On the animistic nature of story, song and poetry?

[Adam]

Heron and Rob have quite rightly supported the notion of a thread to explore the animistic nature of story, song and poetry.

I find myself quite comfortable with story etc as having an animistic nature (in the sense of awareness, understanding, personal identity, autonomy, and volition) though I do find that some of the mental states I approach when thinking in these terms seem, shall we say, unusual? Music, particularly, can approach me as a being who can be encountered, with my experience of being exposed to the music each time feeling like being re-introduced to a particular acquaintance.

Harvey refers to Hallowell's work in discussing Ojibwe story... it appears that the Ojibwe have a range of stories, some simple tales for the fireside, but others, seasonal tales, whose telling is bound up with ettiquette that indicates that such tales are regarded as living persons in Hallowell's sense. I think there are difficulties in generalising Hallowell's work since much of it is based on how the Ojibwe use grammatical distinctions to distinguish between the animate and the inanimate and it is dangerous to make assumptions about what this means, but in my own interpretation of animism, which is primarily experiential and relational, it makes perfect sense to understand some poems, songs and stories as having an identity of their own and a life that qualifies them as animate entities in their own right. Not least because some such, approached in the wrong way may be understood as taking the risk of offending them with adverse consequences to the relationship, which may be a teaching one or may serve some other purpose.

I'll ponder further as I have more time but I am interested in hearing what others may think...

[Heron]

I don't think there can be anything controversial in saying that "story has an animistic nature" or that understanding stories, songs etc as "having an identity of their own" on an "experiental and relational" basis. These are very much descriptors at the cultural level of our experience of something with a life of its own. We can say much the same of landscapes, natural features, woods, streams, even rocks in this sense without challenging - or being challenged by - scientific materialists except, perhaps, at the level of sensibility.

But if we are to go on from that and posit an interpretation of nature and natural objects as, in fact, subjects, both animated and autonomous, then we do invite such a challenge. Are you suggesting that story has autonomy in that sense? That seems to be the way the interesting way to go. Some novelists have said that characters in stories they are writing have come alive in the process and dictated the events of the novel. I've suggested that gods dictate their own stories. But taking it further and saying that the story itself has autonomous identity has greater implications. For instance, does Rigantona control her presentation as Rhiannon or do the Mabinogi stories themselves shape the way she is presented? And what of human agency as a directive role in this process?

[Adam]

Sept 20, 2010 21:59:20 GMT -1 Heron said:

But if we are to go on from that and posit an interpretation of nature and natural objects as, in fact, subjects, both animated and autonomous, then we do invite such a challenge. Are you suggesting that story has autonomy in that sense? That seems to be the way the interesting way to go. Some novelists have said that characters in stories they are writing have come alive in the process and dictated the events of the novel. I've suggested that gods dictate their own stories. But taking it further and saying that the story itself has autonomous identity has greater implications. For instance, does Rigantona control her presentation as Rhiannon or do the Mabinogi stories themselves shape the way she is presented? And what of human agency as a directive role in this process?

I am suggesting that story has autonomy in that sense. In terms of evidence, I can only really offer intuition, and the way in which my own world-view makes more sense and is fundamentally more elegant when I take on board such basic assumptions.

The nature of autonomous agency of story is interesting. It is my intuition that only some, not all stories exhibit this degree of autonomy, although it may be that only some stories exhibit this degree of autonomy *in their relationships to humans people and communities*. In the example you offer above, I do not know how much agency the stories have in their own presentation or shaping over time. Maybe not much. I think it much more likely that the stories have a degree of agency in how much or what they choose to confer on the listener of stories, and how they react to how they have been treated or approached. BUT, that said, the telling of a tale is a synergistic process involving the tale, the teller and the key characters and in that sense the shaping of the story and its presentation may well be directly influenced by the decisions of the story itself in collaboration with the teller and the key characters.

I do think that such a story, approached in disrespectful manner, treated badly, can withdraw the benefits it can choose to confer. I also think that songs, stories etc that exhibit this degree of autonomy partake in their own origination.

I'm not entirely sure I can offer much rigorous in support of these contentions, since they are fairly new to me. But having adopted or approached them, I find the nature of my relationship with song, story etc changing in ways that are pleasing to me.

[redraven]

Conan Doyle famously described Holmes as taking on a life that completely over-run Doyle's own life. I also seem to recall that he sometimes described his writing of the plots to be more of a story told by a witness as opposed to an imaginary tale. Interesting bearing in mind his public spirituality.

RR

[Lee]

eep!

not a lot to add to this, but stories, poems, myths can and do take on a life of their own in some ways and i guess could be seen to grow and evolve (part of me wants to throw in the concept of memes here but i shall resist. oh. shit.)

maybe i should rephrase the above - they appear to take on a life of their own - though whether that makes them alive in some sense or posses some sort of spirit is the kind of philosophical discussion that would go nowhere fast and make many heads ache,

[Adam]

Sept 22, 2010 9:56:34 GMT -1 Lee said:

eep!

not a lot to add to this, but stories, poems, myths can and do take on a life of their own in some ways and i guess could be seen to grow and evolve (part of me wants to throw in the concept of memes here but i shall resist. oh. shit.)

maybe i should rephrase the above - they appear to take on a life of their own - though whether that makes them alive in some sense or posses some sort of spirit is the kind of philosophical discussion that would go nowhere fast and make many heads ache,

Which is why I don't think you can divorce the idea from the "relational" or the "experiential". Ultimately, an animist position is nothing unless it involves behaviour. Unless it informs how one approaches that which is considered animate.

There is some interesting research around that supports the contention that our use of metaphor is, at least in some cases, actually a literal description of our subjective experience (an old assumption of NLP, but backed up by some investigations)... those situations when you are "left out in the cold" or "given the cold shoulder" do actually result in subjects assessing ambient temperature as being several degrees lower than control subjects for example. To describe the experience of being re-united with a story that you haven't encountered for many years as like being re-united with an old friend is, potentially, a true reflection of the experience, with all the emotional and psychological processes that that would entail.

And I am beginning to discover that if I approach the creation of a story or a poem on the basis that the poem or story will have the capacity to co-operate with me in its origination, the experience is utterly different to that of regarding myself as the sole originator.

So I agree... philosophising about whether the actual nature of story as an objective, external entity is animate in this sense is in danger of become 6th form philosophy about whether a table really exists (my 6th form response? Bash your head on it ) UNLESS said philosopher has the intellectual maturity to take it elsewhere, which I cannot claim to have. But all thinking around the subject of animism has to take into account the nature of the relationship we have with the entities we regard as animate. I am quite comfortable with the idea that the evidence for the plausibility of a belief may not present itself until after the belief is held, even if there must be some a posteriori evidence that the belief is worth holding.