Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gary OS 
JoAnn, could you define the word "myth" as you mean it? You have been using the word a lot and it would help me if I had a good working definition as you see it. Thanks.
Gary "no one can question your love for Mannix - both the show and character" O.
Gary,
I'd be happy to -- and it's nice to know you are reading the Mannix thread!
My bottom, bottom line definition of a myth is that it contains more abstract, universal -- and thus powerful -- symbolism than other mere stories. Let me try to explain -- as I mention in closing, I am not an expert on the topic.
My use of the word "myth" to describe Mannix came about after watching the Bill Moyers PBS special with Joseph Campbell from 1988, The Power of Myth. This is not only a famous collection of specials, it appears to be the piece of work of Bill Moyer's most watched and admired. I watched it only late last October, after someone pointed it out to me. Since then, in only the past few months, I've seen it mentioned twice now in my normal viewing, once on Piers Morgan (by no less than William Shatner, who was referring to Star Trek at the time) and once by no less than Steven Colbert, who had Bill Moyers on as a guest a few weeks ago. Steven Colbert referred to the Moyers-Campbell special with some reverence. Bill Moyers was also recently a guest on Bill Maher -- and while I can't remember if the Campbell interviews came up in that interview or not, Bill Maher is clearly a big fan of Bill Moyers, despite the vast divide between them on the subject of religion, and those Campbell specials are, arguably, Moyer's signature piece of work.
Joseph Campbell is "the myth guy." He based his entire academic career on the study of myths, and wrote "The Hero With a Thousand Faces" -- a book I have not yet read, but plan to. Thus, my working definition is culled from his explanation, after having viewed the six hours of his special with Bill Moyers. And, again, if you are interested in the importance of stories, especially inspirational stories, I suggest viewing The Power of Myth. It is quite simply, extraordinary.
So, given that as a backdrop, I'll give the general definition of a myth, and then my working definition.
As with most terms (including and perhaps especially the ones in my very technical field), precise definitions can be elusive. Often, as is the case with myth, there is a precise definition and then the way the term is used. One reason for this is because the precise definition tends to reduce the term to mean less than it does in the actual cultural use. Precise definitions can remove the power of a term, and that is true in this case as well.
At its lowest level, myth is simply a story -- any story. To the extent that stories are made up projections of something inside of ourselves, the characters in stories are all mythological characters. This may be the most precise definition of a myth, at least to some.
However, since mythology is associated with the ancients, the stories that they told -- at least the ones that survived -- tended to be broad narratives that told stories of origin and attempted to explain if not the meaning of life then at the very least how to behave. So the modern usage of the word "myth" takes on connotation of a powerful story, one that explains the values of an entire culture.
For this reason, myths tend to be universal in nature.
There is a reason the ancients defined their myths as types of gods -- the implication was that the elements of which the individual gods were comprised are in each and every one of us. The gods strike elements of ourselves into relief. They are not viewed as "other." They are in all of us. Thus, they are gods.
Thus, my working definition of a myth is a story that is powerful enough to tell us how to live -- or, if that is too much for some to accept, then a story that is powerful enough to inspire us to live better.
So, for example, The Hurt Locker is a story. In that sense, it qualifies as a myth, in the precise technical definition -- the lowest level definition of a myth. But, I doubt that Joseph Campbell would qualify that as a myth, and so neither would I. The reason is because it does not tell us how to behave. It shows us how some others behave, and that can be very interesting. But, in the absence of universal qualities, that type of story does not qualify as a myth.
Thus, one test of a myth may be that we can all identify with the main qualities of the characters of a good myth. For this reason, myths tend to have universal qualities.
For example, list the attributes of Joe Mannix. He is tough, independent, highly ethical and individualist. He answers to himself, first and foremost, but is not an anarchist -- he works with established organizations when necessary, and outside their bounds, when necessary. He sacrifices himself -- he gets beaten and wounded a lot (these are psychological metaphors), but always survives. He does not prioritize creature comforts, and is fully engaged in the outside world. This latter quality is what gives him a sort of crossover quality -- sort of priestly or saintly character that is not sitting on a hilltop somewhere, but rather is engaged in the world.
Interestingly, this latter quality is uniquely Western -- and, if you add the individualist quality, very American. Thus, it tells our back story. Without this kind of back story we would not have nearly the same level of creativity in our culture. For example, this kind of gutsy individualist is the real secret behind why our universities are the greatest in the world -- it is not because we teach technical details well, it is because we prize thinking outside of the box. We prize the individual who listens to his own, inner voice, and so people want to come here to learn. Other cultures, for example, have myths that pay more attention to ancestors, and the need to adhere less to one's inner voice and more to conformity. They are more concerned with learning about how others think than about how to think for themselves -- and how to suffer the consequences of so doing. Or, they might have the hero derive his power from identification with some kind of deity. But, because our culture prizes myths in the form of heroes like Joe Mannix, we are less inclined to bow our heads and concede to organizations and more inclined to listen to our inner voice and pay the price for so doing -- because this is a part of our cultural myth.
By the way, and as an aside, I do not think it was any accident that the Arnaz's, and Lucille Ball in particular, liked the character of Joe Mannix. They were the pioneering type -- individualists.
Now, if you take that list of attributes for Joe Mannix, notice how they have nothing to do with his being a Private Investigator. That list of attributes is both comprehensive and fundamental -- it can be applied to any number of situations. This fundamental, prototypical set of attributes is what tends to elevate story to myth. Joe Mannix is a prototype for behavior -- good behavior by Western and American standards. But, this behavior transcends the specifics of the environment he happens to be in -- setting is incidental to powerful myth, by definition -- otherwise the story would not be powerful -- it would entertain, but not explain who we are and not inspire us to be better. Joe Mannix's behavior seems desirable because of the way it is presented to us, in an attractive way that is simple to understand. But, if the environment is removed, the prototype for the behavior remains. It can be abstracted to be applicable to each and every one of us -- it both explains our culture in a fundamental way as well as inspires us to be better members of that culture. Thus, it qualifies as a myth.
Beyond that, Campbell describes mythical journeys we each take on, individually, psychologically. For this, he examines myths -- powerful stories -- that are common across cultures. There are some fundamental common themes here as well -- ones that are also included in Mannix, and done so very well. The fact that Joe Mannix gets into a lot of fights, takes a lot of beatings, gets shot a lot, and keeps putting himself out here is, believe it or not, useful for the kinds of things our ego needs to undergo as we become better people. Those attributes are also unique to Mannix -- not included in any other show that I am aware of.
I hope this helps. I'll be happy to provide more discourse upon request!
Having said that, I do not profess to be a technical expert on the subject of myths and heroes -- just someone relatively new to the topic, but who is appreciative enough of one myth, in particular, to want to know more myself.
By the way, I am not alone in expressing awe that Mannix is the one show I loved as a kid that holds up in the eyes of an adult. I've seen this type of comment written in several informal reviews of the show. Why do people say this? Because watching Mannix all of these years later is not mere nostalgia. Its universal qualities hold up -- they are timeless. That is evidence of a powerful myth.
Edited by jompaul17 - 2/13/12 at 9:22pm
