FILM ciously subscribing to the archetypal image in this quest, her actions at the human level are motivated by a desire to fulfill herself. Conscious of her ordinariness, she attempts self-realization in the achievements of Sanat and Shankar. With the tragic reversal comes the anignorisis (self-realization)- Tve committed a great sin, I never protested.) Like in the case of Oedipus, in her destruction lies the rejuvenation of the community. In her reunion with the hills, a symbol of eternity and Mahadeva, the regeneration of the archetype is effected. After the ritualistic de-consecration, Durga returns to her consort in the symbolic union of Prakriti and Purusha, ensuring the continuum of life. Speaking about the archetype in cinema, Ghatak said, 'when some images develop as an inevitable consequence and again become inconsequential in the process ^ ,/ of turning into symbols (as in the death ofNita), it is only then that the ^^ archetypal force is born.' After the deconsecration is complete, Nita f ceases to be of any significance as an individual but the archetype is continually perpetuated. In the last sequence wherein Shankar mistakes, for a moment, the friend for Nita, is contained the archetypal process itself. Ritual brings myth and archetypes within our comprehension. Paradoxically, Meghe Dhaka Tara becomes a ritual in itself, not very different from the ritual of classical tragedy. Ghatak believed that 'film-going is a kind of ritual. When the lights go out the screen takes over ... a filmmaker throws up certain ideas and it is the audience who fulfil it... only then does it become a total whole.5 With the end ofcom-1 pyehensible ritual, the cycle of mythic abstraction begins again - the ^t^ruggle with the unknown. Ritual and myth thus complete the cycle ^f artistic creativity. 50 April - June 1983