Poor Rurik

From: D M McNamara <D.M.McNamara_at_durham.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 11:37:05 +0100 (BST)


 Thanks for the revelation about Rurik. Its a shame really, i was thinking of starting my own 'rurik the restless' cult (for insomniac yelmalions). It was quite an ignoble way to go, particularly when you consider the possibility that the trollkin came back later and nibbled his corpse. Maybe he lives on.....a zorak zoran brute might have turned him into a zombie (then he would truly be 'rurik the restless').   I've been thinking about some of the things simon phipp has been saying about arkat/argrath. His theory resembles the Nietzschean one about 'the eternal return of the authentic hero,' which suggested that history was created by 'authentic' great peoples - philosophers, warriors, poets, etc. The authentic individual is one which uses 'that which is at hand'
(zuhandenheit) to accomplish his/her ends - a concept resembling that of
lukacs' 'praxis' ie. not seeing things as 'things,' only as means to ends, as tools....a bit like heroquesting to change oneself in glorantha. The authentic being keeps returning to move on history.   An interesting theory, but sadly one which the nazis made use of. For example, Martin heidegger thought hitler was the authentic 'hero' that would save germany. However, could not arkat be a similar terrible figure, which is leading the world to destruction? He possesses many cults which look towards him as their saviour, and follow him, whatever the consequences. Many cults also view him with hatred (earlier this century opinions on hitler were similarly polarised). Ironically arkat might lead glorantha into its hours of greatest darkness, rather than salvation. Of course, this is a difficult issue, in our world heavily laden with anger and distrust. Personally I feel hitler was a lunatic, yet at the time the bourgeoisie of the west thought him a great man
(particularly in britain, unfortunately). At the moment in Europe
many revisionist histories are being written on the subject by fascist apologists. I feel similar opinions may be brought to bear on arkat/nysalor - saviour or lunatic.
  Attempting to choose between the two may be the problem, and dismissal of the concept altogether might be gloranthas only chance to avoid the eternal circularity of its conflicts. I am not attempting to influence anyones thinking, i was just pondering on philosophical justification for the gloranthan hero cycle. I feel Nietzsche is particularly useful for this, as many of his opinions resemble 'illumination.' I appreciate some of you will dislike this, or hate Nietzsche - i am not overly fond of his work myself, but i'm trying to work out things rigorously in my head, with what i know.
  Obviously, my opinions are influenced by what i am studying, but i personally feel that glorantha's main themes are enrichened by some kind of philsophical background. We have got illumination already of course
(resembling soilpsism/nihilism/'postmodernism'), and i feel it is this
kind of deeper thinking which raises runequest far above the cheap two-bit philosophy and pop-psychology which proliferates in other roleplaying games. Talking about philosophy 'in game' is also useful for 'real life' also! I think this is why glorantha has persevered for so long, in that its rich themes and philosophical underpinnings make it a more 'mature' game, without any of the western capitalist anachronisms which sully other fantasy games. Of course, its got morokanths too.   Just some thoughts, anyway.
   Dominic.

End of Glorantha Digest V2 #634


WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html

Powered by hypermail