| Title | : | Myth and Meaning: Cracking the Code of Culture |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 0805210385 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9780805210385 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Paperback |
| Number of Pages | : | 80 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 1978 |
The lectures begin with a discussion of the historical split between mythology and science and the evidence that mythic levels of understanding are being reintegrated in our approach to knowledge. In an extension of this theme, Professor Lévi-Strauss analyzes what we have called “primitive thinking” and discusses some universal features of human mythology. The final two lectures outline the functional relationship between mythology and history and the structural relationship between mythology and music.
Myth and Meaning: Cracking the Code of Culture Reviews
-
Myth and Meaning, Claude Lévi-Strauss
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: نهم ماه نوامبر سال 1998 میلادی
عنوان: اسطوره و معنا؛ عنوان اصلی : گفتگوهایی با کلود لوی استروس (اشتراوس) - اسطوره و معنا؛ نویسنده: کلود لوی استروس؛ مترجم: شهرام خسروی؛ تهران، نشر مرکز، 1376، در 101 ص؛ شابک: 9643052427؛ چاپ دوم 1385؛ شابک: 9789643052423؛ موضوع: مصاحبه ها - گفتگو در باره انسان شناسی - روانشناسی - اساطیر - قرن 20 م
متن نگاشته شده سلسله گفتگوی لوی اشتراوس با رادیو کانادایی سی.بی.سی به زبان انگلیسی، و ترجمه مصاحبه ها نیز از روی متن انگلیسی ست. مصاحبه در دسامبر 1977 میلادی انجام گرفته و کتاب، نخستین بار در سال 1978 میلادی منتشر و بارها تجدید چاپ شده است. لوی اشتراوس، فروید، مارکس و زمین شناسی را سه الگویی میداند، که به او آموختند واقعیت هر پدیده ای را باید در عمق همان پدیده جستجو کرد. شناخت مکانیسم ناخودآگاه، میتواند تبیینی برای کنشهای انسان به دست دهد (فروید)؛ نظام اقتصادی (زیر ساخت) یک جامعه است که ارزشها و ایدئولوژیهای (روساخت)؛ آن جامعه را شکل میدهد (مارکس)؛ لایه های زیرین زمین، روشنگر تنوع در سطح زمین نیز هستند (زمین شناسی)؛ ا. شربیانی -
تقوم المحاضرة على ثلاثة جوانب - فصول - رئيسية، يتخللهم كلام عام وطائش هنا وهنالك
الأول: المعنى
فيقول شتروس أنه عندما كان طفلًا كان دومًا يتأمل المعنى وراء الأشياء، وقد تمكن - رغم حداثة عمره ورغم عدم معرفته القراءة - من استبطان بعض المعارف من خلاف التمييز بين الحروف الأول للكلمات الفرنسية
كان يرى بأن الطفل، على غرار رؤية أفلاطون، ليس بالصفحة البيضاء التي تشكل حسب معرفتها بالواقع وحسب، ولكنها، مع ذلك تكون لها قدر من المعارف الأولية (عكس رؤية الحسيين)
رأي شتروس أن كل ما في الطبيعة يختبئ وراءه معنى ما
أو كما قالت الصديقة "ناهد" مقتبسة عن ساراماجو :
الاضطراب هو نظام ينتظر الكشف
والاضطراب هاهنا قد يكون موازيا، إذا جاز السياق، هو حالة اللامعنى.
فكل أسطورة قد تبدو لنا مبهمة، هي في الواقع تحمل معنىً ما.
ثانيًا
التنويه على مسألة مهمة، وهي سوء الفهم لدى البعض عند الحديث عن الحضارات الماقبل كتابية
فالبعض يحلو له توصيفها بأنها مجتمعات غير حضارية، بدائية، همجية، جاهلة
في حين يعطي لنا شتروس تصورًا آخر
وهو أن تلك الحضارات، هي، بكل بساطة واختزال، حضارات مغايرة ومختلفة
فبينما نحن نعتمد على العلم الحسي والأدوات والعلم والحواس وهكذا
يعتمدون هم على أدوات أخرى أكثر ثراءً إنسانويا لمعرفة الطبيعة، كالتأمل وغيره
فكل منا قد وجد الوسيلة الأكثر راحة بالنسبة له للتعرف على مجتمعه
ثالثًا:
التأكيد على فكرة ارتباط الأسطورة بالتاريخ، وليس فقط التاريخ المحلي، بل قد يصل لتاريخ وطن أو مجتمع آخر
كمثال، أسطورة التوائم والطقس السيئ
والتي يظن أنها قد تم استيرادها من أمريكا الجنوبية
عكس ما أكد أصحابه بقولهم:
"إن الأساطير بشعب معين يمكن تفسيرها وفهما فقط من خلال الإطار الثقافي الخاص بهذا الشعب فقط"
ويعنون بأن تحليل وبحث الأسطورة يتم عن طريق دراسة المجتمع الذي نشأت فيه الزاهرة فقط، ووفق قوانين محددة، رافضين بذلك مبدأ التوافد الذي يمكن أن يعد عاملًا رئيسًا في تفسير نشأة الأسطورة.
انتهى.
المحاضرة ليست بالسهلة ولا المعقدة، لكنها مكثفة ومركزة للغاية وتحتاج لتأمل وإعمال للعقل كبيرين.
رائع شتروس -
نمره ی واقعی: دو و نیم
به نظرم مزیت این کتاب اختصار، سادگی و بینش دادنشه
دو گفتگوی اول - یعنی "برخورد اسطوره و علم" و "تفکر بدوی و تفکر مدرن" - از نظر بینشی که در نگاه به اسطوره، به تفکر بدوی، و به اهمیت علم داره، جالبه - البته جالب و نه لزوما پذیرفتنی. سومین گفتگو - یعنی "لب شکری ها و دوقلوها: جدایی اسطوره" - تحلیل جالبیه هرچند کافی نیست برای فهم جوانب قضیه. دو گفتگوی آخری - یعنی "اسطوره و تاریخ" و "اسطوره و موسیقی" - به نظرم جذابیت کمتری داشتند
ترجمه در حد فهم مطلب عموما قابل قبول است هرچند جاهایی باید ویرایش شود - من خوشبختانه متن انگلیسی را یافتم و در هر ابهامی به آن مراجعه می کردم. جاهایی مشکلاتی وجود داشت
حاشیه: من به دلیل اینکه هنوز تعهدی به منطق و تفکر منطقی دارم از رویکرد میانه ی لوی استروس در قبال افراط و تفریط لوی برول و مالینوفسکی استقبال می کنم. اینکه "بدوی ها" را یکسره منفعت طلب یا یک سره عارف و فرامنطق نکنیم -
Henüz Levi-Strauss'la tanışmadıysanız Mit ve Anlam çok uygun bir kitap. Belki biraz göz korkutuyor olabilir ama bu türde okuyabileceğiniz en akıcı kitaplardan birisi bence. Antropoloji ile veya sosyoloji ile hiç ilgili değilseniz bile bu kitapta üzerine düşünecek bir şeyler bulabileceğinizi düşünüyorum. Kitap benim için amacına ulaştı, kafamda farklı farklı bir sürü düşünce var ve hepsi de birbirine karıştı. Levi- Strauss bir yerlerde beni görüyorsa kıkır kıkır gülüyordur eminim.
Ben Levi- Straus'un yazar, düşünür, tartışmacı, insan; her bir yönüyle tanıştığım için çok mutluyum. Hem çok zihin açıcı bir düşünce dünyası var, hem de bu düşünceleri çok sade ve doğal bir yolla aktarıyor. Akıp giden kelimelerin dalgasına kapılıp gitmek zevkliydi. Bir de Levi-Straus'un farklı ve birbiriyle alakasız görünen olguları birbirine bağlama şeklini ve hevesini Freud'un aynı konudaki tutumuna çok benzettim.
Ayrıca kitabın sunuşu da çok güzel hazırlanmış, kitabı elinize Levi-Strauss hakkında hiçbir şey bilmeden alsanız da, kitaba başlarken hem Levi-Strauss'u hem de yapısalcı yaklaşımı üzerine düşünecek kadar tanımış oluyorsunuz.
Ne demiş Levi-Strauss:
''Şahsi kimliğime dair bir algım asla olmadı ve hala da yok. Kendim içinde bir şeylerin vuku bulduğu fakat ''ben'' ve ''bana göre''nin olmadığı bir yer olarak görüyorum. Her birimiz birtakım şeylerin meydana geldiği bir tür kavşağız. Kavşaklar tamamen pasiftir; oralarda bir şeyler gerçekleşir. Başka bir yerde, aynı derecede geçerli ancak farklı bir şey vuku bulur. Tercih yoktur, bu sadece şans meselesidir.''
Ben de bulunduğum kavşakta, Levi- Strauss'la bir şekilde yollarımız kesiştiği için kendimi şanslı sayıyorum. Çok fazla Levi- Strauss dedim ve kafamda söylemek istediklerim dönüp dursa da aktaramayacağımı bildiğim için yorumumu bitiriyorum. -
اسطوره شكلي از زبان است و زبان ما را آماده مي كند تا بكوشيم خودمان و دنيايي را كه در ذات خود يكپارچه است با تحميل ديالكتيك ها، دو شاخگي ها و ساختارهاي دوگانه بر روي داده ها بشناسيم . در پشت زبان ماهيت دو تايي مغز قرار داد . راس/چپ ، خوب / بد ، زندگي / مرگ. اينها دو شاخگي هاي اجتناب ناپذيري هستند كه مغز توليد ميكند و داراي دو بخش هستند كه دو چشم و دو دست را كنترل مي كنند ما در ذات خود موجودات دو نيمه اي هستيم كه داده ها را همچون كامپيوتر تنظيم مي كنيم . عقل سليم مان دو تايي است . به نظر مي رسد كه براي پرداخت يك تجربه ، ساده ترين و كار آمدترين راه تقسيم آن به دو نيم است. و سپس تقسيم هر يك از نيمه ها به دو نيم ديگر، به سخن ديگر ؛ آرايش مجدد هر سوال به نحوي كه فقط دو پاسخ ممكن برايش باقي بماند ؛ آري يا خير .
لوي اشتراوس پاره هايي را كه از اين تجزيه بدست مي آيند «واحد اسطوره اي » ناميده که معادل «واج» در زبان شناسي است . اسطوره مانند همه چيزهايي است كه در حال مصرف اند . آنها مي شكنند و مجددا شكل مي گيرند . فراموش مي شوند و دوباره يافت مي شوند . لوي اشتراوس كسي را كه اين چيزها را باز مي يابد ، تنظيم مي كند و دگر بار مورد استفاده قرار مي دهد بريكولر ( خرت و پرت جمع كن ) مي نامد . اشتر اوس تاكيد مي كند كه يك اسطوره فقط به وسيله اسطوره ي ديگر قابل تفسير است نه يك فرمول علمي، به نظر وي محرك هر اسطوره نيازي است براي رفع پارادوكس كه رفع نشدني است . در ساختار گرايي احتمالا چيزي بيش از يافتن عامل يا عوامل نامتغير در ميان تفاوتهاي سطحي وجود ندارد . -
First things first. I need to learn French. I think everybody should learn French. And Russian.
Myth and Meaning is a slim compilation of 5 essays of Claude Levi-Strauss. On subjects such as 'primitive' thinking vs scientific/ 'modern' thinking, mythology when it becomes history, mythology and music...and so on.
Levi Strauss was a staunch believer in diversity of cultures, although in his work as a structuralist, he states that everything, however diverse, including mythologies, can be reduced to a lowest common denominator. Lowest common denominator helps in creating order. And order gives you a chance at deriving meaning. At understanding.
He worries that with the ease of communication, we will lose our originality, our diversity. But he's hopeful that, perhaps, this increasing homogeneity will once again lead to diversification, which in turn will help in retaining a streak of originality.
(I wonder what would be his response to our present times.) Yes, homogeneity is making people strive for 'originality' but this originality, in most instances, is not an outcome of a synthesis of experiences and ideas but rather an outcome of the human desire to be different. And this has been cleverly appropriated by a capitalist regime, for something as banal as promotion of consumption. Of goods, of services, of images, of ideas. To this end, we have become homogeneous even in our desire to be original, to be different.
I suspect, it isn’t even the scientific-modernist approach which has robbed us of the ability to create stories, myths but our shrinking community experiences. And our desire of sharing our lives with others and vice-versa. Maybe, I am being a bit presumptuous here. After all we do share our lives with others. Through social media forums. May be the nature of myths, in itself, has undergone change. Because our community experiences have also undergone change. Earlier people in communities bonded as much for the reason of interdependence as for common fears. Now communities are formed based on shared interests and accessibility. We share our subjectivity, yes, through images, words, sounds in the on line world. But most often, we forgo an important aspect of sharing - collaborating. May be I am stretching it too far by saying that sometimes these online communities, where we share our subjective worlds, through their defined formats of sharing, end up homogenizing our individual experiences. Reducing them to objective 'things'. And maybe this creates an imbalance that we need to acknowledge. Maybe that is why we are slow at mythologising our present. Our need to rationalise is limiting our ability to express ourselves in ways other than the obvious.
That way, Hinduism is an absolute treasure trove of concepts; thoughts which have been beautifully evoked through myths which defy scientific explanation and logic and yet have been accepted by generations of Indians, unquestioningly. I wonder if we ever think about this wonderful duality of our lives - of leading a modern life and yet believing in elephant headed Gods, ascetic-householder God, cursed Goddesses and so on.
May be. I need to think about this some more...
The book fleetingly touches upon a number of issues and is an absolute tease because Strauss references so many of his other works that you realise that to be able to understand him better, there is so much more that you need to read up on. Which.... is a good thing,right?
Anything that keeps you on your toes, anything that keeps you curious. -
"that the word 'meaning' is probably, in the whole language, the word the meaning of which is the most difficult to find. What does 'to mean' mean? It seems to me that the only answer we can give is that 'to mean' means the ability of any kind of data to be translated in a different language. I do not mean a different language like French or German, but different words on a different level."
This small work provides a sort of primer to his school of structuralist approach. The French anthropologist briefly brings out the relevance of the mythologies and how modern sciences have become more inclusive in terms of qualitative essences in the recent times. Atleast reading this one, the idea doesn't appear to be absolute about the ideas of positivism or reductionism yet he comes up with basic 'structures' that could bridge the phenomena all around in various walks. An intriguing parallelism and bridge between mythology and history. Also, it's interesting to find his ways around the channels of music and myth stemming out of language yet certain rudimentary levels missing in each for reconciliation.
"Two inseparable faces of language. In music, it is the sound element which takes over, and in the myth it is the meaning element."
"We are now threatened with the prospect of our being only consumers, able to consume anything from any point in the world and from every culture, but of losing all originality."
"The more a civilization becomes homogenized, the more internal lines of separation becomes apparent, and what is gained on one level is immediately lost on another. This is a personal feeling, in that I have no clear proof of the operation of this dialectic. But I don't see how mankind can really without some internal diversity." -
40 something pages. I'll read it in one sitting. Two labrythine weeks later.
-
به نظر من مهم‌ترین ویژگی این کتاب نثر ساده‌ی اون هست. در کنارش سرفصل‌های کتاب هم ابهام خواننده رو درباره‌ی جزئیات اسطوره کمی برطرف می‌کنن. شیوه برخورد نویسنده با اسطوره به نظر من خیلی مهمه، یه مردم‌شناس که می‌خواد نشون بده چطور اسطوره در لایه‌های عمیق زندگی حضور داره و چطور تفکر آدمهای بدوی به همون اندازه‌ی تفکر علمی آدمهای مدرن می‌تونسته به درک جهان کمک کنه. فصل اسطوره و موسیقی هم برام خیلی جالب بود. خیلی دلم می‌خواست این کتاب به جای شصت و دو صفحه ششصد و بیست صفحه می‌بود.
-
Kitap CBC Radyosu'nda yayınlanan uzunca bir söyleşiden derlenmiş. Zaten minicik bir kitap, mitler üzerine çok fazla bilgi içermiyor ama "modern" insan bunları nereye oturtmalı, hangi kıstaslar çerçevesinde değerlendirmeli, nasıl yorumlamalı gibi sorulara cevap arıyor. Hayatla, müzikle, mitlerle alakalı çok güzel düşünceleri de bizlerle paylaşıyor. Harika, kaçırmayınız.
-
"In order for a culture to be really itself and to produce something, the culture and its members must be convinced of their originality and even, to some extent, of their superiority over the others; it is only under conditions of under-communciation that it can produce anything. We are now threatened with the prospect of our being only consumers, able to consume anything from any point in the world and from every culture, but of losing all originality." (20)
Observations like this abound in
Myth and Meaning: Cracking the Code of Culture. Lévi-Strauss, whose blending of anthropology and philosophy made him one of the most interesting scholars of myth, here offers a set of expanded lectures originally broadcast in 1977 on a CBC radio program called Ideas. In the second essay, "'Primitive' Thinking and the 'Civilized' Mind", Lévi-Strauss reveals the "totalitarian ambition of the savage mind" as distinctive from scientific thought, and how the former results in only the illusion of understanding. He also notes, however, that primitive people had the capacity for "civilizing" the mind, but simply had no need of it, calling upon instead a "fantastically precise knowledge of their environment and all its resources" (19)--something we have (regrettably) lost in our "civilized" state. This supports his concept of myth as a conceptual framework for binaries. It is these binaries that move us toward more qualitative scientific thinking, helping us to "understand a great many things present in mythological thinking which we were in the past prone to dismiss as meaningless and absurd." (24)
This collection of five essays would be a great introductory primer for the reader not yet ready to dig into
The Raw and the Cooked or
The Savage Mind. The most sage advice comes from
Wendy Doniger in her most excellent foreword: "The trick is to jettison Lévi-Strauss right before the moment when he finally deconstructs himself." Indeed, those words apply to the works of many of our great contemporary thinkers. -
Strauss'a giriş için doğru bir tercih yapmışım, güzel bir giriş kitabı. Daha öncesinde kendisi, fikirleri, kimlerden etkilendiği ve yapısalcılık ile ilgili ufak araştırmalar yaptığım için yabancı olduğum pek konu yoktu. Ama bu ufak araştırmalarımın konularını Strauss'un kendi ağzından okumak (aslında dinlemek:D) aşırı keyifli ve öğreticiydi. Mit, bilim, ilkel-uygar insan düşünme biçimleri, dil ve hatta müzik hakkında genel bir fikir edindiğim için diğer okumalarımı çok daha rahat ve keyifle yapabilirim.
-
Li este pequeno livro há alguns anos (9, pelo que vejo), como leitura obrigatória da disciplina de «Pensamento Mítico», aqui na Universidade de Évora. Que me perdoem o aparte muito pessoal, mas em tudo aquelas aulas eram míticas: começavam às 20h, nos claustros vazios do Colégio do Espírito Santo, falava-se da linhagem de certos pianistas, de xamãs, de Jakobson e Saussure, do Matrix, do Castelo de Kafka... Devem ser os únicos apontamentos dessa altura, caóticos, claro, que guardo com carinho. Desde então que sempre quis reler esse livro que na altura achei brilhante. Pela forma como ligava o Mito e a História, o Mito e a Música, o Mito e a Ciência. Verdade seja dita que desta vez não fiquei tão impressionado, já terei lido bem mais do que nessa altura lia, mas fiquei igualmente fascinado. A lucidez de Lévi-Strauss e a clareza do seu pensamento são impressionantes, abrem portas para pensamentos mais complexos e para entender esse pensamento mítico de que somos herdeiros e, como tal, ao qual não somos completamente alheios, ao contrário do que podemos pensar. É, pois, possível que o volte a ler daqui a 9 anos, ou 10 anos. Talvez até antes. Em todo o caso, será sempre um dos livro que mais estimo e que transporto na minha própria mitificação.
-
" I never had, and still do not have, the perception of feeling my personal identity. I appear to myself as the place where something is going on, but there is no ‘I’, no ‘me.’ Each of us is a kind of crossroads where things happen. The crossroads is purely passive; something happens there. A different thing, equally valid, happens elsewhere. There is no choice, it is just a matter of chance. "
Did you happen to feel like you want to cry because something is very exciting and good? this happens to me every time that I read this small book. well Claude Lévi-Strauss is an anthropologist but it's not important if you're not an anthropologist you can enjoy the book anyway and learn about mythology and how the same myths had been repeating in different societies without absolutely no connection between them.
the book is so small so you can read it in 2 hours instead of watching a movie and then you will have the same feeling that you had after watching interstellar. -
Bir konunun ana hatlarını sunan kitaplara rastlamak okuyucuya büyük bir imkan sağlıyor. Lévi-Strauss'un Mit ve Anlam'ı bu zamana değin okuduğum en iyi #başlangıçlar metni.
-
"...onlar bir ve aynıdır; fakat farklı açılardan görünür". (s.67)
Strauss'un soru cevap şeklinde yazıya dönüştürülmüş konferans konuşmaları. Kitap genel olarak 'mit' olanı diğer alanlarla sahip olduğu benzerlikler üzerinden açıklıyor. Metin bölümlerine ortak mitleri örnek olarak yerleştiriyor. Yazının ilgi çekici tezi 'Mit ve Müzik' başlığındaki son kısımda yer alıyor. Dilin anlamsal ve biçimsel karşılığı olarak mit ve müzik arasında zaman zaman birbirinin yerine geçen durumlarıyla örneklendiriyor. Çeviri dili ve metnin içeriği ilgi çekici. -
This was going a solid five stars, or at least four and a half, until halfway through the final chapter Levi-Strauss decided to switch up the plot of The Ring to suit his theory.
-
This book consists of five talks given on the CBC Radio series “Ideas” in December 1977, with a short introduction from religious scholar Wendy Doniger from the University of Chicago. The names of the lectures themselves won’t provide but the barest of insight into the material that Levi-Strauss covers, but since there are only five, I will name them here. They are 1) “The Meeting of Myth and Science,” 2) “‘Primitive’ Thinking and the ‘Civilized’ Mind,” 3) “Harelips and Twins: The Splitting of Myth,” 4) “When Myth Becomes History,” and 5) “Myth and Music.”
These lectures are some of the very few popularizing work that Levi-Strauss did in his extremely long life. As Doniger says in her fine introduction, they “touch upon all of Levi-Strauss’s great methodological paradoxes between myth and science, myth and history, myth and music,” and present the most difficult concepts in “La Pensee Sauvage” (“The Savage Mind”) for the educated lay audience (p. xii).
These lectures don’t really lend themselves to summary terribly well. As you can see above, the entire book itself, including the introduction, is a mere 80 pages. They do, however, give you brief glimpses into the abiding concerns and problems that have, more than anything else, given structure to Levi-Strauss’s unique intellectual path within the field of anthropology, and those related to structuralism in particular. I read this together with Patrick Wilcken’s biography, “Claude Levi-Strauss: Poet in the Laboratory,” which I found added a lot of appropriate background material that was useful in dealing with these talks.
If you find the topics of his lectures interesting, you’ll almost certainly be disappointed in their relative lack of depth. (I suppose you have to sacrifice detail when you’re presenting complicated ideas to a non-professional audience.) However, there are wonderful resources out there with much more detail. Wilcken’s biography is a good place to start, but can be variously supplemented with Christopher Johnson’s “Levi-Strauss: The Formative Years” (an imprint from Cambridge) and “Tristes Tropiques.” And if you get really adventurous, you can try “The Savage Mind” or his two-thousand-page, four-volume “Mythologiques.” With any hope, I’ll get there eventually. -
1. وقتی چیزی دارای معنا است که قابل ترجمه باشد؛ نه فقط به زبان‌های مختلف، بلکه در سطوح مختلف. بنظرم احتمالا منظور نویسنده تبدیل یک مفهوم مثل مهربانی به پانتومیم، سینما، یا مثلا موسیقی، نشان‌هنده‌ی قابلیتش برای معنا داشتن است. اما مثل سایر حرف‌هایش، نویسنده شاهد و مدرکی بر حرفش نشان نمی‌دهد، حرف دلش را می‌زند!
2. استراوس می‌گوید علم دارد کم‌کم می‌فهمد که فلان حیوان که در آن اسطوره وجود داشت، به چه دلیل بوده. اما او تفسیر علمی را با محتوای علمی داشتن اشتباه گرفته است. می‌توان هر متنی که بدون هدف علمی نوشته شده را با تفاسیر امروزی علم توجیه کرد، همانند متون دینی. اما این دلیل نمی‌شود که آن متون به خودی‌خود دارای معنی‌ای باشند که ما در این قرن «کشف»شان کرده‌ایم.
3. کاری که استراوس می‌گوید از دو سالگی انجام می‌داده، یعنی پیدا کردن شباهت یا بقول خودش «ساختار» بین چیزهای متفاوت، علمی نیست. ما می‌توانیم هرچیزی را به چیز دیگری مربوط کنیم و دلایل اثباتی زیادی هم جمع‌آوری کنیم. اما این‌گونه استدلال‌ها معمولا نمی‌گویند در چه صورت می‌پذیرند مقایسه‌شان و ساختاری که پیدا کرده‌ند؛ غلط است.
البته قبول دارم که نویسنده در کتاب‌های حجیم‌ترش ممکن است عقایدش را مبسوط‌تر توضیح داده باشد، اما بنظرم هر نویسنده مسئولیت کتابی که منتشر کرده را برعهده دارد. من بر روی کتاب پیش‌رویم ریویو می‌نویسم و نه فهم کلی نویسنده‌ی محترم از مسئله! -
Ekitap.
Claude'un bir radyo programında çalışmaları hakkındaki sorulara, akıcı ve sizi yabancılaştıracak bir terminoloji kullanmadan verdiği cevapları içeriyor Mit ve Anlam. Çok çılgın da bir önsöz var kitabın başında, Gökhan Yavuz Demir'e saygılar. -
মিথের উৎপত্তি, মিথের সাথে জীবনের সম্পর্ক এই বইটা পড়লে কিছুটা হলে ও ধারণা করা যায়। অবাক করা ব্যাপার হচ্ছে মিথ কখন কখনো জীবনের সাথে এমনভাবে মিশে যায়,আমরা তা আলাদা করতে পারি না।
-
זהו ספר מעניין המציג בקצרה מבחר מרעיונותיו של ההוגה קלוד לוי-שטראוס. הוא מקבל אצלי בקלות שלושה כוכבים.
מדוע תורגם לעברית ומדוע מומלץ לקרוא בו? הפילוסוף נמרוד בר-עם, שתרגם והוסיף גם אחרית דבר, מנמק זאת בעמוד האחרון כך: "העונג הניכר שהפיק לוי-שטראוס מכתיבה פתלתולה ושירית הפך את החשובים שבכתביו לחומה מאיימת ובצורה בפני הקורא המתחיל. נתמזל מזלו של קורא סקרן שכזה, כי בשלהי תקופתו היצירתית העניק לוי-שטראוס ריאיון רדיופוני בכמה חלקים, המסכם היבטים עיקריים שונים של עבודתו. שילוב זה של הצורך לנסח את רעיונותיו באמצעות מדיום שאינו סלחן לערבסקות המילוליות החביבות עליו כל-כך ושל שימוש בשפה האנגלית (שלא שלט בה שליטה מלאה), הניב את המבוא הפשוט והבהיר ביותר לעבודתו שהשאיר אחריו."
זאת כנראה סיבה טובה ואמיתית. יש לציין שלא מדובר במבוא שיטתי של לוי-שטראוס לעבודתו ושגם כאן הוא אינו נמנע ממשפטים בעלי כפל משמעות והתבטאויות שיחייבו את הקורא שאינו מומחה במאמץ פענוחי מסוים. יש גם לומר שלמרות שהנימוק לקריאה אמיתי הוא אינו שלם (כנראה מטעם ענוונותו של המתרגם). אז אני אשלים אותו.
הספר תורגם בצורה יפה ומוקפדת בידי נמרוד בר-עם. (התרגום אינו חף מקשיים בתרגום מונחים, שכנראה לעולם לא יתורגמו בצורה מניחת דעת. למשל הקושי הידוע שבתרגום המונח mind). ניכר כי בר-עם ממש יצא מגדרו לשבץ בתרגום (גם בגופו וגם בתחתית העמודים) הערות וביאורים מאירי עיניים לכל קטע סתום. על כך תבוא עליו הברכה. יתרה מזו הוא גם הוסיף אחרית דבר לתרגום. אחרית דבר שהיא למעשה מבוא תמציתי, מרתק ובהיר מאין כמוהו לתורתו של לוי-שטראוס ולמקום שהיא תופסת בהקשר הפילוסופיה של האנתרופולוגיה והתקשורת האנושית. ולמעשה הייתי אומר כי תשובותיו של לוי-שטראוס הן הנספח כאן למאמר המצוין של בר-עם (ואין אירוניה בדברי). לכתיבתו של בר-עם אני מעניק בקלות חמישה כוכבים ויותר מממליץ לקרוא בה. -
Un acercamiento a la importancia del mito en nuestra cultura, así como la influencia que hoy en día todavía tiene en la sociedad moderna.
Lévi-Strauss explora en Mito y Significado cómo la historia y sus acontecimientos algunas veces se han disfrazado de leyenda, lo difícil que es a veces discernir entre una cosa u otra y el papel de transmisor de los hechos históricos a través del mito. -
إنني لا أعتقد أن الثقافات قد حاولت بطريقة منتظمة أو منهجية أن تجعل نفسها مختلفة عن غيرها فحقيقة الأمر هي أنه منذ مئات أو آلاف السنين لم يكن الجنس البشري على الأرض بهذه الكثرة، وكانت الجماعات الصغيرة تعيش في حالة عزلة ولذلك كان من الطبيعي فقط أن تقوم بتطوير خصائص خاصة مميزة لها ومن ثم تصبح مختلفة عن غيرها. ولم يكن
-
The purpose of this book is to serve as an introduction to the thinking of Claude Levi-Strauss, a French anthropologist who is apparently quite legendary, though I personally had never heard of him before. This is done by having the author answer questions related to what he writes about, which I think is a really good approach. The expertise of Levi-Strauss was in examining mythology, in particular that of indigenous North and South American peoples.
At first I was expecting just another Joseph Campbell-esque romp through eclectic mythologies followed by an assertion of pseudo-Jungian stuff at the end. But I was pleasantly surprised. Levi-Strauss is deeply original. His theory that the mythic mode disappeared in writing with the advent of the novel and retreated into music (especially that of Wagner, Mozart, and Beethoven) is extremely interesting. I also enjoyed his analysis of why there is always a correlation, in indigenous South American stories, between twins and people with pursed lips.
All in all I recommend this short little book to anyone who is interested in these sorts of topics. I look forward to reading a proper book by Levi-Strauss sometime soon. -
কাঠামোবাদী তাত্ত্বিক ক্লদ লেভি স্ত্রসের সাক্ষাৎকারের একটি অনুবাদ পুস্তিকা, অনুবাদ করেছেন প্রিসিলা রাজ। মিথ ও তার অর্থ (যদিও লেভি স্ত্রস নিজেই বলেছেন 'মিথ' ও 'মিনিং' এর অর্থ অথবা সংজ্ঞায়ন বেশ ঝামেলার ব্যাপার) নিয়ে এখানে আলোচনা করেছেন লেভি স্ত্রস, কয়েকটি চমকপ্রদ কেস স্টাডি সহ। সোশ্যাল সায়েন্সে আগ্রহীরা পড়তে পারেন, তবে নবীশদের জন্য খুব সুখকর অভিজ্ঞতা হবে কিনা জানি না। অনুবাদ হিসেবে ভালই, বাংলায় এধরনের একাডেমিক আর্টিকেল অনুবাদের কাজ খুব কম তাই পুস্তিকাটিকে গুরুত্বপূর্ণ বিবেচনা করা যায়। তবে মোটের উপর সাধারণ একটি কাজ বলা যায়, সাধারণ এই অর্থে যে এধরনের কাজ আরও বেশি ও আরও বিস্তৃত আকারে হওয়া প্রয়োজন।
-
A very short book with very little depth. Unlike science “myth is unsuccessful in giving man more material power over the environment” according to Levi-Strauss. I would oppose this theory and suggest myth is a social technology used to organize the conscious and unconscious mind. By creating maleable psychic conditions civilizational epochs emerge giving man material power over the environment via the organization of people under mythic structures.
The scientific theory, which Claude is quite fond of, is a myth employed by scientists as a provisional logic which suggests the synthesis of the thesis and antithesis yields a new standard. The caveat to his near total endorsement of this mythic substratum (which has its roots in the Pythagorean and platonic mystical schools) is that it doesn’t have total explanatory power. He fails to conclude that this system has the same basic epistemic structure as the “savage” formulation of the world.
The whole framing of myth as the mind space of the “primitive” or “savage” (which he is ostensibly trying to escape) is only reinforced by his adoption of it and total lack of self-awareness. The tone he employs when considering Amerindian myths is condescending. He misses the point of myth altogether by considering the empirical veracity of stories that clearly cannot be corroborated absolutely.
Is this the best the “father of modern anthropology” has to offer? The foreword was well written and implied that this is one of his greatest works. Very disappointing. -
Mitlere yeni bir bakış açısı ile bakmak isteyenler için iyi bir kaynak
-
The great thing about moving it that one has to look at all one's books again. In some cases treasures can be discovered that one has forgotten that one owns. Such was the case with this book "Myth and Meaning: Cracking the Code of Culture" and when it was unpacked in its new home, I placed it on my bedside table to make sure that it did not get buried again before I got to read it.
It is a series of short essays which evolved from a series of talks which he wrote and spoke for CBC Radio in English. It is the one place that an English speaker hears his voice directly without the middle man of a translator. Because he is not writing in his native tongue, the arguments are simplified and much less opaque than his writings in French. They are simple but packed with meaning. I ended up reading most of the chapters twice and know that I will be picking it up again and again.
This book does not have the wealth of examples which his longer books have but since it comes at the end of his career, it is integrated and lacks some of the contradictions which occur from book to book as he developed his ideas.
I highly recommend this book as an entree into the world of theories and ideas that is Claude Levi-Strauss.
