ABSTRACT
There is nothing lacking compensation in something else. (Borges 1970:146)
THE MUTUALITY OF MYTHS
There is a certain mutuality to myths. They exist in a ‘mythical field’ (Lévi-Strauss 1987:55). There a myth will depend on other myths for its ‘full’ meaning and effect. This is usually and accurately seen as a matter of supporting similarities between myths (e.g. Leach 1969:22). But a myth self-evidently retains distinctness and difference from other myths. In this, a myth opposes other myths in the field. The mythical field, I argue, is one of mutual relations of opposition and support, of autonomy and dependence. The relation of mutual support and dependence becomes attuned to the cause of a myth’s autonomy when that autonomy is challenged, either by an opposing myth or by a mundane reality. In those events, another myth will, as it were, compensate for the shortfall in autonomy exposed by myths or a resistant reality. We have already seen myths of law and of the individual relating to each other in this way.
