The subjectivity of the creative class in an archetypal perspective: a case study of the IT sector
Over the past two decades sociological discourse has demonstrated growing interest in the cultural and symbolic sources of social actors’ activity. This is particularly relevant in relation to the creative class – a social group that combines innovative thinking, digital competencies, and creative potential. This community is capable of acting consciously, influencing social processes, making decisions, and taking responsibility for their consequences. To gain deeper insights into the mechanisms of this stratum’s actions, the article applies an archetypal approach. Archetype theory enables not only the typologisation of personalities but also the interpretation of deep social action scenarios that shape thinking, leadership style, and innovative behaviour. This approach helps to explain why the creative class is both diverse and united by shared values – freedom, a drive to create, and responsibility for social transformation. The study attempts to analyse the subjectivity of the creative class through the lens of archetypal analysis, with a focus on the IT sector, grounded in C. Jung’s analytical psychology and its further sociological interpretation. In this context, five key archetypes are examined for their role in shaping the identity and subjectivity of the creative class in modern society. These archetypes, rooted in the Jungian tradition and the cultural theory of archetypes (C. Jung, J. Campbell, K. Pearson, etc.), are used as symbolic models representing various aspects of self-awareness, agency, and the functional role of the creative class in the information society. Particular attention is given to the Creator archetype, which embodies the central dynamics of self-realisation, cultural production, and ethical autonomy – qualities typical of members of the creative class. Special emphasis is placed on the Ukrainian context, particularly the IT sector, where archetypal roles manifest in volunteer initiatives, digital creativity, and the development of start-up culture. The significance of the archetypal structure is substantiated as an interpretative tool for a deeper understanding of the social impact of this emerging stratum. Overall, the study contributes to expanding the understanding of the creative class as a subject of not only economic but also cultural transformation in contemporary society.
Baudrillard, J. (2003). Passwords. London: Verso.
Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of the Creative Class. And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books.
Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.
Pichkurova, Z. (2023). Development of Ukraine’s digital economy under martial law. Ekonomika ta suspilstvo – Economy and Society, 58 [in Ukrainian]
Florida, R. (2012). The rise of the creative class: Revisited. Basic Books.
Libanova, E.M. (Ed.). (2020). Human Development in Ukraine: minimising social risks. Kyiv: Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies NAS of Ukraine [in Ukrainian]
Castells, M. (2009). The rise of the network society. 2nd ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Florida, R. (2020). The Rise of the Creative Class. Kyiv: Osnovy [in Ukrainian]
Donii, O.S. (2019). Creative Sector and Culture in Ukraine: Challenges of the Transformational Era. Ukrainian culture: the past, modern ways of development, 25, 7-14 [in Ukrainian]
Jung, C. (2001). The Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious. Kuiv: Osnovy [in Ukrainian]
Pearson, C. (2020). Awakening the Heroes Within: Twelve Archetypes to Help Us Find Ourselves and Transform Our World. Lviv: Vydavnytstvo Staroho Leva [in Ukrainian]
Giddens, A. (2004). Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Lviv: Vydavnytstvo UKU [in Ukrainian]
Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1-26.
Pearson, C.S., Marr, H.K. (2007). What story are you living? A workbook and guide to interpreting results from the Pearson-Marr Archetype Indicator Instrument. Gainesville: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.
Mark, M., Pearson, C.S. (2001). The hero and the outlaw: Building extraordinary brands through the power of archetypes. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Andjelkovic, M. (2022). Digital nomads and the future of work. Journal of Remote Work and Society, 5 (2), 110-129.
McAdams, D. (2010). The Stories We Live by: Personal Myths and the Making of the Self. Kyiv: Laboratoriia [in Ukrainian]
Schwartz, S.H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65.
Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. Glencoe: Free Press.
Berger, P.L., Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.