Status Updates From A Study of Dragons, East an...

I just can't seem to keep my focus on this. The conclusions make no sense.

Well this has gone off the rails quickly. "Most Western dragons are male. But we could say they have female aspects that make them vicious." *writes about attributes of different Egyptian gods* "As you can see, Western dragons have a female anima." Uhm... I re-read it, but you really, really, really did not prove that.

Well that bibliography looks... sobering.

The list of chinese dragon names was useful.

So these are the nine sons of the chinese dragon.... what are they supposed to be?

what's with all the Qing dynasty dragons?

That is the huge dragon that St. George killed? That depiction is only the size of a dog. Or is that supposedly symbolic size? And that Shang dynasty dragon looks nothing like a dragon, more like a pig.

Would be nice if he had such a list of sources for "Western" dragons.

Can't find any of these folktale collections here.

In the Shang Dynasty, neither the image nor the character of the dragon was standardized. Unlike their descendants, the Shang people could use their imagination to change the form of the dragon.

I speculated that this was the case once. And also that over time all these divergent dragons were relegated to being quasi dragons until the standardized dragon was left.

Did he ever actually mention any Western folktales? I cannot remember. Maybe his claim that dragons of myth, folklore and religion in the "West" are all the same meaningwise caused him to ignore folktales in this study.

...in contrast we may take the Dragon flag as representative of ancient China's conservatism, collective obedience, centralized hydraulic state, xenophobia, and cultural continuity. Badly wounded, the dragon was not dead. The spirit of the dragon may shine again, recovering its glory in a new form .

nationalism much?

To the Chinese, however, the mythological dragon is an embodiment of national history and dominant ideology. In most cases, they seek identification with the dragon rather than with the dragon slayer. lt is particularly true for Mao Zedong who changed from a challenger to a creator.
Oh really? Because based on his actions, I would say that Mao is a poisonous folklore dragon.

...dragon plays its esoteric role not by arousing affection or intimacy but by inspiring awe and veneration-the desirable attitude in a society demanding respect for parental and political authority.
Then why did it not arise in the West? Such demands existed there as well. In fact, afterwards, the only reptile he mentions is the snake.

A human fear of reptiles is more genetically transmitted than culturally transmitted...Without being taught, most people love the huge dangerous lion and tiger but detest harmless lizards and toads.

If he says so. Apart from toads not being reptiles, his argument is flawed already by the lack of fear/detest towards turtles and smooth-skinned frogs.

A fatal weakness of Qi's argument lies in the physical appearance of the Chinese dragon, which is standardized and is based on the body of a snake rather than a crocodile.
How does he know? Some of them are shorter and might as well be based on crocodiles, they resemble them as much/little as snakes.
And of course he mentions dinosaurs. Well I will forgive him as in the 90s feathered dinos weren't a big thing.

I believe that the whale and the dragon have only one major feature in common-size.
technically that is correct as there are big and small whales as well as big an small dragons. But I doubt he means that.

...at Nunnington near York, a poisonous self-healing dragon was killed by a knight in armor covered with razors and helped by faithful dog.

never heard of that before. But the source given is called: Dictionary of Medieval Knighthood and Chivalry: People, Places, and Events... I don't know....

In a Chinese folktale called "The Canal Water," the heroine Hang Lian (Red Lotus) took a pearl by force from a dragon. She swallowed the pearl and became a dragon herself.

Interesting, so Dynasty of Dragons was closer to folklore than I thought.

Propp's theory of transformations, responds to the human striving of this century to reduce diversity to unity.
Does the author include himself among those? Because he sounds the same to me.

Apparently this Nezha Dragon slayer was adapted several times but looks like not much of those made it over here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nezha

Why does he think this story associates the dragon with fire? Because of the "Clouds of smoke" or the sounds "like that of a fiery explosion"? Because poison seems to be the dragon's element here, not fire.

In the folktale of the Sun and Moon Pool, the two dragons are called elong (evil dragon).
Is he referring to that tale from Taiwan? It does sound like the one about the Sun and Moon lake: https://islandfolklore.com/2018/01/04...

Finally the Japanese dragons are mentioned again, for one page!!!!!
And based on what he wrote there would be several interesting things but he focuses so much on China. It is interesting what he writes but why that focus? Due to lack of focus?

I had to look up the St. George story because while he states him as a dragon slayer he only stated that he "attached it to the girdle of the "damsel in distress."" According to Wikipedia the dragon was tame then and only killed later by George when the townsfolk had converted.