First off, I'd like to congratulate everyone on the great job they are doing in both the group and individual presentations. I've been keeping track of the times when Dr. Sexson nods his head or makes "approving mumble noises" and more times than not they come in response to a quote rather than an original revelation by the presenter. It seems very apparent to me that Dr. Sexson is more impressed with our ability to quote text from literature that is relevant to our thesis than that of our own creation. Is this a commentary on the nature of myths and literature as a whole? Have we really sucked out the well of originality so much that we cannot produce profound thoughts of our own?
Yes, I know that before we can talk about mythology we must first read and study the important points that have already been made. One cannot make a credible research paper without quoting some other source of literature. Even in the "what I knew then and what I know now" papers, Dr. Sexson seems to be looking for specific examples of eschatology, creation, or storytelling that has shaped one's perspective.
Each time a presenter finishes, Dr. Sexson points out the sources or former stories in which the presenter referenced. Mythology seems to be not so much about telling your story, but more about how your story has already been told.
I want my story to be original instead of being a story which has an origin that is out of one's hands.
No comments:
Post a Comment