Another aspect of Dragonlance that reminds me of the Prometheus story is of the gods of magic teaching mortals how to use it. Though they aren't tortured, they get banished to the Lost Citadel.
Well, almost everything is based on things that where written in the previous eras and it's hard to find original thoughts anymore. Nowdays it seems that every world is bound to have a "Cataclysm" that will clense it from evil and teach its inhabitants (spelling) a lesson. God loves you as long as you don't try to steal his power or try to replace him with another God ;)
I think the story of Noah and the flood came before Dragonlance though... ;)
I think the story of Noah and the flood came before Dragonlance though... ;)
That's alright...the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh came before Noah...
Everything's recycled, man.
For example, while the biblical myth of Noah is obviously derived from the Babylonian flood myth, due to the Jewish people being absorbed into the Babylonian empire. However, the biblical flood myth deals with different themes and consequences than its babylonian counterpart.
That's why I hate people like Joseph Campbell. They compare everything to Christianity and highlight the similarities, while ignoring the differences.
I think the story of Noah and the flood came before Dragonlance though... ;)
Yeah, but everyone knows Noah never existed.
Yeah, but everyone knows Noah never existed.
Hey, dude, I think that's going a bit to far. Unless you were joking, in which case you really should have indicated it better.
Now, back on topic, while the story of Raistlin gettign tortured *IS* indeed similar to the story of Prometheus, keep in mind that Raistlin was not actually tortured. THat was simply a part of Palin's Test. It was the real Raistlin, but it was not the real Abyss, Takhisis, etc. Palin didn't even actually enter the laboratory. I think that story was the most misinterpreted one in all of Dragonlance, and SUmmer Flame doesn't help much. Of course, all the dead were in the Abyss, to fight Chaos. Remember, Tas saw Flint, Tanis, Sturm, and I think Palin's brothers there too. Do you think *THEY* went to the Abyss when they died?
New things come in with everything that is recycled though.
For example, while the biblical myth of Noah is obviously derived from the Babylonian flood myth, due to the Jewish people being absorbed into the Babylonian empire. However, the biblical flood myth deals with different themes and consequences than its babylonian counterpart.
That's why I hate people like Joseph Campbell. They compare everything to Christianity and highlight the similarities, while ignoring the differences.
I think you can find a lot of merit in Campbell's ideas even if you don't see eye-to-eye with a Christian perspective. Jungian psychology has some related ideas about a collective subconscious, why the symbolism in unconnected cultures is often much the same. There is also no denying that fantasy literature has a strong Christian heritage, going back through to The Pilgrim's Progress, the works of George Macdonald, then C.S. Lewis and Tolkien. I wrote my senior thesis on the evolution of mythopoeisis and modern fantasy literature, so this is a subject I've given a lot of thought.
Going back to the flood, the legend of such an event goes through several cultures, and some scientists even believe they know the source (which has less to do with rain and more to do with a rising sea).
Dragonlance borrows a lot of ideas and themes from mythology, real-world history, and some of the basic building blocks of fantasy and weaves it together into something unique. You won't find many original ideas, here or anywhere, but just like two statues can be carved from the same stone, the end results can be vastly different.
Jamie Chambers
Sovereign Press, Inc.
I think you can find a lot of merit in Campbell's ideas even if you don't see eye-to-eye with a Christian perspective.
It's not the christian perspective that bothers me, it is the attitude that all religions and mythology is fundamentally the same because it shares certain story elements. For example, the fact that just because there was a flood, it is ultimately the same story when there are a quite a bit of difference in how the story is presented. For example, the biblical flood of Noah differentiates from the flood in Babylonian myth in that its cause was the irredeemable corruptibility of humanity which caused the Jewish flood.
Jungian psychology has some related ideas about a collective subconscious, why the symbolism in unconnected cultures is often much the same.
Which is why I dislike Jung and Campbell. They focus on particular symbols while ignoring the context. I'm a classicist with one degree, and finishing philosophy/religious double honours degree currently. So this is also something I've given a lot of thought to. ;)
The problem with Jung and Campbell (as well as innumerable other 19th and 20th century thinkers) is that they are ultimately trying to reduce human behavior to a single cause. For Marx, for example, everything is ultimately about class and distribution of wealth. Unfortuneately, human nature and will is a lot messier than that.
There is also no denying that fantasy literature has a strong Christian heritage
I wouldn't doubt that at all.
Going back to the flood, the legend of such an event goes through several cultures, and some scientists even believe they know the source (which has less to do with rain and more to do with a rising sea).
See, I don't buy "race" or "folklore" memory either. People tend to relate stories as they are relevant, and change them to maintain relevancy. Noah's flood has a much simpler explanation, in that it seems especially prevalent among cultures that depend on irrigation for agricultural production (and makes flooding a serious problem). It was fossilized in the text of the bible, and serves nicely as a warning about the wrath of God. Of course, it isn't a very popular story as Christian or Jewish myth goes, largely due to our non-judgemental culture and because the story of Sodom and Gommorah seems to give a much more evocative image of the wrath of God. We are, after all, largely urbanized and thus much more concerned with fire and bombardment than flooding. ;)
You won't find many original ideas, here or anywhere, but just like two statues can be carved from the same stone, the end results can be vastly different.
I agree with the latter part of the sentence, but I disagree that you can't find many original ideas. Original ideas pop up daily, they just have a wider context of human history and human society. The new is synergistic with the old.
I agree with the latter part of the sentence, but I disagree that you can't find many original ideas. Original ideas pop up daily, they just have a wider context of human history and human society. The new is synergistic with the old.
This is a fascinating debate! I wish I wasn't in so far over my head that I could contribute something tangible to this one. But I can't.
However, I am enjoying watching from the sidelines.
First, I don't think that the ultimate goal of Campbell is to reduce diversity and base it all on one cause, especially not the christian one.
I'd say that by revealing some common traits in all the mythologies, beliefs and religions you are able to gain a deeper insight for your own beliefs (which isn't the goal of a scientist either) but develop an understanding for the different approaches the different mythologies have taken regarding the fundamental "problems" dealt with in the "monomyth".
By the way, the flood-myth i.e. isn’t even just a jewish or Babylonian one but a recurrent theme everywhere humans are threatened by water (ravaging torrents or the sea claiming land and lives in storms).
But it’s not the abstract religious system of beliefs that is fascinating but the shared fundamental very individual questions the humanity is pondering from its very early days on.
Myth is initiation of the individual in society and nature, of the human in the cosmology and in general the relation of the single in the whole and defining its place there.
Sorry, I’m afraid this will be practically unintelligible
Regards,
M’s Claw