Scan barcode
audrey_the_kid's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting ideas, but too long and repetitive for my taste. I would have liked more tie-backs to psychology - Campbell stuck more with the philosophy angle. Maybe it's unfair of me, but when he started teasing the therapy stuff, I wanted more of a self-help book, which probably didn't exist in 1949. It's not you, Campbell, it's me. My favorite idea was that therapists are modern-day medicine women, guiding us through rites of passage now that religion is mostly dead.
vvmage's review against another edition
4.0
While certainly not the end of the study into world mythology and religion, it is a worthy entry point, offering many paths to take to continue said study.
mbsmith93's review against another edition
4.0
This book is brilliant yet flawed. I've also read some of the reviews of this book as inspiration, and it feels as if the positive and negative reviewers read two different books.
Positive reviews seem focused on the essays on the spiritual nature of man, on how myth effects us and on how the destruction of myth by science - so that we know myths aren't true - is eroding the human experience in a way that makes the modern man (or woman) feel empty. He writes about this very effectively in both the prologue and the epilogue, and it pushed me to think about myth and religion in a new light.
Negative reviews put more light on Part I: The Adventure of the Hero. This section, making up a little over half the book, is perhaps why the book is so well known, and it's where Campbell lays out his theory for all the things that occur in a prototypical "hero's journey."
Critics point out - rightly - that not all the steps of the Hero's journey exist in every myth or epic tale. To me this is disingenuous to the way Campbell presented his theory. He states very clearly that not every myth contains every element of the hero's journey. For example, some stories end in the very beginning, with the hero refusing to heed the call to adventure - and that's the end. He also states that not all stories follow the path in a strictly linear fashion; some repeat one or another set of steps multiple times (often in threes). Further, these steps are very abstract, so that "refusal of the call [to adventure]" may mean a refusal of either the hero or a refusal of others to allow the hero to proceed. The adventure itself may be a physical adventure, a spiritual one, or even a psychological adventure.
So I would ask, if you can skip any step, and the steps can be analyzed in such an abstract manner, and you can do the steps in virtually any order, and possibly even repeat some of them, how can you write a story that doesn't follow this pattern? So perhaps a more fitting criticism than "the Hero's journey doesn't apply to all stories" might be, "the Hero's journey is so vague as to be meaningless." And yet, Campbell lays out common archetypes for events that may pass in a story. Perhaps these events are not an exhaustive list, and perhaps Campbell was too confident that he had found the one and only "monomyth" shared by all stories, but it is nevertheless a valiant attempt to characterize the vast body of myth and legend.
During Part I, where Campbell runs into trouble is with his citations of dream analysis and other Freudian based psychological research. Science in this realm has been pretty thoroughly debunked, but I think I would still argue that the work is a product of its time, and Freudian psychology was very much in vogue when he wrote this piece. Campbell more than makes up for this issue with his fascinating inclusions of myths from all over the world - China, Europe, Africa, the Americas - everywhere. It was very interesting to be exposed to such a vast body of literature through Campbell's curation.
Where I got frustrated with this book was in Part II. It was, to put it mildly, a bit of a slog. In some sections there was so much quotation of other work and so little of Campbell's analysis that it was difficult to tell what point he was even trying to make. The titles of the sections seemed poorly matched to the contents, and it seemed sometimes as though Campbell wasn't even quite sure what topic he was trying to cover in a given section. So the organization of this work in Part II was horrendous. While there were some interesting tidbits interspersed, they were hard-won
Positive reviews seem focused on the essays on the spiritual nature of man, on how myth effects us and on how the destruction of myth by science - so that we know myths aren't true - is eroding the human experience in a way that makes the modern man (or woman) feel empty. He writes about this very effectively in both the prologue and the epilogue, and it pushed me to think about myth and religion in a new light.
Negative reviews put more light on Part I: The Adventure of the Hero. This section, making up a little over half the book, is perhaps why the book is so well known, and it's where Campbell lays out his theory for all the things that occur in a prototypical "hero's journey."
Critics point out - rightly - that not all the steps of the Hero's journey exist in every myth or epic tale. To me this is disingenuous to the way Campbell presented his theory. He states very clearly that not every myth contains every element of the hero's journey. For example, some stories end in the very beginning, with the hero refusing to heed the call to adventure - and that's the end. He also states that not all stories follow the path in a strictly linear fashion; some repeat one or another set of steps multiple times (often in threes). Further, these steps are very abstract, so that "refusal of the call [to adventure]" may mean a refusal of either the hero or a refusal of others to allow the hero to proceed. The adventure itself may be a physical adventure, a spiritual one, or even a psychological adventure.
So I would ask, if you can skip any step, and the steps can be analyzed in such an abstract manner, and you can do the steps in virtually any order, and possibly even repeat some of them, how can you write a story that doesn't follow this pattern? So perhaps a more fitting criticism than "the Hero's journey doesn't apply to all stories" might be, "the Hero's journey is so vague as to be meaningless." And yet, Campbell lays out common archetypes for events that may pass in a story. Perhaps these events are not an exhaustive list, and perhaps Campbell was too confident that he had found the one and only "monomyth" shared by all stories, but it is nevertheless a valiant attempt to characterize the vast body of myth and legend.
During Part I, where Campbell runs into trouble is with his citations of dream analysis and other Freudian based psychological research. Science in this realm has been pretty thoroughly debunked, but I think I would still argue that the work is a product of its time, and Freudian psychology was very much in vogue when he wrote this piece. Campbell more than makes up for this issue with his fascinating inclusions of myths from all over the world - China, Europe, Africa, the Americas - everywhere. It was very interesting to be exposed to such a vast body of literature through Campbell's curation.
Where I got frustrated with this book was in Part II. It was, to put it mildly, a bit of a slog. In some sections there was so much quotation of other work and so little of Campbell's analysis that it was difficult to tell what point he was even trying to make. The titles of the sections seemed poorly matched to the contents, and it seemed sometimes as though Campbell wasn't even quite sure what topic he was trying to cover in a given section. So the organization of this work in Part II was horrendous. While there were some interesting tidbits interspersed, they were hard-won
andreahrome's review against another edition
Some interesting insights to the hero's journey. Not well organized. And it kept going on and on and on... Maybe I couldn't make it through the whole thing because some moron had underlined every single sentence in my copy from the library. Ugh. Unreadable. Probably not Campbell's fault.
nostalgia_reader's review against another edition
Marking as read for now, even though I've only read through the first section on the Hero's Journey. I didn't have the patience or the tolerance to read the second, Monomyth section at this point. (Hence no star rating; it would be 2 stars for the Hero's Journey section on its own.)
When I took my mythology class in junior college, I loved the how the Heroic Cycle was laid out in neat, easy to understand tropes by the textbook. I enjoyed it so much I used the Cycle in my final presentation, and bought the actual book because I needed to dive a little deeper into some of the tropes. However, I didn't read the full thing. Until now. And I am very glad I didn't commit to reading it all back in school because I probably would have given up on the Heroic Cycle thesis and switched to something different and easier to understand. Because the way this was laid out was a complete disaster.
Campbell throws a whole bunch of myths, esoteric ramblings, and, everyone’s favorite, Freudian analysis into a giant pot, stirs it up, sprinkles completely useless Jungian dream interpretations in for flavor, and serves up a stew of something that’s trying to appeal to the audience of the time (1940s) with its Hip References to Psychoanalysis, special appearances of Eastern Mythology to add some Exotic Examples and make it seem like a Well-Rounded Scholarly Approach.
Now, broken out, Freudian interpretations of myths, while over-done and annoying, ARE a valid analysis in some instances. Jungian archetypes are awesome, although his dream studies are certainly dated. And incorporating examples of myths and tales from all over the world, not just Western myth is vitally important to any sort of work such as this one that’s trying to prove a universal heroic cycle and monomyth.
But bundled together in random, disjointed sections that, half the time, barely seemed to reference the exact point in the cycle they were trying to prove, it’s a terrible mixture. There is no narrative flow, and half the time the myths are retold far beyond the relevant portion to the section of the cycle. Rather than lay out the very basics of the cycle in one chapter, then take a few chapters to focus on ONE different myth or folktale and its unique telling of the heroic cycle, it’s all jumbled together impossibly. And it not until the very last “wrap-up” section that Campbell explicitly states that parts of the cycle can be repeated, combined, enlarged, or eliminated from myths—a KEY point in analyzing any myth or tale, and you aren’t even willing to state that in the intro?
Fortunately, the intro I had to the cycle was strong and positive enough that I’m able to see beyond the dated tropes it’s based around and see the cycle prevail in all sorts of contemporary books, shows, movies, and performances. This just isn’t the book to learn it from, unless you’re a philosophy student, graduate psychology student interested in how Freud/Jung applies to myth, or someone looking for some dated "mumbo-jumbo" to justify your place in your own life as a “hero.”
A key piece of literature in the mythology and psychology analysis realm, no doubt, but not at all one to read casually. I'm going to go and reread my textbook chapter again to re-clarify this all.
When I took my mythology class in junior college, I loved the how the Heroic Cycle was laid out in neat, easy to understand tropes by the textbook. I enjoyed it so much I used the Cycle in my final presentation, and bought the actual book because I needed to dive a little deeper into some of the tropes. However, I didn't read the full thing. Until now. And I am very glad I didn't commit to reading it all back in school because I probably would have given up on the Heroic Cycle thesis and switched to something different and easier to understand. Because the way this was laid out was a complete disaster.
Campbell throws a whole bunch of myths, esoteric ramblings, and, everyone’s favorite, Freudian analysis into a giant pot, stirs it up, sprinkles completely useless Jungian dream interpretations in for flavor, and serves up a stew of something that’s trying to appeal to the audience of the time (1940s) with its Hip References to Psychoanalysis, special appearances of Eastern Mythology to add some Exotic Examples and make it seem like a Well-Rounded Scholarly Approach.
Now, broken out, Freudian interpretations of myths, while over-done and annoying, ARE a valid analysis in some instances. Jungian archetypes are awesome, although his dream studies are certainly dated. And incorporating examples of myths and tales from all over the world, not just Western myth is vitally important to any sort of work such as this one that’s trying to prove a universal heroic cycle and monomyth.
But bundled together in random, disjointed sections that, half the time, barely seemed to reference the exact point in the cycle they were trying to prove, it’s a terrible mixture. There is no narrative flow, and half the time the myths are retold far beyond the relevant portion to the section of the cycle. Rather than lay out the very basics of the cycle in one chapter, then take a few chapters to focus on ONE different myth or folktale and its unique telling of the heroic cycle, it’s all jumbled together impossibly. And it not until the very last “wrap-up” section that Campbell explicitly states that parts of the cycle can be repeated, combined, enlarged, or eliminated from myths—a KEY point in analyzing any myth or tale, and you aren’t even willing to state that in the intro?
Fortunately, the intro I had to the cycle was strong and positive enough that I’m able to see beyond the dated tropes it’s based around and see the cycle prevail in all sorts of contemporary books, shows, movies, and performances. This just isn’t the book to learn it from, unless you’re a philosophy student, graduate psychology student interested in how Freud/Jung applies to myth, or someone looking for some dated "mumbo-jumbo" to justify your place in your own life as a “hero.”
A key piece of literature in the mythology and psychology analysis realm, no doubt, but not at all one to read casually. I'm going to go and reread my textbook chapter again to re-clarify this all.
caterinasforza's review against another edition
4.0
Bazı kitaplar bir yerlerde sürekli karşınıza çıkar, "herkes okumuş, ben hala okumadım" hissine kapılırsınız... Kahraman'ın Sonsuz Yolculuğu benim için o kitaplardan biri.
Kendi adıma herkesin okuduğu, üzerinde konuştuğu dönemde okumaktansa fırtınanın(!) geçmesini bekleyip ilerleyen zamanlara öteleyip durdum. Geçtiğimiz günlerde dinlediğim bir podcastte sürekli esere atıp yapılınca okuma zamanı geldi dedim...
Eser bölümlerden oluşuyor, içeriğe dair kısımlar yeterince paylaşıldığından ben içerikten ziyade şahsi düşüncelerimi yazacağım:
Öncelikle yayınevine küçük bir eleştiri: Kabalcı'dan çıkan kitabın ciddi bir redaksiyona ihtiyacı var. Devrik cümleler ciddi anlamda yoruyor.
İçerikte ilerlerken bir bölümde girizgah yaptığı mitin diğer bölümde devamını görünce insan elinde olmadan mutlu hissediyor. Eserin okumada akıcılığı arttıran en önemli özelliği mitler... Doğu mitlerine hakim olmadığım için Buddha ve Hint Mitolojisi ile ilgili epey bilgi edinmiş oldum.
Sayfa sonlarına eklenmiş dipnotlar çok doyurucu.
Kitabı bitirdiğinizde okuduklarınızın sinema sektöründen edebiyata ve hayatınızda pek çok şeyde kendini tekrar eden bir döngü olduğunu fark ediyorsunuz. Bu bağlamda İthaki yayınlardan çıkan edisyonun kapak görseli boşuna seçilmemiş.
Kabalcı yayınlarındaki editörel sıkıntılar yüzünden İthaki Yayınları'nı tercih etmenizi önerim.
Eyyorlamam bu kadar.
Kendi adıma herkesin okuduğu, üzerinde konuştuğu dönemde okumaktansa fırtınanın(!) geçmesini bekleyip ilerleyen zamanlara öteleyip durdum. Geçtiğimiz günlerde dinlediğim bir podcastte sürekli esere atıp yapılınca okuma zamanı geldi dedim...
Eser bölümlerden oluşuyor, içeriğe dair kısımlar yeterince paylaşıldığından ben içerikten ziyade şahsi düşüncelerimi yazacağım:
Öncelikle yayınevine küçük bir eleştiri: Kabalcı'dan çıkan kitabın ciddi bir redaksiyona ihtiyacı var. Devrik cümleler ciddi anlamda yoruyor.
İçerikte ilerlerken bir bölümde girizgah yaptığı mitin diğer bölümde devamını görünce insan elinde olmadan mutlu hissediyor. Eserin okumada akıcılığı arttıran en önemli özelliği mitler... Doğu mitlerine hakim olmadığım için Buddha ve Hint Mitolojisi ile ilgili epey bilgi edinmiş oldum.
Sayfa sonlarına eklenmiş dipnotlar çok doyurucu.
Kitabı bitirdiğinizde okuduklarınızın sinema sektöründen edebiyata ve hayatınızda pek çok şeyde kendini tekrar eden bir döngü olduğunu fark ediyorsunuz. Bu bağlamda İthaki yayınlardan çıkan edisyonun kapak görseli boşuna seçilmemiş.
Kabalcı yayınlarındaki editörel sıkıntılar yüzünden İthaki Yayınları'nı tercih etmenizi önerim.
Eyyorlamam bu kadar.
nelswadycki's review against another edition
4.0
I read this because I wanted to hear about the Hero's Journey from the source and it did not disappoint. I really liked the poetic/dramatic writing style for a while, but with about 1/5 of the book left, it really started to drag. If you're looking for the Hero's Journey, feel free to skip Part II: The Cosmogonic Cycle. It adds a little additional detail, but at the cost of many words.
I now feel well equipped to refer to summaries or outlines of the Hero's Journey with a good understanding of the underlying components.
I now feel well equipped to refer to summaries or outlines of the Hero's Journey with a good understanding of the underlying components.
theologiaviatorum's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
4.25
This is Joseph Campbell's best known work. George Lucas admits to returning to this work over and over again. In this book Campell seeks to identify the Monomyth, the One Story that is told in all of the world's stories and religions. He builds on Carl Jung's psychology and sees myths and dreams as coming from the same psychic source, the human subconscious. In some sense, myths are just public dreams. “It is not difficult for the modern intellectual to concede that the symbolism of mythology has a psychological significance. Particularly after the work of the psychoanalysts, there can be little doubt, either that myths are of the nature of dream, or that dreams are symptomatic of the dynamics of the psyche ... With their discovery that the patterns and logic of fairy tale and myth correspond to those of dream, the long discredited chimeras of archaic man have returned dramatically to the foreground of modern consciousness. According to this view it appears that through the wonder tales—which pretend to describe the lives of legendary heroes, the powers of the divinities of nature, the spirits of the dead, and the totem ancestors of the group—symbolic expression is given to the unconscious desires, fears, and tensions that underlie the conscious patterns of human behavior. Mythology, in other words, is psychology misread as biography, history, and cosmology" (219). So, while he does not believe any of these stories (including Christianity) to be true in any historical sense, he does believe they are "myths to live by" (the title of another work by Campbell). According to him, we are all acting out our own hero's journey. "In the absence of an effective general mythology, each of us has his private, unrecognized, rudimentary, yet secretly potent pantheon of dream. The latest incarnation of Oedipus, the continued romance of Beauty and the Beast, stand this afternoon on the corner of Forty-second Street and Fifth Avenue, waiting for the traffic light to change" (2). This work is highly recommended to any student of writing, literature, Story, or myth
barrymcknight's review against another edition
5.0
Originally written in 1949, the work is a little academic and dry at times but Campbell's insight and wisdom about the Monomyth is ultimately brilliant and electrifying.