Explore Mythology

[Sìle]

Author: Bob Trubshaw
ISBN: 1872833621

For anyone outside of academia who wishes to learn about myths and/or mythology this is an amazing introductory book with which to start. I am so glad I purchased this book and so upset that I didn't read it the moment it arrived. I could have saved myself an awful lot time, energy and misunderstanding.

The book should have been subtitled: "Explore and challenge your understanding of myth". I have never had to many of my personal ideas challenged and changed by one book! Like most people, I normally have an aversion to my beliefs and ideals being challenged; it can be disconcerting. Mr Trubshaw makes the whole experience enjoyable by allowing you to think. He doesn't say "this is how it is" or "this is how you do it", but, rather, have you considered looking at it from over here? In other words, he positively encourages you to step into the shoes of another, be they from the ancient past or living just across the border from you. I revelled in the experience, oft times speed-reading through the chapters as I immersed myself in Mr Trubshaws words, changing my thoughts as I went.

I did have to slow my reading down, though, as I felt I was missing some very important points. Never have I learned so much, so quickly from so little. As Mr Trubshaw explains, once or twice, this book could have been so much larger; the range of topics could have been so much broader. As it is, this is a lovely little taster that will have you begging for more. Luckily, Mr Trubshaw has provided an extensive bibliography so the reader can follow up any of the ideas explored in the book. He also has a wonderful website dedicated to folklore, mythology, cultural studies and related disciplines - foamy custard.

Having read all but the last chapter (will finish it tonight), I now understand why I was having so much difficulty reading various myths from other cultures - I forgot that my mind was shaped by the cultural myths of the westernised society in which I live. Thanks to Mr Trubshaw, I can approach matters of time, sacred places, mindscapes, liminal space and my own cultural bias from hitherto unknown angles. I actually have a way of gaining insight into the meaning behind the myths of Ireland, Scotland and the rest of Britain, whereas I had previously been struggling to gain even a toe hold.

I would encourage everyone to read this book and explore the foamy custard website. Why? So much of what Bob Trubshaw writes is relevant to day-to-day living. Having an understanding of the nature of politics, religion, the media, and the society in which we live and how these shape our personal myths, regardless of whether we live in a secular society or not, can enrich our understanding of our own values and, I believe, improve our quality of life.

Take the time to read this book. Although it can be used as a reference for all sorts of studies, it is probably be best read cover-to-cover in the first instance. Its not a hard book to read - Mr Trubshaw having simplified complex ideas so the reader may gain a tentative footing before embarking on an intense exploration.

I will certainly be looking at other titles by Bob Trubshaw, including his Explore Folklore. Oh, and if you do find this book refreshingly different and exciting, check out other titles published by Heart of Albion Press.

[Blackbird]

Sounds like a good one!

I've got several of Bob's other books - the one on landscape is very good too. (Actually, they're all very good and he's also a great speaker. I remember way back when I was a baby pagan, his mate had a bookshop in my town and I would spend far too much time just listening to the two of them, soaking in lots of fascinating information) I've also got Jeremy Harte's book on Fairy lore from the 'Explore' series, another brilliant and informative read.

I agree that to understand a culture, you have to understand the worldview first. Language is a great way to get into the mindset - the way in which words and phrases are used is really important to understanding.

Great book review btw

[Heron]

It seems to me that the problem with these post-modernist approaches to religion generally, is that they devalue the idea of the gods as real entities and see everything in terms of socially constructed 'reality'. Indeed, the logical conclusion of such ways of thinking is that Nature itself is simply a social construction and cannot have any ultimate reality ascribed to it.

This is important, so let me outline the basis of my thinking here: If the gods are real, having their existence outside of our experience of them, then the way we 'construct' them and our socially conditioned relationship to them, may or may not be adequate, may or may not meet them and their needs as well as ours, may or may not exist at all. But the gods will still exist. If, on the other hand, we create the gods by socially constructing them, or if they are psychological archetypes from which we generate cultural stereotypes, then they only exist in the way that, say, the idea of a 'celebrity' exists. Real enough, of course, in the world of 'celeb' celebrating culture, but ultimately an ephemeral cultural product with no more substance than that.

The effects of such an approach, then, is to turn the gods into fashion accessories. In origin, these sorts of approaches were ways of assessing the cultural practices of other cultures by the sophisticated anthropologists of the 'civilised' world. So if we look at a tribal culture and come to the judgement that they are constructing certain rites as cultural practices to maintain social cohesion, that may not matter much as the analysis is ours and they know what they are doing and why they are doing on their own terms separate from this analysis. But if we apply it to our own social practice of religion, then we are as good as saying to ourselves "this isn't real but I'm going to share the idea with others that it is". In other words, if we 'deconstruct' myths in this way, any reconstruction can only ever involve temporary structures. There is no building to last any more. And reality slips from our grasp.

Take another example. Western anthropologists have often been keen to discuss shamanism in terms of the observation that shamans may bring on their shamanistic trance by the use of hallucinogenic drugs. From here the implication is that its the drugs that make them see the spirits and have the experience of travelling to other realms. Even where this is not the main emphasis, shamanism is seen essentially as a psychological state. It is never considererd that there might be anything real about the experiences the shaman has or the spirits that are contacted. But if the shaman thought like this, and the people he served regarded him like this, the social cohesion argument would fall apart. So how can we regard our own practices in this way?

Is this the way we want to view religious experience? True it then becomes easy to 'make sense' of it to others, to justify what we do and what we appear to believe, in terms of social strategies or alternative lifestyles. But isn't it all a bit like lying to ourselves in public? I would like to suggest that unless we can regard the gods as real rather than as 'ways of thinking' then we might as well forget serious religion and start campaigning for pagan soap operas.

[Deleted]

I didn't realise he had a website! Thanks for the link.

At the moment I am reading his book on Black Dogs which is very good, as soon as I have finished it I will post up a review if you like as there is information on black dogs in british folklore.

[Sìle]

Heron,

Perhaps I am a bit thick, but does you post relate to the review I posted?

Regards,
Webwitch

[Heron]

webwitch said:

Heron,

Perhaps I am a bit thick, but does you post relate to the review I posted?

Regards,
Webwitch

It constitutes my thoughts on the ideas put forward on the 'foamy custard' website you gave a link to.

[Sìle]

heron said:

webwitch said:

It constitutes my thoughts on the ideas put forward on the 'foamy custard' website you gave a link to.

The whole website or one particular article?

[Heron]

webwitch said:

heron said:

webwitch said:

It constitutes my thoughts on the ideas put forward on the 'foamy custard' website you gave a link to.

The whole website or one particular article?

The premise that it is the way we think about things rather than the way they are that defines reality is one particular aspect of the site's approach, but one which characterises the general post-modernist theories which lie behind much of what is there. I thought it was important to challenge that idea and, indeed, that whole approach. I think it is important that we understand the implications of what, on the surface, can seem like attractive ideas.

[littleraven]

webwitch said:

So, are you going to respond to all the articles listed on the site?

I don't think that you can reasonably, honestly expect Heron to do something like that.

What Heron has expressed is a problem with the approach that seems prevalent throughout the foamy custard site, the psychological approach to religion/mythology. What this does is internalise the experience of deity so that it becomes a creation of the individual mind, and projects this onto external experience. This is *extremely* problematic if you profess a polytheistic worldview, where deity exists independently, outside of us.

If you accept the analytical concepts behind the site you are in danger of creating a 'cognitive dissonance' within your spiritual understandings. There exists within you two opposing, contradictory beliefs on the same subject. This is eventually quite destructive.

[Sìle]

littleraven said:

webwitch said:

So, are you going to respond to all the articles listed on the site?

I don't think that you can reasonably, honestly expect Heron to do something like that.

What Heron has expressed is a problem with the approach that seems prevalent throughout the foamy custard site, the psychological approach to religion/mythology. What this does is internalise the experience of deity so that it becomes a creation of the individual mind, and projects this onto external experience. This is *extremely* problematic if you profess a polytheistic worldview, where deity exists independently, outside of us.

Okay, I thought I had deleted that post in its entirety last night. I must that that I did not take away from the book/site that which you and Heron did. What I understood was that this was one approach of several that one can use when looking at myths.

I guess different people read different things, depending on how they think.

[Heron]

webwitch said:

littleraven said:

I guess different people read different things, depending on how they think.

Yes but it's important to know what we think and look beyond what might be attractive on the surface and see the deeper problems of 'cognitive dissonance' as LR succinctly puts it.

What I'd hoped to do by my original post was stimulate some discussion which would have drawn out the implications of thinking about religion in this way as it's not always obvious when such views are first encountered.

It's a debate we need to have and I thought your pointer to that site was a good opportunity to begin to define how we relate to the gods. We should all be thinking clearly about that. If we then differ we at least know what approaches exist across the list and how we can relate to each other. If people don't define their positions it is, of course, easier to live comfortably with each other, but difficult to know what basis there is to do anything significant.

[redraven]

Excellent review WW, hadn't heard of this guy, have read some of the site, will read more later.
I think rather than hijack what is essentially a library review, some of the points raised would be better dealt with on a separate thread, so I am going to create one with How we relate to our Gods.

RR