[Stephen Gerringer]

Difficult to determine what Joseph Campbell would do and say today, but I do believe he would remain relatively consistent – which to me suggests his challenge for most of us would be to “say yea to it all”:

Well, I’ll tell you. This is a big confession. I’m a minority of one. I think what’s happening is okay. I’m very optimistic. And I tend to like what’s going on. Most of my intellectual friends are superior to it. I’m not. War? Fine. The human race lives in a way that may not be comfortable to all of us, but this is the way life has proceeded. And for me I say yes. I don’t think the world has to be corrected. . . . The very attempt to correct the world is what complicates it. I mean, they’re part of the problem. And, then that’s fine. One says, Yes, that’s the way it is.

Well that – good people killing people in wars – the wars of conquest began about 2350 B.C. in the Near East and that’s the hot spot today. Seems to be the tendency in that part of the world more than any place else. And that’s the result of tribalism. But I’m not the one to say this should not have been. There’s a line in Schopenhauer’s World as Will and Idea where he says, ‘Life is something that should not have been.’ And I think that’s what a lot of people really feel. Because of the way it goes, it’s reprehensible, holocausts and other things of the kind. Storms that wash California into the sea.

I just write my books. I feel that what I have to say is something that suggests the harmony of peoples. That it’s a symphony of celebration of mankind that we find in the myths. And I know that what I have written already has made a little bit of a dent. But you can’t turn yourself into Hercules to carry the globe on your back, and say, ‘What are you doing, and now gonna do with it.’ You’ve got a little job, and do it well. That’s all I can see that anybody would do. And if you think the thing to do is to reform the world politically, go into politics. Personally I don’t think that’s the best way to make a difference . . .

Now I’ve started a little society and this is probably the place to advertise it. It’s called the Society To Stop the Continental Drift. I don’t think you realize the seriousness of this thing. In a couple of hundred years, Santa Barbara is going to be up by Nome, Alaska. What’s that going to do with the ecology, and everything else in the United States? I don’t know anybody who’s really taking this seriously enough to do anything about it. ”

(Excerpted from a question and answer session at Esalen with Fritjof Capra and Sogyal Rinpoche)

I’m willing to bet that seeming indifference (the operative word is “seeming”) to activism would be difficult for many Campbell followers, myself included, to fully embrace today, though I can’t help but appreciate the humor with which he makes his point in that final paragraph.

[Stephen Gerringer]

Jennifer,

Thank you again for your generosity of spirit and time. We haven’t had a lot of responses so far; I fear the immediacy of Facebook and its dopamine feedback loop make it difficult for those plugged-in to social media to make the effort to visit a discussion board, log in, write thoughts out long form rather than in meme, and await a reply (you may already have deduced conversations unfold at a much more leisurely pace here – sometimes it takes a day or two or more for one’s thoughts to simmer and percolate to the surface).

But quantity is no substitute for the thoughtful self-reflection of your posts.

You write

Sometimes it isn’t to show something that hasn’t been seen before, but also to show something that may have been seen but ignored or overlooked. “SEE?”

So maybe artists are not just seeing, but are those who have found a way to show?”

. . . which brings to mind the following passage from the opening paragraphs of Campbell’s Creative Mythology (The Masks of God, Volume IV)

In the context of a traditional mythology, the symbols are presented in socially maintained rites, through which the individual is required to experience, or will pretend to have experienced, certain insights, sentiments, and commitments. In what I am calling “creative” mythology, on the other hand, this order is reversed: the individual has had an experience of his own — of order, horror, beauty, or even mere exhilaration — which he seeks to communicate through signs; and if his realization has been of a certain depth and import, his communication will have the value and force of living myth — for those, that is to say, who receive and respond to it of themselves, with recognition, uncoerced.”

I love art (whether painting, poetry, performance, et.al.) in large part because it introduces me to someone else’s inner world in a way that resonates with my own.

Namaste

[Stephen Gerringer]

Jennifer,

Thank you for a thoughtful reply! I appreciate your sense of self-awareness, and especially the recognition the process is not always the same. For me, the key sentence in your post is

Over the years I have decided that as long as I like what I have created, I am not troubled much by its popularity.”

That brings to mind for me this observation from Joseph Campbell:

An artist is not in the field to achieve, to realize, but to become fulfilled. It’s a life-fulfilling, totally different structure … And it doesn’t matter whether you’re first-, second-, third-rate in the public eye. Each artist, as I know them, is in fulfillment in his or her own way. It’s not a competitive field.” (The Hero’s Journey 111)

I’m also curious about the creative spark – the source of inspiration. I hope you don’t mind if I ask, apart from, say, a specific commission, do you notice any common thread in the birth of your creations? Do ideas appear fully formed and you work toward re-creating an original vision? Or is creation more a process, something that flows through you, even surprises you, taking on a life of its own? What would you say is the balance between inspiration, intention, spontaneity, discipline, and play?

I know it’s not easy putting that into words, but I believe there is value in considering and understanding the creative process. Campbell spoke of artists as the seers and shamans of our modern era. Seer strikes me as an apt term: seems to me art could be described as a way of seeing, or perceiving. It might well be intuitive for most artists, whatever their medium – but I also see value, for those who are not artists or don’t think of themselves as creative, in cultivating that mode of perception.

One more question – when did you know you were an artist? Did you make a conscious decision to pursue art? Or did you over time realize that you have always been an artist.

Don’t feel obligated (these are conversations, not interrogations), but have you the time and the inclination, feel free to shed whatever light you can on your internal process.

Bliss On,
Stephen

[Stephen Gerringer]

Well stated, Steve.

I’m curious if you have a particular artistic medium (writing, painting, music, et.), or are speaking of the state of flow and creativity in relation to life in general?

Either way, I really appreciate this observation in particular:

It was almost as if I were acting as a divine channel/medium for divine inspiration to flow through me and to whomever or whatever was present.”

That’s a wonderful description of what it’s like to be touched by the Muse (to put it in mythological terms).

[Stephen Gerringer]

Thanks for bearing with me, Craig!

As a matter of fact, that is not the actual difference between those two members of the corvid family – but since most people couldn’t say just exactly what distinguishes one from the other, that’s what I latch onto to make the pun work (I’m not proud – certainly nothing to crow about). 😄

Puns, though, do intrigue me. That leap of association, the dynamic that makes punning possible, seems embedded as well in symbolic thinking – which brings us back to your essay (intuiting a relationship between mythic stories and my story), and the example you share from your own life. Had we, unbeknownst to each other, been sitting the other side of the same rock at the exact same moment you had your experience, I might well have turned to indigenous tales of Raven given the setting, influenced by the geography and the myths associated with it; you, on the other hand, recognized a congruence with the material in which you were immersed.

Same three ravens, same geographical context, but different lives, different histories, different circumstances, and a difference in engagement with the same mythic image.

That to me is one of the wonders of mythic symbols. It might be different if we were raised in a cultural where everyone underwent the same initiations, were fed the same myths, participated in the same rituals – but today, when that just isn’t happening, every myth and fairy tale – and, come to think of it, every song, story, painting, and poem – has both a collective and a subjective aspect. The latter speaks specifically to me and my circumstances (assuming that I have “the ears to hear”), just as it does to all the other “me”s who engage the same set of symbols.

That protean, shapeshifting aspect strikes me as very much part of the magic of myth.

[Stephen Gerringer]

Hey James,

I believe I will start over with a different thread. That’s only because the conversation has moved away from the subject (and not because it’s not a worthwhile conversation); though we can wrest it back on track, anyone drawn here to discuss writing and creativity would have to wade through several off-topic posts – so I’ll open another conversation on a related subject, and maybe cap this one.

We started off with Joseph Campbell discussing the source of creative inspiration with Bill Moyers, within the framework of the written word. Since music is more your medium, it might help for you to approach the subject from that direction. Do you write songs, or are you primarily a performer. If you do write, where does the music come from; and if your strength is performing, what is happening to, within, and through you as you play, immersed in a song.

Just tossing that into mix. When and if I get a new post up, you might want to take your experience, and perhaps that of the audience, as a starting point

. . . or not.
😉

[Stephen Gerringer]

Writer’s block results from
too much head. Cut off your head.”

(A Joseph Campbell Companion: Reflections on the Art of Living)

Too much head in this thread. Not that I haven’t enjoyed it, but we seem to have fallen down a rather wordy rabbit hole. Intellectual analysis has its place (goddess knows I love to wallow in it), but all too often serves as the Muse’s kryptonite.

I believe I’ll start over with a different thread . . .

[Stephen Gerringer]

I too, Marianne, am far more enamored of Campbell and Jung than of Freud – both C.G. and Joe speak to me more than good old Sigmund, who nevertheless deserves respect for disrupting the status quo and changing the conversation.

And I do find deconstruction unnerving – once everything is torn down to its constituent parts, and then those, too, are deconstructed, there is no ground to stand on. To me, that’s unsettling, and smacks of intellectual nihilism – but my discomfort may well be due to my default setting (I’m a lumper, not a splitter). Just because I have trouble embracing that approach doesn’t mean there is no value in it.

Though this is a good conversation, it does seem to have wandered far afield from a discussion of writing and the creative spark. Not to worry, as apparently this discussion needed to emerge; nevertheless, could be a touch confusing to forum-goers expecting a discussion of  writing and creativity (considering both the topic, and the fact we’re in the Creative Mythology forum, devoted to art and the creative impulse). Rather than try to wrestle us back to the topic, I think I might open another thread.

[Stephen Gerringer]

This is tangential to the actual conversation, but thought I would share about the time I asked my ornithologist friend the difference between a crow and a raven.

“Well,” she said, “you know the pinion feathers on the end of birds wing that help them steer? Ravens have 11, while crows just have ten.”

So it seems the difference between a crow and a raven is simply a matter of a pinion . . .

[Stephen Gerringer]

Shaahayda, you write

I’ll mention Campbell’s own words, ‘Historical Development of  Mythology’ is what I am  interested in — Not the various volumes of the Historical Development of  Mythology, which too are master pieces.” (I think you mean the Historical Atlas of World Mythology” rather than the “Historical Development of Mythology” in that second sentence.)

I hate to sound contrary (not that I can help it – Mercury is in retrograde), but do keep in mind that Ms. Yang is specifically addressing The Hero with a Thousand Faces. That has a different accent than Campbell’s later work.

Speaking of the difference between The Hero with a Thousand Faces, and, four decades later, The Historical Atlas of World Mythology, Joe explains:

The big organizing principle that I am using is historical and geographical—it’s an atlas. In The Hero with a Thousand Faces, I was stressing the archetypes; the accent was psychological. Here, I am stressing the differentiations and the distribution of the differentiations.

Hero with a Thousand Faces didn’t focus on the historical development of mythology (the working title, you may recall, was “How to Read a Myth”). Though the quote you borrow from James is correct in terms of the perspective Campbell developed across the whole arc of his life, that historical development of myth isn’t the point of the work Yang is addressing – but if you share that quote, absent context, it comes across as if you are claiming that is indeed the point of The Hero …

If you are going to reach out, I suspect you’d get better traction gently highlighting demonstrable errors she can correct (PoM is not a television adaptation of HWATF; books credited to Heinrich Zimmer are not major works by Campbell, etc.), rather than steer her toward a big picture understanding not directly related to the task she set out to accomplish.

[Stephen Gerringer]

The original topic of the thread focuses on Joseph Campbell’s approach to writing, rather than the hero’s journey (true, the HJ  can be a useful aid for fiction writers, but Joe didn’t write fiction – none, at any rate, published in his lifetime), so when James in his comment referenced the hero’s journey in regards to personal myth, I wasn’t sure where he was heading (there is, after all, a wide gulf between the hero’s journey as a writing template, and as a guide to life).

The mention of Chris Vogler’s The Writer’s Journey does bring us back to the topic.

James writes

My problem with Vogler’s particular template is that it is often seen as a concretized construct for the alchemical process that takes place within the individuation process so that all individual stories or personal life experiences have a tendency to be interpreted through this particular lens instead of the wide variation that any persons life-course may take.”

That’s a complaint that seems to apply as much or more to Joseph Campbell’s schema of the hero quest first announced in The Hero with a Thousand Faces; it, too, is “often seen as a concretized construct for the alchemical process . . . so that all individual stories or personal life experiences have a tendency to be interpreted through this particular lens instead of the wide variation that any persons life-course may take” (not what Campbell intended, of course, but that is certainly how many see it – not that Campbell, nor Vogler, for that matter, should be blamed for a reader’s misunderstanding)

Vogler’s book, unlike Campbell’s, is first and foremast a guide to creative writing, specifically screenplays. Neither individuation nor alchemy are mentioned, nor is his intended audience those who are trying to improve themselves or seeking the meaning of life. The book is merely about applying mythic structure to the craft of creative writing (though the latest edition now includes a new final chapter, called “Trust the Path,” added for those who wish to  discover themselves through the act of writing).

Two summers ago at the annual combined JCF Board and staff meeting, Chris gifted each of us with copies of the latest edition of The Writer’s Journey (which, I trust, addresses Shaahayda’s concerns about Vogler’s relations with JCF. Though he does his own thing, he does not downplay his debt to Joseph Campbell and is generally supportive of JCF’s mission).

Nevertheless, I do share James’ uneasiness in general.  Like James, I don’t have any problem with what Vogler writes in his book, and happily recommend it to others. My issue is with the tendency of more than a few writers and directors working in the Hollywood dream factories to take the guidance offered in Vogler’s book as a rigid formula for turning out blockbuster box office gold – a concern Vogler himself warns against in his book. As with George Lucas and others, awareness of the hero’s journey story arc can help one polish and improve a tale, but is no substitute for talent.

Which brings me to Shaahayda’s understandable frustration with Hannah Yang’s summary of the hero’s journey story pattern. Some unforced errors are way off base, such as the claim that The Hero with a Thousand Faces was adapted for television as the Power of Myth (as Shaahayda notes, only one of the six broadcast episodes is focused on hero myths), or listing, among five of “his other major works,” three books by Heinrich Zimmer (Campbell did edit these works, and had much to do with their creation, but ultimately they are major works by Zimmer, not Joe).

At the same time, Yang gets several things right, given her mission and her audience. Keep in mind this is essentially a simplified summary of the hero journey motif designed for a broad audience – sort of a Cliff Notes version – rather than an evaluation of Campbell’s entire body of work.

From that perspective, Yang’s comments about Freud’s and Jung’s influence are on target. Discussing The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Campbell notes in a radio interview “For a while I was equally committed to Freud and Jung as the principal explicators of myth in psychological terms, but during the years the Jungian position has seemed to me to be more and more important.⁠” It wasn’t until well after he finished Hero that he gravitated toward Jung as a guide to life, seeing Freud  as more focused on the role myth plays in the psyche of the those with pathological conditions.

Yes, over the course of his lifetime Campbell’s work embraced more than just Freud and Jung, but Hannah Yang isn’t discussing his entire corpus. Her mission is to succinctly summarize the origins of Campbell’s identification of the hero’s journey arc, which is equally indebted to Freud and Jung. In a piece like this, which is basically a brief dictionary or encyclopedia entry, can’t really blame someone for not covering every nuance of the subject (I’m frankly surprised she got as much in as she did).

Similarly, the objections to the hero’s journey Yang shares with readers aren’t her own complaints, but “common criticisms” of the hero’s journey (which any good teacher is obligated to raise). Though one might disagree with these criticisms, Yang isn’t defending them, just sharing them with her audience. What she says is accurate – these are common criticisms, and she would be remiss to leave them out, though the wording is a little awkward (e.g. the statement that Campbell’s work “reduces the world to binary choices” is more often expressed as the claim that Campbell embraces duality – not a valid observation to to my mind, but one that is heard from some, like Robert Segal).

Shaahayda, like you my initial tendency is to want to reach out and enlighten this individual, correct her misunderstandings – but I believe James offers a valuable piece of wisdom when he asks why this bothers you so much. What would it serve to reach out to her and correct her? What would that accomplish? Would she read a brief paragraph from you, slap her forehead with the palm of her hand, and be convinced that her take is in error? Unlikely (heck, most people who post material on the internet for public consumption already know to never read the comments).

I write the responses to the general queries people send in via JCF’s online contact form. Just today, I pulled up a query that landed in my InBox several days ago, which asked us, “Are you related to Joe? What deplorable examples of humanity you are. You know it, and you know why. For everything Joe gave to our human family, you have taken away.”

That must have struck a nerve, because I spent an inordinate amount of time crafting a response detailing JCF’s accomplishments, observing how little of Joe’s work would be available if the Foundation didn’t exist, and so forth and so on. I edited and re-edited it down to a little over 1,100 words. When it was perfect, just as I was about to click Send, I asked myself the question James posed to you” “Why does this bother me?” – and an addendum: “what do I hope to accomplish?”

I’m not going to convert this individual. He is just trolling us, and isn’t going to read my response with an open mind and rue his insensitive words – so, fortunately, I did not send off my missive (though I saved the draft – I should be able to use portions of it elsewhere at some point).

I don’t think it’s necessary to try and convert Ms. Yang either, whether with a detailed erudite post, or by assigning homework (i.e. come to this website and read what’s here so you can learn the proper facts about Campbell). I don’t think such actions would have the effect you’d hope. Not that you shouldn’t express an opinion – such feedback can be important – just don’t be wedded to the results.

If someone misquotes or plagiarizes Joseph Campbell, JCF will certainly correct them. And if there is an egregious misstatement of fact (e.g. Campbell was an anti-Semite, or a misogynist), that could, depending on the platform and who is posting it, require a response  But we aren’t going to take issue with everyone who writes about the hero’s journey and expresses a contrary opinion on some points; nor are we going to ask for credentials from anyone who offers a critique, positive or negative, or demand they financially support the Foundation, any more than Joseph Campbell would have been expected to write a check to the C.G. Jung Institute when he analyzed and opined about Jung’s work.

Rather than play whack-a-mole, I find the best approach, at least for JCF, is to do our best to ensure we present Campbell’s core understandings as clearly as possible, to the widest possible audience. That’s part of the reason behind creating our 500-plus quotation database – Joe’s own words. The update of our website will include permanent thought pieces on the hero’s journey, the four functions of myth, and what Campbell means by “follow your bliss” – informative for the general public, while, at the same time, almost in passing, popping some of the most egregious misstatements by citing Campbell’s actual words. That works much better than most direct engagement, which only feeds the controversy.

That said, maybe we can veer back to the subject of Campbell’s thoughts on the creative spark that started this thread . . .

[Stephen Gerringer]

Robert Juliano

I have long looked at these phenomena (not just UFO sightings, but alien abductions, sightings of the Virgin, as well as “ladies in white,” Black Dogs, fairy encounters, Yetis, Bigfoot, ghosts, and such) as occupying the imaginal realm, a’ la Henry Corbin, but had not yet had the time to compose a post on the subject; fortunately you covered that ground better than I could.

Thanks for your contribution to the conversation!

[Stephen Gerringer]

Shaahayda writes:

Stephen, talking about the Historical Atlas Vol 1, part 1 and Vol2..print form, (1988 – 1989) I found them at this book store:

https://www.secondstorybooks.com/advSearchResults.php?action=search&orderBy=relevance&category_id=0&keywordsField=joseph+campbell+  “

And even if one purchases all the books in the Historical Atlas this vendor has on hand, still missing the second part of Volume I and the first part of Volume II – but that’s pretty much the only way to find the print copies these days, piecemeal, though dedicated and regular searches (and if one doesn’t move quickly, then someone else buys them and you have to start over).

If one has the time and can afford to track down all five published parts of the print edition of the Atlas, I do recommend that. They are visually arresting, and well worth it.

As you note, no re-release of the print version is planned (that would take ears of dedicated effort – just confirming permissions for the hundreds of photos is labor intensive and time consuming – and would be incredibly expensive). That’s also a reason why, in the digital addition, we don’t associate the offerings we have with the published “parts” of the existing print volumes, as that division is irrelevant in an eBook (in much the same way, once cassette tapes went away, JCF no longer had to edit audio lectures down to fit an hour format, or provide for a break 29 minutes into the lecture so listeners could flip the tape over).

But eventually releasing the two volumes of the Historical Atlas as complete eBooks will make this material accessible and affordable for the general reader – and there are also advantages to eBooks that print volumes don’t have (such as links to related material).

[Stephen Gerringer]

Thank you for bringing this up, Shaahayda. I’m confident you aren’t the only Campbell reader who has questions about the Historical Atlas.

Before I address your numbered questions, I’ll provide a little background – or rather, a lot of background (which will likely answer a few of those questions).

The idea for the Historical Atlas of World Mythology, originally envisioned as a large, illustrated single volume coffee table book, started with Alfred van der Marck,  the head of the the division of McGraw-Hill headquartered in Switzerland. He approached Joseph Campbell, who declined the project and referred him to Mircea Eliade, the other leading light on mythology. Eliade loved the idea, but believed Campbell was the only person up to the task, so van der Marck again approached Joseph, who let himself be persuaded and signed a contract with McGraw-Hill in 1976.

Joe was excited because this work would be centered on visual images:

 

My own view is that the visual aspect of myth is what is primary. Myth derives, it seems to me, from envisionments, from visions, and vision is trans-cultural, trans-linguistic. . . .

The logics of image thinking and of verbal thinking are two very different logics.⁠ I’m more and more convinced that there is, as it were, a series of archetypes which are psychologically grounded, which just have to operate, but in whatever field is available to them. In the myths, they are represented pictorially. There’s a big distinction to be made between the impact of the image, and the intellectual and social interpretation and application of the image.⁠ (Joseph Campbell, from a yet-to-be-published manuscript I’ve edited)

Campbell envisioned the Atlas as consisting of images of works of art from a specific cultural matrix on the same page as the related myths and explanatory text, along with charts, graphs, and maps, all woven together. (The technology to do this did not exist when he wrote The Masks of God in the fifties and sixties, and much less The Hero with a Thousand Faces in 1949):

This one also has a totally different format.⁠ I don’t think there has been another scholar anywhere who has had the good fortune to have a publisher who said, ‘How many pictures do you need?’⁠ I think that actually mythology is image, and it’s only because the publication of pictures is so expensive that we don’t realize that in our reading.⁠3 So this opportunity to have hundreds and hundreds of pictures, the ones I choose—and besides, those brand new, beautiful maps—opens a whole new prospect to exposition. I can say things here you can’t say without a visual accompaniment⁠.

Myth is expression, not just reading. The reader has to see the picture and say, “Aha!”, so the reference has got to be right there; the picture and text need to be on the same page. I just can’t tell you what agony it is getting the illustrations into the book, though I love working with them⁠. The discourse is really extrapolation out of the implications of the image. And to be able to have a book where my prose meets the image, right on the same page, is a marvelous privilege. It really is. In the Masks of God it’s all conceptual, but here, you can have the experience⁠.” (ibid)

This proved a very expensive, time-consuming process – but over the course of four years Campbell ran into roadblocks with the designer. Eventually, van der Marck fired the designer and assigned a new designer that Joe loved – but then that designer died. Campbell persuaded van der Marck and McGraw-Hill to hire Robert Walter to help take charge and organize the massive material for the Atlas (which was shipped over from Switzerland in dozens of boxes).

Then, in late 1981, McGraw-Hill fired Alfred van der Marck. Joseph Campbell was incensed at their treatment of his friend and publisher, so he refused to write another word; he returned his advance, and paid an additional $25,000 to secure title to all the material developed up to that point (a huge financial hit; Campbell was no a man of wealth – I have it on good authority that, between teaching, writing, and public appearances, he never earned more than $15,000 any single year of his life; he didn’t even receive a pension from Sarah Lawrence when he retired). Van der Marck spent the next year trying to persuade every major publisher to buy Campbell’s book. Come Christmas of 1982, Fred van der Marck, Bob Walter, and Joseph Campbell met to determine next steps.

That’s when Joe observed that Fred was a publisher, Bob an editor, and Campbell a writer, so they should just publish it themselves. They mortgaged everything they owned to come up with the initial funding and created Van der Marck Editions. Campbell had a long list of books he wanted to publish, including work by other authors such as Marija Gimbutas, and, after the Atlas, several books of his own (the posthumously published works that comprise most of the Collected Works of Joseph Campbell have their origin in that list).

Campbell’s notes and research for the Atlas, starting back in the 1970s, are extensive (written in pencil on yellow legal pads). He began with Africa, and soon had collected so much material that he realized the Atlas could easily be an unwieldy dozen or so volumes that still wouldn’t do the subject justice, so realized he would have to come up with a different format. Eventually, he settled on four volumes:

I. The Way of the Animal Powers
(Starting with early hunters and gatherers, cultures where shamanism was the primary approach). Published in 1983

II. The Way of the Seeded Earth
(the mythological shift that comes in with agriculture) Published in 1988/89

III. The Way of the Celestial Lights
(beginning with the development of civilization in Mesopotamia, Egypt, India, and China, when humanity’s mythological focus turned to the heavens) Never completed

IV. The Way of Man
(the mythological shift that begins around 500 B.C., with the perennial philosophy as it appears among the Greek philosophers in the Mediterranean region and Buddhism in India, continuing up the present – paralleling, in many ways, ideas contained in The Masks of God Vol. IV: Creative Mythology) Never completed

Sad to say, Campbell died after the first volume was published and about three-fourths of the way through the second volume.   Bob and Fred were able to pull enough material together left by Campbell to complete the second volume (The Way of the Seeded Earth); alas, the final two volumes died along with Joe.

Volume I – The Way of the Animal Powers, was published in 1983 as a beautiful but massive, unwieldy, coffee table sized hardbound book,selling for $75 ( a prohibitive sum back in the early eighties, equivalent to roughly $200 today). When it was released in paperback, still oversized, it was published as two distinct coffee table sized softcover books:

Historical Atlas of World Mythology
Volume I: The Way of the Animal Powers
Part 1: Mythologies of the Primitive Hunters and Gatherers

and

Historical Atlas of World Mythology
Volume I: The Way of the Animal Powers
Part 2: Mythologies of the Great Hunt

One can occasionally purchase Volume I on eBay in the huge, single-volume hardbound version, but more likely you’ll find it in the two softcover books noted above (which is what I have on my shelves).

The second volume (The Way of the Seeded Earth) was released as three separate coffee table size books in 1988 and 1989, after Campbell’s passing:

Historical Atlas of World Mythology
Volume II: The Way of the Seeded Earth
Part 1: The Sacrifice

followed by

Historical Atlas of World Mythology
Volume II: The Way of the Seeded Earth
Part 2: Mythologies of the Primitive Planters: The Northern Americas

and finally

Historical Atlas of World Mythology
Volume II: The Way of the Seeded Earth
Part 3: Mythologies of the Primitive Planters: The Middle and Southern Americas

(so, in answer to your question number 7, the print version of the Historical Atlas of World Mythology that can sometimes be found in used bookstores, or possibly online, consists of only the first two volumes published in five parts, each part a separate book.)

The digital version does engender some confusion. Each of the five parts that comprise the two volumes consist of multiple sections. Only four sections from the first part of volume one have been digitized and made available as eSingles (these are the “parts” you can find on Amazon and elsewhere, which are not the same as the books that comprise Parts 1 through 5 of the physical volumes). No sections from the second part of Volume 1, nor any section from Volume II, are available in a digital format.

On to your questions:

1.      Why is the Atlas only in Kindle format?

It isn’t. The sections of the Atlas that have been digitized are available in mobi, ePub, and PDF formats. Amazon’s Kindle only uses the mobi format, so that’s all you’ll find on Amazon, whereas iBooks uses the ePub format (though I don’t believe any sections of the Atlas are available through iBooks, which doesn’t publish little parts of a book, all Joe’s other work should be).

2.       Are other formats available through other vendors?

If you go to our eBook page at this link and scroll down, you’ll find the four small sections of Volume I of the Historical Atlas that have been published so far (the same ones up on Amazon)

Each of these sections can be purchased and downloaded from JCF in mobi format (if one has a Kindle device), ePub format (if your eBook reader is iBooks or another ePub platform), and as a PDF. You choose which format as part of the purchasing process

3.      There (on Amazon.ca + com) are books 1, 4, 5, 6. Where are 2 and 3?

Only 4 sections of Volume I are available as eSingles so far, with 4 more to come (and that’s not counting the 8 parts of  Volume II, which has yet to be digitized). You’ll find all the parts listed here, with links to what you can download.

Those 4 sections were chosen because they are primarily text, and hence easier to transfer to an eBookl format. David Kudler, Managing Editor of the Collected Works, was new to the art of designing eBooks when those were created several years ago; the Historical Atlas is incredibly complicated, given the mix of text, images (hundreds of images), maps, charts, tables and reference notes. Coordinating those so they work together the way Campbell intended is no easy task in an eBook (even more difficult than producing the original print volumes). It’s tedious and time-consuming.

At the same time, we had several new Campbell works to complete, as well as revised editions to create of existing works whose copyrights had reverted to JCF. Those took priority. It quickly became apparent that if JCF concentrated on completing the many sections of the Historical Atlas, it would be years before we could start releasing his other works as eBooks – so we moved ahead with that (most are now available for digital devices).

Now that David has the craft perfected, at the last Board meeting he shared that, once a few other priority projects are met, he will return to working with the rest of the Historical Atlas.

4.      IS there a delay in their publication?

I believe that is covered in the answer to the previous question.

5.      A Reviewer wrote, the Kindle version never downloaded. Is it Amazon’s fault or the customer’s, but that was the only review on Kindle for “People’s of the Equatorial forest”

That’s something for Amazon to determine, which they apparently have, as your next question indicates.

6.      So I tried downloading, and it downloaded just fine.

Glad it worked – seems Amazon resolved the problem

7.      One final question. Would this book be available in print form as one Single Atlas or in segments, book 1 thru —-?

As noted somewhere above, in print form the Historical Atlas was available in two volumes, consisting of five distinct oversize  books (Volume I in two parts, Volume II in 3 parts).

There are no plans to publish Volumes III and IV, as Joseph Campbell is not here to write them. Nor are there plans to re-release print versions of the first two volumes.

Instead, we will ultimately end up publishing all the sections of Volume I as one large, beautiful eBook (including the four sections already out) replete with hundreds of images, and the same for Volume II. That date lies a few years in the future (possibly by  2025, given the current publishing schedule).

Shaahayda – I trust that answers your question. Thank you for bearing with me!

[Stephen Gerringer]

Norland,

As you have mentioned (and we discussed prior to the publication of your essay), Campbell doesn’t really express himself on the subject – though I do recall a couple passing mentions re life in outer space (apart from the Fire Women from Outer Space poster). I have looked for those since our email exchange, and finally found one:

The idea that we will have a divine visitation by some friendly forms, benign forces from other planets who will come to our aid and save us, is a clear reflection of an outmoded understanding of the universe. Jung wrote that the modern myth of unidentified flying objects tells us something of humankind’s visionary expectations. People are looking for visits from the outside world because they think our deliverance will come from there. But the space age reminds us that voyages into outer space turn us back to inner space. The Kingdom of God is within us, but we have this idea that the gods act from ‘out there.'” (A Joseph Campbell Companion: Reflections on the Art of Living 168-169)

The other reference, which was much warmer toward the likelihood of life elsewhere in the universe, I’m still searching for.

[Author]

Posts