Final Draft - Preview Matter - Florida State University
Final Draft - Preview Matter - Florida State University
Final Draft - Preview Matter - Florida State University
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Claude Lévi-Strauss’s theory entails that all myths are speculative, or problemreflecting,<br />
when properly understood. Proper understanding requires<br />
concentration on an underlying structure of relationships, rather than on their<br />
overt content or any narrowly allegorical interpretation. 83<br />
Kirk suggests that Lévi-Strauss attempts to create a universal interpretation of myth,<br />
which is the greatest flaw of his theory. 84 Even if “structuralism” fails to account for the<br />
interpretation of all myths, I do believe that we can profit from Lévi-Strauss’ scholarship in<br />
several ways. The first is his notion that myths help to mitigate contradictions. In the case of<br />
theriomorphic and therianthropic deities, we may observe a dualistic system symbolized by the<br />
mingling of human and animal forms and in the often contradictory and opposite facets of their<br />
nature. I believe that the iconography of such gods lends itself to the process of mediation<br />
between opposites using a visual method much in the way mythology accomplishes this effect<br />
through narrative. This leads to the second idea that can help us, that animals are “good to<br />
think;” Lévi-Strauss makes this deduction based on the notion that the choice of animals as<br />
symbol is based on empirical data that is then related to man’s attempt to express ideas and<br />
relationships. 85 I believe the iconography used in the representation of theriomorphic and<br />
therianthropic gods demonstrates this theory.<br />
Following the notion that animals are good to think with, the process of myth-making<br />
should not be separated from the creation of iconography. Images and textual narratives are both<br />
critical in understanding the complex nature of ancient deities. Greco-Roman mythology is<br />
somewhat unusual due to its highly literary nature; 86 yet we have little preserved writing which<br />
features theriomorphic and therianthropic deities. Even so it remains important to examine the<br />
impact that scholarly opinions concerning “originality” in myth have had on the reception of<br />
Etruscan and Roman mythology because the same biases which dominate the study of literature<br />
are also present in the study of iconography and visual narratives. Feeney sums up the largest<br />
problem facing the scholar of Etruscan and Roman myth in Literature and Religion At Rome:<br />
Cultures, Contexts, and Beliefs.<br />
“…in myth more than any other cultural sphere the primacy and energy of the<br />
Greeks' activity appears automatically to weaken any Roman counterpart. 'Myth'<br />
simply is 'Greek myth', not only to contemporary classicists but to the first<br />
83 Kirk 1970, 7.<br />
84 Kirk 1970, 7.<br />
85 Lévi-Strauss 1962, 89.<br />
86 Kirk 1974, 112.<br />
21