Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.94 AVERAGE
3.94 AVERAGE
I found the parts about the structure of stories very interesting. I found the parts mapping these back to psychological theories less so.
I've heard this book referenced a lot when listening to people breaking down what makes a good story vs a bad story. So I thought I give it a shot.
It was a lecture with great examples that I recognize. Unfortunately my mind would wander so I'd have to restart the chapter so I would catch what I would miss. That is my pitfall.
He went over Greek, norse and other basic myths that came about to start the classic heroes tale of the call to action.
Great book but I might need to get a physical copy so I can make some notes.
It was a lecture with great examples that I recognize. Unfortunately my mind would wander so I'd have to restart the chapter so I would catch what I would miss. That is my pitfall.
He went over Greek, norse and other basic myths that came about to start the classic heroes tale of the call to action.
Great book but I might need to get a physical copy so I can make some notes.
I'm really glad this book was a requirement in one of my college courses. Discussions were always interesting with this title. Another strong book of mythology, definitely worth reading.
This book was really good, but it failed to keep me into it because of my lack of mythological & religious knowledge. I may revisit this book in the future though.
I can see how this book changes people. This was my first read through, I plan to reread soon and take notes. I probably won't review it here, but I honestly believe that anyone with an interest in mythology, religion, literature, or storytelling should read this at least once.
This is not a long book, but it is a thick one. It ranges from being extremely fascinating and full of wonder to academic and hard to follow. The book was written in the 40s when Freud was still all the rage, but taken now, some of the psychoanalysis feels as some of the stories. Because sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar and a hero facing a dragon is just drama.
One cannot help but wonder how selective Campbell can also be when choosing his stories to make his points. There’s time when he points to similarities between a myth and a contemporary (at least for that time) person’s dream without explaining the connection. Leaving me wonder if I missed something.
Overall, however, Campbell is charming and his enthusiasm for stories and cultures just leap off the page. It’s hard not to get caught up in much of it, but it can get hard to slog through some of the more dense sections. One thing for sure, one cannot walk away from this book thinking about how the monomyth ties into all the stories we consume today and how someone might look at all of our story telling a thousand years from now.
One cannot help but wonder how selective Campbell can also be when choosing his stories to make his points. There’s time when he points to similarities between a myth and a contemporary (at least for that time) person’s dream without explaining the connection. Leaving me wonder if I missed something.
Overall, however, Campbell is charming and his enthusiasm for stories and cultures just leap off the page. It’s hard not to get caught up in much of it, but it can get hard to slog through some of the more dense sections. One thing for sure, one cannot walk away from this book thinking about how the monomyth ties into all the stories we consume today and how someone might look at all of our story telling a thousand years from now.
If you aren't an academic, this is primarily interesting because of the impact it's had on pop culture creators. Pretty much the only myth I can think of that convincingly maps onto all of this book is Star Wars, which was based on it. For most of the other mythologies, I just don't find it convincing. Campbell cherrypicks and stitches together examples that fit his theory and doesn't adequately explain why other myths diverge. This is unconvincing, and worse, dull. People encounter more situations in life than coming-of-age/heroic apotheosis narratives. Not everyone, indeed, hardly anyone, maps onto the archetypal hero narrative for more than a brief period of their lives. Viewing all stories as a way to make sense of either coming-of-age or reconciling oneself with death flattens the personalities of mythology, flattens cultural differences, and flattens life.
Additional complaints:
If my high school English and History teachers marked this up, it would be covered in red "Explain your quotes". Some paragraphs are composed literally just of quotes, with no lead-in or explanation. When quotes are linked to Campbell's overall point, he presents the mythological narratives as fact, without discussing the source or acknowledging that there could be different varieties of the myth that have different biases or goals.
SUPER SEXIST: Campbell pretty much thinks women are Magical Pixie Life Forces that only exist as wombs and prizes. It's really gross, I hated it, and he neglects my favorite parts of mythology in order to allow this argument to stand. Athena is mentioned once in the whole book, and only in the Table of Contents description of an illustration for the Jason myth. Campbell clearly didn't have the intellectual imagination or integrity to question how she challenged his interpretation of mythology.
Poor signposting and definition of basic terms: Throughout the book, Campbell fails to explain where his argument is going or why a piece of evidence is important. There's a lot of thesis-last writing where he explains where he was going with something after he goes through the whole argument. This is a level-one, "look, I'm fancy" rhetorical technique that typically gets drummed out of writers in freshman seminars because it is intellectually lazy and annoying as all hell to read. Campbell also waffles throughout the book about the basic way he wants to relate to mythology. Is it a manifestation of universal sub-conscious tensions? Is it somewhere between history and literature? Is it the result of an actual Force-like energy surging throughout the universe? Campbell doesn't really know.
I'm only giving this 2 points instead of 1 because Campbell does at least appear fairly widely-read, incorporating myths from well beyond the European tradition including Buddhism, Hinduism and North and South American native peoples. There were at least five myths I'd never found written out in longform before, and that was worthwhile. His reading of a lot of Buddhist myths seemed very off-base to me, but I can't criticize it because I'm not that widely read in Buddhist theology.
Additional complaints:
If my high school English and History teachers marked this up, it would be covered in red "Explain your quotes". Some paragraphs are composed literally just of quotes, with no lead-in or explanation. When quotes are linked to Campbell's overall point, he presents the mythological narratives as fact, without discussing the source or acknowledging that there could be different varieties of the myth that have different biases or goals.
SUPER SEXIST: Campbell pretty much thinks women are Magical Pixie Life Forces that only exist as wombs and prizes. It's really gross, I hated it, and he neglects my favorite parts of mythology in order to allow this argument to stand. Athena is mentioned once in the whole book, and only in the Table of Contents description of an illustration for the Jason myth. Campbell clearly didn't have the intellectual imagination or integrity to question how she challenged his interpretation of mythology.
Poor signposting and definition of basic terms: Throughout the book, Campbell fails to explain where his argument is going or why a piece of evidence is important. There's a lot of thesis-last writing where he explains where he was going with something after he goes through the whole argument. This is a level-one, "look, I'm fancy" rhetorical technique that typically gets drummed out of writers in freshman seminars because it is intellectually lazy and annoying as all hell to read. Campbell also waffles throughout the book about the basic way he wants to relate to mythology. Is it a manifestation of universal sub-conscious tensions? Is it somewhere between history and literature? Is it the result of an actual Force-like energy surging throughout the universe? Campbell doesn't really know.
I'm only giving this 2 points instead of 1 because Campbell does at least appear fairly widely-read, incorporating myths from well beyond the European tradition including Buddhism, Hinduism and North and South American native peoples. There were at least five myths I'd never found written out in longform before, and that was worthwhile. His reading of a lot of Buddhist myths seemed very off-base to me, but I can't criticize it because I'm not that widely read in Buddhist theology.
challenging
informative
mysterious
slow-paced
I enjoyed the mythology very much, however, I found large parts to be misogynistic (or, as a good friend pointed out, dated) with far too much emphasis on Freud's theories. I can see the application of these ideas as relevant to most literature.