Recommended Article on Carl Jung

Today, the 50th anniversary of C.G. Jung’s death, an excellent introduction to his ideas appears on the BBC website, reflecting on what Jung would make of 2011.

Among many other concepts that have entered our culture, he coined the terms extravert (nowadays called extrovert) and introvert. I suspect he would have been fascinated and appalled by the modern web’s capacity to allow us to be both at once, walling ourselves off from our environment completely while sharing our inmost thoughts with billions of strangers.

But I digress: this blog is not about theories of personality. Rather, it is about mythology and its intersection with the modern world. On this, too, Jung has much to say. For Jung, although he never quite put it this way, mythology represents the dreams and personality of a culture rather than of an individual. That is, just as individuals have dreams that express feelings, desires,  memories, fears, and other currents bubbling up from our unconscious, myths are the dreams and stories which bubble up from the collective unconscious (our group imagination). Stories that “ring true” for many people over generations get told and retold and preserved. They are shaped by and shape what most people in that group think, feel, and value most over several generations.

In America, for example, we’ve got George Washington and his cherry tree, the Statue of Liberty and her “huddled masses yearning to breathe free“, Rosa Parks sitting in the front of the bus, or the myth of Manifest Destiny (not quite as dead as one might hope) . These are American myths. Their cultural importance does not depend on whether they are factually true, but on how each “rings true” for many Americans, how we perceive these stories, use them as inspiration or guidelines, pass them on and apply them to our world.

Mythology and psychology are strongly related; each influences the other.

That is the most important thing I learned from Carl Gustav Jung, along with its corollary, that most people need guiding myths to inspire us, so that the lack of common stories contributes to social factioning and miscommunication, and a sense of loss of meaning and purpose on the personal level. Without mythology, we look up in the sky and see just points of light. With mythology, we see constellations: not only as useful units of organization, but as pictures; we see Star Trek and Star Wars; we see our descendants living Out There; or we may imagine doomsday asteroids, omens, UFOs. Again, it doesn’t matter whether they are true; what matters is their psychological impact and meaning for us.

This blog is dedicated to the premise that as geographical and cultural borders collapse and reshape themselves,  mythology becomes cross-cultural even as it fails its old function (elaborated more fully by Joseph Campbell) of establishing and maintaining cultural identity. We no longer have a shared body of myths: instead, different groups and people adapt and are drawn to myths that suit their own needs or personalities, creating virtual tribes just as social media has allowed us to establish virtual circles of friends. These myths are more fluid, and most people take them as metaphors (a la Joseph Campbell) more than literally true — with the exception of fundamentalists.  Myths seldom function as the guiding principle of any one culture quite the way they used to be, yet we can recognize stories and myths from around the world that ring true regarding events and cultural changes happening around the world.

I think Jung would recognize some of the divisions going on in the world today as the struggles of many competing mythic systems, different landscapes of the imagination, struggling to maintain their borders ever more fiercely now that borders are so easy to cross.

My Favorite Carl Jung Book:


Memories, Dreams, Reflections by C.G. Jung

Not strictly theoretical, this is Jung’s self-mythology, stories about his life which “ring true” and help to illuminate and explain his psychological theories.

Rapture vs. Ragnarök: A Pagan Apocalypse

While the earthquakes of Harold Camping’s apocalypse failed to roll around the globe at precisely 6PM (God has apparently modernized enough to observe human time zones), I spent the day reading The Road to Middle-Earth: How J.R.R. Tolkien Created a New Mythology. I suppose I find modern mythology more appealing when presented as such.

Of course, the myth of the “Rapture at [time] [date] [year]” is not really modern, although it has grown steadily more punctual along with our systems for telling time. The human yearning for an exclusive and meaningful exit is not new. I’ve always felt a mixture of admiration and (I’m ashamed to say) a touch of schadenfreude for Jesus’ first disciples, disappointed in their expectation of His return during their own generation, yet somehow hanging onto their beliefs and building a religion that has long outlasted its original expiration date. Their resilience in the face of dashed expectations set a precedent which has been followed by apocalyptic societies ever since. Which begs the question: what to do after the apocalypse fails to materialize?

Quite unexpectedly, I stumbled across a possible answer in Tolkien’s discussion of Ragnarök, the apocalypse of Norse mythology, which has some interesting points of departure (of course) from the Christian concept of Judgment Day. The answer is both obvious and startling, considering its source.

Ragnarök is the mythical last battle between good and evil, recounted in the 13th century Poetic Edda (“Völuspá” verse 43 onward) and in Snorri’s Prose Edda, Ch. 51). Both eddas paint familiar visions of an apocalypse and the chaotic last years leading up to it: a time of human wars and sinful crime precede natural disasters (both fire and winter), eclipses, and finally a battle with gods and heroes on one side, giants and monsters on the other. This battle results in mutual annihilation and almost total destruction of the world. The stories of Ragnarök do hint at a new world arising from the ashes of the old, but it is hard to be certain whether this glimmer of hope predates Norse pagan contact with Christianity. Regardless, Tolkien’s comments (or rather, Shippey’s summary of them) deal with Ragnarök itself, not with any hope of surviving it.

Shippey summarizes Tolkien’s commentary on Ragnarök as follows:

A major goal of The Lord of The Rings was to dramatise that ‘theory of courage’ which Tolkien had said in his British Academy lecture was the ‘great contribution’ to humanity of the old literature of the North. The central pillar of that theory was Ragnarök—the day when gods and men would fight evil and the giants, and inevitably be defeated. The right side remains right even if it has no ultimate hope at all. In a sense this Northern mythology asks more of men, even makes more of them, than does Christianity, for it offers them no heaven, no salvation, no reward for virtue except the sombre satisfaction of having done what is right. (The Road to Middle-Earth, p. 156)

I often run into the assertion that Christianity contains a set of moral guidelines without which non-Christians (and atheists) can have no ethics. Yet Tolkien, a good Catholic, devoted his life to studying pre-Christian literature and mythology, and arguably wrote a new pre-Christian mythology in The Lord of the Rings. He was grasping at certain older truths which (he said) were actually easier to convey in this fashion (Lettersp. 147). It appears that one of these truths was the startling idea that humanity could live ethically, even without knowledge of the Christian God. As a Catholic, he would never argue that one could be saved by works alone, but simply that salvation was not the sole reason to do the right thing.

The concept of Ragnarök—or at least Tolkien’s interpretation of it—is nevertheless a grim one: good souls battle for the sake of doing good, even when there is no hope of victory. One who had fought in the Battle of the Somme could certainly relate to this sort of pagan courage, “the very brink, where hope and despair are akin.” (“The Last Debate”, Return of the King) This is a code of ethics grounded on the principle of no Rapture: or at least, no guarantee that any one person will live to see it.

I am struck by the contrast between Tolkien’s “theory of courage” and the guiding principle of many Christian apocalyptic cults. For them, believers will be saved by the right beliefs, not by courage; courage is irrelevant when one is guaranteed victory. “Us versus them” is not a struggle between good and evil, fought to the last breath. Instead, “us” means believers,  while “them” is everyone else: including friends, relatives, or people who simply have not heard the message. Ragnarök will only happen to those “left behind”, who are regarded with pity (at best) or disdain. (The feeling is often mutual.)

Belief in the next world often leads to disregard for this one. Some of Harold Camping’s followers maxed out credit cards, quit jobs and abandoned worldly responsibilities in the weeks or months leading up to their expected Rapture. Others, more charitable, donated much of their savings to the billboard campaign and/or endured public ridicule to spread the word to as many people as possible. Critics harped on how much charity work could have been done with all that money and manpower, but for these believers, such work is futile: the next world is the only one that matters.

That being so, what does an apocalyptic do on the day after an apocalypse fails to materialize?  Probably revise one’s appointment calendar and stick doggedly to the “belief not works” and “heaven not earth” side of the equation. But if there are any lessons to be learned from a Rapture postponed, it might be the ones Tolkien found in the myth of Ragnarök: the challenge of doing “good [merely] for goodness’ sake,” and the possibility that this world, too, is worth fighting for.

 

Recommended (Online) Reading:

Apocalypse Now: Why Believers Will Grow Stronger If the World Doesn’t End” by Maia Szalavitz

“The Millennium Is Here Again: Is It Panic Time?” by Jon Paulien

Books Referenced in This Post:

     

Grave Goods: An Affirmation of Life

Anubis and Mummy, Roman Period Funerary Portrait

Roman-Period Egyptian Tomb Portrait: Gods Escort Deceased to Afterlife

A fascinating article in the LA Times this week tells of a modern expression of a practice that goes right back to the dawn of human prehistory: the sacrifice or disposal of offerings for the dead. In this case, Chinese are burning paper facsimiles of iPads, iPhones, and other modern luxuries to “give” to their deceased family members.

In this modern expression of the ancient tradition, we can see clearly that the grave goods which fill many of our museums are not so much a preoccupation with death and morbidity, as with life.

I first became aware of this distinction when studying ancient Egypt as a child. Popular culture and Hollywood dwell much on mummies, skeletons, and curses of the dead when talking about Egyptian burial customs. Isn’t it macabre how they wrapped and preserved dead bodies? Yet for the Egyptians, who believed in an afterlife for those who were “true of heart,” you could take it with you. So those who could afford it were buried with jewelry, cosmetics, game boards, furniture, beds and pillows, foodstuffs, wine, cloth, all manner of toys and tools, shoes, deceased pets, even small magical statues that they could order to do work for them should they need it or someone else require it of them. These artifacts were believed to live, so to speak, in the afterlife, just as the soul lived on in the afterlife.

When I see statues, mummy portraits (above, late period), tomb paintings, and grave goods from ancient Egypt, I am always struck by how much of a celebration of life these things represent and are. In fact, they show us the life the Egyptians loved or wished to live, so, after a manner of speaking, they did achieve immortality.

Other culture’s funerary traditions have a similar purpose.

Some can be playful: you will see coins, cigarettes, spirits left on graves in some graveyards to this day. Latin American Dies de los Muertos is one of these, in which family members picnic at the family plot and leave offerings of flowers, candy, skulls, and other items not so much as gifts to be used in heaven (although some are clearly sent as consumables), but just as a way to remember the deceased.

Others are more grandiose. In powerful, imperial, martial cultures, you have staggering expenditures of wealth for burials like China’s famous terracotta army, a full-scale corps of warriors built to protect the spirit of China’s first emperor. In cases like these, a celebration of life has taken on the patina of the person’s life: a powerful person must be accompanied by powerful displays.

In ancient times, rarely, this tradition took on a more similar cast: animal or even human sacrifices were sent to the afterworld alongside royalty. So the Royal Tombs of Ur in ancient Mesopotamia included entire households of retainers, all dressed in their finest, who evidently took poison to accompany their monarch. In that case, celebration of life has gone painfully awry: the belief in the afterlife was too literal, and the life of the monarch valued over those of followers.

Thankfully, in most cultures, the burial of grave goods reflects a more compassionate outlook: it is a last chance to say goodbye to a loved one, and we send them off with their best. Even Christians may include favorite clothes or personal effects. So when next you go to a museum — where, naturally, artifacts preserved in tombs make up many a collection, since they are most likely to be preserved — consider what the grave goods say about people’s love of life, of family ties, and of their hopes for a blessed afterlife. Don’t assume grave goods reflect a culture’s preoccupation with death.

Recommended Link: Storytelling in India

I just ran across a good article on the revival of storytelling traditions in India, and how it’s captivating modern audiences who have moved to flatscreen TVs, Bollywood, and other modern marvels.

Lost art of Urdu storytelling returns to Delhi

~ BBC Correspondent Anu Anand

There is also some meaningful commentary on how storytelling is helping Indians come to grips with partition. Historia originally meant stories, after all.

The Ham Sandwich and Eternal Happiness

An old logic joke goes like this:

I. Nothing is better than eternal happiness.
II. A ham sandwich is better than nothing.
III. Therefore, a ham sandwich is better than eternal happiness!

It turns out that there are a lot of ham sandwich myths trying to reassure us that our life is tasty just as it is. They don’t usually argue against eternal happiness, of course, but they try to reassure us that getting much less than we want is not so bad, after all.

The Midas Gift Card

You may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true. ~ Mr. Spock

One common variant of the myth is for a god to grant a mortal a wish which turns out to be a curse rather than a gift. The most famous of these tales is that of King Midas, who proves such a good host to Silenus the satyr-god that he earns a boon of his guest. Midas asks for the golden touch, only to discover that he cannot touch, eat or drink anything, since all turns to gold. (In early variants of this myth, Midas captures Silenus, suggesting the nature-spirit originally cursed or tricked the king).

Another variant more plainly shows divine retribution in disguise: Hera, disguising herself as a gossipy nurse, goads one of her husband’s mortal paramours to ask him to reveal himself in the same guise that he wears before Hera. Zeus, ignorant of his wife’s manipulations, rashly vows to grant Semele any one wish. Bound by his oath, he cannot refuse Semele’s request, and is forced to manifest as a thunderbolt which incinerates her.

A more complex interpretation of “be careful what you ask for” archetype appears in The Neverending Story, an excellent children’s book by Michael Ende. Commanded to “Do what you wish,” the young protagonist Bastian fastens upon “wishing” and neglects “doing.” His wishes are shallow, satisfying various cravings (often at the prompting of others whom he tries to impress), and he eventually loses almost everything through self-destructive behavior. It takes a long journey of self-deception and self-discovery before Bastian learns that do what you wish means he must figure out what it is he most wishes — especially, what he truly wishes to be — and do it, achieve it, make it come true.

Superpowers Suck

I’ve had it with the hero biz, frustration has got me down.
Why should I bother with saving the city when I’d rather be painting the town?
I’m faster than a speeding bullet, I’m tougher than a moving train,
But I’d throw it all away in a minute if I
Could  just once get the jump on Lane.

~ “Superman Sex Life Boogie” by Tom Smith

Another modern myth which plays out again and again in comics, books and films is the idea that powers or gifts beyond the lot of ordinary mortals are a curse, not only because they usually obligate the possessor to be heroic, but also because they make it hard to live an ordinary life. This is not merely the lament of postmodern superheroes, however. Even ancient mythological heroes have their regrets:

“Achilles,” [said Odysseus], “no one was ever yet so fortunate as you have been, nor ever will be, for you were adored by all us Argives as long as you were alive, and now that you are here you are a great prince among the dead. Do not, therefore, take it so much to heart even if you are dead.”

“Say not a word,” he answered, “In death’s favour; I would rather be a paid servant in a poor man’s house and be above ground than king of kings among the dead.”

~ Homer Od. Book XI, Samuel Butler translation

Immortality Is Also a Drag

Who wants to live forever? ~ Queen, “Highlander

Gods and immortals grow bored. In many myths and stories, they seem to need interactions with mortals in order to have something to do (or someone to worship them). However, there is often great sorrow when immortals mingle with mortals.

Eos, goddess of the dawn, begs Zeus to grant immortality to her lover Tithoneus, but forgets to request eternal youth. Zeus peevishly lets the mortal grow old, feeble and babbling, until finally he becomes a cicada. The twins Castor and Pollux suffer a fraternal twist on the usual myth: Pollux is born of Zeus, his brother of a mortal father, so that Pollux must mourn his twin’s death. Their constellation myth explains that Pollux prevailed upon Zeus to place both of them together in the heavens.

Another variant of the “immortality trap” is the Rip Van Winkle motif: a mortal may sojourn in Faerie or some immortal country for a time, but on returning, all friends and family will be dead and gone. Sometimes the years catch up with the mortal upon exiting the immortal realm, so that he dies of old age.

Tolkien (yes, I’m bringing in Tolkien again) poignantly explores the theme of immortality’s curse in his tragic romances between Elves and Men. In his mythology , the fall of humankind comes not by acquiring knowledge of good and evil, but rather by seeking for immortality. Númenor, the Atlantis-like kingdom of Men, is swallowed by the sea when its king dares to lead a fleet to the Undying Lands. His descendants flee to Middle-earth, but even there they yearn ever for eternal life. The Elves cannot understand this longing: to them, watching the world change and decay from its unmarred beginnings is a burden and sorrow. They envy the “Gift of Men.”

These stories are just a few variants of the mythic pattern. Some seem to argue that our mortal lot is not so bad, after all. Others are merely speculative fiction of a sort: assuming one had godlike powers, wishes fulfilled, or immortality… what would it be like?  It is curious to see how often the answer is, “more trouble than it’s worth.”

Keep your ears open and consider your own favorite flavor of mythology — are there any ham sandwich myths? Or consider some of your favorite fictional books or films. The more you look, the more you’ll find this archetype cropping up in new guises.