Primal Religions 2025

 David Abram believes that nature itself is sentient and intelligent like people are. If nature were sentient in that way then would it not have tried to prevent the industrialization of the world for the sake of its continued survival? If I were in danger of having my body being destroyed for others to build things with I would go out of my way to make sure that such a thing were not feasible. Intelligent life shows signs that it is intelligent and nature as a collective has not done so. 

 The class has outlined that storytelling is better when done out loud than when read from written text, but is reading written text out loud a good bridge between the two styles of information spreading. If you read a book out loud you are engaging in the community and cementing a memory for those who hear it to share, but the text is static and unconnected to the world around it. If an oral story were to be written and read aloud in the same place later that connection to nature is still there, but is it diminished due to nature no longer being the only connecting point for the story as it has the written word as well? Does this distinction matter at all if it is in the same place and if it does not does that mean that myths should not be spread beyond those that can hear it at the correct place?

 Is a trickster defined more by their personality or their actions? To me a trickster is someone that has certain personality traits that make them different from others. A character can perform all the same actions as a trickster, but if they lack a certain level of whimsy, levity, or above it all mirth than I do not think of them as a trickster. On the other hand there are actions that feel integral to a trickster based on those personality traits. A whimsical person that does not try and manipulate is not a trickster, but neither is a serious manipulator. A combination of both is good for the classic trickster, but where is the defining line of a trickster? Or is that vagueness intentional?

 How do oral religions survive in the modern age? I know that they can simply choose not to engage in anything from their end, but with how nosy people are I don’t see how it’s possible. The videos we watched in class point out how the Australian Aboriginals are almost out of practicing people and even then some have regular jobs as well. With how connected the world is now it seems impossible to be an isolated group. Do the oral societies adapt to writing but keep their beliefs or do they go out of their way to make sure that the only way knowledge can be spread is word of mouth?

 I think that the use of masks in rituals is really interesting as they remove the person performing the ritual from it. Whether it is a mask of a spirit, a god, or an ancestor by wearing a mask you are surrendering your identity to who the mask is. They serve as mediums for the ritual to connect to the supernatural while also narrowing down the purpose of the ritual to specific purposes. The number of purposes that have been given to masks is surprisingly high as they can be used for communing with the dead, ask for a good harvest, show status, or honor ancestors. 

 The use of music in oral religions can have many different benefits, but I think that the most important one is that it keeps the tempo for a ritual. Rituals are supposed to be these very big deals that need to be performed perfectly, but it is very difficult to perfect steps without something for your brain to latch on to. Music becomes that connection between what you can do and what you want to do. Assigning specific actions to shifts in tempo, rhythm, or octave is something easy to latch onto and serve as a guide for when you should make a specific action. It also has the added benefit of improving the performance of the ritual to any observers and thus making it more memorable.