The Classic Myths in English Literature and in Art (2nd ed.) (1911): Based Originally on Bulfinch's "Age of Fable" (1855) — John Stuart Mill — John Shaqi
The Classic Myths in English Literature and in Art (2nd ed.) (1911): Based Originally on Bulfinch's "Age of Fable" (1855)
John Stuart Mill · en
they should not be allowed to pass allusions already explained without
recalling verses that contain them.
But above all things should be cultivated, by means of this study, the
spiritual capabilities of our youth. _Pabulum_ for thought, accurate
habits of memory, critical judgment, simplicity and directness of oral
and written expression, may all be furnished or developed by other
educative agencies; but what stimulus to fancy, to poetic sensitiveness
and reflection, to a near kinship with the spirit of nature humanized,
can be found more cogent than the contemplation of the poetic
traditions that abide in verse? Mythology, fraught with the fire of
imagination, kindles the present from the past.
In this new world of ours, shall slopes and mountains, gorges, cañons,
flowery fields and forests, rivers, bays, Titanic lakes, and shoreless
reach of ocean be seen of eyes that lack insight, be known of men for
whom nature does not live? Surely the age of myth is not wholly past;
surely the beauties and the wonders of nature are a fable of things
never fully revealed; surely this new republic of ours, no less than
her prototypes by Tyrrhenian and Ægean seas, utters, in her queenly
form and flowing robes, a spirit, a truth, a potential poetry, and a
beauty of art, the grace of which we Americans, with deeper imaginative
training and sympathy and awe, may yet more highly value and more
clearly comprehend.
2. _Of the Classic Myths in their Relation to Art._[1] The illustration
of a book on ancient mythology offers great difficulties, because
the modern reader expects one thing and the ancient artist, on whose
works one must rely, intentionally offers a very different thing. We
have grown to be a reading people, forming our ideas largely on the
written word, while in antiquity the spoken word opened the door to
understanding. A story which has been committed to writing is fixed
for all time, having lost its power of growth; whereas a tale that
passes from mouth to mouth, with no record by which to check its
accuracy in particulars, is free to expand. It changes with the moods
of those who tell it, and the intellectual and moral standards of those
who listen. People to-day are unimaginative and literal. They also
expect that the pictures which illustrate their books shall follow
the individual conceptions of the author closely. When the story is
dramatized a certain latitude is granted to the actor; the artist,
however, who illustrates the book has no such freedom. He is expected
to take precisely the author's view of a fictitious character, and,
consequently, his individuality may show itself only in the technique.
In antiquity there were no standard books of fiction or of myths.
When writing came into use with the sixth century before Christ, the
individual versions of this or that great epic poem or drama were
preserved; but the great mass of the people knew them, not because they
had read the manuscripts, but because they had heard them acted or