The relationship of myth to literature has largely been overshadowed in contemporary theory by perspectives of a linguistic or sociological orientation and by relativist, sometimes negatory, stances on all searches for meaning. This book attempts to show that myth criticism and critical theories of more recent provenance are not irreconcilable. While taking into consideration some of the more influential tenets of structuralist, post-structuralist, Marxist and feminist theory, it applies a post-Jungian ('archetypal') approach to illustrating the perennial nature of a particular myth (the Fall of Man) in two main traditions (Mesopotamian and Christian) and in the contemporary novel in English.
The discussions of five major novels by William Golding, Patrick White, Martin Amis, Salman Rushdie, and Wilson Harris not only serve to expand the mythological insights achieved in the first part of the book; they also suggest the incommensurability of imaginal, novelistic life with mythology's age-old intuitions about the human condition.
Myth criticism emerges from this book as an irreplaceable vantage-point from which man's lapsarian predicament can be scrutinized synchronically as archaic wisdom, contemporary anxiety, and post-colonial commitment to the building of a new human city.
The discussions of five major novels by William Golding, Patrick White, Martin Amis, Salman Rushdie, and Wilson Harris not only serve to expand the mythological insights achieved in the first part of the book; they also suggest the incommensurability of imaginal, novelistic life with mythology's age-old intuitions about the human condition.
Myth criticism emerges from this book as an irreplaceable vantage-point from which man's lapsarian predicament can be scrutinized synchronically as archaic wisdom, contemporary anxiety, and post-colonial commitment to the building of a new human city.
