New Post
Search
HelpRe: Hera (edited)
in reply to a message by Manipura
it doesn't need to be meaningfully symbolic in order to be used in modern times as a name.
Yeah, that's pretty much my whole idea here.
What I think is not possible is acting as if Hera (specifically, that name) can be meaningfully symbolic without understanding one's relationship with the cultural context her power is depicted in. Although it doesn't need to be meaningfully symbolic in order to be used in modern times as a name.
Right, okay - I would say "not possible to claim it's meaningfully symbolic, without having related it to one's own perception of the cultural context her power is depicted in" - since we don't *have* the cultural context her power is depicted in. It's separated from us by millennia. We have only our own culture's transmission of some stories, along with a framework for our understanding of them - as if they were our own cultural heritage. Despite us not really being able to "get" how anyone believed in gods like this, and having to characterize myths as "religion" or "propaganda" (terms with meanings specific to our culture).
Propaganda's biased info used to promote a particular POV which is *conceived/treated as authoritative* ... you say.
Okay ... I'd say it's information from agency (biased and promoting a POV), which superficially functions as a cultural artifact (art or literature or religion or news or advertising etc), and essentially functions for social-cultural control of the many by a few. As it is disseminated from a small group to the general society, whether deliberately for the purpose of social control, or not (often it's not deliberately for "control" but it does functionally control). Myths fit the bill, yeah - but so does our own modern popular entertainment, and so does any authoritative cultural analysis we might give of ancient Greek mythology. You speak as if with authority, when you judge what cultural values and contexts are positive or negative, and I just can't be sure I agree or not ... I don't know what concept you're referring to, when you cite power of marriage and imply it's something our culture might ever depict. How is it positive for you, if you reject Hera's entire context as patriarchal and rapey. Isn't that reinventing it and claiming it's connected to Hera because you yourself make an analogy? I mean, I guess I see how that works, you can certainly do that - it's a legit privilege of people who live later rather than earlier, to interpret history in whatever ways seem beneficial. But for myself, if I wish to decide whether or not Hera is meaningfully symbolic for me, I'm interested in emotionally relating to what Hera *does* represent archetypally (despite her and her stories having been conceived and always transmitted in cultural, or "propagandistic," contexts) - before I can get interested in reimagining what she would or could represent, if recontextualized using my own personal ideals and concepts (which are ultimately just more cultural propaganda).
- mirfak
Yeah, that's pretty much my whole idea here.
What I think is not possible is acting as if Hera (specifically, that name) can be meaningfully symbolic without understanding one's relationship with the cultural context her power is depicted in. Although it doesn't need to be meaningfully symbolic in order to be used in modern times as a name.
Right, okay - I would say "not possible to claim it's meaningfully symbolic, without having related it to one's own perception of the cultural context her power is depicted in" - since we don't *have* the cultural context her power is depicted in. It's separated from us by millennia. We have only our own culture's transmission of some stories, along with a framework for our understanding of them - as if they were our own cultural heritage. Despite us not really being able to "get" how anyone believed in gods like this, and having to characterize myths as "religion" or "propaganda" (terms with meanings specific to our culture).
Propaganda's biased info used to promote a particular POV which is *conceived/treated as authoritative* ... you say.
Okay ... I'd say it's information from agency (biased and promoting a POV), which superficially functions as a cultural artifact (art or literature or religion or news or advertising etc), and essentially functions for social-cultural control of the many by a few. As it is disseminated from a small group to the general society, whether deliberately for the purpose of social control, or not (often it's not deliberately for "control" but it does functionally control). Myths fit the bill, yeah - but so does our own modern popular entertainment, and so does any authoritative cultural analysis we might give of ancient Greek mythology. You speak as if with authority, when you judge what cultural values and contexts are positive or negative, and I just can't be sure I agree or not ... I don't know what concept you're referring to, when you cite power of marriage and imply it's something our culture might ever depict. How is it positive for you, if you reject Hera's entire context as patriarchal and rapey. Isn't that reinventing it and claiming it's connected to Hera because you yourself make an analogy? I mean, I guess I see how that works, you can certainly do that - it's a legit privilege of people who live later rather than earlier, to interpret history in whatever ways seem beneficial. But for myself, if I wish to decide whether or not Hera is meaningfully symbolic for me, I'm interested in emotionally relating to what Hera *does* represent archetypally (despite her and her stories having been conceived and always transmitted in cultural, or "propagandistic," contexts) - before I can get interested in reimagining what she would or could represent, if recontextualized using my own personal ideals and concepts (which are ultimately just more cultural propaganda).
- mirfak
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1