Runes again

From: Nils Weinander <niwe_at_ppvku.ericsson.se>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 1995 16:51:09 +0200


Greybeard:
>Whilst it is fun to talk of monomythical runes, and then talk of how differing
>cultures view them, let's develop the idea that to some cultures this is an
>irrelevance. I know the game is called RuneQuest, but I think Glorantha has
>grown from being obsessive about runes. So to some people runes may simply
>be symbols, or may not be used at all. It is far more culturally rewarding for
>us as world makers to have other ways of explaining the world than just runes.

Of course the runes as graphic representations is just one view. But the runes are just symbols for an underlying structure. Every culture is bound to explain the workings of the world in some kind of structure. I prefer to think that there are some absolutes in these fundaments rather than having to deal with a completely solipsistic subjectivist world.

To explore the fundamental structure, what different cultures think of it, likenesses and differences, the runes are a convenient vocabulary. No more, no less. So until someone comes up with some better suited symbol set to use for discussing such matters, I'll continue to use the runes even though they are a blunt instrument.


Nils W				| It's hard to win when you always loose
Office: niwe_at_ppvku.ericsson.se	| 

Home: nilsw_at_ibm.net

Powered by hypermail