Me>> Look at the Real World. There is only one sun. Yet in and around
>> the mediterranean sea, a region of constant cultual intercourse,
>> there are many names and cults for the sun. So why should we make
>> reference to the egyptian sun god Ra if we are detailing a supplement
>> involving the Italian Pennisular? That is equivalent to the relevance
>> the monomyth has in glorantha today.
> My point is that there's a basic set of truths behind Glorantha or
>Earth. If the ancient Egyptian view of the universe was the Truth, then the
>ancient Italian viewpoint was not the Truth except in the points where it
>agreed with the Egyptian. The Monomyth is an attempt at defining the Truth
>of Glorantha and is thus useful even if it is not 100% accurate.
Whoah there. The Monomyth is not the only attempt at defining the Truth of Glorantha. It is what the God Learners _believed_ was the Truth. Every Mythology in the Real World and Glorantha is an attempt at defining the basic set of truths. So why should we give pole position to the God Learner version? It will only give the impression that the belief of the locals is wrong. Yet since the Monomyth is not 100% accurate, the locals may be right when they deviate from the Monomyth.
Consider:
In Dara Happa, they believe that time existed before the Dawn and that there is no such thing as the Cosmic Compromise.
Both these beliefs are flat out wrong in the Monomyth. Yet they are _closer_ to the basic set of truths as the Monomyth. On other details, the Monomyth is truer but that does not make the belief of the Dara Happans any less false.
>The myths of a specific region are useful for that area, but how do
>they relate to the total Gloranthan Truth? This is important if
>they're going to be interacting with peoples from outside that area;
Not really. There is a simple method for determining how an outsider is treated by the local population - they compare his beliefs and customs with their own. No reference to the monomyth is necessary.
>heck, isn't that pretty much the whole basis behind Arkat and
>HeroQuesting?
No. What we are talking about when we say 'Monomyth' is a map of mythic reality. The God Learner points at the Sun and says Ehilm. The Dara Happan points at the same thing and says Yelm. The Monomyth is merely a descripton of the Cosmos and not "the truth of the world to the extent that an objective observer can determine them as opposed to the what each group's myths say". It used the God Learner's *own* myths to describe the Cosmos. It was continually refined as new peoples and their myths were discovered so that the God Learners could be more powerful but it was still part of their philosophy (ie 'believe in the Monomyth and you will be a Good God Learner') and not the Cosmic Truth.
>I don't buy any notion that every people's world concept can be
>totally different and unrelated and yet everyone is still the Truth.
You're conflating the concept of truth as in historical reality (ie what actually happened) and the potency of people's magic. In Glorantha, magic can perform observable effects in the eyes of an objective observer. But four different philosophies can be identified in casting effective magic in glorantha: the Humanists, the Theistics, the Mystics and the Naturalists? Which one of these is truth?
Since most gloranthans who do the magic are ignorant of the 'basic set of truths', it follows that they do not need to know these truths to do magic anymore than the brewer needs a chemistry degree to make good beer. Knowlege of the internal processes can help and some gloranthan mythologies do have some idea of what the basic set of truths are. But in the RW, the God Learners would have believed in Phlogistonists when others believed in Hermetic Alchemy (with oxygen beyond the God Learner comprehension because of their blindness IMO).
Powered by hypermail