Lesson 1: Introduction and Lord of the Rings I
This is the first of two lessons where we look at The Lord of the Rings trilogy. We'll be looking at Gandalf, mostly, and how he fits into Joseph Campbell's archetype model – then we'll turn to Jesus.
“My Hero!”: Analyzing Scripture and Movie as Myth
There are many ways to analyze scripture (and, for that matter, film). In the nearly 2000 years since most of Christian Scripture was written, humanity has studied and taken inspiration from the New Testament on many different levels.
Medieval theologians believed that all scripture was to be understood simultaneously on three levels: literarily (though this has a different meaning today), metaphorically, and spiritually. Today, scripture scholars analyze the Bible on even more levels; literally, metaphorically and symbolically, historically, spiritually, theologically, even mathematically. Students of other fields, such as anthropology, sociology, history, and psychology, analyze the Bible on even more levels.
Today people turn to the Bible for reasons ranging from wanting to know what 8th century Persians had for lunch to seeking guidance on what they themselves should have for lunch.
Some say that the Bible holds the answer to humanity’s most difficult questions, or that the words written in the Bible are Logos: the Word of God, the actual presence of the divine on Earth. Even if you are unwilling to go that far, at the very least, we can agree that the Bible is an incredibly rich resource.
We can also say that no one method of looking at the Bible is the only method of looking at it. Very few literalists – Christians who believe the Bible is the recording of historical fact – would say that the Bible should only be considered as a historical record book. As well, very few atheists would say that the Bible is a useless bundle of unimportant scribbles. The truth is, the more methods we learn to unearth the Bible’s resources, the richer we will be intellectually and spiritually.
In the first half of this class, we will look partly at scripture (and film) by analyzing its myth structures. We will be using, roughly, Joseph Campbell's myth structures as outilned in his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1949). There are two important things to remember as we do:
- The word “myth,” as defined for this class, DOES NOT mean a fictional story or fable. In fact, as we will see, the word myth has very little to do with whether something is historically accurate or not. It is also much different from a fairy tale or fable because a myth means that something is TRUE.
In fact, you might note here, that when something is called historical it is not always true in the best sense of the word. Of course, history does not tell the entire story (and it is written by the victors). Remember, Mussolini made the trains run on time. Although this may be historically accurate, it is hardly a truthful reflection of Mussolini’s years in power. Myths, however, are true, in the deepest sense of the word.
In the words of Mircea Eliade, “Myth narrates a sacred history; it relates an event that took place in primordial Time, the fabled time of the “beginnings.” …Myth tells only of that which really happened, which manifested itself completely… In short, myths describe the various and sometimes dramatic breakthroughs of the sacred (or the “supernatural”) into the world… " (Mircea, Eliade. Myth and Reality. New York: Harper and Row, 1963. Pages 5-6.)
- One can study the myths of the Bible – the Truths of the Bible – while simultaneously considering the Bible the literal truth and the Word of God. In fact, truth and God are very compatible. One can also study the myths of the Bible while considering those myths to be historical fact. Considering the stories in the structure of a myth will only add depth to the historical facts.
In fact, here is where the definition for myth in this class differs from Joseph Campbell’s definition of myth.
There are many elements of Campbell’s theory which are not only controversial but have no relevance to our discussion. For example, Campbell concluded at one point: “All religions are true, but none are literal.” Campbell seems to imply that the similarities in myth throughout the world logically lead one to the idea that myths are only psychological realities, not physical realities.
Campbell’s methods are excellent; Campbell’s conclusions, however, can be argued. (This is one reason why we'll concentrate on the first half of his book, and leave the second half – that deals more with the psychotherapeutic aspects of myths – for you to read at your leisure.) For another argument against Campbell from the point of view of a Christian, read Tom Snyder's article: http://www.answers.org/CultsAndReligions...
As you read Campbell, decide for yourself whether you agree with his methods and conclusions.
The point here, long belated, is that we shouldn’t be afraid of using the word “myth.” It is simply another level of analysis which should not invalidate any other method of analysis.
As you read the excerpts from Joseph Campbell’s book, consider not only the Bible stories that you know, but also the characters from The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Note how both begin to fit in rather well, without losing any of their “sacredness.”
NOTE: I suggest you read the selections and watch the movies (if you haven’t already) before you read the lesson. Upon repeated viewings, more parallels will come to you.
