Study Questions for Sproul's Primal Myths - Part 1
Thad Curtz (for Humans and Nature in the Pacific Northwest)

Our first seminar on Sproul's book, Primal Myths, will be Wednesday, October 12th, the middle of the week after next. As usual on Wednesday, you will be writing a response journal to help prepare for the discussion and bringing it to seminar with you. However, the "reading" assignment for this first seminar on the book consists of a number of explicit steps; combining reading some sections of it with talking, writing and thinking about them.

We are spelling them out like this, as a series of assignments, partly because we hope this series of steps will help us get past some of the difficulties the book poses if you just sit down and try to read it straight through. We are also doing it as one exercise or model of some ways to work on a book or study it in preparation for seminar, rather than simply sitting down and reading straight through it. (Simply sitting down and reading straight through the book will never leave you particularly well prepared...) Some of these things are quickies - you are just supposed to pay some attention to them - some ask you to take some time one way or another. When you come to a question followed by a row of stars (*****************), puzzle over the question on your own a little before you go on past the stars, because they are followed by some more pointed questions - even hints, sometimes. (Of course, you can always cheat and look ahead if you want, but you will learn a lot more if you try on your own first.) You might want to use a piece of paper to cover the parts you haven't read yet, if you find it hard not to keep seeing what's coming next in spite of yourself.The total amount of reading involved in this assignment is quite small; you are supposed to be putting considerable time into thinking about the reading.

Part A

Before you plunge doggedly into the book, you want to think about what the author seems to be up to, to orient yourself, try to get a sense of the territory and what you might want to look out for, instead of just marching straight ahead into the forest.

1. The title - always worth thinking about.

Suppose she had called it Creation Stories From Around the World? A nice descriptive title, no? What sorts of things does Primal Myths imply or evoke that my alternative doesn't?

2. Look over the "Table of Contents"

What can you figure out about the structure of the book from it?
*****************************************************************************
Here, in particular, you might see what ideas you can come up with about the order in which she arranges the sections. Why does she put them in this sequence? What does it suggest or imply? How many pages does each section get, in comparison with the other sections? What ideas can you come up with about those choices? Suppose she were a Chinese author, writing for Chinese audiences - work out a possible table of contents for that version of this book.

3. Read the Preface

She tells you several things here about some of the choices she has made in the anthology part of the book. You don't have much to go on about them yet, but they are worth a look at this point. (You might want to come back to them after reading the Introduction.) What can you figure out at this point about the possible implications of these choices?
*****************************************************************************
1. She has cut off all the "socio-cultural" and "historical" parts of the stories. (You'll notice that she says this is "somewhat arbitrary" - which should be a red flag for you that not every author would think this was a good idea.) She also says that the cultures themselves would think that this meant leaving off half of the story. What does this suggest about what matters to her - what she is interested in and isn't interested in? How does this fit with her assertion in the next paragraph that she has wanted the translation of each myth that "most authentically evokes its cultural and religious source"?

2. She has chosen "the most powerful" myths. Imagine some other collection of myths, by some other author, in which being "more powerful" wasn't a reason for putting a myth in. (Inventing imaginary comparisons like this is always a good way to jog your perceptions about what is going on...) Any ideas about what this choice might suggest about what she wants the book to do and why she is writing it?

3. She talks about "avoiding duplication of themes or attitudes". Imagine some book about myths in which duplication of themes or attitudes was the whole point of assembling the collection. Any ideas about what the point of a collection like that might be? Why isn't she interested in showing how themes or attitudes re-occur around the world?

Part B

Now we want to take a little stock of what you already know and feel about the topic.

1. Each myth in the book is proceeded by a little introductory paragraph in which she tells you a bit about its context and, often, what she thinks its point is. Do not read these in this next stretch; just read the stories. Leaf through the book at random, and pick out and read six of the myths. Pick ones that are scattered through the book. Pick at least one reasonably long one, of at least a few pages. (Keep a list of them for later.) Now put the book away and write for at least ten minutes about what you think about myths in general. What are they; why do they exist; do they matter, and if so why; what do they have to do with other human creations like dreams or novels or advertisements; and so on.

2. Now pick whichever myth seemed the most interesting to you and work on it. Don't read Sproul's blurb about it. Read the myth over, read it out loud, think about it -- try to figure out whatever you can on your own about what it might mean or imply or suggest about humans and nature.

3. Now find somebody else (they don't have to be in the program, but that would be fine) and have a conversation with them about what they think about myths and what you think about them.
Talk to them for at least a half hour. If the conversation runs out of steam before then, find somebody more interesting to talk to for the rest of the time. Then read the myth you worked on, and talk with them about it. Then read what Sproul says about it, and see if you agree with her interpretation or if the context she provides gives you any new ideas.

4. Write out whatever ideas you have about what the study of myths might have to do with the program and its themes - most generally, with understanding humans and nature in the Pacific Northwest, but also with any particular sub-themes you may have noticed or started to think about so far.

Part C

Now we are ready to actually tackle the book.

1. First, we want to get clear about what the book's thesis is, the central thing it is trying to get us to believe. (I'm assuming we're reading a piece of scholarship, like this one; stories are different.) If it is any good, it will have a thesis, although it may be complicated. Typically, a well-written academic book will go to considerable trouble to lay out the thesis for you in the Introduction. You want to know what it is, before you begin, so you know what the author is trying to do with the evidence he or she presents as it comes in. It won't be very easy to understand or remember what is going on if you aren't clear about where you are headed. Work hard on trying to be sure you are clear about what the thesis is before you spend time on reading through the book. If it isn't in the intro, read the conclusion. If it isn't there, leaf through and look at the beginnings and ends of the chapters.

Here, you only have the introduction (and the little blurbs) by Sproul herself, so this is more like reading an essay. Read the first four paragraphs and the last paragraph of the Introduction. (They are not easy; there may well be some terms in them that aren't clear or things you don't get yet.) Read them a couple of times - maybe talk to somebody else who's reading them if you have a classmate handy, like in a van next to you! Try to answer two questions. 1. What does she want to get you to believe? 2. Why is she writing the book- that is, who is it for, what situation is she addressing, why does she think what she wants to get you to believe matters or is important?

Now that you have some sense about the thesis, you might want to take a little stock of your relation to it? Do you already believe it? Do you really disagree with it? Does it arouse passionate responses in you, make you feel enthusiastic or disgusted? Having taken stock of your responses, you need to think about how to work with them in order to be able to learn about what the author says and the reasons they give to support it. (If you are enthusiastic, you might need to work on being skeptical this week. If you are disgusted, you might need to work on paying attention...)

Just for the record, we hope that it's very clear that our inclusion of a book on the reading list does not necessarily mean that we believe its thesis. It only means that we think that understanding what the author says, and the author's reasons for believing that, can cast some important light on the issues that we are exploring. Sometimes, of course, some of us do also believe what the author does - that, in itself, is never a very good reason that you should believe it. Understanding the author's reasons for believing it might lead you to believe it too; it might only deepen and sophisticate your understanding of why some other people in the world believe it, even though you still don't. (That's a valuable piece of knowledge in its own right, of course.)

NOW, go ahead and read it through. Try not to get bogged down by terminology this time through - keep going and see if things clear up. When you get done, you might try writing out a summary of what you think she says, or explaining it to somebody. You might go back and work some more on the places that feel unclear or interesting. You might just read it again slower, marking it up. She makes a number of claims about myth - make a written list of the ones that seem important.

Now we want to ask some questions about what she says. You can do these in any order that feels interesting.

1. Ask about how she defines her central terms...

One of the standard definitions of a myth is "a story about a god." (Two things to think about here - what is a story, as opposed to an essay or a theory, say, and what is a god, as opposed to a hero or a human being.) How does Sproul use the term "myth"? Why does she want to shift its meaning as she does?

Try to get clear about any other terms that seem central, including "absolute reality", "domestic myths" (p. 3), "theoretical and existential truth", "idolatry", the "Holy", "ritual", "archetypes", etc.
If you need help, get yourself a study buddy or a study group, and work on deepening your understanding of these central ideas together. You should come to class prepared to explain what she means by them in your own words.

2. What sort of story do you believe at this point about the creation of the universe and the natural world around us? Do you think that the claims Sproul makes about myth apply to that story? Why or why not?

3. How about Darwinian evolution, if you didn't already consider it? Is it a myth in Sproul's sense? How well does each of the items on your list of her claims about creation myths apply to it or not apply? Does she admit any difference between a theory and a myth? Should she?

4. How well do the items on your list of her claims apply to some other candidates for modern myths? The story of Superman? Marxism? Psychoanalysis? Who Speaks for Wolf? Think about one of these at least, or some other possible modern myth that interests you.

5. Explore some ways of disagreeing with her claims. Some Americans (and some of you) probably disagree with her thesis because it is "too religious". Try to get clear about exactly what somebody with that view might say to counter her argument, even if you do not share that view yourself. Some Americans (and some of you) probably disagree with her thesis because it is an attack on religious belief. Try to get clear about exactly what somebody with this second view might say to counter her argument, even if you do not share the second view yourself.

NOW, look at her evidence. Go back and read the six myths you began with. Read all of Section Two - Near Eastern Myths, and all of Section Seven - North American Myths. Pay attention to three questions.

1. How well does each of these myths fit with her claims in the Introduction about what myths are like and what they do?

2. Do the myths in each of these two sections seem to be related to the other myths given from that same area? If so, how?

3. What can you see about how each of these myths might reflect or affect the relations of humans and nature in the place in space and time that it comes from?

4. Now that you are clearer about her thesis, what do you think about her omission of all the "socio-cultural" parts of the story? Any ideas about how having the second halves of the stories left on would affect her claims about them?

Part D

Read over the piece you wrote early on about what the book might have to do with the program's themes. See if you have any new ideas or connections to add. Now write your response paper.

Then think a little about before we get into class about what issues might be involved for you or for other people in the group in discussing this book. What about people who really feel negative about religion, if there are any? What about people who have strong religious commitments if there are any? We want to deepen our understanding of Sproul's view, what it means, why she holds it, and why she thinks it matters. We want to deepen our understanding about what, if anything, myths have to do with the relations of humans and nature in the Northwest, now and in the past. And we'd like to have an interesting time and get to understand each other better. Discussions about religious issues do not always lead to these outcomes, but they should in seminar...