Impact of Joseph Campbell on PostMo Journies?

[Born Free]

When I came across Joseph Campbell about 10 years ago, I found his approach to myth a breath of fresh air, and so in contrast with Mormonism's (fundy) literalism.

I am amazed at the number of people who have not heard of him or more accurately, have seen anything of substance by or about him. After speaking to an exMo friend yesterday who is teaching a unit on comparative religion under ancient history at year 12 in high school, I asked if she was familiar with his work. She wasn't.

I said that she might find him an interesting resource and one that might accelerate engagement with teenagers seeing how a new Star Wars movie is in the theatres here, and because of how much George Lucas was influenced by Campbell and he openly acknowledges that.

I originally saw some of The Power of Myth series on free-to-air TV here (Campbell was interviewed by Bill Moyers originally for PBS there), but missed some, so I went looking yesterday to see if the series was available, and sure enough, found this in the library at a local relaxation centre.

Has anyone else discovered Jospeh Campbell in the journey beyond Mormonism, and what was your response to his work?

Daryl

[helemon]

Has anyone else discovered Jospeh Campbell in the journey beyong Mormonism, and what was your response to his work?

Daryl

Yes I also watched his show during a PBS fund drive I think. Very interesting fellow. I don't know how much he contributed to my leaving Mormonism though.

[Born Free]

Yes I also watched his show during a PBS fund drive I think. Very interesting fellow. I don't know how much he contributed to my leaving Mormonism though.
Helemon,

I wasn't thinking of his work helping people leave, but I guess that is conceivable. I did not see that possibility as I didn't come across him until after I had left.

I guess my question is more targeting to whether Campbell helped people reframe their relationship with myth after leaving.

I love his expression: words cannot describe the most important things; people frequently misunderstand the things that point to the most important things.

Daryl

[free thinker]

Hey Daryl


I read The Power of Myth about seven years ago. It was a referral from a mormon lass. She was gorgeous by the way. As a TBM I found it interesting. I was the executive secretary at the time I read it. I may have to dig it out and go through it again.

I wonder now, why she gave it to me? I also wonder what she is up to now.

Cambell, I think, was a genious. Some of it was over my head at the time. I had a hard time grasping it. It seemed almost too esoteric for me!!

Saw Return of the Sith today!! Thought it was pretty good!!

Free Thinker

[Born Free]

Hey Daryl


I read The Power of Myth about seven years ago. It was a referral from a mormon lass. She was gorgeous by the way. As a TBM I found it interesting. I was the executive secretary at the time I read it. I may have to dig it out and go through it again.

I wonder now, why she gave it to me? I also wonder what she is up to now.

Cambell, I think, was a genious. Some of it was over my head at the time. I had a hard time grasping it. It seemed almost too esoteric for me!!

Saw Return of the Sith today!! Thought it was pretty good!!

Free Thinker

I got through about 1 1/2 of the 6 tapes yesterday. Give them a crack if you can get your hands on them.

His notion that the most powerful trascendental experiences cannot be described adequately in words or language is a very interesting concept.

Campbell is coming in for some criticism these days from some quaters, but I find his work has great value for me.

If my memory serves me well, I recall that Jacki Kennedy, during her time as a publisher, played an important role in getting the book published.

Daryl

[flotsam]

I actually came across Campbell while on my mission. It was a weird experience. I was doing the missionary thing, going from door to door peddling my book when a woman let us in. She was Romanian or something. But she sat and listened to us for a few minutes. Then she got excited and started talking about this book called "The Power of Myth." She read some of it to us. My companion was unimpressed, but I was an English major and was able to see what she was getting at.

Anyway, she told me, "I'll take your book, if you'll take mine."

"Cool, free book," I thought.

We never really saw her again, and the book went in my suitcase until I got home.

I got it out a few years later and got totally into it. Certainly more compelling than the book I exchanged for it ;) .

Also, being trained in writing, and especially screenwriting, I've had Campbell up the wazoo. A lot of story theorists use Hero With A Thousand Faces to explain the "monomyth" and its application to story structure. It was quite helpful when I encountered it.

But you're right. Campbell has something. He really does a good job of helping the reader see not just that our stories are myths, but that myths are kind of our lifeblood, and should therefore be taken seriously AND metaphorically. I like his idea that we need to study other people's myths because we can see them as myths, and can interpret them well. Our own myths are too close to us.

Darn tootin'.

[free thinker]

His notion that the most powerful trascendental experiences cannot be described adequately in words or language is a very interesting concept.

I like this a lot! I think I may have to revisit that book, or the tapes, and see what I can glean. I am sure that my perspective as a post-mormon will be much more expansive, and therefore I will probably learn more.

You know how it is when you see everything through mormon colored glasses!! :cool:

free thinker

[Born Free]

I actually came across Campbell while on my mission. It was a weird experience. I was doing the missionary thing, going from door to door peddling my book when a woman let us in. She was Romanian or something. But she sat and listened to us for a few minutes. Then she got excited and started talking about this book called "The Power of Myth." She read some of it to us. My companion was unimpressed, but I was an English major and was able to see what she was getting at.

Anyway, she told me, "I'll take your book, if you'll take mine."

"Cool, free book," I thought.

<snip>

Darn tootin'.

Sounds like an acquisition in which you received way better than you gave. I am not sure she will feel the same way after getting to the BoM.

The question floating around in my mind as I review the tapes is "Is there some redeeming value in Mo mythology that I have overlooked?" Frankly I suspect not.

Daryl

[helemon]

I love his expression: words cannot describe the most important things; people frequently misunderstand the things that point to the most important things.
Daryl

It is interesting that the Mormons take such a literalist view of scriptures when the endowment is more of a mythos initiation right like Campbell describes.

So what does this mean about the earlier thread discussing how we do not need myths anymore? I think Campbells work is a perfect example of how myths can be a powerful tool for conveying truth. The problems with myths is when people try to claim they are literal facts rather than allegory.

[Born Free]

It is interesting that the Mormons take such a literalist view of scriptures when the endowment is more of a mythos initiation right like Campbell describes.

So what does this mean about the earlier thread discussing how we do not need myths anymore? I think Campbells work is a perfect example of how myths can be a powerful tool for conveying truth. The problems with myths is when people try to claim they are literal facts rather than allegory.

I will go back and reread what particpants shared previously and compare that with what Campbell states.

I expect we will never outgrow myth. Myth is story and we remember in the language of story. Listen to anyone who wins international memory competitions, dozens and dozens of names or cards, etc, and they all use story to engage the brains enormous capacity. Our brains seem poorly suited to the storing and recalling of abstract 'fact'.

The trouble seems to arise when we lose how we define myth. Our society seems to have largely made myth synonemous with lie.

Sam Keen in Hymns to an Unknown God identifies 3 major myths governing our age.

So we have lost respect for myth, even while the advertising industry successfully employs it every day to access out wallets.

Meanwhile Mormonism insists that its evidently laundered history is historical fact, and scorns and trivialises others myths. Go figure!

Daryl

[flotsam]

So what does this mean about the earlier thread discussing how we do not need myths anymore? I think Campbells work is a perfect example of how myths can be a powerful tool for conveying truth. The problems with myths is when people try to claim they are literal facts rather than allegory.

Boy, I must have missed that thread because I would have argued heartily against it. Of COURSE we're steeped in myths. There's a very powerful one here on the PostMo board: it's the myth of the hero who escaped Mormonism. We think it's a literal story, because some of us lived it. But that isn't how it operates on the board. It acts like a myth, containing truths bigger than what the literal story suggests.

If you look at the "How I Escaped Mormonism" stories, even the one posted just yesterday by the person with the elephants for an avatar, they all take the same form (so beautifully outlined by Daryl). “I was a Mo. I had some doubts. Then something happened, and I got out. Now I'm out, and I'm happy.”

Take a look at Mo conversion stories. Just the same thing. “I wasn't Mo, I met the missionaries, got a testimony, and got baptized.”

They go in; you go out.

It's the Eden story. Or the Exodus. Or the Pioneer story.

But what we're trying to get across is what it is like to be transformed. What a journey is like. It doesn't matter what the transformation is. We're all saying the same thing. "What I had wasn't healthy. Something needed to change. It did. And now I'm in balance again."

You've cast your experience into a story that makes it meaningful. That’s what humans do. Of course, your TBM friends and relations will have a different myth to cast your experience in. The tale of the prodigal son. They're just waiting for you to finish the story and come back.

You can often see what you're trying to say much better when you look at what kind of myth you're telling, rather than focusing only on the content.

[miss taken]

Thanks Daryl, this is a really interesting thread.
I have NEVER heard of Joseph Campbell, mores the pity, it seems.

Being the intellectual heathen that I am, my ears really pricked up, when I noted that George Lucas was influenced by him in his writing of the Star Wars series. There's something about those films that I love, (like the Matrix) and relate to.

So I am off to check him out now.

Mary

[flotsam]

So we have lost respect for myth, even while the advertising industry successfully employs it every day to access out wallets.

Daryl


Neil Postman wrote this really entertaining book called "Amusing Ourselves To Death." One of the best parts is when he describes the "parables" used by advertizing. The parable of the man with body oder. The parable of the late traveller. The parable of the hungry motorist.

The ad sets the story up: person in trouble. Then presents the solution: the product. And the product solves everything. Of course, people don't recognize that it's a parable, or a myth. Because the set up is designed to help them empathize with the everyman character with the sniffles, or pimple before a hot date. So when the solution comes, it feels like salvation.

What you're buying when you purchase a product you've seen advertized isn't the product, it's the story behind the product. You're expecting the story to enter your life. Otherwise, how can I explain the perverse pull I feel toward the Axe line of soaps and deodorants?

I buy on myth all the time. For example, I prefer to buy organic produce now that I have the money to do so. Why? I really can't detect a better taste, or improved nutritional value. I buy it because there's this story about the evil corporate farms and their insidious insecticides verses the honest (though usually long-haired) farmer raising up "natural" foods. When I'm confronted with the egg display, all I can see are the chickens cooped up in their little boxes laying eggs and chewing off each other's tail feathers. So I buy the cageless-hen eggs.

I'm buying a story. And the story makes me feel good. I have NO WAY of knowing what is really going on. Just like I have no evidence whatsoever that the earth revolves around the sun. But I believe it. Because it's a good story. It draws on my values.

And, of course, the Post Mo site does exactly the same thing. How else do we explain that healthy, sexy family on the homepage? "Join the Post Mos. We're sexy and healthy. And you can be too. Just click here." The only Post Mos I have ever met are Peter_Mary and his lovely family. And they're not too hard on the eyes, but I wouldn't put 'em on the homepage. Otherwise people would think Post Mos are all barely over 40 and ... well, pretty much like the rest of us.

And who wants that?

Give us sexy and healthy any day.

:slap: Ouch! :slap: Ouch! :slap: Ouch!

Stop that Peter_Mary!

Here, I'll hit myself. :duh

However, get in a conversation with P_M and the clan, and you'll fall in love. I did.

That's beauty of print. You see souls first. And there are some real beauts out there.

As a website I am thoroughly unfamiliar with says, "Come for the porn, stay for the people."

Amen.

[flotsam]

Meanwhile Mormonism insists that its evidently laundered history is historical fact, and scorns and trivialises others myths. Go figure!

Daryl

Of course, that's all just political necessity. If you want to run a large group, you have to develop a myth that is both convincing and simple. Take a look at any national history. It's always the same thing. Take a look at the histories even subversive groups write about themselves. Same thing: convincing and simple.

And of course you trivialize other people's myths. It's so easy to see chauvinism (in its political sense) when you're outside the myth, so it's easy to mock. But also, the large political myth needs to be believed as the one and only, otherwise, people won't be willing to put their lives on the line for it.

Plato knew this. He said that to found a well-functioning society, you had to tell a "noble lie," or a "grand myth." There has to be some unquestionable value that people are willing to rally around.

There was an interesting attempt at transcending these political myth boundaries in Ridley Scott's recent movie "Kingdom of Heaven." It's about a knight who is charged with defending the Christian-held Jerusalem from attacks of a huge Muslim army. Both sides feel that God will ensure their victory. When it turns out that God seems to be on the Muslim's side, the hero develops a myth stating that every person in the walls of Jerusalem is important and that they should fight to save those people. He sees God as someone who, if he has any degree of human feeling, will help them out in such a cause. And if He doesn't, who needs Him?

Ends up, they hold out against all odds (actually they do all this defense preparation that reminded me of Captain Moroni preparing the cities for the Lamanite attacks) and the Muslims have to negotiate. Once they offer safe conduct of the people out of the city to another civilization, the hero (Orlando Bloom with actual hair on his face) turns the city over.

I kind of like that: overturning metaphysics so you can pay attention to actual people.

[flotsam]

The question floating around in my mind as I review the tapes is "Is there some redeeming value in Mo mythology that I have overlooked?" Frankly I suspect not.

Daryl

This is the way I see it. If millions of people are buying into the Mormon myth, then there has to be some redeeming value about it. Otherwise, people wouldn't buy it. It has to speak to people on a deep level.

And if you look at Mormonism, you'll see a lot of the same elements that make other religions successful rolling around in there. A theory of happiness, an idea about the meaning of life, some good stories to illustrate them and lend them credibility, and a prefab organization that comes along with the theology. Now, it doesn't work for everyone. But for some people it does.

For example, if you're willing to say that ancestor worship in Asian religions has value (I think it does, it helps people construct a sense of who they are and of their value in the world) then you have to say that Mormon work for the dead has value. Because it's the same concept in different clothes. It's important to have a sense of history, to have a story that makes your life meaningful, to bring families close together. And the story that you're doing a service for your ancestors, who helped you get born, is a powerful one. You're connecting yourself to the world symbolically (and literally, if you believe).

There are all kinds of Mormon stories that take a piece of the world's myths: First Vision - Burning Bush, Priesthood Restored - Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration, Salt Lake Temple - Solomon's Temple, Joseph's Martyrdom - Jesus' martyrdom. The facts are irrelevant, the myths have been constructed, and they work the same way the old myths work. The only difference is, there are historical documents around to muddy the Mormon myth.

That could be a weakness for Mormons. Christians’ and Jews' history is so far in the past that there's much less chance of debunking their myths on factual grounds. So the essential myth never gets upset. However, Mormons' sense of myth CAN get upset because their myth is tied to recent, documented events. And as most of you know, having a myth upset is one of the most fundamentally destabilizing things that can happen to a person. No wonder Mormons are so guarded about their history. Reminds me of how the early Christian church treated the "peripheral" gospels. The religion was just too young to deal well with different stories. They had to stick with one until it was strong enough to dominate contenders.

Man, I don't know what's happened to me tonight. I've practically worn my keyboard down to the desk. I think you guys found a topic that I have opinions about or something.

By all means, argue with me.

[Born Free]

<snip>

That could be a weakness for Mormons. Christians’ and Jews' history is so far in the past that there's much less chance of debunking their myths on factual grounds. So the essential myth never gets upset. However, Mormons' sense of myth CAN get upset because their myth is tied to recent, documented events. And as most of you know, having a myth upset is one of the most fundamentally destabilizing things that can happen to a person. No wonder Mormons are so guarded about their history. Reminds me of how the early Christian church treated the "peripheral" gospels. The religion was just too young to deal well with different stories. They had to stick with one until it was strong enough to dominate contenders.

<snip>

By all means, argue with me.
flotsam,

You have identified what I see as Mo's Achilles Heel - that many of its myths are built upon explicit lies. :eek: That is what I see as anthitical to viable myth.

So, sorry to disappoint, you aren't going to get any argument out of me! :)

Daryl

[silverfox]

I received The Power of Myth as a gift last year from a friend. (never mo Christian dude) Haven't cracked it open yet (damn, I need more TIME!) I will blow the dust off of it and put it on my desk as a reminder.

[peter_mary]

Couple o' Items:

First, I have to slap flotsam again :slap: for suggesting that me and my family shouldn't be featured on the front page, enticing people in to PostMormon.org! He has only seen us naked, and we look EVERY bit as good as the "happy family" on the home page when we're dressed!

HA! I'll bet THAT nabbed your attention, didn't it! Now you get to spend the rest of the day wondering if it's true or not...and I'm not gonna help you out! :p

The silliness aside, I LOVE what flotsam has said in his myriad of posts on this subject. I'm very much in agreement with the premise of all he's saying, so I don't have much to add.

But to answer BornFree's question: Yes, I've read some of Joseph Campbell, in fact just finished "Hero With a Thousand Faces" last week, and it was VERY intellectually satisfying. In fact, I had intended to post a thread on that very subject, and you beat me to it.

For those who are not familiar with Joseph Cambell, here's your assignment. It's fun and easy, so don't dilly-dally, get off the damn computer and go to Barnes & Noble or Borders, and find "Hero With a Thousand Faces." Take it to the cafe, order your favorite espresso drink, and read the Epilogue (the last chapter). It's only 8 or 10 pages, but it is profound. If you don't decide to buy the book at that point, I'll be amazed. But even if you don't, you'll have been touched by the wisdom.

Go down, then return and report.

(We will go down...come James and John)

Peter_Mary

[flotsam]

flotsam,

You have identified what I see as Mo's Achilles Heel - that many of its myths are built upon explicit lies. :eek: That is what I see as anthitical to viable myth.

So, sorry to disappoint, you aren't going to get any argument out of me! :)

Daryl

The only way I'm going to agree with you about "explicit lies" is if you also say that every other religion and culture in the world is also built on explicit lies. Just some of them are easier to see than others.

Otherwise you will have to argue with me. Because what I was trying to get across was that Mormon myth is different only in the matter of time. It's younger, so its myths are more easily analyzed from a scientific point of view.

That's the only difference I see, anyway.

[free thinker]

I'm buying a story. And the story makes me feel good. I have NO WAY of knowing what is really going on. Just like I have no evidence whatsoever that the earth revolves around the sun. But I believe it. Because it's a good story. It draws on my values.


Help me out here man. No Evidence? ;)

Let me offer a couple of things that may point to it's reality.

The days pass, sunrise, sunset etc.

The seasons change.

We have sent a few people out in ships and they have verified it.

:D

I know you meant something else!! Just messin with ya!!

I used to love the mormon myth. It did give my life tremendous meaning. Things change. The history is innacurate enough for the myth to have any sway in my life now. Did some reading and found out it just didin't jibe with what I was taught.

Simple for me! Not sure what myths I follow now. Gonna think about it though!!

free thinker

[Born Free]

The only way I'm going to agree with you about "explicit lies" is if you also say that every other religion and culture in the world is also built on explicit lies. Just some of them are easier to see than others.

Otherwise you will have to argue with me. Because what I was trying to get across was that Mormon myth is different only in the matter of time. It's younger, so its myths are more easily analyzed from a scientific point of view.

That's the only difference I see, anyway.
Flotsam,

Most of those religions were founded in a pre-rational age. Certainly, civilisation has since shifted (arguable I know), but that is where they had their foundation.

And many in them accept that their stories are myth, not historical fact. I recall reading in one of Spong's works that in the first century leading scholars regarded literal interpretation of the Old Testament as laugable.

The Christians we hear the most noise from today are those 'with little brain' who still insist in literal interpretation. Others accept as metaphore, still others cannot appreciate the contemporary value of myth, so have turned their back and walked (and are the poorer for it IMO).

So where does that leave Mormonism? From the top down, it is insistent in the literalness of not only its own history, but also of that of the Bible, and to make matters worse, it was created in a scientific era, in an age of rationality.

For my money, that is what makes it problematic.

That creates all sorts of problems. The StillMo friend I caught up with on Saturday, is a medical doctor, and deals with the Church's extremes by creating some split between the 'Cultural Church' and the 'Gospel'. This is a great face and dilema-saving conceptual split, which manages to stave off decision time. I did not probe how operationally this pans out. She did state that she gets no callings these days, as she is seen as too 'practical' and ungullible.

For me, one of the most valuable aspects of myth is to observe what I project onto them, an idea that is foreign to Mormonism. In seeing the unresolved trauma, ideas, hopes and desires that I project on mythical character, I get an exciting insight into ways I might heal and evolve, ways I might slow confusing my issues with that of my fellow travellers. Mormonisms denial and fear of 'split-off parts' is legend, and no where more evident that in its sanction on mask-wearing.

As I look at most of the older religions I see basically two schools that are vital, that have energy: the Fundamentalists, with whom I have little to nothing in common, and the Mystics, who interest me greatly.

The Fundys rarely have or use the braincells they possess to get beyond their religous myths as fact, whereas the Mystics, rarely or never see any fact, only illuminating myth.

So I see the creation of story, that you know is substantially created, in a rational age, whilst shunning any notion that it is myth is a whole different degree of problem from that for older religous traditions. The comlete absence of the Mormon equivalent of Mystics speaks volumes for me.

Your observation re Moism that "It's younger, so its myths are more easily analyzed from a scientific point of view. " cannot be viewed passively IMO. To choose to create lies in an age of reason is a markedly more problematic and conscious act of ????, that to create myth in a semi-literate, pre-rational society.

BTW, I do not let other religions off the hook. I find the majority of Judeo-Christian scripture as historical nonsence, but reserve a special scorn for MoMyth!

Daryl

[Born Free]

<snip>

Yes, I've read some of Joseph Campbell, in fact just finished "Hero With a Thousand Faces" last week, and it was VERY intellectually satisfying. In fact, I had intended to post a thread on that very subject, and you beat me to it.

For those who are not familiar with Joseph Cambell, here's your assignment. It's fun and easy, so don't dilly-dally, get off the damn computer and go to Barnes & Noble or Borders, and find "Hero With a Thousand Faces." Take it to the cafe, order your favorite espresso drink, and read the Epilogue (the last chapter). It's only 8 or 10 pages, but it is profound. If you don't decide to buy the book at that point, I'll be amazed. But even if you don't, you'll have been touched by the wisdom.

Go down, then return and report.

(We will go down...come James and John)

Peter_Mary
Peter_Mary,

I have The Hero of a Thousand Faces in my library, so made the time this morning to reread that chapter, and it is stunning. More so now that I am older and wiser than when I last read it. I suspect that after I have rewatched the tape series on The Power of Myth, I will reread The Hero, so expect to make links and have insights that eluded me last time.

I think this material is great content for people to be digesting as part of their Post-Mo journey. I might have to go back and add it to my own Stage 10 processes. He was one of the resources I discovered that brought me to the realisation of how narrow, and shallow the Mormon take on the world is, how literal and unsophisticated, how pitched to the lowest common denominator. How milk! :rolleyes:

P_M, please pitch your observations/remarks re Campbell into the ring. (I regret having stolen your thunder! OK, not really. I was chuffed to have beaten YOU to the punch on something; a feat not easily achieved! :) ) It was rather synchronous that we both turned that direction around the same time.

Daryl

[peter_mary]

[

P_M, please pitch your observations/remarks re Campbell into the ring. (I regret having stolen your thunder! OK, not really. I was chuffed to have beaten YOU to the punch on something; a feat not easily achieved! :) ) It was rather synchronous that we both turned that direction around the same time.

Daryl

Daryl gets an "A+" for fulfilling the assignment in such a prompt fashion (and for returning and reporting...I guess you can take the boy out of Mormonism, but you can't take the Mormonism out of the boy! :D )

Really, it would be hard for me to add much to what has already been discussed. For me, the power of Joseph Campbell's work (and others) is helping me to understand the evolution of human thinking, and how that was translated into the stories of our species. It is fascinating to see the links and common themes in myths from people as diverse as the Maoris, the Arapaho, the Celts, the Persians, etc.

The Hero Quest is a particularly compelling story, one that I suspect Jung and Freud were correct in identifying with a deeply-seated psychological archtype, and one which plays itself out on a daily basis in our lives to this day. Flotsam is so correct when he identifies the hero's quest in converting either into or out of the Church. It is that indominatable spirit in each of us to push past the limits of our present experience, and break free into something new, exhilerating, and meaningful. All of us on this forum are making the hero's quest...but so are so many who are seeking out Mormonism, or Christianity, or Islam, or Buddhism, or whatever.

What I learned from JC (Joseph Campbell) was the source of this archtype, and the recognition (again) that we do the stories a gross disservice when we think of them literally. But thinking about what they mean, how they inform our personal experience, imbues those stories with real power. And that is not exclusive of the Mormon story. I DO agree with you, Daryl, that the Mormon story loses its power for me when I realize the deliberateness with which is was contrived and then packaged as literal truth. That doesn't settle well with me. But the same thing is happening all over the western world. Even Western Buddhists have a tendency to think of Nirvana as a literal place, like heaven, and of their spirit residing forever, as a unique, identifiable personality, in that Nirvana.

Nevertheless, as flotsam points out, if the stories bring a person a sense of heightened purpose, of importance to their existence, and it moves them in a direction that they perceive to be progress, then the myth serves its purpose in their life. That doesn't mean it does in mine, but frankly, it doesn't matter what I think, about THEIR stories...it only matters what I think about MY stories. I am no longer moved by MOST of their stories (some I still like...for instance, I refer my children to King Benjamin's sermon on a regular basis, reminding them all that they are "unprofitable servants." They hate me for it... :D )

I have a new story, a new myth, that informs my life, but I can not claim any more power in that story than someone else who is moved to genuine acts of compassion or charity or power by their Christian or Jewish or Mormon beliefs. What I learned from Joseph Campbell is simply that the brain organizes its understanding of the universe, and the human position in that universe, according to some fairly predictable patterns, that result in some fairly predictable story outlines. The details are all different...and beautiful in their own right. But ultimately it's simply about people striving to reach beyond the limits of their present sight, to see, and behold, and become something more, something better, than they perceive themselves to be at the present moment. That's good stuff, man. It's what helps me love people, in spite of the stupid stuff we do.

Peter_Mary

[flotsam]

So I see the creation of story, that you know is substantially created, in a rational age, whilst shunning any notion that it is myth is a whole different degree of problem from that for older religous traditions. The comlete absence of the Mormon equivalent of Mystics speaks volumes for me.
Daryl

What an interesting question. ARE there mystics in the Mormon midst? There are a few people that I would say qualify: Joseph Smith and Hugh Nibley to name two.

My reasoning is that they certainly created complex, compelling stories that are far beyond the realm of rationality. Joseph created a sweeping metaphysical story rooted in the ideals of his time. Hugh created a story, rooted in obscure texts and even obscurer translations, and even obscurer interpretations, to uphold Joseph's story.

Admittedly, both Joseph and Hugh have averred that their stories are true in a rational sense. But take a look at the texts they put out, they invite the reader to pretty much toss aside all references to empiricism and enter a kind of free associative exploration. They do deep readings that inevitably transcend the texts they're concentrating on.

Beyond those two, I'd certainly offer Terry Tempest Williams as a Mormon mystic. Her ability to use metaphor to connect her readers to the sacred in nature is quite profound. And if you've ever met her in person (I got to do an interview with her once) you'd be amazed by the goddesshood she emanates. I certainly was.

The problem with Mormon mystics is that most of them can only get their publicity through vanity press publication, which nobody takes seriously. And since Mormonism still isn't a major player in the world's thought, people aren't likely to stumble across Mormon mystic's work and see it for what it is. And the Mormons themselves certainly wouldn't see the value of mystic's work, because they either get exed or go into self-imposed exile.

Oh, another Mormon mystic: John H. Koyle. He started a mine that I lived beneath my entire childhood. Folks called it the Dream Mine. An angel had come to Koyle and directed how he was supposed to dig the mine. He was supposed to find all kinds of treasure, and maybe even the golden plates. Fascinating story. He pursued it his whole life, never found treasure, but some really amazing things happened.

I'm going to make a documentary on it someday if I ever get back down to the lower 48.

I don't know, does it disqualify you for mystichood if you take your visions literally? Or are you accepting the calling to be the physical embodiment of the metaphor? Is that what Jesus meant about doing the father's will?

[peter_mary]

What an interesting question. ARE there mystics in the Mormon midst?



I agree that Joseph Smith would qualify as a Mormon mystic, but I struggle with Nibley... Joseph clearly saw himself in the role of Prophet, while Nibley saw his role as scientist. Joseph was peering into a stone in a hat, making no bones about the fact that this information was from God. Nibley asserted to know his information by virtue of empirical study, although in many instances, he stretched reason beyond the breaking point in my opinion. So for me, I can't make Hugh a mystic...help me out (without making me go back read his prodigious works. I've read "No Ma'am, That's Not My History," which soured me on the man forever).

The problem with Mormon mystics is that most of them can only get their publicity through vanity press publication, which nobody takes seriously. And since Mormonism still isn't a major player in the world's thought, people aren't likely to stumble across Mormon mystic's work and see it for what it is. And the Mormons themselves certainly wouldn't see the value of mystic's work, because they either get exed or go into self-imposed exile.

I think the REAL problem with Mormon mystics is that mysticism has no place in Mormonism. Mormons don't want mythos, that want facts. The very reason we tell fantastic stories in Fast & Testimony meetings is to attempt to validate with empirical evidence that God works actively in our lives. We don't want to touch the mystery, we want proof of its existence. So that only leaves room for the likes of...

Oh, another Mormon mystic: John H. Koyle. He started a mine that I lived beneath my entire childhood. Folks called it the Dream Mine. An angel had come to Koyle and directed how he was supposed to dig the mine. He was supposed to find all kinds of treasure, and maybe even the golden plates. Fascinating story. He pursued it his whole life, never found treasure, but some really amazing things happened.

And there's the fine line: Are you a mystic, or are you insane? How am I to know? I have heard the account of a certain faithful Mormon who LOVED to go to the temple because of the miraculous events that would occur when he would go. He would see concourses of angels, the face of God, and spoke of one time feeling the top of his head open and a beam of heavenly light pouring in to illuminate his soul.

Then he was diagnosed with bi-polar mood disorder, and as soon as he was stabilized on lithium, the miraculous visions ceased. It was a real test of his faith, as you can imagine. Still, while he attended the temple in that manic condition, the experiences were as real to him as my experience of sitting here dictating this message out of a hat to my faithful scribe :D .

I don't know, does it disqualify you for mystichood if you take your visions literally? Or are you accepting the calling to be the physical embodiment of the metaphor? Is that what Jesus meant about doing the father's will?

I DON'T think it disqualifies you...in fact, I would expect that most of the great mystics who defined the world's great religions (Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Lao Tzu, Joseph Smith, etc) probably took their mystical experience very literally. The problem comes when we believe them. Which is why we should follow the admonition of the Buddhist sage who once said..."If you meet the Buddha, kill him!" (Now ponder that koan, grasshopper)

Peter_Mary

[free thinker]

Oh, another Mormon mystic: John H. Koyle. He started a mine that I lived beneath my entire childhood. Folks called it the Dream Mine. An angel had come to Koyle and directed how he was supposed to dig the mine. He was supposed to find all kinds of treasure, and maybe even the golden plates. Fascinating story. He pursued it his whole life, never found treasure, but some really amazing things happened

Flotsam ,if you do this book, will you be including the info from Krakauers book. " Under The Banner of Heaven"?

I dont think it would be complete without it.

free thinker

[free thinker]

The above posts made me ask internally, concerning metaphysical matters.

1 Is there real truth? Definitive, objective, empirical!!

2 Is there a life after death? Is this a reality? Is the soul a living thing that is eternal?

3 What will we find after death if the above is affirmative?

4 Does anyone here, alive now, know these answers? The real truth!! Do you?

5 Does it really matter whether or not we know?

free thinker

[Born Free]

Daryl gets an "A+" for fulfilling the assignment in such a prompt fashion (and for returning and reporting...I guess you can take the boy out of Mormonism, but you can't take the Mormonism out of the boy! :D )

<snip>

Peter_Mary
P_M,

I'm not too sure whether to feel flattered or to go sit in the corner, sulk and suck my thumb! :Crazy:

There is this great passage on the 6th tape - Masks of Eternity, a quote from Carl Jung: "Religion is a defence against the experience of God".

How does that align with what many of us have described as your Post-Mo experience? Sure has some resonance for me!

Daryl

[flotsam]

Flotsam ,if you do this book, will you be including the info from Krakauers book. " Under The Banner of Heaven"?

I dont think it would be complete without it.

free thinker


Not only have I read Krakaur's book, I've read books and writing on John Koyle that can only be found in the Spanish Fork public library. I'm not as obsessed with him as people who have done their MA theses on him, but I'm farily conversant on the chap. He's one of my unlikely heroes: in the church until his final years, but total dedicated to his crackpot vision.

What a guy.

[helemon]

There is this great passage on the 6th tape - Masks of Eternity, a quote from Carl Jung: "Religion is a defence against the experience of God".

How does that align with what many of us have described as your Post-Mo experience? Sure has some resonance for me!

Daryl

http://www.quotecha.com/quotes/quotation_324.html
"Religion is what happens when God has left the building." - Bono

[Born Free]

http://www.quotecha.com/quotes/quotation_324.html
"Religion is what happens when God has left the building." - Bono
helemon,

Great quotes site. Thanks for that - already bookmarked!

Daryl

[bigeddy]

P_M,

There is this great passage on the 6th tape - Masks of Eternity, a quote from Carl Jung: "Religion is a defence against the experience of God".

Daryl

I watched the tapes several years ago. I own the set but did not remember this at all. I will now go review all of them to see what else I missed. This one quote will be worth it.

As to Daryl's question; it rings true with me also. I have not yet responded to the thread where (avatar with the horse) asked why we left the church but when I was wondering what to write that did not just rehash all I have written I decided it was best to summarize that I left moism because I valued growth and wanted to grow and moism did not want me to grow--so I left. Now, with the insight from reading the quote I can see that the way I wanted to grow was to continue to explore the god experience, the touch of the divine, the mystic music, the flavor of one-taste.

I like this quote.

Ed