342
PARTISAN REVIEW
The theory of evolution, on the other hand, led to the conclusion that
myths had developed out of folktales in accordance with the general
evolutionary process. The American anthropologists accept neither
of these views. In the writings of Boas, for example, we learn that the
folktale is a permanent and universal form of literature and that what
are usually called myths are to be thought of as folktales which have
been elaborated upon by specially gifted individuals. Several formal
distinctions have been made between myth and folktale; but these
distinctions are almost completely confounded by the literature of
primitive peoples as it actually exists. Primitive literature should be
thought of primarily
a~
folktale; once this has been grasped we are in
a position to observe that folktales have sometimes been remodeled
by story-tellers of religious or philosophic temperament. By far the
most useful definition of myth is one which cuts across formal distinc–
tions and says, Myth is any kind of literature which functions in a
certain way to the fulfilment of certain ends.
Some Functions of Myth.
In what follows I shall try to do two
things at once: show how literature becomes myth in primitive cul–
ture and suggest how our literature, especially our poetry, may be–
come mythical. Obviously I shall have to leave several large questions
unanswered. What I say is suggestion only.
Myth must always discover and accept preternatural forces; it
must always reaffirm the efficacy of the preternatural and insulate it
from the ordinary world. Here a note of definition: the word "super–
natural"
is
often used in discussions of myth, sometimes with the
necessary qualifications, oftener without. But there are at least two
objections to "supernatural": it implies a philosophical di:stinction
between two realms of being which are unknown to the myth-maker
and it has certain misleading theological overtones. I therefore use the
word "preternatural," by which I mean to indicate no more or less
than is conveyed by the Melanesian word
mana;
whatever has imper–
sonal magic force or potency and is therefore extraordinarily beau–
tiful, terrible, dangerous, awful, wonderful, uncanny or marvelous
has
mana
and is, in our sense of the word, preternatural. Myth shows
us reality set afire with our own emotions. In this sense myths do not
show us what is
less
than ordinarily natural; they show us what is
more
than ordinarily natural. This function may be regarded as a
given fact which holds true of all myth and of much poetry. But not
all literature which deals with the preternatural is myth.
Literature becomes mythical by suffusing the natural with pre-
