Forbidden books — OZONE Asylum, home of the Mad Scientists

Philosophy and other Silliness

Forbidden books

This page's ID: 28096

Edit Post

Who can edit a post?	The poster and administrators may edit a post. The poster can only edit it for a short while after the initial post.

Your User Name:
Your Password:
Login Options:	Remember Me On This Computer

Your Text: Insert Slimies » Insert UBB Code » Close Last Tag \| All Tags UBB Help	I will admit that I have not had time to peruse the links you helpfully provided above (just as you apparently have not had time to send me that email ;). No need for it now, though, as I'm leaving the day after tomorrow). But I did want to say this: it is an ancient idea that language possesses magical power. Look at the Bible for one common example. How did God create the world? By speaking it into existence--that is, through language. Just as there is good magic, there is bad magic, and just as there are good words, there are bad words. Not that the words themselves are bad (although there are indeed single words that are believed to be magical in and of themselves--more on that later), but put together in a certain way, a certain grammar, they come to possess an evil influence. Mind you, there is a distinction between evil content and evil words. The former is a judgment of meaning, while the latter is a judgment of the intrinsic, magical power of the word(s). It is no surprise that there are many tales of forbidden books, magical tomes, evil texts that will drive the reader insane. These play on the ancient human belief of magical language. But it is another story entirely as to whether these texts actually ever existed. The idea of magical language is a successful meme because it is fascinating and it convinces us that we can create--or destroy--with the fruit of our hearts and minds. The meme is not without factual basis, of course. We have sayings such as "the pen is mightier than the sword," which confirms our belief in magical language, as well as such sayings as "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me"--the biggest lie ever told to children, because we all know that names [b]do[/b] hurt, and they go on hurting long after broken bones have healed, sometimes even to the grave. Each and every human being has experienced both the hurtful and healing power of words, so it is no great leap of imagination to postulate that words in themselves possess magical power. But do they really possess this power? Remember, it is not the content we are referring to here. All those texts you mentioned? They have their power because not because of what they say, but because of the words they use to say it. To use Judeo-Christian tradition as an example again, take the Tetragrammaton--that is, YHWH, the rendering of the Hebrew name for God. Everyone knows what it refers to, but you can't actually write out the name because it is sacred. The Scriptures (any scriptures, really) as a whole are also a study in magical language--it took centuries for Europeans to even dare think about translating the Bible (despite the fact that the Septuagint was itself a Greek translation) because of the sacred nature of the text. Sure, the content was important, but they also believed that the words themselves were sacred. These days, though, we have numerous translations of the Bible in more languages than I can imagine. Why? Because we have moved away from a magical understanding of language and recognized that the importance of the semantic value of language--even sacred language. Not that the fascination with magical language has been disappeared, just that it has been suppressed by practicality, at least in this instance. But I wander. Back to those texts. Did they really exist? I suppose that depends upon your point of view. If you're asking whether someone ever wrote a text about a yellow king, I would say yes, it is entirely possible. If you're asking whether that same text actually drove people who read it insane, I would say no, it is rather unlikely. Does this really matter, though? As a student of folklore and oral literature, I tread the fine line between "truth" and "reality." Truth is absolute, reality is relative. In terms of truth, The Yellow King probably never existed. In terms of reality, it had (and is still having, apparently) an effect on the minds and imaginations of people. Which is more important? I would say the latter, but I am biased because of my field of study. There's a lot more to say on the subject, of course, but I'm getting into babbling territory. I apologize for not directly addressing the texts you mentioned, but I started thinking in general about the subject ever since I first read this thread. Due to my upcoming trip, I probably won't be able to contribute much more to the discussion, but I did just want to unburden my mind here and maybe give you some food for thought. [img]http://www.liminality.org/asylum/sigs/suho_umbrella04.gif[/img] ___________________________ Suho: [url=http://www.liminality.org]www.liminality.org[/url] \| [url=http://www.ozoneasylum.com/4837]Cell 270[/url] \| [url=http://www.ozoneasylum.com/5689]Sig Rotator[/url] \| [url=http://www.ozoneasylum.com/22173]the Fellowship of Sup[/url] Loading...
Options:	Enable Slimies Enable Linkwords

« Backwards — Onwards »

Show Forum Drop Down Menu