and better. But hey, if you want to just dabble at exploring your inner-self and are just fine with meager platitudes, ARCHETYPES is the perfect book for you.