Mythic Fiction discussion

What do you consider "must-reads" to gain historical, literary, lit crit, or other background/perspective, in order to better understand myths and get more out of reading them? The obvious one is The Golden Bough. Another classic is The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales. What others do you recommend?

Michele wrote: "What do you consider "must-reads" to gain historical, literary, lit crit, or other background/perspective, in order to better understand myths and get more out of reading them? The obvious one is ..."

Good points. However, it's important to realise that while these books were both ground-breaking and influential in their time, criticism has moved on. I have an edition of the Frazer work, The Illustrated Golden Bough, which as well as condensing the multi-volume work also has an added commentary placing the study in context.

The Uses of Enchantment: the meaning and importance of fairy tales is also a very exciting book to read, especially in the light of Bettelheim's own distressing wartime experiences, but must also be taken with a pinch of salt. The most obvious point to make is that he squeezes significance out of details which by the nature of folktale can be quite variable (eg, from memory, the seven dwarfs 'represent' seven months of the year when, actually, many variants of the Snow White tale type have numbers of dwarfs/helpers different from the canonical seven).

The same applies to the equally influential The White Goddess which, in a similar way to The Hero with the Thousand Faces tries to over-schematise the creative impulse as well as reduce it to one grand approach that applies to all times and cultures.

Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed all of these works (though I have to admit I've only dipped into Frazer), but, hey, critical science moves from hypothesis to hypothesis, and that's the way it should be.

And now you've got me started...

I useful reference, IMO, is New Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology.

I also like Irish Fairy and Folk Tales but WB Yeats and A Dictionary of English Folklore. One of the best encyclopedic dictionaries is Dictionary of Celtic Mythology

Kernos wrote: "I useful reference, IMO, is New Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology.

I also like Irish Fairy and Folk Tales but WB Yeats and A Dictionary of English Folklore."

I agree about the two Oxford dictionaries you've mentioned, especially the MacKillop one on Celtic mythology, but the English Folklore one is good too.

The Larousse encyclopedia is wonderfully all-encompassing, drawing as it does on world mythology, but as far as I can see for a book that was first published in 1959 it probably needs updating. My edition (probably the same as yours Kernos) has, if my memory serves me right, an introduction from Robert Graves (correct me if I'm wrong!) who was controversial then and would certainly be old hat now.

I don't have the Yeats book but I've a reprint of Lady Gregory's re-tellings of Irish myth. Nowadays any decent book on Irish myth would need to come with a truck-load of notes and source references. Joseph Jacob's Celtic Folk and Fairy Tales is also widely available in 20th-century reprints, and he did include some interesting notes and sources, with references to changes he made in his re-tellings (which was honest of him; the Grimms, earlier in the 19th century, just kept re-writing for subsequent editions the folktales they'd already collected to suit their view of authentic German tradition).

Chris wrote: "Good points. However, it's important to realise that while these books were both ground-breaking and influential in their time, criticism has moved on..."

Well, yes. But I'd argue that the very nature of myths and folk/fairy tales means that criticism from ANY era is useful. The nature, meanings, value and interpretations of myths change over time, just like the myths themselves. There's no such thing as the definitive interpretation of Rumpelstiltskin; there are just the different ways people have viewed it over the years, the different meanings people have ascribed to it.

So while The Golden Bough may have (ok, does have) some factual errors, it's still useful as an exemplar of what myths meant to scholars at that time and how scholars were treating them. Since the meaning of these kinds of stories comes primarily from the reader rather than from the story itself, then how people or scholars viewed them then is just as useful/relevant as how they view them now, right?

Or maybe I'm getting too meta-textual LOL!

Michele wrote: "But I'd argue that the very nature of myths and folk/fairy tales means that criticism from ANY era is useful. The nature, meanings, value and interpretations of myths change over time, just like the myths themselves..."

No, you're quite right, for fiction readers and writers it's the human response that matters rather than just an impersonal rational analysis (though some scholars, like Marina Warner manage to inject a passion into their writing).

And I seem to remember that then current anthropological theories influenced a whole host of fine fiction writers and poets (just don't ask me to quote chapter and verse, but I'm thinking Charles Williams and T S Eliot here, for example, but not Dan Brown).

No, do get metatextual: it's what makes the world go round, right?!

And I seem to remember that then current anthropological theories influenced a whole host of fine fiction writers and poets (just don't ask me to quote chapter and verse, but I'm thinking Charles Williams and T S Eliot here, for example, but not Dan Brown).

So you don't believe Dan Brown is revealing truths long kept hidden by the Illumaniti?... ;-)

Kernos wrote: "So you don't believe Dan Brown is revealing truths long kept hidden by the Illuminati?... ;-)"

Some questions you must ask yourself:
1. If Dan Brown is revealing truths long kept hidden by the Illuminati, were they worth revealing?
2. If truths are being kept hidden, shouldn't Julian Assange be told?
3. Now that the truths are revealed by Dan Brown, has the world changed for better or worse?
4. If Dan Brown has written about it, Umberto Eco probably got there first, surely?
5. If I don't stop rabbiting on, Dan Brown may think I have been hiding truths worth revealing... What do you think?

Seriously, back to non-fiction...
If fairy tales are part of the myth/popular culture/literature continuum, then one useful book to consult is The Classic Fairy Tales edited by Maria Tatar (it came out in 1999); this has good discussion, plus a number of variants on the 'classic' fairy tales as well as the odd modern re-telling. Don't confuse it with the similarly-titled The Classic Fairy Tales by the Opies, which gives the originals or most popular versions of many of the most familiar narratives, all with stunning illustrations.

On a more mythological note, anything by Marina Warner can be recommended.

If you want to deal with the Matter of Britain, you really do have to read MORTE D'ARTHUR, and possibly the earlier epics. Likewise if you want to tinker with Norse myth you probably should try and go through the Eddas, and at least read the librettos of Wagner.

I am all for reading 'primary' sources, esp modern translations and did Classical sources way back in college. More recently, I have studied the Welsh and Irish myths in translation and the Eddas, I never considered reading Wagner. That is a great idea. Can you recommend a good English translation of the librettos? I have not been able to get a handle on the Finnish myths. [Has anyone seen the Finnish miniseries Rauta-aika, based on the Kalevala?

A big problem is handling all of the names and variations in spellings and stories, esp if one had not grown up with the myths. I sometimes wonder if one can develop an intuitive understanding of these without having them be part of your childhood. I have a good friend from Dublin, a linguist in training, whom I asked how she kept all of these people and stories straight. She said, "They always have been part of my life."

Brenda wrote: "If you want to deal with the Matter of Britain, you really do have to read MORTE D'ARTHUR, and possibly the earlier epics. Likewise if you want to tinker with Norse myth you probably should try an..."

For the Matter of Britain, even though we moderns are hugely indebted to Malory, I would always recommend going first to what you call the 'earlier epics': Geoffrey of Monmouth and Chretien de Troyes in particular, as well as the Welsh Arthurian material in The Mabingion. Malory is wonderful, but indirectly responsible for the huge amounts of codswallop we get from TV series like Camelot, Merlin and their ilk, not to mention the scores of Hollywood riffs on A Connecticut Yankee...

Wagner's librettos will be available somewhere on the net, I'm sure, Kernos. I was made aware of Wagner's skills in distilling, editing and dramatising the Northern myths by following the subtitles on TV transmissions of the Ring cycle many years ago. It struck me at the time that they would make good standalone dramas even without the music.

The Finnish myths are something I've never yet got into, mainly because of the spelling and pronunciation difficulties with the names. Sibelius used the Kalevala stories as inspiration for several striking orchestral works, and that may be a way of accessing the material in the first place.

There is nothing much to be done about blatant modernizations. Do not see the THOR movie, and hope to be anywhere near Norse mythology! However, it is undeniable that the modern reader will very probably have seen THOR, and if you want to write about Norse gods you probably have to take that into account.

I have a real soft spot for W.B. Yeats' Celtic Twilight, because he actually gathered the fairy folk tales from the people in the Irish countryside (before that kind of intimate knowledge and oral history was lost). I could read that book everyday for the rest of my life : )

I've got, but must confess that I've done little more than dip into, Roland Barthes' Mythologies. This collection of essays looks at the process of mythologising, especially in the contemporary (that is, mid-20th century) era, but can be useful when trying to make sense of all kinds of past myths.

Chris wrote: "...This collection of essays looks at the process of mythologising, especially in the contemporary (that is, mid-20th century) era..."

Does he mean things like Superman or LOTR becoming myths?

Kernos wrote: "Chris wrote: "...This collection of essays looks at the process of mythologising, especially in the contemporary (that is, mid-20th century) era..."

Does he mean things like Superman or LOTR becom..."

Can't remember, I'd have to look at it again! But, I think, yes.

Did anyone mention the works of Carl Jung or Marie- Louise Von Franz and their discussions of archetypes as they relate to fairy tales? Von Franz's The Interpretation of Fairy Tales is utterly fascinating (as in, you can stay up all night reading it!). Just more food for thought : )

Diane wrote: "Did anyone mention the works of Carl Jung or Marie- Louise Von Franz and their discussions of archetypes as they relate to fairy tales? Von Franz's The Interpretation of Fairy Tales is utterly fasc..."

I'd not to my knowledge come across The Interpretation of Fairy Tales before, but I'll try to look it out.

Was much intrigued with Franz and Emma Jung's The Grail Legend many years ago (lots of archetype discussion and delving into obscure scholarly corners) but recent browsing into it reminded me how much it (and its scholarly sources) has dated, and how much the original medieval texts were filtered to squeeze Jungian insights out of them.

Still, I thought it was fascinating, and it certainly influenced my thinking at the time.

I don't think I've read their analysis of The Grail Legend--sounds interesting! But I agree with you--sometimes you have to watch for scholars squeezing a text's meaning to suit their purposes. Still, I do find archetypal analysis fascinating--the idea that that certain characters and plot lines resonate within all of us because they speak to the overall human condition. It's one of the reasons I love to read Mythic Fiction, past or present : )

Diane wrote: "I don't think I've read their analysis of The Grail Legend--sounds interesting! But I agree with you--sometimes you have to watch for scholars squeezing a text's meaning to suit their purposes. Sti..."

I seem to have repeated myself with my comments on caution and out-of-datedness (Michele quite rightly took me to task on this), but I don't want to come over as a grumpy old killjoy, far from it! Many of these studies were part of a contemporary zeitgeist, and while zeitgeists come and go that's not to say there isn't anything of worth left in the studies.

Jungian archetypes are certainly a striking way of looking at characters in dreams and stories. Their presence can be felt in the catalogues of folklore motifs and tale-types on the one hand, and in Christopher Booker's The Seven Basic Plots (useful but idiosyncratic and very reactionary) on the other, and of course Joseph Campbell (The Hero with a Thousand Faces and others) was heavily influenced by Jungian ideas (as, on the fiction side, was Hermann Hesse).

I still hear what you're saying though, Chris (I think!). Although I love to read Jung and Campbell, I like to experience stories freshly, without letting anyone's analysis becoming a formula or "filter" that guides my thinking too much. Only later do I explore the reaction of others and test them against my own. If they resonate, great, but I reserve the right to argue with anyone's interpretation. In fact, I really enjoy hearing a new perspective that hadn't occurred to me! That's precisely what makes Mythic Fiction so fascinating: the depth and variety of understanding : )

Returning to Michelle's original NF must-reads, one non-fiction book I've enjoyed which threw a lot of light on the relationship between myth and the antiquity of fairytales when I first came across it was Fairytale in the Ancient World by Graham Anderson.

This title, incidentally, won the Mythopoeic Scholarship Award for General Myth and Fantasy Studies in 2003. http://www.mythsoc.org/awards/ has a list of past recipients of this award which makes interesting reading. Also, if you are into the Inklings, as well as adult and juvenile fantasy writing, past award winners are listed here too.

Hi,

I am currently reading Song of Achilles and would love to learn more about Greek mythology. If anyone could point me in the direction of a book which would help me learn more about the gods and mythologies generally that would be great :). Thanks!

It's hard to recommend anything from my books as many are ancient history themselves and very likely out of print. Most famous is Robert Graves' The Greek Myths: he was certainly well read, but you have to take his analyses with a pinch of salt as few if any academics agree with many of his conclusions. As a poet and novelist his creative inclinations led him to jump to unprovable conclusions (as in his The White Goddess).

A good option is to look at the Wikipedia page dealing with this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...) and do a little research on what suits your needs: there is a section specifically on Greek myths. Again, be warned, some are less reliable than others, and the list is of necessity very selective (and idiosyncratic: the Percy Jackson series??!!).

As a rule of thumb, the more recent the study, the more reliable it may be, and on this basis I would probably go with the 2008 The Penguin Book of Classical Myths by Jenny March, if I was to start from the beginning. Don't know about any illos, though; I like books with piccies. There is a good Thames & Hudson book I'd recommend on the art of the Greek Myths Art and Myth in Ancient Greece A Handbook by Thomas H. Carpenter, which gives you an authentic view of how the ancients pictured their myths, better than any Disneyfied version.

Finally, have a browse in charity shops around where you are: you might find something adequate to your needs at a fraction of the price!

Aw thank you, that's great! :) I will have a browse around and see what I can find in addition to these.

While I agree that the old hat, Joseph Campbell, needs to be read with a pinch of salt, I think he is the best starting off point, at least for a comprehensive survey. I recently finished "The Mythical Creatures Bible" by Brenda Rosen which is part of the Godsfield Bible series, and while it wasn't the most well written, and certainly isn't critical, it was beautifully illustrated, and a lot of fun. It will be a useful quick reference.

There are other, broader things that help enormously, if you want to be knowledgable about the field. The Bible, which taps you into all the Judeo-Christian stuff. A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM, the premier Faerie work in Western Lit. MORTE D'ARTHUR, the door to all Arthurian stuff in English. There must be lots of works like this.
I am trying to think of an entry for American folklore, and the only thing that comes to mind is the Bre'er Rabbit stories.

Brenda wrote: "There are other, broader things that help enormously, if you want to be knowledgable about the field. The Bible, which taps you into all the Judeo-Christian stuff. A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM, the ..."

Good points, Brenda. I'll have to think broader too.

The Library of Congress has a list of what it feels are the most influential American books:
http://myloc.gov/Exhibitions/books-th...

I had to add the definitive academic resource for Greek mythology: Early Greek Myth: A Guide to Literary and Artistic Sources. Truly exhaustive and informative, although probably the most academic on the market.

Baelor wrote: "I had to add the definitive academic resource for Greek mythology: Early Greek Myth: A Guide to Literary and Artistic Sources. Truly exhaustive and informative, although probably the most academic..."

This looks fascinating, especially with the provision of myth variants, but clearly not one for casual reading.

I adore anything by Marina Warner. Jack Zipes is pretty academically central I think? (Having never actually studied this stuff formally) but still very readable, too.

Kate wrote: "I adore anything by Marina Warner. Jack Zipes is pretty academically central I think? (Having never actually studied this stuff formally) but still very readable, too."

Yes, Zipes' The Oxford Companion to Fairy Tales is excellent, and I've seen his contributions elsewhere too.

I also enjoyed Graves' THE GREEK MYTHS, though with him you have to blink at the idea of myths recapitulating the changes in the historical progression of religious cults.

Richmond Hathorn's 1977 GREEK MYTHOLOGY is good, but out of print, and probably couldn't be located except through a library loan.

Not to get off on a rant here, but Barthes' MYTHOLOGIES is not a study of myth. It uses the term "myth," very irresponsibly IMO, to mean what Barthes wants it to mean in his personal Marxist hermeneutic. If you're into Marxist studies of literature and culture, it's a must, but it's got nothing to do with archaic myth.

J.R.R. Tolkien's On Fairy-stories
Katharine Mary Briggs's Encyclopedia of Fairies: Hobgoblins, Brownies, Bogies, & Other Supernatural Creatures

And not must read, but useful for those who like the topics:

J.C. Holt's Robin Hood
G. Ronald Murphy's The Owl, the Raven, and the Dove: The Religious Meaning of the Grimms' Magic Fairy Tales