A past interview uncovered: A " Cafe' " Discussion

Are you looking for a quotation that you can't quite place? Trying to track down a hard-to-find publication? Here, folks can help you find the answers, or discuss ways for you to discover them for yourself.

Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.

Locked
JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

A past interview uncovered: A " Cafe' " Discussion

Post by JamesN. »

During Joseph Campbell's time in Paris there was a sea change of ideas that was taking place that was to directly influenced all the arts. Not only what is now considered to be modern painting; but many of the other artistic disciplines such as writing, music, and dance just name a few. This explosion of creative energy lasted for close to 3 decades and ended about the time of the Great Depression in the US. Much of the intellectual changes that were taking place had a profound influence on Joseph's ideas such as the work of James Joyce and many others too numerous to mention. The term " Cafe' Society " refers to the ( atmosphere ) that centered around the intellectual and artistic community as they gathered in small cafes to share and exchange these new and creative thoughts that were taking place which in turn influenced each other's work.

The title of this thread represents this desire to exchange ideas about some of the " interconnectedness " of Joseph's themes that evolved from the recent surfacing of one of his last interviews with Jeffery Mishlove after the release of " The Inner Reaches of Outer Space " and possibly one of his last. From the discussion of the interview the thread has now come to address many of Joe's ideas with the sweep of a
broader brush stroke thereby offering the opportunity to include a larger range of issues not available with the focus centered around single topic subject matter. Welcome to the Café'.

( And to begin ):


Hey everyone. I just came across this past interview of Joseph Campbell done by Jeffrey Mishlove after " The Inner Reaches of Outer Space " was released on a series called " Thinking Allowed ". Yet another great window into his personal warmth and powerful themes. Not to be missed! 8)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6EZOtgxi_Y
Last edited by JamesN. on Fri Aug 15, 2014 5:58 pm, edited 3 times in total.
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Hey everyone.

There has been discussion about exploring the above interview and I have made a suggestion of utilizing the " Audio Lectures " as a resource to open this up a little more since it contains many of Joseph Campbell's ideas already in a loose conversational format and I think maybe somewhat easier to grapple with. Clemsy as one of the moderators has kindly offered his guidance so I thought I would point out a couple of interesting features that might be helpful. One would be that there is both ( audio ) as well as ( printed transcript ) versions to digest and that I think is very helpful. Two is that there is previous discussion available to compare one's own individual impressions with which I think is also an advantage concerning insight as well as choice.

I took the liberty of scanning through some of the topics and this one in particular seemed to match up with where our previous discussion left off; but certainly " any " choices would be open for suggestion; Clemsy or someone else may have something to offer here. ( Just a place to start if need be. )



New Horizons:
http://www.jcf.org/new/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4055

( Incidently; during the discussion Martin; one of our moderators; offers I think a very cool and creative example of using one's imagination. )

Cheers :wink:
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Roncooper
Associate
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:51 pm
Location: Eastern Tennessee

Post by Roncooper »

For me this talk is about describing myth in detail and presenting the need for a new mythology. I see it as a call to action from the greatest scholar of human reality and would like to discuss this talk in terms of a new mythology. A new mythology must start with a dialogue and I would like to be part of that discussion.

Below, I have listed the insights he gave. He presented 21 in 28 minutes. It seems to me that he was driven to present a complete picture in a short time.

To start I want to address the first two minutes from the perspective of a new mythology. What does it mean to be a world person and belong to the world community?

Minute 1 Campbell introduces our organs as the source of myth and states that they conflict with each other.

Minute 2 he states that the myth harmonizes the organs so that the person can live a good life. He also states that the myth should help us live within the human society and within nature, and help us through the stages of life.

To paraphrase him, the will wants one thing, the heart another, and the intellect another. The myth should harmonize this. I suggest that the new myth needs to value these organs as equals. This is the only way to be inclusive of everyone. It should address the values and provide a path for each of the organs.

Rather than use the term “battle of the organs” I like to cast this in a more positive light by saying that the human personality is multidimensional, with these dimensions represented by the heart, the will, the intellect, our creativity, and our consciousness. Over time this multidimensional personality has created civilizations, the great religions, each with its different emphasis, science, skilled caregiving, and great art.

The new mythology should embrace all of these dimensions as a way of harmonizing them. Each represents a specialized part of our personality, and they should be made to work together like the fingers on our hands.
I have to stop now and will come back to minute 2 later. I would appreciate any help or comments.

Minute 1 Campbell introduces our organs as the source of myth and states that they conflict with each other.

Minute 2 he states that the myth harmonizes the organs so that the person can live a good life. He also states that the myth should help us live within the human society and within nature, and help us through the stages of life.

Minute 3 the mythology is a social construct rather than a personal construct.

Minute 4 new myth needs to be global. It needs to support all of humanity and the earth not a single culture.

Minute 5, mythology helps a person become a member of a group.

Minute 6, mythology also provides an inner path.

Minute 8, Buddha consciousness

Minute 9, Christ consciousness is the same image only a different emphasis the first is the inner peace ideal and the second is life in the outer conflict

Minute 10, mythology must include modern science and give it personal meaning

Minute 12, mythology is the validation of experience and gives it a spiritual dimension

Minute 13, Hindus figured it out, somehow

Minute 14, myths are prophetic of human development

Minute 15, new mythology needs two things, first to accurately include the amazing physical reality and second to make the mythology for a world person not a local culture

Minute 17, the problem of taking myths literally

Minute 18, birth being more than just a biological phenomenon and then the problem of humanizing that child

Minute 19, myth as a guide through the stages of life

Minute 20 presents universal themes and death as a leaving the body behind for consciousness. He also introduces the idea of images and how they take us to the truth beyond the image

Minute 21, need to emphasize the universal over the local value

Minute 22, metaphors and connotation vs denotation

Minute 23, Campbell not a mystic but a scholar who was inspired by beauty

Minute 25, follow your bliss and it is the message of God to yourself

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Wow Ron that is awesome! You must have put a lot of time into this. Especially the way you broke down the various segments and the inter-relationships to a general theme. Quite a lot to absorb within one post but perhaps Clemsy, Andreas, or someone else has some thoughts they would like to add here. One thing comes to mind I remember Joe said was that things are changing and happening too fast in the world at this moment for any one type of a new myth to emerge; but I don't see any reason why we can't explore the possibilities; perhaps like you are illustrating with what a new myth should include for starters. These are just my first impressions of course and not in any way am I meaning to discourage the direction you are suggesting. This reminds me about Martin's point in the New Horizons discussion of " imagining "; or like the theme of John Lennon's song. ) Let's see where this takes us. 8)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b7qaSxuZUg
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Roncooper
Associate
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:51 pm
Location: Eastern Tennessee

Post by Roncooper »

James,

Thanks for the kind comment. This isn't work for me and I wish I had more time to spend on it.

Returning to minute 2, Campbell states that the myth harmonizes the organs so that the person can live a good life. He also states that the myth should help us live within the human society and within nature, and help us through the stages of life.


It seems to me that the only way to do this is to understand the values and goals of each of the organs, or dimensions of our personality, and accept that each has its own domain. Where would we be without love or intellect or consciousness?

The real question is how should a world person perceive these dimensions. I think it is clear that a person specializes in one of these dimensions, or at least one at a time. Given this situation the new mythology should provide paths for each and also provide a way to honor the ones that are not a person's path of choice.

The hard part is the second part of minute 2. What is the nature of a world society? What are the rules for its members? They need to be listed. The will needs a code of honor. Who should make this list?

It seems to me that we have all kinds of meeting. There could be an international conference on honor that could help develop this code. I need to think some more, and I would appreciate help and comments.

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Ron.

I hope you will pardon me but my mind has been on the Robin Williams situation and it brings to mind that while we are exploring some of these aesthetic realms it might be useful to include this:

http://www.jcf.org/new/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4359

It occurs to me until we deal with some of these mental aspects I don't think we are going to be able to get too far towards anywhere doable realistically speaking. Also I think getting some kind of workable relationship that establishes a functioning harmony between different cultures and how to accept the various mythological interpretations so as to keep people from killing each other would be right up there at the top of the list as well. The economics and ecological dynamics involved are another dimension we might be able to get to next; but I think these first two would need fairly immediate attention; ( just saying ). Mentally unbalanced power hungry people with guns and weapons who have rather closed-minded ideas about who is in control might hold up the " new world order " a bit before things can get organized. I like your approach; but we probably need to survey some of the " larger landscape " while contemplating the assembly process before we get too far ahead of things don't you think? ( Not being critical but again just offering a suggestion here if you know what I mean. ) :wink: I would like to add however that I really like your ideas of imagining: " What if ". :)


( A quick addendum if I may. Given the nature of this discussion and the Robin Williams aspect I just mentioned; this item just posted on yahoo. Although it may not quite match up with the topical material or maybe this is just what my head has been into today or perhaps even a little synchronicity; I don't know. I haven't seen this yet; but it's definitely on my list. ): :o

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/robin-will ... 67702.html

At any rate; cheers my friends; I must sign off for now.
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Andreas
Associate
Posts: 2274
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:07 am

Post by Andreas »

Wow Ron that is awesome! - James
Indeed awesome, thanks Ron for taking the time to do this.
The hard part is the second part of minute 2. What is the nature of a world society? What are the rules for its members? They need to be listed. The will needs a code of honor. Who should make this list?

It seems to me that we have all kinds of meeting. There could be an international conference on honor that could help develop this code. I need to think some more, and I would appreciate help and comments. - Ron
More rules? Oh noes, run for the hills!! :)

Joe said mythology is the moss on the rock and that takes time to develop.

I don't think mythology is about rules but the environment defines these rules despite.

Joe also said that we cant have a mythology anymore and everyone has to make or find his own myth. We can't have a mythology exactly because these rules change and because we discover new things all the time.

Science does provide the tools for a global myth. After a really dark period of "enlightenment" we are able to realize now that we are all the same organism, a biological phenomenon.

Unfortunately it dawned on me, sometime ago, that there are no win win situations.

The lack of spirituality, the lack of seeing the mystery that exists behind every thing, is the price we have to pay for our knowledge.

And that is the problem for me. How to incorporate spirituality in science. When these two can co-exist, then a new mythology will develop. Until then, enjoy the conflict! :P
“To live is enough.” ― Shunryu Suzuki

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Andreas wrote:
Wow Ron that is awesome! - James
Indeed awesome, thanks Ron for taking the time to do this.
The hard part is the second part of minute 2. What is the nature of a world society? What are the rules for its members? They need to be listed. The will needs a code of honor. Who should make this list?

It seems to me that we have all kinds of meeting. There could be an international conference on honor that could help develop this code. I need to think some more, and I would appreciate help and comments. - Ron
More rules? Oh noes, run for the hills!! :)

Joe said mythology is the moss on the rock and that takes time to develop.

I don't think mythology is about rules but the environment defines these rules despite.

Joe also said that we cant have a mythology anymore and everyone has to make or find his own myth. We can't have a mythology exactly because these rules change and because we discover new things all the time.

Science does provide the tools for a global myth. After a really dark period of "enlightenment" we are able to realize now that we are all the same organism, a biological phenomenon.

Unfortunately it dawned on me, sometime ago, that there are no win win situations.

The lack of spirituality, the lack of seeing the mystery that exists behind every thing, is the price we have to pay for our knowledge.

And that is the problem for me. How to incorporate spirituality in science. When these two can co-exist, then a new mythology will develop. Until then, enjoy the conflict! :P
Yes Andreas; I think that indeed is part of the issue. The global societies are now in a state of dysfunction and the old cultural myths no longer serve the needs they once addressed. The world needs something new to survive but unfortunately the processes for this to take place will not emerge by expectation but must evolve over time and no one knows what they will look like or when they will occur.

That said; one of the things I like about John Lennon's song " Imagine " and the social impact that it produced was that it proposed a challenge to " envision " things from a new point of view. And it was in a view that had much in common with some of the things Joseph Campbell presented. For instance such as considering things globally; looking at the larger picture in terms of materialism and human suffering; and trying to think of all of this in a different way. Part of the trick and hurdle I think is being realistic about the way this is implemented. Thinking " outside of the box " as it were; does not necessarily infer a panacea; but to consider things from a new perspective.
:wink:
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Andreas
Associate
Posts: 2274
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:07 am

Post by Andreas »

Yeap, that is true James. I often fall victim of this trap, you know, the unrealistic expectation we might have about the world.

But what you said about suffering and materialism got my attention. I guess materialism and suffering go hand in hand, don't they?

Isn't that why Buddha talked about detachment, impermanence, etc.

Isn't that why Campbell in this video says that death is not loss and that the myths teaches you how to dis-identify from the body and identify with the spirit or consciousness.

Anyways, I am bit tired so... Laterz
“To live is enough.” ― Shunryu Suzuki

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Andreas my apologies but I'm tired like you are and not quite on top of things. My first post was just too garbled so I'll try and get back to this later when I'm a little fresher.

Cheers
. :wink:
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Roncooper
Associate
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:51 pm
Location: Eastern Tennessee

Post by Roncooper »

James, Andreas,

You are posting much to fast for me. I will try to catch up.

James wrote:


Ron.

I hope you will pardon me but my mind has been on the Robin Williams situation and it brings to mind that while we are exploring some of these aesthetic realms it might be useful to include this:

http://www.jcf.org/new/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4359

It occurs to me until we deal with some of these mental aspects I don't think we are going to be able to get too far towards anywhere doable realistically speaking. Also I think getting some kind of workable relationship that establishes a functioning harmony between different cultures and how to accept the various mythological interpretations so as to keep people from killing each other would be right up there at the top of the list as well. The economics and ecological dynamics involved are another dimension we might be able to get to next; but I think these first two would need fairly immediate attention; ( just saying ). Mentally unbalanced power hungry people with guns and weapons who have rather closed-minded ideas about who is in control might hold up the " new world order " a bit before things can get organized. I like your approach; but we probably need to survey some of the " larger landscape " while contemplating the assembly process before we get too far ahead of things don't you think? ( Not being critical but again just offering a suggestion here if you know what I mean. ) Wink I would like to add however that I really like your ideas of imagining: " What if ". Smile

I don't think these problems can be fixed with the tools we have today. We can only offer an alternative to the madness. Even if it is only an academic exercise, I think it is valuable to discuss what it means to be a world person. In my opinion Campbell gave us the seed of the new mythology in this talk, and the more attention it gets, the closer we come to planting the seed.

I live with the horrors of suicide, first hand, and I don't want anyone to travel that path. In my opinion the only real help for these people will be a new myth that brings meaning and community to their lives. A myth that will meet them more than half way by speaking directly to them.

Discussing a new mythology may come to nothing, but maybe not. Maybe the discussion will grow into something useful

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Ron:
I don't think these problems can be fixed with the tools we have today. We can only offer an alternative to the madness. Even if it is only an academic exercise, I think it is valuable to discuss what it means to be a world person. In my opinion Campbell gave us the seed of the new mythology in this talk, and the more attention it gets, the closer we come to planting the seed.

I live with the horrors of suicide, first hand, and I don't want anyone to travel that path. In my opinion the only real help for these people will be a new myth that brings meaning and community to their lives. A myth that will meet them more than half way by speaking directly to them.

Discussing a new mythology may come to nothing, but maybe not. Maybe the discussion will grow into something useful
Hey Ron.

Yes it seems the flow here is rather quick; I am scrambling somewhat to keep up myself but that's OK. I think the nice part about this is the interest in exploring this avenue from a contemplative approach as in your last sentence. I would suggest if I understand the point you are making though that this to me represents what Joseph Campbell's themes are all about; especially concerning Carl Jung's work. He also mentions you don't have to throw the myths away but to reinterpret them from the metaphorical or symbolic perspective to understand the message of what they are saying. This is important because a one-size-fits-all approach I think definitely would not work here; but I don't think that is what you meant. That said however I do think the " Monomyth or Hero's Journey " is all about harmonizing the individual and their quest concerning this particular reference. You can see no more tragic example than Robin Williams heartbreaking incident.

BTW Andreas I will try and get back to your ideas if needed after I have had a chance to go over the interview again. I want make sure about the connection of the interpretations you posed; but I was also mixing several different cross-references in my own posts. After looking at this again with fresher eyes this morning I believe I can see what I missed and yes I think in part the non-attachment aspect you are referring to in that sense applies. But don't forget the East and West have very different approaches concerning the ego and society as regarding the individual's role and their relationship to " fulfillment " for lack of a better word here. Joseph mentions the rock solid ego of the western individual and the difference of the eastern emphasis on serving the greater society first as opposed to individualism in the west. And this I think is where westerners may be different concerning detachment if I'm understanding what you are pointing out. In the western tradition say like in Christianity; there is this concretized focus on the factual and historical as opposed to the symbolic or metaphorical; in the east not as much; and also the emphasis is shifted one could say to a less ego oriented interpretation as to functioning within the society itself. At least this is a distinction I seem to remember Joe making in " The Power of Myth ". Human greed and lust for power might be seen as " universal " regarding human flaws however; and this is where some of the psychological aspects and dimensions might come into play. We are generalizing of course with some of these connections within the topical premise; but overall I don't see how that can be avoided. And since we are using a kind of comparative approach with this anyway I'm sure there will some loose or rough edges and that's to be expected and fine I think. :wink:

I'll be in and out today but will try and check back.


Cheers :)
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Roncooper
Associate
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:51 pm
Location: Eastern Tennessee

Post by Roncooper »

There are so many good ideas here I wish I could respond to all of them at the same time. Instead I am stuck with one at a time.

Andreas wrote:


More rules? Oh noes, run for the hills!! Smile
In the talk Campbell says that one of the functions of myth is to make the children members of the society, which in the case of the new myth would be the world society. This process would include a set of rules to live by, hopefully smaller than the set we follow today. It would probably be necessary to differentiate between global rules and cultural rules. Trying to establish this is the hardest part because people kill and die for their rules.

Joe said mythology is the moss on the rock and that takes time to develop.

In the case of the new moss the rock is the earth, Campbell provided the spore, and those who act on the spore are the protonema. The actual moss might be a long time coming.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moss

:wink:


Joe also said that we cant have a mythology anymore and everyone has to make or find his own myth. We can't have a mythology exactly because these rules change and because we discover new things all the time.
In response to this, I choose to follow the guidance from his talk on this thread, which stresses the need for a new global mythology, because this talk occurred in 1987 and he had more time to think about it. I think if he were alive today he would be screaming for a new mythology, but of course that is my opinion.


Science does provide the tools for a global myth. After a really dark period of "enlightenment" we are able to realize now that we are all the same organism, a biological phenomenon.

Unfortunately it dawned on me, sometime ago, that there are no win win situations.

The lack of spirituality, the lack of seeing the mystery that exists behind every thing, is the price we have to pay for our knowledge.
The wonder and awe that a scientist feels are religious experiences. I was a scientist and I know this for a fact. Unfortunately science can become the only “true” path. The new mythology must honor all of the dimensions of our personality and provide paths for our wills and our hearts as well as our minds.

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Ron:
The wonder and awe that a scientist feels are religious experiences. I was a scientist and I know this for a fact. Unfortunately science can become the only “true” path. The new mythology must honor all of the dimensions of our personality and provide paths for our wills and our hearts as well as our minds.
A really nice offering Ron. The only other thing I would personally add would be what Joseph referred to as the " beyond all categories of thought " definition he uses when referring the concept of " God " by which he illuminates as the understanding of humanities efforts to describe the " unknowable ". There are several different ways he goes about addressing this such as: something beyond words, the vast reaches of outer space; the dimension beyond which the mind can reach; the dimensions of time and space and the idea of duality; what we only know at the moment and science as a working " hypothesis "; the concept of God as an attempt to clothe the great mystery; and so and so on. But yes I think in the sense you are pointing out most definitely addresses the idea. Whether you would substitute the word provable or knowable for ( true ) in this case is not so much the issue here I think because generally speaking this is what I believe you are referring to if I'm understanding correctly.

( Clerics are all about ( faith ) in " absolutes ". Two examples of this dysfunctional viewpoint for me would be the denial of Darwin and the conflicts in the Middle East ". And the ideas we are talking about here would drive a cleric nuts! :P :lol: )
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Roncooper
Associate
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:51 pm
Location: Eastern Tennessee

Post by Roncooper »

I'm catching up.

James wrote;


Yes Andreas; I think that indeed is part of the issue. The global societies are now in a state of dysfunction and the old cultural myths no longer serve the needs they once addressed. The world needs something new to survive but unfortunately the processes for this to take place will not emerge by expectation but must evolve over time and no one knows what they will look like or when they will occur.
I am not sure what you mean by won't emerge by expectation. I think it was during the Power of Myth interviews that Campbell said myths do not come from the people, they come from a select few.

Vyasa wrote the Mahabharata. We know who wrote the books of the Bible. There was a council of Nicaea.

I don't see anything wrong with being proactive. What have we got to lose? It can't get much worse.

I believe that people making up their own mythologies out of ignorance is a bad thing. Biker gangs create codes of conduct. Street gangs have codes of conduct. Codes which are primitive in my opinion.

I believe that the myth of the world person would be a welcomed alternative to the cultural myths many people are trapped in.

I don't have any expectations, but it seems to me that without attention Campbell's spore will never become moss.

Locked