Friday, February 4, 2011
The Journey Inward
What is Joseph Campbell's main argument as articulated in his interview with Billy Moyers? Use specific textual evidence to explain your response, and please be sure to read ALL of the other responses. Your comment should indicate that you've read and considered your classmates' respionse. Please note that the blog responses are mandatory and not posting is like not turning in a response paper.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Throughout the interview, Joseph Campbell discussed many aspects of humanity with Moyers, the majority of his ideas seeming to be concerned with a higher power that transcends all other life. Originally, I thought that that was Campbell's main idea, that there will always be a higher power that we must give credit to for the creation of our world. However, I think Campbell's argument is defined in the last line of the interview: "This is it" (85). Though Campbell and Moyers continually discuss creation and the greater power that created our world, the fact of creation is somewhat trivial; what matters is how we live our lives in the "experience of eternity right here and now" (85). As humans, we have the tendency to look too closely at the past and at the future, therefore forgetting what occurs in the present. When we do finally look into the present, we are dismayed at the fact that life does not occur in the ways we want it to; we do not want to accept struggle and hardship. Campbell says, "You've got to say yes to this miracle of life as it is, not on the condition that it follow your rules" (84). He argues that life will never work out in every way we want it to, as all humans desire different things; it's impossible to have a world that serves all people to their own advantage. Given this, we must accept what our world does provide us, and accept even the things we do not want to. We must accept the way life is, accept the fact that there are things we cannot understand, accept the higher, transcending power above us, and accept pain and suffering. The journey of life is a journey of acceptance, of learning that we are not the ones with the power to change how life is: "The hero is the one who comes to participate in life courageously and decently, in the way of nature, not in the way of personal rancor, disappointment, or revenge" (82).
ReplyDeleteFor the majority of the article, Campbell mainly focuses on the idea of a higher power, and the need for humans to embrace the unknown. He calls God "the ultimate mystery of being beyond thinking" (76), and discusses those who "transcend the field of nature" (75). Myth, in this sense, is created to connect humans with the mystery of life; it defines the metaphors that exist within our world. For example, there are myths that discuss heaven and reincarnation, two topics that Campbell defines as metaphors, not actual, physical things. He says, "The myth puts you there all the time, gives you a line to connect with that mystery which you are" (68). Myth connects us with the archetypes that occur within nature, such as the serpent in religious stories, and give us a way to connect the stories of the past with the lives we live today. Through myth, we find a way to accept the unknown. Myth gives a reason and origin for many of the ideas we do not understand (such as the myth of Pandora, originating sin within the world). Although we must recognize that these stories are not entirely true, but just a metaphor, we are still presented with a story that gives us an idea of where these unknown aspects of life came from.
One of my favorite lines in the interview is a quote from the Chinese Tao-te Ching: "He who thinks he knows, doesn't know. He who knows that he doesn't know, knows. For in this context, to know is not to know. And not to know is to know" (65). This quote represents what I believe is Campbell's central argument; we must accept the unknown graciously, accept the fact that there are so many aspects of life that we are not meant to understand. The journey of life is to live it for all it is worth, not to dissect it: "the hero's sphere of action is not the transcendent but here, now" (82).
I think that Joseph Campbell would disagree with the idea that "myth gives a reason and origin for many of the ideas we do not understand (such as the myth of Pandora, originating sin within the world".
ReplyDeleteI think that Campbell views the purpose of mythology as something much greater than providing an explanation for things we do not understand.
When Bill Moyers presents the traditional view of mythology, which is that myths serve to answer questions, he asks Campbell, “Weren’t [the writers of myths] asking, for example, who made the world? How the world was made? Why was the world made? Aren’t these the questions that these creation stories are trying to address” (62)? Campbell rejects such a possibility because he thinks that myths have a more important function than explaining the world around us. He argues that through the answers that myths provide, people “see that the creator is present in the whole world” (62). The realization “that God is the creation, and that you are the creature” allows people to experience a deeper level of spirituality and a divinity that is especially personal. Campbell’s main point is that the function of myths is to “realize that god is within you” (62). Myths speak to the “deep mystery of yourself and everything else” (45). They show us that “heaven and hell are within us, and all the gods are within us” (46). All humans share similar expectations, problems, and aspirations, which are communicated by mythology. Campbell states, “if we look inward, we see that we are the source of them all” (47).
Campbell believes that there is an overarching “mystery of life” that “is beyond all human conception” (57). It is an unknowable concept about life that transcends human thought. “The ultimate word in our English language for that which is transcendent is God” (58). God is an idea that can never fully be comprehended. It transcends our basic ideas of duality and opposites. “And myth is that field of reference to what is absolutely transcendent” (58). But specifically Campbell argues that myths let people experience what is transcendent by showing them that it lies within them. Myths allow people to experience the “journey inward”. It is a journey into an inner space that “is the source of all things” and “that which transcends all thought”. By communicating the primal and universal ideas of man, myths enable people to experience “the kingdom of heaven within” (68).
When we “subscribe to one of these myths”, “we are looking for a way of experiencing the world that will open to us the transcendent that informs it… we are looking for some accord with the mystery that informs all things” (61). The one great story of mythology is “to be in accord with the grand symphony that the world is, to put the harmony of our own body in accord with that harmony” (65). The universe is incredibly mysterious and awe inspiring. Myths, which communicate the stories of this universe, attempt to bring our spirituality to the same level as the grandeur of the universe. They show us that we can share the beauty of the world. That we are gods.
One of the problems with the Christian religion is that “we cannot identify with Jesus, we have to imitate Jesus. To say, ‘I and the father are one,’ as Jesus said, is blasphemy for us” (69). Campbell does not support a religion where people are not allowed to feel sacred. He states that instead of focusing on all of the sins people commit during a week, the church should as people to “identify your notion of yourself with the positive, rather than the negative” (66). Indeed, one of the aspects about Catholicism of which Campbell approves is the consumption of the body and blood of Jesus. It allows people to “turn inward, and have Christ working within them” (74). Just like the function of myths, the consumption of the Eucharist allows people to feel truly sacred. It gives them the feeling that they are as important as a god.
Mike mentioned a quote is his response that I think summarizes Campbell's main argument: "myth is that field of reference to what is absolutely transcendent” (58). Moyers asks Campbell “what do you think we are looking for when we subscribe to one of these myths?” (61) to which Campbell responds, “I think what we are looking for is a way of experiencing the world that will open to us the transcendent that informs it, and at the same time forms ourselves within it” (61). In this way, mythology represents man’s search “to have some kind of instruction that will enable us to experience the divine presence” (61) not only outward in “the grand symphony that this world is” (65), but also inward in “the plane of consciousness where you can identify yourself with that which transcends pairs of opposites” (56).
ReplyDeleteMyth is an attempt to identify the “metaphysical dualities” that exist in the world (58), which Campbell identifies to be “everything in the field of time and space is dual” (ex. right and wrong, male and female, god and man). To transcend is to move beyond these dualities both in the world and within, where opposites do not exist and everything is the same-- heaven and hell, man and god, yes and no-- all the same. There is no separation, “your enemy, for example, is simply the other side of what you would see as yourself if you could see from the position of the middle” (65).
However, this is not within the human ability whilst we exist in the “temporal world”. Thus myth is “in the form not of words but of acts and adventures, which connote something transcendent of the action here, so that you always feel in accord with the universal being” (65). Campbell feels that attempt to capture “images” that are metaphors “beyond even the concept of reality” (68). They employ metaphors such as “reincarnation “ or “heaven” where greater ideals are expressed. For example, Campbell believes that reincarnation “suggests that you are more than you think are. There are dimensions of your being and a potential for realization and consciousness that are not included in your concept of yourself” (70). Myths, in a sense, incite man’s desire to reach transcendence. It represents “the spectacle of the human imagination groping to try to understand this existence, to invest in their small journey these transcendent possibilities” (65).
Campbell emphasizes the “small journey” of humans to make the point that it is not possible for us to “transcend”. It is “the ultimate thing (which is no thing) that we are trying to get in touch with is not so enclosed. We enclose it as we try to think of it” (75). Ultimately, humans “senses are enclosed in the field of time and space, and our minds are enclosed in a frame of categories of thought” (75). However, myth is the way that we try to comprehend. If we cannot think of it directly, as we are limited by thought, the symbolic and metaphoric nature of myth allows us to think at it from the side (indirectly). It is the way in which human can grasp the wisps of transcendence, the language of myth provides imagery that gets at the edges of “eternity…[the] dimension of here and now that all thinking in temporal terms cuts off” (84).
Those of you who have already posted have done a very thorough job explaining some of the most important elements of the interview. I think one of the things that makes Campbell so interesting is that he's simultaneously confident in his authority on mythology and questioning of the ways that "we" have always interpreted religion.
ReplyDeleteTo those of you who have not posted, and may be looking to go in a direction other than that which your classmates have already taken, consider something Mike brings up in his post: the notion of "mystery of life". How, if at all, does this resonate an idea (even the specific language) of The Road?
I know that the question I posed is one about Campbell's argument, but as the night wears on and our collective analysis of Campbell's responses to Moyer's questions becomes increasingly thorough, it may be difficult to find new things to say, and so, you might think about the following:
1. In what ways is the "transcendent" spirituality that Campbell talks about apparent in The Road? Where, when, or in whom, specifically?
2. Is The Road an American myth? Why or why not? Whose (Campbell's, yours?) definition of myth are you using in thinking about this question?
3. What is the point of thinking about The Road as mythology?
4. Think about the relationship between dreams and mythology as articulated by Campbell--how does this apply to The Road?
Dualities serve as a main function in life, as Joseph Campbell asserts in his interview regarding “The Journey Inward”. As Moyers poses to Campbell “Why do we think in terms of opposites” Campbell replies, “Because we can’t think otherwise” – opposites are what seem to bring life into perspective for humans, they serve to demystify reality and the “mystery of life” (Campbell/Moyers 57). Myths themselves help us to make sense of dualities in life. As one particular myth has asserted “Heaven and hell are within us” but how can that be? How can both these places be a part of the human psyche? The answer, although not perfectly clear, is as Campbell discusses “Myth is a manifestation in symbolic images, in metaphorical images, of the energies of organs of the body in conflict with each other” (46). Campbell’s argument seems to be based off of these conflicting ideas, that life in all of its eternity will be filled with ideas that are in conflict with one another, but he affirms at the end of his argument that “the experience of eternity right here and now, in all things, whether though of as good or as evil, is the function of life” (85). This is very much similar to something that Emma was discussing. She stated that “we must accept the unknown graciously” and I believe that is true, as do I believe that Campbell would think that was true as well. We must accept what we do not comprehend, accept those confusing dualities to just be a part of life. I also feel, though, that in order for this ‘journey inward’ to occur an individual must be aware of the manifestations of contradicting ideas that are within themselves. Agreeing with Emma, it is important to accept good and evil, but furthermore as Campbell suggests one must “feel a sense of wonder at the spectacle of the human imagination groping to try to understand this existence” (65). This quote is one I believe Chelsea explored in her response. I thought it was interesting what Chelsea brought up in her sentiment “To transcend is to move beyond these dualities both in the world and within, where opposites do not exist and everything is the same—heaven and hell…” so as I was discussing above one must transcend the mere thought that dualities exist, but so not to contradict myself, accept these dualities as a part of life too.
ReplyDeleteNow in the midst of my writing this response I noticed that Ms. Parrish posed some other questions for those who have yet to post (me). So switching my idea so as not to keep blabbing and repeating what has already been said, I am going to discuss a little bit about The Road as I deem it as an American myth. The purpose of myth as Campbell describes as “the black moment is the moment when the real message of transformation is going to come. At the darkest moment comes the light” (46). That speaks greatly to the entire novel—at the darkest moment (in my opinion) in the novel when the man leaves the boy in total darkness or rather alone on the road, wonderful, good and kind people come wandering up the road behind him. As the father and son traveled the road and their lives were filled with darkness, they never saw any lingering signs of ‘light’. There were the few times such as when they found the room filled with canned food that had not been contaminated and were able to stay there, sleep in beds and were warm, but it did not last, the light could not last. That is why when the total and complete darkness came for the boy, when he was left alone, that finally stable light came to find him, the good people who were ‘carrying the fire’ as well.
One really interesting question that Ms.Parrish brought up, was the relationship between mythology and dreams. Campbell classifies dreams as being "base on a body of experiences that have a significance in your life and that you didnt know were influencing you."
ReplyDeleteThis specifically corralates with myths, as they often make an impression on ordinary lives, without us even recognizing their impact.
Myths often are what instill universal morals and virtues,that impact society just as much as they impact the indiviual. An example of this, is the establisment of religion. In Ancient Egyptian and Greek mythology, which originates long before the idea of Christ, comes the concept of worship. The Greeks and Egyptians worshiped the sun, the moon, and all other natural occurances that were associated with goodness, and prosperity. This idea of worship is rooted in our own culture, eventhough it has been altered ovvertime. And although we may not "worship" the sun, it is still a universal symbol of prosperity and goodness. Perhaps most symbols that work their way into modern culture originate from myths.
As myths come from a universal "public" experience, dreams are "a personal experience" that embed into your subconcious, and teach us about our selves, just as myths teach us about our culture.
But how else is "A myth different than a dream?" Campbell asserts that "If your private myth, your dream, happens to coincide with that of the society, you are in good accord with your group. If it isnt, you've got an adventure in the dark forest ahead of you." And if your dreams are "in accord with the public mythology, [you're] more likey to live healthily in that society" (48). In the society potrayed in The Road, civilization is scarse, and the world is dark and cold. However the father's dreams do not coincide with his society, as he rejects the world as it is, and repeatedly dreams of the old world. This further prevents him from living "healthily in society," and Campbell asserts that the consequence for this, is "[becoming] neurotic" (48). Campbell goes on to state that when one has descended into neuroticism, "They've moved out of the society that would have protected them, and into the dark forest, and into the world of fire..." (49). Interestingly enough, the characters in The Road, already to literally seem live in this world of neurotism, as they travel a col, dark world, where everything is scortched by fire. The paradox, is that when they dream about a world of normalicy, free of neurotics, (as it was in the old world) they end up facing a much darker place that arises from their psyche. The private myth, can lead to downfall, as it torments the characters with memories of a society that might never exist again, and the characters fall "farther and farther out of step" with the society that has come to be.
As many of you have said before me, Joseph Campbell asserts in his argument that "myth is that field of reference to what is absolutely transcendent"(58). He emphasizes the human instinct to label and find explanations for concepts such as "God," however, he moves beyond that point by explaining that "God," whatever that may be, has no explanation. Campbell quotes Eckhart and says, "the ultimate and highest leave-taking is leaving God for God, leaving your notion of God for an experience of what which transcends all notions"(56-57). Furthermore, Campbell asserts that in being spiritual or having belief in some higher power, one must not be influenced by the experiences of others, but rather, attempt at experiencing God in a personal manner.
ReplyDeleteIn Cormac McCarthy's The Road, the boy establishes his own notion of what God is and what he can provide through his own experience. Throughout the novel, the boy refers to himself and his father as those who are "carrying the fire." I understood this phrase to not only have symbolic meaning to the story itself, but also be an embodiment of the boy's belief in some sort of higher power. At the end of the story when the father is at his last hours of life, the boy questions "Is it real? The fire?" and the father answers, "Yes it is," to which the boy questions further, "Where is it? I don't know where it is"(McCarthy 278). The father answers by saying, "Yes you do. It's inside you. It was always there. I can see it"(McCarthy 279). It is interesting that the boy continuously uses this phrase to motivate and assist him in his struggle for survival, and yet proceeds to question the validity of that exact concept. I believe that this is exactly what Campbell is saying in his interview; religion or spirituality is not something that can be named for it is all things, it is the center for human life to thrive off of. The boy himself questions his understanding of his own spirituality because he cannot define it himself, however, he is able to transcend into a state where he doesn't need a definition of what "carrying the fire" really is, or where it is, or why he is carrying it. The only thing he needs to move forward with his journey is to believe.
To go off in a different direction, I think that another main point that Campbell asserts in his argument is that all human experience is a similar one. He draws ties between different myths in different religions and is able to locate where in these myths that the central ideas and morals are the same. For example, Campbell equalizes a line from Genesis 2:"Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done..." to a myth from the Pima Indians: "I make the world and lo, the world is finished. Thus I make the world, and lo! The world is finished"(51). In drawing similarities between different religions, Campbell emphasizes that "the human psyche is essentially the same all over the world. The psyche is the inward experience of the human body, which is essentially the same in all human beings, with the same organs, the same instincts, the same impulses, the same conflicts, the same fears"(60). Campbell is stating that every human experiences the same types of feelings and obstacles because we are all humans; we share the same desire to understand the unknown and to define what cannot be defined.
I think that Claire's point about the darkest point in the novel is very interesting to consider. Campbell's idea that "at the bottom of the abyss comes the voice of salvation" is very interesting in that it suggests that total destruction and elimination is necessary for complete understanding. Moreover, this message lends a new perspective to the Man and the Boy's constant search for light in the post-apocalyptic world. Frequently, the man leaves his son in order to look out over the hills or roads that they are staying on, searching for any bit of light, "looking for anything of color. Any movement. Any trace of standing smoke" (Campbell 21). At the darkest of times comes the deepest desire to find the light, the "real message of transformation" (46).
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the idea of light in the darkness alludes to the constant burning of fire in the background of The Road. Fire is feared by the Man and the Boy (as when they are in the mountains seeing the fire consume the last of the woods and when they see the destruction caused by people caught in a freak fire storm on the road), but fire is also revered as something inherent to the good. Although the burning could be interpreted as a constant tension, a reminder of the struggle between good and evil, the fire serves as an obvious source of light.
The symbol of fire itself can be interpreted in two ways. First, fire is destructive. Everything it touches it consumes, destructing it. At the same time, once it has consumed everything in front of it, fire wanes away, suggesting a frailty in fire. Additionally, fire serves as a source of warmth for the Man and the Boy in The Road, and serves as a distinguishing characteristic for the good and the bad in the novel. The idea of "carrying the fire", perhaps, relates to Campbell's idea of "light" at the darkest possible moment. In a world devoid of safety, comfort, and freedom, light itself has become a volatile version of its previous self. The transformation from a gentle source of light into an unpredictable source of destruction and creation parallels the idea of the transformation of man from civilization to having the capability of great good while also total destruction.
The idea of the transformation of light through the apocalypse might also allude to the idea of The Road as a myth. However, what is interesting is that this is not apparently a myth of creation so much as it is one of destruction. Ms. Parrish asked if The Road could be interpreted as an "American Myth", but I do not think it can be interpreted on the same plane as the creation stories and myths that Campbell discusses in the interview. Campbell says at one point in the interview that "one of the main problems of mythology is reconciling the mind to the brutal precondition of all life, which lives by the killing and eating of others" (50). In this sense of the word "myth", the road absolutely qualifies as an American myth. However, if you take a closer look at Campbell's previous assertion that myths "help you read the messages" about "the deep mystery of yourself and everything else", then I do not know if The Road can be held to the same standard as texts such as the Bible or other religious texts.
Campbell says, "The best things can't be told because they transcend thought" (57). This is one of many of his main ideas in this interview. He later goes on to say, "myth is that field of reference to what is absolutely transcendent" (58). According to him "transcendent means to 'transcend,' to go past duality" and these myths ("manifestation in symbolic images") that many people believe in, like God "are within us" (46). These Gods, or religious ideas are present in us at all times, so in a way they transcend thought. No one believes that someone is actually within them, yet they will believe that there is a man in the sky watching down on them. "The mystery of life is beyond all human conception" (57). It is almost impossible to accept things that are unimaginable. To transcend into this field of reference one must take a journey inward, so in doing this they find themselves, but also God. He obviously is not actually in you, but Campbell assumes we realize this. "You turn inward, and there Christ is working within you" (74). The most challenging part though is not making the journey inward, but the journey outward because if no one makes that journey "we'd all be a bunch of babies still in Eden, without any participation in life" (54). In The Road the son transcends into himself and finds the fire and at first he is reluctant to believe, "Is it real? The fire?" (278). He is not sure, but in the end he is able to make the journey outward because he finally accepts that he has this fire within him. This fire can be an archetypal image for the Son of God, or religion, or any type of symbol. So Campbell says that not only is God on of these myths, we, ourselves, are also one. We must identify with ourselves, transcend into our own being and face whatever it is. But as he says, "the best things can'y be told"
ReplyDeleteAnother point that Campbell makes is that "we cannot identify with Jesus, we have to imitate Jesus" (69). The son in The Road does exactly this. He is the one that is carrying the fire, the one that will save the world. He is sent by his father to continue all life, which is what God did with Jesus. The son is living in a world where religion is the least of their worries. They do not commonly refer to religion and if they do, they do not praise it. In the novel, the boy almost acts like Jesus throughout. "You're not the one who has to worry about everything.
The boy said something but he couldn't understand him. What? He said.
He looked up, his wet and grimy face. Yes I am, he said. I am the one" (200). He takes on the qualities of Jesus, he imitates him in order to understand these myths because "He who drinks from my mouth will become as I am, and I shall be he" (69). Even though this is a very low point for the father and the son,"at the darkest moment comes the light." The boy is able to journey inward and outward from himself. He transcends myth and goes past duality. He does not see the bad in anyone anymore, even though he calls them the bad guys. For him there are no dualities. In the world he is living in, he becomes a myth.
I would like to go off of what Celi and Rebecca discussed about the relationship between dreams and myth. I had just rewrote an entire new response but accidently pressed tab which erased everything, so I apologize for not continuing the thought process of later comments. Also, my page numbers for The Road quotes are strange locations because I had used a kindle to read the novel, and it did not provide legitimate page numbers.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Campbell, "myth is a manifestation in symbolic images, in metaphorical images, of the energies of the organs of the body in conflict with each other" (46). Being said that the myth is intended to serve the conflicting organs of the body, it is suggested that myth satisfies the desires of the collective human. Dreams, on the other hand, are private myths "that have some kind of significance in your life and that you didn't know were influencing you" (48). While many dreams are dissembled as myths, they are, in fact, intended to enlighten the individual, which is far different than the collective. According to Campbell, the relationship between dreams and myth is one in which "the myth is the public dream and the dream is the private myth" (48). That being said, myths must be relatable to every individual because they are the public dream, and dreams must give metaphoric or symbolic knowledge to individual struggle.
In The Road, dreams and myths play very important roles. The novel itself appears to be very myth-like, with its setting in a strange, mutated post apolocalyptic world which is gray, ashy, murky, and haunted by death and endless fire. The fact that neither the man nor the son has a stated name furthers the idea that the book is, indeed, a myth, since it strays from individualizing too much. Dreams in the novel prove to comply with Campbell's theory as well. One night, the boy wakes from a dream where he "had this penguin that you wound up and it would waddle and flap its flippers. And we were in that house we used to live in and it came around the corner but nobody had wound it up and it was really scary...The winder wasnt turning" (location 428). When the boy told his dream to his father, there was little reaction. This is likely because the father could not make sense of a penguin toy, however, to the boy, it was a metaphor for his perserverance to find the coast and to survive the harsh, dangerous conditions when death is so prominent. The boy feared the scariest part, the fact that "the winder wasnt turning", or that there would be nobody left to keep winding him up and pushing him through the hardships. Additionally, like in myths, the father is "visited in a dream of creatures of a kind he'd never seen before" (location 1888). Masked in a very myth-like appearence, the dream followed the description of dreams according to Campbell.
While reading I recognized a familiar idea, similar to that of Schaub's essay. Both Schaub and Campbell discuss the idea of "meaning without embodiment". The philosophy that something can have symbolic importance without physically being present.
ReplyDeleteCampbell claims that "Heaven and Hell are within us, and all the gods are within us" (46). As they are "magnified dreams". To many religious folk, Heaven, Hell, and God are extremely important to their spiritual lives. However following Schaub's response to the road, heaven, hell, and god are not physically inside a person however spiritually Campbell believes that they are in fact "dreams". Therefore meaning is possible without embodiment. Furthermore he claims "God is thought. God is name. God is an idea" (57). Clearly thoughts, names, and ideas are not physically present however they hold importance and therefore though God is not physically there, he is still meaningful without actually being embodied. Therefore God's gender is unimportant as a physical God is too not necessary; therefore God spiritually is very meaningful but physically can be perceived to not be present. Throughout main passages of the interviews Campbell continues to argue that "God is within you", therefore in The Road, when the father questions Ely if God exists, and he responds no, the father is correct when questioning: "No?” for one God may not be present but for others like the father and son, God like the fire, continues to thrive within them.
Many of Campbell's ideas allude to aspects of The Road. When Campbell discusses gender roles and the roles of women, I automatically connected the ideas to the plot of The Road. Campbell claims that mothers are ones source, further he states that "we are separated from out source" (63). The boy is separated from his mother, his "source", as she is unable to survive in the post-apocalyptic world and ultimately kills herself. He, like the archetype that Campbell discusses is separated from his source and struggles with the task of reuniting "that broken cord".
Both the ideas of "meaning without embodiment, and separation from ones source, are extremely coherent in not only Schaub's essay, but in The Road as well. Therefore it is interesting to explore the ways in which McCarthy chose to play with archetypal ideas, in such an unorthodox setting.
On Mike’s “Mystery of Life”:
ReplyDeleteThe ocean, for the man and the boy in The Road is the final destination. They look to as it as if it is the afterlife- it could be heaven or hell but what is most important to them it that it is after, what they think will be the end to the life they currently live. However, Campbell asserts that there is no literal place that puts an end to what Mike calls the “overarching mystery”. “The person who thinks he has found the ultimate truth is wrong” says Campbell since the solution the man and the boy search for is “inward” (65, 68). The ocean is no different than anywhere else on The Road.
Campbell probably would have approved of McCarthy’s ending. If the man and the boy had reached the ocean and they found people and civilization and ”unending delight” they would forget what they had experienced (85). Because what they had experienced was eternity- “the dimension of here and now”(84). They never reach some promised land because “This is it”, one cannot expect to reach anything beyond it, because “what you are living is but a fractional inkling of what is really within you”(70,87). “Your life is much deeper and broader than you conceive it to be” and anyone has the potential at any moment to reach inward (70).
It is terrifying to think of eternity, of the “deep mystery” that is the same yet different for us all. It “smashes all your fixed notions of things” in a manner “tremendous, terrific” (45). However, it is the answer “ to our nature, our being” and no matter how it haunts us it remains in a way “utterly fascinating” (45). We need to be scared of what the future holds and we need to acknowledge its mystery or we can only be disappointed. When we see the light in the future and we think we are sure of our future happiness it is the “darkest moment” within our lives. The man in The Road is well aware of this, he knows hope is lost when he chooses to live within his dreams rather than reality. His dreams may be beautiful but they hold no paradise, he must acknowledge life’s mysteries and try to find peace within himself.
(This reminds me a lot of “A Stop at Willoughby” which is a really old, really creepy Twilight Zone episode I saw in a marathon once if any of you guys ever saw that)
I apologize for posting at such a weird time but I typed up almost my whole thing last night when i exited out of the window by accident and lost everything. I'm just going to re-type what I had to say last night.
ReplyDeleteOf course it is impossible to ignore the ideas of spirituality and myth that Campbell hits upon throughout this entire essay my attention was drawn to something that Claire mentioned in the beginning of her response which is duality. Campbell seems to be very intrigued by the idea of two. "Out of one comes two", (56) is one of the first things he says on the matter and is the basis of his idea that two is eternally trying to return to one. "The gods then split them all in two. But after they had been split apart, all they could think of to do was to embrace each other again in order to reconstitute the original units", (64) Campbell explains, and while they try to regain this oneness they use two different types of "explanations" and "myths". The way in which this two struggling to be one idea relates back to spirituality is on page 58 when Campbell says God transcends duality, meaning he is one. Now Campbell sees regaining oneness as a waste of time considering how similar the two (male and female) actually are, but these two end up using myth to bring themselves closer to God and we see this when Campbell discusses "civilizations being grounded in myth" (72) and religion being the second womb on page 66.
To bring this closer to the Road and address one of ms. Parrish's questions I was going to talk about that transcendent spirit. While I don't see the man and boy embodying the duo Campbell talks about seeing as it is usually male and female or something else unfitting, I do see them trying to achieve the same thing. As I earlier refereed to Campbell believes God transcends duality and the main two in The Road are still trying to join in him in this. Through the much talked about "carrying the fire" I see the characters trying to keep alive the oneness of the human family.
Interestingly, though Connor does not directly refer to Amanda's post, and Amanda does not specifically use the word "rebirth," both of you are addressing the notions of rebirth and resurrection. Water is generally (archetypally) considered to be a symbol of rebirth, and yet, as Amanda points out, it is not the solution to all the problems of the world. Is it still a source of cleansing? What in the texts supports either that it is or that it is not? Does the idea of dualities play into the way in which McCarthy inverts a lot of symbols--water, fire, death (or maybe "inverts" is not as accurate as uses contradicting?)
ReplyDeleteOther notes: Claire and Rosie both do a great job of getting to the Abyss. Biblically, The Abyss is often located in the story of Jonah and the Whale. Sometimes Campbell even refers to the abyss as "the belly of the whale"--man's darkest, most hopeless hour just before revelation and atonement.
Rosie brings up another point about myth--is The Road "sweeping" enough to be a myth? Or is it infused with mythic elements? What is required of something, beyond "transcendence" (if that's even possible to define) for it to be a myth? Rosie's question (and subsequent assertion) reminds me of the classical definition of an epic--that it must meet four requirements: 1. long 2. involves a hero 3. employs an invocation of the gods/muses and finally, deals with a crucial moment in natonal identity.
Finally, Liz's focus on "meaning without embodiment" is really astute. Think about this, not only in the context of spirituatity and The Road, but in the use of metaphor in literature in general (which seems to be how Campbell classifies/understands religious texts and myths).
Great job on this post, everyone.
AP