On a bit of a tangent:

Chris Vogler talks about how a story doesn't need all archetypes. Often the missing archetypes add an additional element or problem to the story.

I'd take that one step further. Art is a reflection of the time in which it is produced.

An overwhelmingly large number of modern stories do not have a mentor archetype.

I think this may be a reflection of the rise of public education and the loss of apprenticeships.

It may also have to do with a more disposable mentality at large and a very self-serving-centered career path where all the weight of failure and/or success is placed squarely on the individual.

I think we have largely gotten rid of Mentors -- for better or worse (My personal opinion is for worse).

To get back to the topic --

WALL STREET has a Mentor character (GORDON GEKKO) that not only encourages Bud Fox to choose the wrong path, but is quite frankly evil.

I also think WALL STREET is a great example of a story where we start to devalue/question/or demonize the value of the "Mentor."

Wall street is a great example, one of, if not my favorite movie of all time... but I have to disagree on Gekko being the mentor. At least for the second half of the film, I see him as more of the trickster and Bud Fox's father as the mentor since he kept telling him the entire movie that what he is doing is wrong. Just my opinion in order to spark some debate.

He's both. Archetypes can wear multiple masks -- particularly the Trickster. And when a Mentor is a "bad" Mentor he will also always be a Trickster, as he was misleading the protagonist.

You've hit the nail on the head though of the demonizing of modern day Mentors.

Bud's father as a Mentor is shown to us as antiquated. He is so dismissed by the main character that his function as Mentor is handicapped. He is unable to impart his knowledge as Mentor upon Bud Fox because Bud rejects it.

Gekko is shown to us as glitzy and glamorous. Both Gekko and Fox's father are Mentor types and Bud is left to choose for himself.

Bud chooses Gekko who imparts his wisdom on how to scam the system. In this sense he's much more of a Mentor than Bud's father ever could be.

Most modern stories present the Mentor archetype in this fashion (if it's even present at all). A character that provides guidance, but ultimately leads to the character's downfall.

The "true" Mentor archetype is rarely used as anything more than counterpoint.

There aren't many Obi Wan Kenobi's in modern day storytelling. They are more often than not Miranda Priestly's.

Instead of the kindly old man who offers assistance -- it is an idol who the protagonist longs to be like.

And isn't that a reflection on modern times?

Interesting discussion - I recently applied the Hero's Journey to CHINATOWN and found out something I'd never noticed before even though I've seen it a couple of dozen times - J.J. Gittes doesn't have a Mentor as such, and that's probably one of the primary reasons for his downfall.

"An overwhelmingly large number of modern stories do not have a mentor archetype."

Really? Just going on the films nominated for best picture this year that I saw, THE SOCIAL NETWORK, TRUE GRIT, BLACK SWAN, INCEPTION, and WINTER'S BONE all had Mentors (some a bit compromised!). Looks like THE KING'S SPEECH had one too. What's the basis for your claim?

@James: DeafEars got to the same post I was going to make -- just looking at the major films from Academy Awards, most have Mentor characters. And frankly, I don't see much in the way of them waning as a presence in contemporary stories. A Protagonist will always find characters along the way to influence and oftentimes help them. Generally those character types break down as either mostly focused on the Protagonist's emotional development (Attractor) or intellectual development (Mentor).

What you may be suggesting is that the traditional model of a Mentor -- the wise old sage ala Obi Wan, Gandalf, Miyagi -- is changing. Perhaps more nuanced Mentor characters who morally in the gray or more representative of 'dark wisdom.' That may or may not be true.

I'd be curious to hear what recent movies you've seen that don't seem to have a Mentor character. Perhaps you're right.

Re Wall Street: How about I post that for a larger, more public discussion? I'll try to get that up by tomorrow, certainly by Wednesday. I have to say I concur with Chris D's take: Gekko is not the Mentor, but a Trickster (ally / enemy), and Bud's father is the Mentor.

One final thing: While characters can wear different masks -- in this scene play a Trickster or Mentor, in the next scene an Atractor or Nemesis -- I consider those sub-archetypes. Their Primary Archetype, that is their main narrative function, does not change. A Protagonist is always in essence and fundamentally a Protagonist, a Nemesis is always in essence and fundamentally a Nemesis, and so on.

Again they can wear masks from scene to scene, relationship to relationship, but in my view their primary archetype function does not change.

The Wall Street discussion sounds interesting. Right off the bat, I have to wonder why Gekko isn't a Nemesis wearing a Mentor mask for the first half, but rather a Trickster wearing a Mentor mask. What would Bud's Nemesis be then? Greed? Himself?

An example of a Nemesis who wears a Trickster mask is in Die Hard - the scene where Hans Gruber, my favorite movie villain, pretends to be an escaped American hostage... but McClane sees thru the ruse. The whole scene was written when the producers found out Alan Rickman could do a convincing American accent - just an example of how felicity can conform to archetypal patterns.

I'm basing the Mentor off function, rather than role.

Part of the narrative function of a Mentor is to impart wisdom. They do this in the form of knowledge and/or gifts. This knowledge is key to the development of the protagonist.

While it is possible for a Mentor to fulfill this role even with the protagonist rejecting him -- Ie the Mentor imparts his wisdom and the protagonist chooses to ignore it -- ie Anakin Skywalker and Obi Wan Kenobi's relationship -- WALL STREET seems like a different case to me. Bud Fox openly embraces Gekko from the start of the film. In fact, he wants to be like him. He openly rejects his father, really before his father can impart anything to him.

Bud wants the idol. And rejects anything that isn't his idol, including what would typically be a Mentor. But I'd argue that not allowing the Mentor to perform his function makes him not a Mentor. He's not performing the services of the archetype.

The TRICKSTER as archetype can (and almost always does) don the mask of another archetype. That is the very nature of the Trickster. Is there a case where an evil Mentor is not also a Trickster? I can't think of one off the top of my head.

I'd throw PAN'S LABYRINTH out there as an example of the opposite of WALL STREET. The satyr feels like a TRICKSTER character throughout the entire film. Every task feels like he is misleading Ofelia and leading her to her doom. It isn't until the end that we realize he was truly a Mentor.

I guess what we are talking about is the perception of the character versus their narrative function.

And to address the loss and warping of Mentor's in modern storytelling --

Who is the Mentor in TOY STORY 3?

PIXAR and DISNEY live and die by the Hero's Journey narrative structure. And even their stories are lacking this key component.

Who is the mentor in Wall-E?

In fact, in the B-story of Wall-E, the autopilot acts as the captain's Mentor and turns out to be the bad guy.

This is much more common to see now, than say, Jimminy Cricket. Or the mouse in Dumbo. Or the fairy Godmother in any Disney princess tale.

Altruism is lost. There's a cynicism reflected in the corrupted Mentor. And I think that's a direct reflection on the times.

We're talking about supernatural aid function. Which means that mentorship has nothing to do with right and wrong. Also, that the function can be performed without an archetype. See Kal Bashir's 510+ stage Hero's Journey over at http://www.clickok.co.uk/index4.html - he's got it spot on.