medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>From: Marjorie Greene <[log in to unmask]>
>As an addendum to Frank's message, I'd like to point
>out that, to a certain extent and using a very broad
>definition, you're dealing with stories - literature.
Equating "stories" and "literature" is a modern concept. "Literature" is a
modern concept. For most of the history of humankind, stories have been
oral, oral storytelling follows different rules than creating a written
work--as in a twentieth century novelist's retelling of a battle or a tale
is not the same as a traditional storyteller's.
As I see it, examining the evidence from a culture that was largely oral (as
opposed to literate) requires examining the way people told stories, what
the words and images they used meant to *them* as opposed to us, what models
of storytelling they were using. When you are aware of the models and
conventions and expectations, then you acquire a different sense of what
people were trying to say. And there were indeed conventions or rules for
speaking of the supernatural, though those rules are not always obvious to
us and, indeed, were often more instinctive than conscious to the people of
the past.
Jim, I liked your linking these stories with "myth" for they were ideed
myths. They were not literature in the modern sense of creative, individual
works. They were not strictly historical accounts. These "stories" tell us
what people believed about themselves and their world. They also tell us how
they looked at their past.
In Irish, Welsh, and other traditions, stories were thought to be more than
tales. They were thought to contain power in themselves, just as verse had
power intrinsic in the words and metrics. Telling certain stories brought a
blessing on the one who told it and those who heard it. While these notions
died out among the aristocracy, they persisted far longer among the less
literate.
>And as one trained in literature, I tend not to deal
>at all with "proof," but with interpretation of what
>amounts to mental constructs, emotional or symbolic
>artifacts of the past, spiritual "bones" or "fossils."
>As long as your interpretation does not do violence to
>facts and moves forward an appreciation or
>understanding of what you've got at hand, why not
>hypothesize to your heart's content?
Frank spoke about the use of evidence, and I think he made important points.
But I also think we need to distinguish between what the stories meant to
the people telling them vs. what they tell us as modern people. And I
thinking treating the stories of an essentially oral culture as "literature"
is failing to appreciate the significance of the differences between them
and us.
Francine Nicholson
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|