Redirection to Medieval Sheep...

Several months ago, I mentioned Michael Drout's research in comparing the DNA of medieval ms vellum, which he talked about over at Wormtalk and Slugspeak. In his latest post, he's expounded a few more details and given an update on how the research is going so far. It's fascinating, and looks to lend quite an innovative aspect to interdisciplinary work and the field of medieval studies. Go check out the post for more information.

ITM Book Club...

Some of you may be interested in this post and this post over at ITM (if you don't get to regularly check it out)--announcing an online book club & discussion focused on various aspects of the Middle Ages. I just received the first book in the mail (which I found more than 50% reduced from a seller over at Amazon--perhaps you can find as good a deal if you hurry!), and it's already fascinating reading. Even if you're not into cannibalism (but, really, who wouldn't be?), keep your eyes out for future books, as some of the suggestions look like great reads.

More on What Jack Says...

Following the last thread on Lewis's views of mythology and literature, I dug out a correspondence from a few years ago. It came from Perry Bramlett (a Lewis scholar), who visited Houghton and gave a seminar on Lewis. When I asked him about Lewis's views on myth, he promised to email me; the following was his response. Perhaps it will help focus anyone who wants to read up on Lewis--especially for those who have his woks handy. (Consider the rest of this post quoted from Bramlett's email.)

Walter Hooper's "C S Lewis: Companion & Guide" (if you can find it in the library or order it) has several discussions of Lewis and mythology. And "The C S Lewis Readers' Encyclopedia" (which I wrote for) has a good article (by Wayne Martindale of Wheaton College) on "Lewis and myth."

Lewis mentioned mythology several times in his writings, and some of these are:

1) In "The Weight of Glory" (chap 5) he mentioned mythology and paganism...

2) In the same book (chap 1) he had a quote about mythology and poetry...

3) In "God in the Dock" (pp 57-58, 66-67, 83-84, 132) he mentions mythology as the precursor to Biblical religion...

4) In "Surprised By Joy" (chap 7) he refers to Christianity as the Christian mythology... In the same book (chap 5) he mentions that in mythology he was almost sent back to the false gods to acquire some capacity for worship...

5) In "Reflections on the Psalms" (chap 10) he mentions the death and rebirth pattern in mythology as not accidental and that it teaches the truth that humans must undergo some sort of death in order to truly live...

6) In his "Letters" (24 Oct 1931) he mentions that the desire for a "vague something" as seen in pagan mythology shows a first and rudimentary form of the "idea of God"

7) In "The Weight of Glory" (chap 5) he says that if Christianity is a mythology it is not the one he likes the best... (This was before he became a Christian; he said he liked Greek, Irish and Norse mythology better)

Jack says this...

Conversation with someone (probably one of the R47 group) led me to pick up Gordon MacDonald's Phantastes this weekend. The edition we had on the shelf includes an adaptation of Lewis's introduction to an earlier (1946) anthology of MacDonald's work. The intro is interesting; Lewis pulls no punches in pointing out MacD's limitations:

• The texture of his writing as a whole is undistinguished, at times fumbling. Bad pulpit traditions cling to it; there is sometimes a nonconformist verbosity, sometimes an old Scotch weakness for florid ornament...

Yet for all this, Lewis avers that MacDonald writes fantasy better than anyone else--but that creates a problem for the critic: what is fantasy, after all? Is what MacDonald accomplishes properly a literary art? Lewis' reason for asking this introduces a take on the relationship between myth and literature--indeed, between myth and language--that I would love to discuss with R47-ers and their ilk. Lewis again:

• The critical problem with which we are confronted is whether this art--the art of myth-making--is a species of the literary art. The objection to so classifying it is that the Myth does not essentially exist in words at all. We all agree that the story of Balder is a great myth, a thing of inexhaustible value. But of whose version -- whose words -- are we thinking when we say this? ... For my own part, the answer is that I am not thinking of any one's words. No poet...has told this story supremely well. I am not thinking of any particular version of it. If the story is anywhere embodied in words, that is almost an accident. What really delights and nourishes me is a particular pattern of events, which could equally delight and nourish if it had reached me by some medium which involved no words at all.

Lewis goes on to say that this independence from the words distinguishes myth from poetry. Again, he says it best:

• In poetry the words are the body and the 'theme' or 'content' is the soul. But in myth, the imagined events are the body and something inexpressible is the soul: the words, or mime, or film, or pictorial series are not even the clothes--they are not much more than a telephone.

He goes on to say that myths get under our skin, 'shock us more fully awake,' cause us to question all that we hold certain. They give us delight, wisdom, and strength that we never anticipated. So herewith a few questions:

1. Are you with Jack on this one? (And how does this work with J Campbell's and others' takes on myth?
2. Where do you draw the line around what is and isn't myth, what's primary and what derivative (and where does JRRT fit on that scale?)?
3. Thinking about part of the BABEL project discussion, can he be right in saying that words themselves might not even be needed? (I myself am skeptical on that one -- but I am admittedly logocentric.)

Be well, and post!

Redirection...

For a brief summary of my honors thesis that in turn led to another post pontificating on general thoughts on neomedievalism and its implications for our culture, head over to Point of Know Return: Part I and Part II. Please feel free to leave comments there or extend your comments into a responsive post here.

Where have all the mead halls gone...

...and where are all the bards?

Pop-culture references aside, I have recently realized that thinking about mead halls saddens me.

Why?

Perhaps it is because I am a dreamer with an eye inclined to the heroic, the fantastic, and the charm of things old-worldly. Or perhaps I am wishing for what the mead halls represent: pride, togetherness and a fine oral tradition. Either way, the buildings are no more.

In their steads we have fast food restaurants, diners and the various and sundry bars and pubs. No more does the community get together because they are a community and share that bond. The annual chicken barbeque is close enough. Lost in individual lives, food is tasty but serious meals are a waste of time. Our time-charged consumermobiles drive us from point to point, picking up burgers on the way.

Being a self-proclaimed writer of sorts, I find this disheartening on a number of levels. One is the fact that everything has managed to balance the appearance of being dynamic with a static and homogenized reality that nothing actually seems to happen--nothing worth immortalizing. Birth, growth, school, work and death, with a light chance of success and a smattering of relationships. Another is that, by downplaying the importance of meals and togetherness, individually and as a whole, the would-be bards are ostracized to dark corners and holes to dig up materials for the next contest or open mic night. The bard becomes disconnected rather than immersed, tolerated rather than welcomed.

Food cannot be blamed for it all, though I maintain it plays its own role in the problem. It is also that, in the race to win any more, a body needs so much information with immediacy and in abundance. We have ready access. With food, knowledge and even networked relationships flying hither and yon at the speed of irradiated humming birds, the attention span slips slowly thorugh mechanized processers, diminishing. Bards, for all of their love, interest and care for their communities, have no place here. The places closest to their beloved halls are regular bar stools or the table set aside for the coffee regulars in some small-town diner. Through there has never been such a capacity for communication, people have become distant and dazed. Some lose the ability for apt face-to-face discussions, while others never are given the chance to learn.

Never before has the village that raises the child been so hands-off. In disconnecting ourselves, we have lost our feel for the underlying themes and strings that bind humans together. Ye olde truths and tales from the bard are become relics--shiny baubles and memories of past eras. How quaint.

It seems that communications galore have closed off our minds. People no longer talk with the stars or walk with the gods. The man who swam in the sea last week has met no mermaids and has slain no krakkens.

Like he said...

Hey All,

Pop over to Point of Know Return for a refreshing read of an old standard.

Thanks to Leslie for the loan of the Hitchhiker's Guide omnibus--earth was just detroyed, and I'm sure there's much fun ahead.

What will be our next task?