The relation between Myth and Mundane

From: s.lucek_at_ic.ac.uk
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 97 13:41:14 +0100


The Myth and mundane planes.

The relationship between the mythic (or hero) plane(s) and the mundane ('real') world of Glorantha seems a fascinating question to me. It also seems a very important one, since everyone in Glorantha interacts with the Mythic plane, whether through routine religious ritual or full blown hero questing. These are the answers I have come up with. Note that they are all my opinions, but I am lazy and cannot be bothered typing 'I think' or 'in my opinion' all the time.

Are Myths Universal or Relative? Both.

Myths are relative. One person's view of the myth world (i.e. the collection of myths that they believe in) will be different from another's. While two people may believe and live similar myths they are not exactly the same myths. It is undoubtedly the case (as Martin Laurie pointed out recently) that anything created, worshipped or viewed with cultural prejudice will be subjective. Because people worship the gods form their own cultural perspective their myths are subjective (this is almost a tautology, peoples myths are their worship).

Myths are also Universal. There are myths that bind together the whole of Gloranthan reality. If not then the the God Learner Mono-myth would not be possible. That is not so say that the Mono-myth is right, but just that the God Learners were able to connect many myth strands by virtue of the Universal aspect of myths. If myths were not Universal then hero questing would only change an individuals myth world (and that of those that somehow shared some aspect of this myth world), and yet hero questing can involve those who do not believe in the quester's myths.

So a myth is Universal and Relative. Can one separate out the Universal and the Relative strands of a myth? No. A myth is a whole. Dissecting a myth changes it, it is not just the sum of lots of little bits. That does not mean that it is not useful to examine various aspects of myths, you can learn a great deal. It is just that doing so you examine something other than the whole myth. Therein lies the error of the God Learners (though I think it likely they were well aware of this).

Is the mundane world a mirror of the myth world, or is the myth world a mirror of the mundane world? No, neither. Both together form a whole. The mundane world changes the myth world (for example by religious ceremonies and hero quests), and the myth world changes the mundane world (for example the way someone lives is determined by their beliefs, which are based on the myth world, and so it can be said that they live by myths). Any interaction between the myth world and the mundane world changes both. An individual living a myth changes the myth and is changed by the myth. For example, Orlanthi customs and traditions reflect the ways and deeds of their gods. Are the ways and deeds of Orlanthi gods as they are because of the people that worship them or are the customs and traditions of the Orlanthi as they are because of the gods they follow? It is both. The customs and traditions of Orlanthi and the ways and deeds of the Orlanthi gods are one and the same, one does not lead to another, but both to both.

Although I dislike the terms subjective and objective, it seems that a great deal of interest has arisen in the debate between subjective and objective deities and myths (as far as I can make out the people involved in this debate have very different ideas on what these words mean!). For me you can only approach the question of subjective / objective reality of myths by considering the relationship between the mythic and mundane plane. Sandy Petersen has said that nobody in Glorantha believes that their myth world is subjective. Since the myth world is fashioned by people beliefs (and also peoples beliefs are fashioned by the myth world), then that means the myth world is not subjective. However, because people worship the gods form their own cultural perspective their myths are subjective. So gods, as myths, are objective AND subjective.

Stephen Lucek.

P.S. Thanks to Joseph Troxell for saying he liked the insurance salesman eating Uz story, it was written by me!


Powered by hypermail