Unlocking the Love-Lock: The History and Heritage of a Contemporary Custom
Unlocking the Love-Lock: The History and Heritage of a Contemporary Custom
复制标题
解开爱情锁：当代习俗的历史和遗产
作者：
G. Monger
上帝--第二世界，用她从J. R。R.托尔金-是不那么严格地从人类分离，或主要，世界比通常假设。神虽然不是人，但却与人亲近。神话之所以成为真实的，是因为神是可信的，也因为神话发生在一个离现在不远的时间和地点，一个离人类不远的时间和地点。神话的世界不是科幻小说的世界。(For这是一个很好的论据，证明希腊人确实相信他们的神，至少相信他们的神话的一部分，见保罗·维恩，希腊人相信他们的神话吗？[1988年]，被引用。我并不理解约翰斯顿的意思，他指责比较主义者或理论家以某种方式“将希腊神话从他们的叙述中剔除”（66页）。唯一一个对这个故事轻描淡写的理论家是列维-施特劳斯，他把结构与情节对立起来。所有其他理论家都在世界各地的神话或各种神话（如英雄神话）中寻找共同的情节。他们是如何忽视叙事的？约翰斯顿把希腊神话中的人物分为五类。人物的范围从那些被认为仅仅是虚构的到那些被认为是真实的。她还提出了一系列的英雄，从那些接近神的人到那些远离神的人。她观察到，希腊的英雄比其他古地中海文化中的英雄要多得多，在其他古地中海文化中，关于神的神话比关于英雄的神话多得多。(On英雄神话，见罗伯特·A·Segal，Hero Myths [2000].）约翰斯顿还讨论了一个在希腊神话中甚至比在印度神话中更常见的特征：变形，或人类转变为动物，植物和矿物。虽然约翰斯顿涵盖了许多理论，但她忽略了心理学的理论。弗洛伊德和荣格对读者或观众的心灵投射到神话人物身上的关注，恰恰解释了约翰斯顿的主题：神话的现实。神话之所以有效，是因为它真的是关于自己的。总的来说，约翰斯顿提供了一个高超的概述方法，希腊神话，神话的故事是更复杂的比G。S.柯克的神话（1973）或埃里克·萨波的神话理论（2005）。对于民俗学家来说，它与威廉·汉森的《古典神话：希腊人和罗马人的神话世界指南》（第二版，2020年）具有同等的吸引力。
gods—the secondary world, to use the term she takes from J. R. R. Tolkien—is less rigidly separate from the human, or primary, world than is often assumed. Gods, while not humans, are close to humans. Myth becomes real because gods are plausible and because myth takes place in a time and a place not so far removed from the present, human one. The world of myth is not the world of, say, science fiction. (For an excellent argument that the Greeks did believe in their gods and in at least parts of their myths, see Paul Veyne, Did the Greeks Believe in Their Myths? [1988], which is cited.) I do not follow what Johnston means by faulting comparativists, or theorists, for somehow ‘excising Greek myths from their narratives’ (66). The only theorist who downplays the story is L evi-Strauss, who pits the structure against the plot. All other theorists seek a common plot among myths worldwide or among kinds of myths, such as hero myths. How are they thereby ignoring the narrative? Johnston works out five distinct kinds of characters in Greek myth. The characters range from those taken as merely fictional to those taken as real. She also works out a spectrum of kinds of heroes, who range from those close to gods to those far removed. She observes that heroes were far more numerous in Greece than in other ancient Mediterranean cultures, where there were more myths about gods than, as in Greece, myths about heroes. (On hero myths, see Robert A. Segal, Hero Myths [2000].) Johnston also discusses a characteristic found much more often in Greek than in even Hindu mythology: metamorphoses, or the transformation of humans into animals, plants, and minerals. While Johnston covers many theories, she ignores psychological ones. The focus of Freud and Jung on the projection of the reader’s or spectator’s mind onto mythic characters explains exactly Johnston’s subject: the reality of myth. Myth works because it is really about oneself. Overall, Johnston offers a superb overview of approaches to Greek myth, and The Story of Myth is much more sophisticated than G. S. Kirk’s Myth (1973) or Eric Csapo’s Theories of Mythology (2005). For folklorists, it would be of equal appeal to Willliam Hansen’s Classical Mythology: A Guide to the Mythical World of the Greeks and Romans (2nd edition, 2020).