posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 07:17 PM
Originally posted by Logarock
Originally posted by Byrd
Stripping him down to basics still doesn't give the same thing as Kokopelli other than they were male and played a wind instrument. But if you use
that as a generalization, then you can include Count Basie and Satchmo and the Archangel Michael.
There is much more of a comparison than simply wind instrument and they were male. I cant believe you looked at anything if that all you can come up
You don't believe that I read a lot of Hopi myths and am familiar with the major writings about their legendary history? You don't believe that I
read everything I could get my hands on about the Romans and Greeks, including all the remaining plays of Aeschylus, Euripides, and Aristophanes (and
that Aristophanes' play, "The Birds" is one of my favorites?)
I did read all that, and more.
As for the hunchback thing Pan was known to allow nymphs to ride on his back.
You know this comparison was of enough interest that even none other than Jung looked into it. I have yet to read his findings.
Frazier, frankly, is better on cultural archetypes since he was researching anthropological concepts. Jung's archetypes are archetypes of the
unconscious mind, written before a time when we began to understand how culture can bias our own concepts and constructions of archetypes in our
From a cultural standpoint, Jung's material is easily knocked apart by looking at original source material for the cultures. From a psychological
standpoint, how archetypes work in individual minds is a fascinating study and one that's worthwhile pursuing. And cultural (single culture)
archetypes are the study of a field in anthropology called "semiotics." It's an endlessly fascinating field.
But it takes more than "they were just guys and played musical instruments" to make a mythic connection -- or even a semiotic/archetypal one even
when the timeframe is the same.