On Fri, 14 Mar 1997 09:15:46 -0600 "Steven Mintz, U. Houston" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Inspired in part by our on-going discussion "why students hate > westerns," I have reread Richard Slotkin's three-part > study of the creation, dissemination, and functions of the American > myth of the frontier from the 17th century to the 1980s. > Slotkin presents a provocative analysis of the nature of myth in > modern society, and Hollywood's role in defining and spreading > these myths. I would be very interested in your comments > and reactions. > > If I might simplify his intricate argument, myths, in his view, > carry a heavy charge of symbolic meaning and resonance. > While rooted in historical "realities," myths outlive the material > conditions that produce them and serve as primary organizing principles > of our historical memory. Over time and through constant repetition, > these myths become part of our common language and serve as deeply > encoded and powerfully evocative sets of metaphors, which both define a > sitation and prescribe our response to it. As examples, he cites > the 17th century Indian captivity as a model for the Iranian hostage crisis > and Custer's "Last Stand" as a model for early U.S. defeats in World War II. > > In modern society, he argues, the process of mythmaking is the > commercial product of a cultural industry. And while such myths > arise from a process of natural selection, in which producers and > consumers interact, commercial popular culture tends to present > the mythology of certain identifiable communities of cultural producers, > and thus reflects the folklore of the movie industry, journalists, > hack writers, and so forth. Thus rather than reflecting the "national > mind," myths tell us a great deal about the assumptions and ideology > of certain influential groups. > > Implicit in the frontier ideology, he argues, are certain assumptions > about a unified "us" versus a savage "them"; the necessary > costs of progress; and the idea that violence can serve a purifying, > even regenerating function. Myths, he emphasizes, are elastic (for example, > one can evoke the figure of Jesse James in a populist attack on powerful > economic interests), but for all their flexibility, myths are also ideological. > Thus in the case of the frontier myth, Slotkin argues that it helped serve > in complex ways to rationalize the processes of capitalist development. > > I'd be interested in your thoughts. Is Hollywood in some sense the > custodian of our "collective cultural unconscious"? Can one speak of > a way that it uses myth to disseminate a distinctive ideology? > > Steve Mintz ---- To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]