Custom essays on Theories of Myth paper

This work is dedicated to the specific topic called “Theories of Myth paper”. It consists from summarizing and analyzing the information and thoughts, given in different works about this theme, summarizing and applying theories of myth to selected creation myths. The essay sheds light on the main argument of the definition and determining of term “myth”. Our core focus will be on the determining main standpoints of such questions: how to conclude the essay by reflecting on the theories to help explain the cultural function of myths in general, as I am going to show through this paper.
Keywords: myth, proof, theory approach

“There is no reason to suppose that the world had a beginning at all. The idea that things must have a beginning is really due to the poverty of our thoughts.” (Bertrand Russell)

Introduction
In the beginning of my report I would like to pay your attention that, I have used the information, which originates in a special category of mythology. In my essay I will try to explain interrelation between world outlook of ancient people and point of view of our modern culture which is suggested to us. The first, I consider that it is necessary to make definition such term as myth, and to underline the features of myths about creation of the world that are inherent in many cultures. Myths are symbolic tales of the distant past and part of cultural identity. In addition, myths are the sacred story, which concerning the origins of the world or how the world and the creatures in it came to have their present form. In conclusion, I would like to say that myths about creation of the world and the American culture (in our case, as we see, a mass culture) have common features.

Theoretical approaches of the mythology

There is definitely a big amount of theoretical approaches for analyzing myths. They are New Criticism/Formalism, Traditional Biographical Criticism, Traditional Historical criticism, Structuralism and others. I will describe an Archetypal Criticism, Reception Theory and Translation Theory. First works well with comparative studies. Ironically, it is easy to find examples of archetypes in mythology; traditionally, pretty fascinating as an approach when you are reading myths and thinking about their significance. Next one can be defined as a good chance in looking at how readers in later centuries used or changed myths as they read them. Such approach is especially good for medieval readings of classical myths. It is appropriate with classical myths. The last one is good for finding out the misunderstandings in translation, when dealing with ancient language (Greek, Latin or even modern languages, which helps to translate). Thus, main points of these approaches were described.

The main question of the work

The ancient myth and mass culture are identical in many aspects and directed to achievement of the same purposes. In the first: the anthropological myth has the aim of adaptation and the further distribution of ideas of his founders. The myth attracts the representatives of another people by the way of more attractive forms of behaviour and is influenced on consciousness of people and by that reaching the various purposes. This tendency is characteristic to mass culture. The mass culture phenomenon exists as means of distribution of these ideas and points of view that are inherent in the American nation.
It is obvious that mass culture has influence on mass consciousness, is connected with mass media and focused on consumer tastes and instincts, has character of manipulation. It is awful but Mass media represents the big threat for the independent person; it possesses the dangerous tool of suggestion, the tool of social training of the person.
In the second: one of the important functions of modern mass culture is that it consists of creation public consciousness myths. In literary works of mass culture, as well as in myths, real and ideal criteria do not separate from each other. Unfortunately, these criteria have become a subject not of knowledge, but belief. There is an opinion that the most adequate term expressing essence of products of mass culture, is such term as ‘icon’ in understanding of the sample of behaviour and thought. This term carries symbolical, essentially unreal character, is a subject of belief, worship, instead of means of reflection and world knowledge. The mass culture mystifies the real processes occurring in the nature and in human society. And the purpose is filling of leisure and to liquidate pressure and stress after the working day. These preconditions create the person who easily adapts to the quickly changing life of the modern person. However, the mass consciousness formed by a culture, is expressed by conservatism and limitation. As it is known in practice the mass consciousness has peculiar features. This culture in greater degree is created not realistic images, but stereotypes which is inherent in myths about the origin of the world. The similar situation stimulates idolatry which was characteristic for ancient Greece with its Gods-Olympians. Today modern “stars of an artificial Olympus” have fanatical admirers not less, than ancient gods and goddesses. In despite of the seeming triviality, the mass culture has rather accurate world outlook program, which is based on the certain philosophical base.

Conclusion
Theories I have described help people to understand mythology. In conclusion, I would like to say that myths about creation of the world and the American culture (in our case, as we see, a mass culture) have common features. Also I have tried to explain my point of view of this problem in our culture, and also to prove a certain interrelation between thinking of ancient people and modern Americans. Moreover, I would like to show similarity of problems appearing in consequence of construction of new society and difficulty of development of general views and values. I consider that the aims are executed in all points.

 
References
Encyclopedia of contemporary American culture/edited by Gary W. McDonogh, Robert Gregg, Cindy H. Wong. New York, 2005.