Reverse Archaeology And The Metaphoric Flexibility of the Gods

Reverse Archaeology And The Metaphoric Flexibility of the Gods

Gordon White

What has stayed with me over the past couple of months is just how accommodating these archetypal forms really are -and especially Aphrodite herself, I suppose.

One of my go-to definitions of what actually constitutes an archetype is that it is a font of infinite emanation. You can never exhaust it like you can an oil well. (Although I’m not sure about them, either. Story for another time.) Aphrodite graciously submitted to Luccio’s process of co-expansion, co-exploration. It’s called Reverse Archaeology presumably because it is a layering onto rather than uncovering but -and I said this to the actual archaeologist who accompanied me to the exhibition- ‘true’ or ‘normal’ archaeology -at least on its best day- might be described as an uncovering of those infinite fonts.

There is something specifically generous, specifically eerie about the Olympians in particular with regards to this infinite archetypal behaviour. And it feels like they are ‘back’ in a way that is more like the Romantic era or perhaps the Renaissance than their historic heyday.

Reverse Archaeology - I guessed that meant taking something we know or understand, to a greater or lesser extent. Then bury it so it is lost and forgotten.