Since we are used to fairly scholarly and detailed arguments about Roman cavalry tactics, crop growing in the ancient world, medieval demographics and possible uses for trollkin urine, and since Greg's allegiance to mythic thinking and especially to the thought of Joseph Campbell have always been one of the distinctive features of Glorantha, it seems that the opportunity to explore some basic myth analysis tools may well be worthwhile. It can't be any worse that multi-dub power masteries in Hero Wars, can it?
As some of you know, my writing time (not to mention the rest of my life) is constrained by my magazine production deadlines - for now I'll simply make a few points and promise to come back in detail sometime next week, post-pasteup.
JOSEPH CAMPBELL I don't find it surprising that academic books on mythology fail to mention Joseph Campbell, whatever his status in popular culture. What Campbell presents us with in his monomyth is essentially a MYTHOLOGY ABOUT MYTHOLOGY, Jungian and universalist spectacles that highlight and simply certain features of SOME myths and obscure, overlook or completely distort other features. The academic arguments with and about Campbell's monomyth occurred in the fifties, and essentially consisted of people asking Campbell for actual examples, and not getting very satisfactory replies. Campbell wrote over a span of half a century: much (though not all) of his factual data has been superceded and the naive Freudianisms of say, 'The Hero of a Thousand Faces', are no longer part of our intellectual currency.
Campbell's Jungian worldview is complete unto itself: the monomyth is about OUR READING of myth, and tells us nothing about what a myth means in the culture that produces it. Campbell's toolkit works best for pre-digested, highly literate 'standard' and 'masculine' versions of myths, and is completely useless outside a fairly narrow cultural type.
There's a lot more to it than that of course - I have an intense love/hate relationship with Campbell dating back to the turn of the eighties, when Greg was telling just about everyone he could to read 'Hero of a Thousand Faces'.
I don't use the monomyth much these days, and when I do it is as an editing rather than a creative tool. I DO use however, some Jungian approaches based on Campbell, notably the work of Carol S. Pearson, who has expanded the monomyth into twelve 'hero journeys' of diverse types such as Creator, Destroyer, Caregiver, Innocent etc. I find these approaches more versatile, and able to avoid some of the closed thinking that tends to surround the Campbellian version hero. If you're interested, check out 'Awakening The Heroes Within'.
LEVI-STRAUSS LS was perhaps the last of the grand universal theorisers of anthropology; although he transfixed the western academic world in the seventies with 'Mythologiques' and Structuralism, the sad fact that he left few disciples and his work is universally admired but otherwise ignored. The West, we are told, is POST-STRUCTURAL, and perhaps rightly so. Cognitive neurophysiology and other disciplines have led us in much more testable directions in explaining the workings of the human mind.
Having said that, I think a working knowledge of binary oppositions and their mediation in myth is a very useful tool for anyone writing or otherwise constructing stories, and I'll put a few paras together on the subject.
GLORANTHAN REALITY AND THE MONOMYTH Is the monomyth somehow TRUE in Glorantha? Is it part of reality itself, or (as in our world) merely one way of looking at, understanding and digesting parts of the natural and supernatural order. Is the central importance of the HERO likewise an artefact of our bias and observation, or is it integral part of Gloranthan reality? In our fascination with the hero and the heroquest, are we ignoring other, less glamourous but equally important methods for changing and maintaining Gloranthan reality? (I'm not talking about animist/theist/materialist/mystic philosophies here, but *our* working toolkit and understanding of the internal mechanics of Gloranthan reality). What sort of myths AREN'T we exploring? How can we use basic tools of myth analysis in creating our own myths, stories and scenarios? Can we identify unique features of Gloranthan stories?
No answers, just some questions and a promise to return to this in more detail. BTW, most of the above qualify as Illumination checks.
Cheers
John
(Following his bliss down to the jewel point and then round the corner to
the ontological sushi bar).
PS: Not wanting to discuss THAT movie in detail until our Brit friends get a chance to see it, but weren't the female Gungans on the Ring just GREAT. Quack. This latest Lucas epic also an example of excessive Campbellism in action, and of the dangers of too much self-conscious myth-ticking, too much reliance on structure, and not enough human drama or character interaction. For an even better (?) example of Campbell-by-numbers, check out Willow, also by Lucas. The Call - check. The refusal - check. Round the next corner there's the threshhold guardian... check.
j.
===
"Out of the south she came, as mysterious and violent as the blessing winds of Sea Season, and just as beautiful. Out of the south, through gors deep and gallt wide, 'cross ice-shielded streams and shadow-dark valleys. Out of the south, till at last she came to the stead called Lagerwater, home to the Bluefoot Tovtaros, the true Orlanthi folk at the very centre of the world.."
Powered by hypermail