NMR ISSUE 13

Astrological Forecast 13
Belief and Magic
Chiron Key to Higher Consciousness
Collective Integrity Conduits
Consummation of Joy
Demeter and Persephone
Editorial 13
I am She
Letters 13
Longhorn
Magick and the Law
Metaphysics of the Gulf War
Selenite
Tarot 101
The Adepts
The Channel
The Goddess Is…
The Oldest Magick
The Witch's Corner
Tower of Myth
Where are the Rituals

Articles
Authors
Rituals
Book Reviews
NMR Issues
NMR Covers

Tower of Myth

Scot Rhoads

Myths help to codify and communicate a society's structure. Without some form of myth, there is anarchy. Some (notably, the late Joseph Campbell) blame the increases we see in crime, delinquency and other manifestations of a crumbling society on our lack of myth. But, from another perspective, one can say that we have too many myths—what we lack is a mythic system."

This may seem a strange way of looking at our situation. But consider that myths reflect culture on a deep level. It is the reflection of that culture that allows people to internalize it, find their place within it and support it. But what reflects our culture?

Time originally incubated myth. Repeated stories in an oral tradition evolved into myths. Deep, culturally unifying features survived over the centuries. It was as if the people as a whole told the stories. Thousands of tellings gradually introduced universal ideas and filtered out the idiosyncratic. Stories evolved into dreams of the people," filled with images holding much hidden information about the culture.

Once a story permanently recorded, it is no longer a myth. Ancient myths would change with the culture, like an object floating down a stream with you. When you record a myth, you freeze it in time. This is like anchoring the floating object—it no longer moves with you. The myth is no longer part of your immediate cultural milieu. As you proceed, the myth recedes, like the object anchored in the stream. Your perspective on it changes; it can no longer fill its original function. It becomes a story. But other things can fill the function of myth.

Our new mythology springs from popularity. The tales that capture the collective mind of the culture are now the closest thing we have to myths. To be popular, a story must speak to a large segment of the population. In other words, it must treat a part of the mind that many share. The more people that share this part, the more basic, the more fundamental, this part of the mind must be. Anything that is tremendously popular, even nonfiction, is very likely addressing a very fundamental part of the culture.

Originally, history" was part of myth. The stories that survived and the forms they took also helped to provide the framework for the culture. History as a factual account" barely existed before the 19th century. In the Middle Ages, for instance, no one seemed to care (or even notice) when figures in biblical scenes were depicted in contemporary dress.

Now, people can get in serious trouble for not being as accurate as possible. Journalistic ethics demand that stories reflect the events that happened as much as possible and the character of the reporter as little as possible. This is destructive to the mythic process." Never the less, accurate" reporting can still become mythic." Mass communication now takes the place of time. Instead of looking at the traditional stories of a culture to divine its structure, you can look to a new kind of myth."

History, fiction and news have given our society a bottomless reservoir of stories. We have more information at our disposal than our ancestors could imagine. The stories that become popular, therefore, must be those that speak to us. This is true whether or not they are supposed to be entirely accurate, for accuracy is malleable. Some time ago, Custer was a hero, now he is a villain. Custer's Last Stand is still the same event, but historians focus on different aspects. How we choose to depict the battle—or rather, the depiction we choose—reflects a fundamental change in our society.

Back when Custer was the hero and the Indians in the media were all bad guys (except for a few collaborators like Tonto), these stories told people to feel negatively about Indians (excuse me, Native Americans). They told people how to feel about what Native Americans represented—aboriginals, heathens, those standing in the way of industrial progress, etc. Each story was, of course, the product of no more than a few individuals or of history," but their popularity changed their role from mere reporting or entertainment. Not only did they reflect a significant aspect of the culture, but also their pervasiveness made its mark in turn upon the culture—a positive feed back loop.

But Custer is now the villain. This new myth does not communicate the same message as the old. Ancient myths as changed slowly as their cultures. Rapid change in myths followed rapid changes in the culture—through defeat, natural disaster, the introduction of the horse, etc. But the comparatively fast and dramatic change of the Custer myth is common in our culture. Partly, this is because our society seems constantly to undergo dramatic change. It will not accept the kind of framework our ancestors had. On the other side of the coin, a mythic system usually provides a stable framework for a society. Our present myths cannot do this. There are too many conflicting myths and they change constantly—it is like trying to build on a foundation of water. Our myths cannot form a framework to stabilize our society.

Today's myths are so fluid because we now have a far more conscious role in choosing them—and vice versa. In an aboriginal tribe, the pool of knowledge is limited to the memory of a few individuals. Necessity limits that pool to those things that are advantageous to the group. Darwinian selection would push groups away from non-fitness-maximizing" myths or destroy the group. But this `direction' necessarily occurs on an unconscious level. It is on such a large scale that a conscious mind, limited to the experience of one lifetime, cannot grasp it.

The present pool of knowledge is so vast that one can find nearly any idea at any time. The salient myths are chosen by subconscious whim rather than subconscious necessity. Necessity demands a structure that serves the society, whim does not. Our culture is like an adolescent. Children need structure imposed on them to learn how to behave. Adults have this structure within them. Adolescents are in the difficult position of having the seeds of the structure within, without a fully developed conscious will to handle it properly.

Most in our culture seem to recognize a need for fundamental improvements—in drug abuse, law enforcement and education, for instance. Myth used to strongly influence these problem areas. As we abandon the old myths, we see the need for their structure. If we consider our new myths," we may be able to find a way to build a new structure.

Aboriginal cultures need a respect for nature in order to maintain a balance that will ensure their survival. One can find this attitude in Chief Seattle's famous speech. This respect figures strongly in myths, which depict brother animals, plants and rocks with Man as parts of a union in nature, for instance. Now we have Godzilla. Don't laugh—this myth warns us we are out of balance with nature and that this could destroy us. Godzilla can be as powerful a myth as any. But now, unlike the ancients, we can consciously choose our myths.

Many cultures tend naturally [some debate this] toward xenophobia. This survives today as racism. As a culture, we have chosen to reject this. We are consciously trying to eliminate it. Our myths reflect this. The popular black faced minstrel singers of the 19th century are now anathema. Racism as a menace is even a cliché now in the media. The myth has changed over the last couple centuries through the conscious choices of those in our society.

In a news or historical story, we should consider it as we normally do: how does this affect my life, what should I do about it, is this accurate, etc. But in addition, we should look at how the story speaks to our subconscious. This is as valid as any other criterion. Did George Washington have wooden teeth? No, they were ivory. From a strictly historical standpoint, we should reject this story. But this story also says that Washington was a `man of the people' in a way that this sentence, for instance, cannot. From a mythic standpoint, we may want to hang on to that story. Similarly, scholars have devoted remarkable energy into producing the most accurate version of the Bible, historically or translationally. These are interesting and significant standpoints, but the most important question will always be how does this version affect me. If you find that the Reader's Digest version does more for you than the King James version or the latest translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls, then let that be your Bible. Don't feel compelled to stick to a version you don't prefer, make your choice consciously.

When we recognize our ability to consciously choose the character of our society and the role that our modern myths" play. We, as creators and consumers, can do our part to shape our society to fit our desires. But, at this point, our culture has not recognized this consciously. Until we do, I suspect we will be unable to approach one important aspect of myth—that is what I call the mythic structure." This lack is the main thing that puts the quote marks around the term modern myths." Without a framework, these myths" can do only part of their job. They can instruct and shape attitudes, but they cannot provide a framework for a society because they lack focus.

Aboriginal myths carry a coherent code and set of attitudes. The confluence of so many ancient codes in America's Melting Pot, and the media's melting pot, has confused them all into a useless jumble. The conflicting codes erode one another, they all come tumbling down in what many see as the fall of Western civilization. But this need not be a collapse. The Tarot's Tower card depicts destruction in order to build better. We can consider our woes to be a selection process. We have a vast collection of regional myths and codes. We can now sort through them to choose those that will best suit our nascent global society.

I believe this is what we are doing. But we are not doing it consciously. It might not be much easier if we were, but I expect it would be faster and less painful. Through becoming aware of the new role that conscious choice makes in our lives—a role beyond the comprehension of our ancestors—we can build the best world that we can. Let us not only recognize the role of our modern myths," but create a structure that will allow them to function effectively.

The structure we create will have to allow as much freedom as possible. It would be counter productive to try to impose one strict code on the world, as the fundamentalists do. But it cannot be too weak, or it will be less effective than the League of Nations. It seems, though, that we are well on the way. Globally, people condemn aggression, even for a good cause." [Desert Storm is no exception: it was a powerful statement against aggression and everyone seemed to prefer to solve the problem nonviolently, though relatively few felt that this was plausible.] Another code is the equality of all adults, regardless of race, sex, disability, religion, politics, etc. One code is freedom—economic, social and political. A very important developing code is environmental. Then there are other more mundane" codes against stealing, murder, even drug abuse. These are the behaviors that the planet is deciding to universally condemn.

The codes" are awfully vague, when you compare them to the explicit taboos of the past. There is nothing to tell you not to eat pork or what clothes you must wear. Part of the code is that such things are now the realm of the individual, not the society. You cannot longer stone someone for parting his hair wrong. The code is deliberately vague and plastic—because it is nascent, and because it must include such a variety of people. It will never be the kind of rigid structure that served in the `childhood' of our species. It offers a great flexibility to the individual, and thus demands great responsibility. This must be the keystone of any new mythic system—individual responsibility.

Let us look at the myths we create and see how they fit on our new framework, for they will be helping to create it. When the mass media presents us with a story that fits into the structure we want, say, Yeah! I like that. When something unpleasant becomes tremendously popular, even when we choose to participate, say, No, this shall not be a part of our code." Batman may qualify as a potential negative myth. Do we want to support the idea of vigilantism as an acceptable part of our mythic structure? If we do not, we should recognize this. (But we should never feel guilty for enjoying a good flick.) As we focus on our conscious choices, we will build the structure our society desperately needs. This may not greatly affect the nature of mass media. It is unlikely that every product will take on a significant mythic quality (or try to). What will happen is that the process that now occurs will become conscious. We will notice when a myth" (even an ephemeral myth") fits into the structure we desire and supports it.

For the first time, individuals can consciously create society on its fundamental level. We need only look at what we are doing and think about our choices. Until recently, much of life was governed by the unconscious. We were at the mercy of any negative desire in the collective unconscious. Now we are passing through the upheaval that will teach us to consciously examine our thoughts, behaviors and rules of conduct, and choose the ones that best serve our highest desires. The human race is growing up.