We can use the master's tools to rebuild our house

James Hillman, a myth scholar, incorporates a vision of archetypes that is more flexible, less patriarchal than Jung's.  His operational understanding of the archetype is not a fixed Platonic essence, such as anima and animus, but an image.  He writes,“‘by attaching archetypal to an image, we ennoble or empower the image with the wildest, richest and deepest possible significance." I would like this anthology to reveal this significance in the bad women archetypes, in transgressive and crazy women, because despite their negative connotations, they exhibit Eros which in its purest sense, is the drive for authenticity, for power, and the capacity of self actualization. 

Goddesses like Brigid in Briton, Sarasvati in India and Nidaba in Sumer were credited with the invention of the alphabet and the creation of language and writing.  They exhibited Eros, they re-drew the shape of the world around them. Yet, according to Annis Pratt, today “women like words have been considered symbolic objects of use in a masculine structure, linguistic tokens rather than wielders of words in our own right.”  Some feminist scholars have claimed its necessary to reinvent language to get the feminine back into the world, into literature.  I would disagree.  In the words of  Audre Lord, we can use the master's tools to rebuild our house.