| |
|
christianity molded the essence of many different spirits into different shapes, the essence of those pagan spirits remain in the christian faith
Well, the Catholic church did, anyway. (I assume the Eastern Orthodox churches did as well, but I know considerably less about it.)
Most of the Protestant faiths deliberately moved away from that for the very reason that they were merely gloss over pagan stuff. The Anglican/Episcopal churches are an obvious exception to this.
Quantum: If the Beatles are so great, why are Westlife number one?
I percieve this as mocking me. Do you think the question is pointless? Or am I just missing something?
2: I've never heard of Westlife, so if they're number 1 I missed it.
We can reopen the whole fiction/fact can of worms if you like, but let's not pretend Neil Gaiman has anything useful to say about gods and goddesses.
Rude Boy: his ideas about the Gods should be taken with the same pinch of salt you might attribute to the theological speculation of Bob Monkhouse or Terry Wogan.
It's like going to JK Rowling as your primary source for information about doing practical magical work for clients.
It's like comparing something moderate to something ridiculous to remove it's value entirely?
Why are we in 'one apple spoils the barrel' mode?
I don't think anybody is trying to say that Neil Gaiman knows everything there is to know about the gods, or even that he's a practicing pagan or magician or whatever (at least I'm not).
But how is this an all/nothing prospect? Must he either be exactly right, or he's useless? Must his writing be a literal reflection of our reality, or else it's Harry Potter?
If nothing else, the realities he proposes give us the opportunity to think, seriously, about the repercussions of those philosophies, allowing us to see why the stories don't actually reflect reality as we know it.
I don't know how well read Bob and Terry are, but I know Gaiman is extremely well read in the areas of mythology, folklore, and if I'm not mistaken, philosophy. He has a very strong grasp of the significance of storytelling. But this is the same guy who says, repeatedly, "Writers are liars", and he certainly has no qualms about telling a story that isn't intended to reflect reality in a direct, literal sense.
So the grain of salt is less "This is total bullshit and he doesn't know anything at all. Don't bother thinking about how his work reflects on your reality." and more "This isn't intended to be a literal story of how he percieves your magical reality. It's a story about an idea, to entertain and prompt thought about what your own reality is based on."
--Ember-- |
|
|
