You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The intention of Slochower's book is twofold. On the one hand, he would clearly define what he calls “mythopoesis,” and he would meticulously explore literary masterpieces which reflect a certain process adumbrated in the definition: from theoretical exposition to practical application, a just enough procedure. On the other hand, Slochower would do this in such a way as to catalyze intellectual growth and behavioral change in the reader, behavioral change which he would have transpire at the sociocultural level.
Mythopoesis, we learn, “recreates the ancient stories.” Accordingly, Slochower's book
examines those myths which have seized the imagination of our classical writers, who then transformed the various mythological accounts into a single, unified work of art …; while mythology presents its stories as if they actually took place, mythopoesis transposes them to a symbolic meaning. Indeed, the mythopoeic works examined in this study arose when the literal account of the legend could no longer be accepted. They arose in periods of crisis, of cultural transition, when faith in the authoritative structure was waning. It is at this juncture that our great prophets and artists would redeem the values of the past in their symbolic form, transposing their historic transitoriness into permanent promises.” (p. 15, Slochower's italics)
The cultural significance of myth, as we traditionally understand it, is to preserve, buttress, or reinforce tradition. Mythopoesis “would not restore the dead past, but would redeem its living heritage” (Slochower's italics). The hero becomes “the creative agent of the community,” and although the creative change he advocates through the very nature of his being does not obtain fully at the conclusion of his journey, he still points the way: the mythic quest is inherited and passed on through the hero's “assimilation.” Slochower addresses himself to an analysis of Job, Greek tragedy, Dante, Cervantes, Shakespeare, Goethe, Melville, Nexö, Dosto