First things first. I need to learn French. I think everybody should learn French. And Russian.
Myth and Meaning is a slim compilation of 5 essays of Claude Levi-Strauss. On subjects such as 'primitive' thinking vs scientific/ 'modern' thinking, mythology when it becomes history, mythology and music...and so on.
Levi Strauss was a staunch believer in diversity of cultures, although in his work as a structuralist, he states that everything, however diverse, including mythologies, can be reduced to a lowest common denominator. Lowest common denominator helps in creating order. And order gives you a chance at deriving meaning. At understanding.
He worries that with the ease of communication, we will lose our originality, our diversity. But he's hopeful that, perhaps, this increasing homogeneity will once again lead to diversification, which in turn will help in retaining a streak of originality.
(I wonder what would be his response to our present times.) Yes, homogeneity is making people strive for 'originality' but this originality, in most instances, is not an outcome of a synthesis of experiences and ideas but rather an outcome of the human desire to be different. And this has been cleverly appropriated by a capitalist regime, for something as banal as promotion of consumption. Of goods, of services, of images, of ideas. To this end, we have become homogeneous even in our desire to be original, to be different.
I suspect, it isn’t even the scientific-modernist approach which has robbed us of the ability to create stories, myths but our shrinking community experiences. And our desire of sharing our lives with others and vice-versa. Maybe, I am being a bit presumptuous here. After all we do share our lives with others. Through social media forums. May be the nature of myths, in itself, has undergone change. Because our community experiences have also undergone change. Earlier people in communities bonded as much for the reason of interdependence as for common fears. Now communities are formed based on shared interests and accessibility. We share our subjectivity, yes, through images, words, sounds in the on line world. But most often, we forgo an important aspect of sharing - collaborating. May be I am stretching it too far by saying that sometimes these online communities, where we share our subjective worlds, through their defined formats of sharing, end up homogenizing our individual experiences. Reducing them to objective 'things'. And maybe this creates an imbalance that we need to acknowledge. Maybe that is why we are slow at mythologising our present. Our need to rationalise is limiting our ability to express ourselves in ways other than the obvious.
That way, Hinduism is an absolute treasure trove of concepts; thoughts which have been beautifully evoked through myths which defy scientific explanation and logic and yet have been accepted by generations of Indians, unquestioningly. I wonder if we ever think about this wonderful duality of our lives - of leading a modern life and yet believing in elephant headed Gods, ascetic-householder God, cursed Goddesses and so on.
May be. I need to think about this some more...
The book fleetingly touches upon a number of issues and is an absolute tease because Strauss references so many of his other works that you realise that to be able to understand him better, there is so much more that you need to read up on. Which.... is a good thing,right?
Anything that keeps you on your toes, anything that keeps you curious.