fredag 5 april 2013

Sanningen i myten

Vad finns det egentligen för sanning i en myt? Hur kan de fundamentala myterna, berättelserna och historierna om vår tids skapelse, om tidernas begynnelse, historierna om skador som skett och synder som begåtts långt före vi var födda bära någon mening för oss idag?

Först ur Emi-Simone Zawalls understreckare om Bruno Schulz:

I essän ”Mytologiseringen av verkligheten” (1936) beskrev Schulz hur han föreställde sig att det fanns en oerhört stark relation mellan verklighet, språk och mytologi. Han menade att språket i begynnelsen härstammade från ett enda ord, och att detta Ord var detsamma som Myten. Myten genererade i sin tur Meningen som i sin tur genererade Verkligheten. Det som inte är meningsfullt är inte heller verkligt, resonerade Schulz. Verkligheten är Ordets skugga. 

(SvD, tipstack till "Den Andra världen" i P1)

 Sen Slavoj Žižek på samma tema:
The basic lesson of the Hamlet myth is thus that the "mythical" form of the narrative content is not the starting point, but the end-result of a complex process of displacements and condensations: it is not enough to say that today's myths are faked, inauthentic retro artifacts - the notion of a faked imitation of the myth should be radicalized into the notion that myth AS SUCH is a fake. Heidegger located the Greek breakthrough, the founding gesture of the "West," in the overcoming of the pre-philosophical mythical "Asiatic" universe: the greatest opposite of the West is "the mythical in general and the Asiatic in particular." However, this overcoming is not simply a letting-behind of the mythical, but a constant struggle with(in) it: philosophy needs the recourse to myth, not only for external reasons, in order to explain its conceptual teaching to the uneducated crowds, but inherently, to "suture" its own conceptual edifice where it fails in reaching its innermost core, from Plato's myth of the cave to Freud's myth of the primordial father and Lacan's myth of lamella. Myth is thus the Real of logos: the foreign intruder, impossible to get rid of, impossible to remain fully within it. Therein resides the lesson of Adorno's and Horkheimer's Dialectic of Enlightenment: Enlightenment always already "contaminates" the mythical naive immediacy; Enlightenment itself is mythical, i.e. its own grounding gesture repeats the mythical operation. And what is postmodernity if not the ultimate defeat of the Enlightenment in its very triumph: when the dialectic of Enlightenment reaches its apogee, the dynamic, rootless postindustrial society directly generates its own myth. 
(Slavoj Žižek, "From the Myth to Agape")


Inga kommentarer: