Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Star Wars as Mythopoeic art

Expand Messages
  • FrMacKen@xxx.xxx
    Ted and Jim, Although I see what you mean, the fact of the matter is that every movie has to made to sell. Star Wars is a bit of an action movie and as such,
    Message 1 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      Ted and Jim,
      Although I see what you mean, the fact of the matter is that every
      movie has to made to sell. Star Wars is a bit of an action movie and as such,
      needs some action and certain "Hollywood" pizazz or the studios won't buy it.
      Even though book publishers are looking for the next best sellers, they are
      far less demanding on the content of a book than studios are of movies. Who
      could foresee how good Star Wars could be if Lucas had no demands from the
      studios? I'm sure as legendary as he is, he still had problems with studio
      heads getting all his ideas to film.
      I am not putting down Star Wars at all. However (You just knew that
      was coming!), painting a picture on canvas is much easier than describing it.
      Looking foward to anyone's reply for or against me. Differences when
      aired in an intelligent forum are good for the healthy mind.
      Ron
    • Stolzi@xxx.xxx
      So, Ted, what do you think of the criticism that by introducing in PHANTOM MENACE the microscopic blood particles (?) which make a Jedi, Lucas has made the
      Message 2 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        So, Ted, what do you think of the criticism that by introducing in PHANTOM
        MENACE the microscopic blood particles (?) which make a Jedi, Lucas has made
        the Force material and changed its spiritual aspects as known to us in the
        earlier film/s?

        Mary S
      • Matthew Winslow
        ... The Force itself is still immaterial. The midichlorians allow one to manipulate/use the Force. That would seem to me to keep the Force as spiritual
        Message 3 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
        • 0 Attachment
          Stolzi@... [Stolzi@...] wrote:
          > So, Ted, what do you think of the criticism that by introducing in PHANTOM
          > MENACE the microscopic blood particles (?) which make a Jedi, Lucas has made
          > the Force material and changed its spiritual aspects as known to us in the
          > earlier film/s?

          The Force itself is still immaterial. The midichlorians <sp?> allow one to
          manipulate/use the Force.

          That would seem to me to keep the Force as spiritual as ever: it's still the
          energy binding all life, but now it's only certain bits of life that get to
          partake of that great Force. (Gosh, that sounds Calvinist <g>.) Of course, in
          the original trilogy, some were 'strong' in the Force, so now we know *why*
          they are, but there's still a lot of mysticism left.

          --
          Matthew Winslow mwinslow@... http://x-real.firinn.org/
          "No passion in the world is equal to the passion to alter someone else's
          draft."
          --H.G. Wells
          Currently reading: The Death of Adam by Marilynne Robinson
        • Jim Bohannon
          ... And books aren t??? Even Tolkein & Lewis & Dickens wrote for money, and they had to put out something that the market would pay to see/read. Blessings,
          Message 4 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
          • 0 Attachment
            > From: FrMacKen@...
            >
            > Ted and Jim,
            > Although I see what you mean, the fact of the matter is that every
            > movie has to made to sell.

            And books aren't??? Even Tolkein & Lewis & Dickens wrote for money, and
            they had to put out something that "the market" would pay to see/read.

            Blessings,
            Jim
          • Jim Bohannon
            ... Mary, I m not Ted, but I ll take this one. This is a pretty strong allusion to the incarnation story in Christianity. In Christianity, God, who is
            Message 5 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
            • 0 Attachment
              Stolzi@... wrote:
              >
              > From: Stolzi@...
              >
              > So, Ted, what do you think of the criticism that by introducing in PHANTOM
              > MENACE the microscopic blood particles (?) which make a Jedi, Lucas has made
              > the Force material and changed its spiritual aspects as known to us in the
              > earlier film/s?
              >
              > Mary S
              >


              Mary,

              I'm not Ted, but I'll take this one. This is a pretty strong allusion
              to the incarnation story in Christianity. In Christianity, God, who is
              Spirit, becomes incarate (takes on flesh) in the form of Jesus Christ.
              In Christianity this is looked at as the strongest evidence of the love
              of the Creator for the creature. Through the incarnation God identifies
              with the plight of humanity and all creation.

              In Phantom Menace, George Lucas weaves in an astonishing variety of
              world mythical and religious tradition!

              Blessings,
              Jim (who, by the way, is a Christian minister)
            • Ted Sherman
              Ron, How can I disagree with anything you ve written? You re correct on all counts. Tolkien similarly had to deal with editors and publishers (Rayner Unwin)
              Message 6 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
              • 0 Attachment
                Ron,

                How can I disagree with anything you've written? You're correct on all counts.
                Tolkien similarly had to deal with editors and publishers (Rayner Unwin) who were
                interested in not only a good story, but also in how much money the story would
                make for the firm. No publisher agrees to publish a work if they think the work
                will not sell. Remember, Tolkien wanted to publish TLOR as one book, but it was
                the publisher who suggest (required/demanded) the book be divided. Was that
                decision made for aesthetic reasons or because of the production costs associated
                with such a hefty volume? Or was there perhaps a marketing idea involved that by
                issuing the book in three volumes, the publisher would create a "captive
                audience" that would keep coming back for more?

                Both film creators/directors/producers and authors are hindered and obstructed
                when they attempt to manifest their works. And the same holds for all other
                artistic or creative endeavors. While still in our minds, the works we create are
                perfect and flawless, but in the transition from pure thought and image to very
                limited words on pages or images (concocted by actors interpreting words on
                pages) on screens, those works get muddied. That's why painters are never (or
                almost never at least) satisfied with their works. It's also why authors revise
                and edit ad infinitum. Dorothy Sayers' The Mind of the Maker has much to say on
                this (and similar) issues.

                Thanks for keeping me on my toes and for making me think about some things I've
                not thought of in a while.

                Ted
              • Ted Sherman
                Mary, Great question. Let me attempt an answer by referring to a recent discovery/announcement that Einstein s brain physically differs from ordinary brains.
                Message 7 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
                • 0 Attachment
                  Mary,

                  Great question. Let me attempt an answer by referring to a recent
                  discovery/announcement that Einstein's brain physically differs from ordinary
                  brains. One part of it, if my memory is correct, is larger than usual. So, does
                  this physical anomaly account for Einstein's genius and his ability to come up
                  with theories that still defy scientists (and that are gradually being proven
                  true)?

                  I thought the testing of young Anakin's blood for the midichlorians (sp?) was
                  an interesting twist. We learn that the presence (or lack thereof) of these
                  organisms in the blood affects one's ability to feel and use the Force. Young
                  Anakin, we are told, has a higher reading than even Yoda, who, it is implied,
                  has the highest level recorded.

                  Thus, the midichlorians aren't the source of the Force, but they are what allows
                  one to use the Force. In essence, they are like the red fast-twitch muscle
                  fibers that allow certain people (my brother for instance) to be sprinters, or
                  the white (?) slow-twitch muscle fibers that allow others (like me) to be
                  distance runners. Luke obviously has a high midichlorian count, but I would bet
                  Han Solo does not.

                  None of this undercuts the spiritual/mytstical quality of the Force or of
                  Lucas's vision. The vision is not Christian, per se, though it does incorporate
                  Christian elements, just as it incorporates elements of other religious
                  traditions.

                  Yours,

                  Ted

                  Stolzi@... wrote:

                  > From: Stolzi@...
                  >
                  > So, Ted, what do you think of the criticism that by introducing in PHANTOM
                  > MENACE the microscopic blood particles (?) which make a Jedi, Lucas has made
                  > the Force material and changed its spiritual aspects as known to us in the
                  > earlier film/s?
                  >
                  > Mary S
                  >
                  > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
                  >
                  > We must be crazy! We're practically giving our books away! Doubleday
                  > Book Club� offers the best sellers and more! Get 5 books for just $.99
                  > + 1 free with membership! Go to http://www.onelist.com/ad/doubleday8
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  > The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
                • WendellWag@xxx.xxx
                  In a message dated 6/23/99 6:21:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, FrMacKen@aol.com ... studio ... If you re talking about _The Phantom Menace_ here, then Lucas
                  Message 8 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
                  • 0 Attachment
                    In a message dated 6/23/99 6:21:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, FrMacKen@...
                    writes:

                    > Who could foresee how good Star Wars could be if Lucas had no demands from
                    > the studios? I'm sure as legendary as he is, he still had problems with
                    studio
                    > heads getting all his ideas to film.

                    If you're talking about _The Phantom Menace_ here, then Lucas didn't have to
                    worry about any demands from the studios. The movie cost $120 million and
                    George Lucas put up every cent of it himself. It was of course distributed
                    by a studio, but no one other than Lucas had any say in the making of it.

                    Wendell Wagner
                  • Diane Baker
                    ... It was a real clunker if you re writing myth. The Force needs no explanation. It simply IS. ---djb.
                    Message 9 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Stolzi@... wrote:
                      >
                      > So, Ted, what do you think of the criticism that by introducing in PHANTOM MENACE the microscopic blood particles (?) which make a Jedi, Lucas has made
                      > the Force material and changed its spiritual aspects as known to us in the
                      > earlier film/s?
                      >
                      > Mary S
                      >
                      It was a real clunker if you're writing myth. The Force needs no
                      explanation. It simply IS. ---djb.
                    • FrMacKen@xxx.xxx
                      Ted, Wendell, and Jim, I was referring to the first Star Wars film. Here is something to ponder: Filmmakers have images to portray their ideas, whereas writers
                      Message 10 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Ted, Wendell, and Jim,
                        I was referring to the first Star Wars film. Here is something to
                        ponder: Filmmakers have images to portray their ideas, whereas writers use
                        mere words to invoke their ideas. After all, a picture is worth a thousand
                        words.
                        Yours in creative discussion,
                        Ron
                      • Jim Bohannon
                        Ron, You are absolutely right. And as we discussed, the media are different. I for one am rather partial to words. There is a richness in imagery crafted in
                        Message 11 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Ron,

                          You are absolutely right. And as we discussed, the media are
                          different. I for one am rather partial to words. There is a richness
                          in imagery crafted in words that visual images can't attain. Words also
                          offer a depth of enrichment for the soul that is, in my opinion,
                          unreachable by even the most gifted film producers.

                          Yes, a picture is worth a thousand words, but I think you will agree, we
                          can chew on the words and digest them slowly. In the long run, they may
                          be more nourishing than the images. Still, as a visual artist, I can
                          still appreciate the unique and wonder-filled gift of being mesmerized
                          by a painting, a sculpture, a movie image, or even a cartoon.

                          I don't think there has to be a battle over which is superior. It is
                          all of them working in harmony that makes the world sing. I want you to
                          know, Ron, I always appreciate your input.

                          Wishing you peace,
                          Jim

                          FrMacKen@... wrote:
                          >
                          > From: FrMacKen@...
                          >
                          > Ted, Wendell, and Jim,
                          > I was referring to the first Star Wars film. Here is something to
                          > ponder: Filmmakers have images to portray their ideas, whereas writers use
                          > mere words to invoke their ideas. After all, a picture is worth a thousand
                          > words.
                          > Yours in creative discussion,
                          > Ron
                          >
                        • FrMacKen@xxx.xxx
                          Jim, I think that this would be a rather boring world if everyone agreed on everything. I think that opinions, when stated thoughtfully, can stimulate the
                          Message 12 of 29 , Jun 23, 1999
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Jim,
                            I think that this would be a rather boring world if everyone agreed
                            on everything. I think that opinions, when stated thoughtfully, can stimulate
                            the mind. I am glad that no one was offended by my opinion.
                            Pax Vobiscum,
                            Ron
                          • Matthew Winslow
                            ... I d like to point out that the virgin birth idea (or rather, the God impregnating a woman idea -- which is what TPM is more likely, since we don t know
                            Message 13 of 29 , Jun 24, 1999
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Jim Bohannon [bohannon@...] wrote:
                              > I'm not Ted, but I'll take this one. This is a pretty strong allusion
                              > to the incarnation story in Christianity. In Christianity, God, who is
                              > Spirit, becomes incarate (takes on flesh) in the form of Jesus Christ.
                              > In Christianity this is looked at as the strongest evidence of the love
                              > of the Creator for the creature. Through the incarnation God identifies
                              > with the plight of humanity and all creation.
                              >
                              > In Phantom Menace, George Lucas weaves in an astonishing variety of
                              > world mythical and religious tradition!

                              I'd like to point out that the virgin birth idea (or rather, the God
                              impregnating a woman idea -- which is what TPM is more likely, since we don't
                              know that Shmi had not experienced, um, 'carnal knowledge' of a man) is common
                              to many world religion and myth systems besides Christianity. Since Lucas is
                              following Campbell's idea of the hero, this would seem to point less to a
                              Christian reference (after all, if we say it's a Christian reference, then we
                              would have to follow to the conclusion that Lucas is saying Vader is Christ)
                              than to a mythological reference.

                              (And, btw, I'm also a Christian.)

                              --
                              Matthew Winslow mwinslow@... http://x-real.firinn.org/
                              "A man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't
                              read them."
                              --Mark Twain
                              Currently reading: The Death of Adam by Marilynne Robinson
                            • Diane Baker
                              ... You may have a point; if you watch the films in the order of the six episodes, you see some of the difficulties of starting out a project, and without 2
                              Message 14 of 29 , Jun 24, 1999
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Ted Sherman wrote:
                                >
                                > From: Ted Sherman <beohilde@...>
                                >
                                > Star Wars (all the films) are very mythopoeic, if one takes them in their
                                > entirety. The newest installment, though panned by many/most critics as not
                                > being up to the calibre of the earlier films, fits right in with the earlier
                                > films and begins to set the context for them. That, of course, is one of the
                                > reasons for the film's being panned.

                                You may have a point; if you watch the films in the order of the six
                                episodes, you see some of the difficulties of starting out a project,
                                and without 2 and 3, we don't have the whole tale.

                                > Another is the thesis of the film: that there's a wicked trade federation that the > noble Jedi warriors must combat. [snip] . . . Lucas uses the trade dispute
                                > issue to set up the reasons for the fall of the republic and the setting up of the > empire.

                                I tumbled to this one, and had no problems with the story being about a
                                trade dispute, once I gave it a moment's thought. I admit my first
                                reaction was negative, but then I thought: "Well, of course; what
                                better way to show a political system than to show how they deal with a
                                trade dispute?"

                                One of the major complaints I have about the Trek universe is that they
                                often create stories without any reference to a viable and working
                                economy (except when it's convenient, and you're working with the
                                Ferrengi characters). JRRT does not make this mistake in LOTR; you get
                                the idea that there's a real economic and political set-up in Middle
                                Earth. You needn't do a lecture on economics, but in the background,
                                one has to feel that some commodities are valuable, and that the
                                majority of the inhabitants of your mythical worlds have jobs and
                                perform services of some sort. One quibble I had: it would have been
                                nice to see a scene in which we get a glimpse of the average inhabitant
                                of Naboo, and have some sense of how the blockade affects them. (BTW,
                                Naboo was not a name I would have chosen! Are the inhabitants
                                "Nabooki," "Naboos," "Naboosians," or something else entirely?)

                                > In my fantasy lit courses, I regularly refer to Star Wars because I know the
                                > students will understand the connection between, say, Gandalf and Obi Wan, or
                                > Shea Ohmsford and Luke.

                                I'm afraid I don't remember who Shea Ohmsford is. I take it he's a
                                young quester, but in which book does he appear? Wait a minute. Isn't
                                that the hero of *Sword of Shanara?* I seem to remember that name
                                before I threw the book across the room. When I cane across the name
                                of Alanon the wizard, I said "That's it." THUNK! Do you use *this* in
                                your fantasy lit course? Say it ain't so! (Or is my memory playing
                                tricks again? A situation very likely.) ---djb.
                              • Diane Baker
                                ... Now, the question is, what s serious art? That s a can of worms we would have a hard time getting out of if we open it. The fact that we *need* another
                                Message 15 of 29 , Jun 24, 1999
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  FrMacKen@... wrote:
                                  > I doubt if Star Wars can be called serious art. Star Wars is our futile attempt at > forging our own myth. Ah, that is another problem in our society. However that is > not for this time or place to discuss.

                                  Now, the question is, "what's serious art?" That's a can of worms we
                                  would have a hard time getting out of if we open it. The fact that we
                                  *need* another mythology (however thin) is a sad statement. For me the
                                  traditional Christian one works just fine, and the SW myth takes a lot
                                  from it (along with other religious and spiritual elements.) Yet
                                  another can of worms!

                                  > P.S. Diane: Ron ydw i.
                                  > Rdwy'n dsygu Cymraeg tipyn bach.
                                  > (I think that is how it's spelled)
                                  >
                                  The Welsh looks right to me, and I can say the same thing, with the
                                  accent on "tipyn bach." ---djb.
                                • Ted Sherman
                                  ... The question why we need another mythology is very powerful. Why have the old myths failed (if they have) and how can new myths replace them??? The
                                  Message 16 of 29 , Jun 24, 1999
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Diane Baker wrote:

                                    > From: Diane Baker <dianejoy@...>
                                    > Now, the question is, "what's serious art?" That's a can of worms we
                                    > would have a hard time getting out of if we open it. The fact that we
                                    > *need* another mythology (however thin) is a sad statement. For me the
                                    > traditional Christian one works just fine, and the SW myth takes a lot
                                    > from it (along with other religious and spiritual elements.) Yet
                                    > another can of worms!
                                    >

                                    The question why we need another mythology is very powerful. Why have the old myths failed (if they have) and how can new myths replace them??? The popularity of the SW films, of Tolkien's (and the other
                                    Inklings') works, and of fantasy lit in general all attest to the power of myth (and mythopoeic artistic endeavors) to move people, to offer hope to the hopeless, to brighten and enliven dark and deadened lives.
                                    But how does these works accomplish these things? Moreover, Diane mentioned the need of myth in our lives--why do we need it? What function or purpose does myth (and the mythopoeic arts) serve, especially at the
                                    end of this millenium and the beginning of the next? Hmmmmm.

                                    I have been asked to guest edit an issue of Mythlore for this fall, so I am requesting article submissions on the works of Lewis, Tolkien, and Williams, but also on other mythopoeic writers and artists: G.
                                    MacDonald, Susan Cooper, Philip Pullman, Terry Brooks, RE Klein, Stephen Donaldson, George Lucas (just to stir things up a bit), etc. I'd like to focus this issue around the theme(s) I've raised above. What is the
                                    value of these authors' and artists' works for our everyday lives, for our inner selves, our perspectives on and understandings of the world around us? In short, what is the value of their mythopoeic art in our
                                    society (or societies for those living outside the US) today? What does the popularity of these authors' works say about our need for myth?

                                    Please send hardcopy submissions to:

                                    Professor Theodore Sherman
                                    Box X041
                                    Middle Tennessee State University
                                    Murfreesboro, TN 37132

                                    Or you may email your submission (in either plain ASCII/text format or as Word 97 or WordPerfect or Microsoft Works for Windows formats) to me at the following two addresses:

                                    tsherman@...
                                    beohilde@...

                                    Please note that my home email address will change tomorrow (Friday afternoon), when I switch to a cable internet connection and change ISPs.

                                    Yours,

                                    Ted
                                  • Ted Sherman
                                    ... Yes, Shea Ohmsford is the protagonist in The Sword of Shannara, which I do teach in my fantasy lit courses. I use it because of the wonderful twist at the
                                    Message 17 of 29 , Jun 24, 1999
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Diane Baker wrote:

                                      > FI'm afraid I don't remember who Shea Ohmsford is. I take it he's a
                                      > young quester, but in which book does he appear? Wait a minute. Isn't
                                      > that the hero of *Sword of Shanara?* I seem to remember that name
                                      > before I threw the book across the room. When I cane across the name
                                      > of Alanon the wizard, I said "That's it." THUNK! Do you use *this* in
                                      > your fantasy lit course? Say it ain't so! (Or is my memory playing
                                      > tricks again? A situation very likely.) ---djb.

                                      Yes, Shea Ohmsford is the protagonist in The Sword of Shannara, which I do teach in my fantasy lit courses. I use it because of the wonderful twist at the end of the
                                      story (involving the true power of the sword), and also because it's a wonderful book to use in discussing intertextuality. Brooks' world is our world after a nuclear
                                      catastrophe, and there's all sorts of political intrigue that one can easily see is borne out of the period in which Brooks was writing the novel (early-mid 70s).The
                                      intertextuality part involves comparing the figures in TSOS with those in TLOR. There's almost, but not quite, a one-to-one correspondence between the nine walkers in
                                      TLOR and the band that eventually go in search of the Sword in TSOS. I've not read any of Brooks' other works though.

                                      One final note: another great (or at least very good and believeable) mythopoeic writer is Stephen Lawhead, whose Song of Albion trilogy is, I think, a great story
                                      and a wonderful conglomeration of Celtic materials. His Athurian sequence ain't bad either, though I almost prefer Jack Whyte's no-nonsense (meaning no magic and
                                      mysticism) Chronicles of Camulod series.

                                      Ted
                                    • FrMacKen@xxx.xxx
                                      Diane, I understand your feelings about Star Trek, although the Next Generation was an excellent series. And yes, they did discuss monetary matters aside from
                                      Message 18 of 29 , Jun 24, 1999
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Diane,
                                        I understand your feelings about Star Trek, although the Next
                                        Generation was an excellent series. And yes, they did discuss monetary
                                        matters aside from the Ferengi society. I happen to think that Star Trek: The
                                        Next Generation was one of the best television shows in it's day. (Can it be
                                        five years since that show went off the air?)
                                        I do not believe that even my beloved Star Trek came remotely close
                                        to Tolkien's world. My feeling that Star Trek was akin to a morality play set
                                        in the future. The best episodes were character driven and often exposed
                                        certain faults (i.e. the episode after Picard was returned to the Enterprise
                                        after being held by the Borg. That episode exposed Picard's fear at his
                                        inability to control his situation..one of my favourite episodes).
                                        It was not as grand as the Star Wars myth, but remember: without Star
                                        Trek, there would be no Star Wars.
                                        Yours truly,
                                        Ron
                                      • FrMacKen@xxx.xxx
                                        Diane, I fear that I didn t state myself clearly. This society is much too preoccupied with financial concerns to care about the fanciful. It is deemed a waste
                                        Message 19 of 29 , Jun 24, 1999
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Diane,
                                          I fear that I didn't state myself clearly. This society is much too
                                          preoccupied with financial concerns to care about the fanciful. It is deemed
                                          a waste of time. All but select few (such as us) explore our imagination and
                                          let it take us whither it will. We as a country only have time for myth if it
                                          is on television or the movies. I really believe that the act of storytelling
                                          (from whence myths began) is a lost art. I think that is one of our ills
                                          today. We don't take time to read or read to our children. Instead we set our
                                          children in front of a television set or a video game and leave them alone.
                                          Does that stimulate their minds? I think not. And as good as Star Wars is, it
                                          is not as good as reading a book; letting the author take our imaginations on
                                          a wonderful trip, forcing our minds to create images out of mere words.
                                          Ah, but there is another can of worms.
                                          Ron
                                        • Diane Baker
                                          ... OK, I can accept that. I ve never quite had the stomach to return to Brooks. I just had this vision of Alanon the wizard getting up before a small group
                                          Message 20 of 29 , Jun 24, 1999
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Ted Sherman wrote:
                                            >
                                            > From: Ted Sherman <beohilde@...>
                                            >
                                            > Diane Baker wrote:
                                            >
                                            > > I'm afraid I don't remember who Shea Ohmsford is. I take it he's a
                                            > > young quester, but in which book does he appear? Wait a minute. Isn't
                                            > > that the hero of *Sword of Shanara?* I seem to remember that name
                                            > > before I threw the book across the room. When I cane across the name
                                            > > of Alanon the wizard, I said "That's it." THUNK! Do you use *this* in
                                            > > your fantasy lit course? Say it ain't so! (Or is my memory playing
                                            > > tricks again? A situation very likely.) ---djb.
                                            >
                                            > Yes, Shea Ohmsford is the protagonist in The Sword of Shannara, which I do teach in my fantasy lit courses. I use it because of the wonderful twist at the end of the
                                            > story (involving the true power of the sword), and also because it's a wonderful book to use in discussing intertextuality. Brooks' world is our world after a nuclear catastrophe, and there's all sorts of political intrigue that one can easily see is borne out of the period in which Brooks was writing the novel (early-mid 70s).The intertextuality part involves comparing the figures in TSOS with those in TLOR. There's almost, but not quite, a one-to-one correspondence between the nine walkers in TLOR and the band that eventually go in search of the Sword in TSOS. I've not read any of Brooks' other works though.

                                            OK, I can accept that. I've never quite had the stomach to return to
                                            Brooks. I just had this vision of Alanon the wizard getting up before a
                                            small group and saying, "Hello. My name is Alanon and I'm a wizard
                                            alcoholic." Figured a writer that careless with names can't be too
                                            great, and every time I came across that name, I'd snicker instead of
                                            getting into the meat of the story. And with fantasy, that wizard
                                            usually sticks around until at least a third of the way through the
                                            book. I've had other people tell me that they like the function of the
                                            sword, and that Brooks does have some interesting points. Maybe I'll
                                            have to give him a second chance.

                                            > One final note: another great (or at least very good and believeable) mythopoeic > writer is Stephen Lawhead, whose Song of Albion trilogy is, I think, a great story
                                            > and a wonderful conglomeration of Celtic materials. His Athurian sequence ain't > bad either, though I almost prefer Jack Whyte's no-nonsense (meaning no magic and
                                            > mysticism) Chronicles of Camulod series.

                                            Ohhh, yeah! I like Lawhead fine. He does very careful work, and knows
                                            his Celtic mythology. Have you seen his *Byzantium?* And yes, I have
                                            *all* of Jack Whyte's *Chronicles of Camulod* series. Excellent. I've
                                            enjoyed it greatly. ---djb
                                          • Diane Baker
                                            ... I agree; I love Trek; please don t get me wrong. ... Absolutely right. It s more like a morality play than epic or myth. The best episodes were character
                                            Message 21 of 29 , Jun 24, 1999
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              FrMacKen@... wrote:
                                              >
                                              > From: FrMacKen@...
                                              >

                                              > I happen to think that Star Trek: The
                                              > Next Generation was one of the best television shows in it's day. (Can it be five years since that show went off the air?)

                                              I agree; I love Trek; please don't get me wrong.
                                              >I do not believe that even my beloved Star Trek came remotely close
                                              > to Tolkien's world. My feeling that Star Trek was akin to a morality play set in the future.

                                              Absolutely right. It's more like a morality play than epic or myth.

                                              The best episodes were character driven and often exposed certain faults
                                              (i.e. the episode after Picard was returned to the Enterprise after
                                              being held by the Borg. That episode exposed Picard's fear at his
                                              inability to control his situation..one of my favourite episodes).

                                              Another agreement; no quarrel here. That was a very good ep. Another
                                              fave was the one where he was held prisoner by the Cardies. I also
                                              liked a good number of Deep Space Nine eps.

                                              > It was not as grand as the Star Wars myth, but remember: > without Star Trek, there would be no Star Wars.

                                              And without Trek, there'd probably be no 2001 or other great SF films.
                                              My only point is that there were some economic holes in some of the
                                              tales. ---djb.
                                            • Paul F. Labaki
                                              The Inklings (I think correctly) would likely have taken the position that we have our own mythology; for Christians, the names and stories can be found in a
                                              Message 22 of 29 , Jun 27, 1999
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                The Inklings (I think correctly) would likely have taken the position that
                                                we have our own mythology; for Christians, the names and stories can be
                                                found in a book we call "The Bible." The fact that there are people who
                                                believe the mythology to be true and act accordingly does not invalidate its
                                                mythic nature.
                                                --
                                                Paul Labaki

                                                ----------

                                                >
                                                >> Star Wars is our futile attempt at forging our own myth.
                                                >
                                                > Thank God we are still making the attempt! Woe be unto us the day we
                                                > stop!
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > Respectfully,
                                                > Jim Bohannon
                                                > Milledgeville, Georgia
                                                > USA
                                                >
                                                > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
                                                >
                                                > The Literary Guild� offers you half off publishers' edition prices on
                                                > the books you love to read. Get 5 books for only $2 + 1 free with
                                                > membership. Go to http://www.onelist.com/ad/doubleday7
                                                >
                                                > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                > The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
                                              • Diane Baker
                                                ... I would certainly agree. Mythology does seem a bit tinged with the notion a story, which for the most part, should be disbelieved, but has to be
                                                Message 23 of 29 , Jun 28, 1999
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Paul F. Labaki wrote:
                                                  >
                                                  > From: "Paul F. Labaki" <sheik@...>
                                                  >
                                                  > The Inklings (I think correctly) would likely have taken the position that
                                                  > we have our own mythology; for Christians, the names and stories can be
                                                  > found in a book we call "The Bible." The fact that there are people who
                                                  > believe the mythology to be true and act accordingly does not invalidate its
                                                  > mythic nature.
                                                  > --
                                                  > Paul Labaki

                                                  I would certainly agree. "Mythology" does seem a bit tinged with the
                                                  notion "a story, which for the most part, should be disbelieved, but has
                                                  to be respected for PC's sake." I prefer the term "mythos." JRRT and
                                                  CSL do subscribe to this "mythos," of course! ---djb.
                                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.