Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Theories of Mythology Laurel Bowman (bio) Eric Csapo. Theories of Mythology Blackwell. xiv, 338. US $32.95 In preparation for teaching an upper-year undergraduate class on myth and theory this year, I read several recent introductions to theories of myth. Eric Csapo's Theories of Mythology was streets ahead of the rest. It is lively, literate, erudite, and well versed in the theories it treats. It particularly excels in placing the theories in their historical, cultural, and intellectual context, which allows Csapo to trace not only the chronological development of theories of myth, but the cultural and intellectual forces impelling and directing that development. Csapo demonstrates throughout the ability not only to describe but to apply theory in flexible and innovative ways. His last chapter, 'Ideology,' demonstrates the fusion of mythical, cultural, and literary theory in the late twentieth century, arising from their common basis in (and reaction to) structuralist thought. Csapo apologizes, in the preface, for being unable to read Vladimir Propp in the original Russian; every other theorist he has read in the original languages. I forgive him Propp, and frankly stand in awe. Certainly reading the theorists in the original languages is essential, to avoid the biases introduced by translation; and equally certainly, not all those writing on theory have done it. Csapo's solid grounding in the original texts, both theoretical and mythical, makes his writing at once authoritative and engaged. Nothing here is second-hand. Csapo begins with a discussion of the definition of 'myth,' in which he demonstrates that our definitions of the term 'myth,' which are the basis for any theoretical interpretation, are themselves inextricably linked to the theoretical assumptions they condition. His chapter on comparative approaches revitalizes the elsewhere often monotonous discussion of the principal theories of myth arising from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, by showing their relationship to each other and to the intellectual currents of the time. He gives priority to the discovery of the Indo-European language group, and to the development of comparative anthropology and the necessity of producing a model for cultural [End Page 365] development that acknowledged without apparent prejudice the differences between cultures, while continuing to give the culture of the British Victorian male intelligentsia first priority. His discussion of Freud is a close and careful reading of Freud's use of myth and its association with his techniques of interpretation of dreams. The discussion of ritualist approaches begins very usefully with Émile Durkheim on religion, and only then moves to Jane Harrison and Walter Burkert. The final chapters on structuralism and ideology are a tour de force, useful reading for any student of literary theory. Throughout the book, Csapo is careful to draw out the hidden assumptions of each school of thought, and the consequent shortcomings of each approach. Csapo does not discuss Jungian interpretation with myth, or the enormously popular 'Hero's Journey' model, loosely based on Jung, which was developed by Joseph Campbell. Campbell's work is not properly speaking a method of mythical interpretation and would have been out of place in Csapo's book, but I would have liked to hear what Csapo had to say about Jung. Csapo also does not discuss feminist readings of myth, except to mention them very briefly as a subcategory of Marxism. I would have liked to see a lengthier treatment of that approach. But the most thorough book can't cover everything, and what Csapo has done is lucid, illuminating, refreshing, and extremely informative. I recommend it to anyone looking for an intellectually engaging overview of theories of interpretation of myth. Laurel Bowman Laurel Bowman, Department of Greek and Roman Studies, University of Victoria Copyright © 2007 University of Toronto Press Incorporated
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.013 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".