This is an archetype; appearing in some form in most cultures, long before there was any collaboration between them.

It is the great chaos, the unknown unknown with the capability to destroy Society. But it has this treasure! How odd is that?

The hobbi’ts Smaug had a mountain of treasure. St George’s Dragon had a virgin. Harry Potter’s Basilisk had Ginny (Virginia). The various dragons of Oriental lore had gifts of wisdom or power to bestow. The Serpent of Genesis boasted the treasure of becoming as unto God.

(And then various Heroes appeared and did their thing).

So what do you think? Why does the Archetypal Dragon of chaos have a treasure?

The smart ass answers are often amusing. But I’m hoping a few will actually put some thought into it to constructive discourse.




15 Comments

Leave a response

You must be to post a response.

  1. Jear77 6 months ago

    Keep in mind this is from a fantasy writer’s viewpoint… but may not really answer the question per se.
    Dragons represent the things that humans are not: durability, knowledge / wisdom, long-livedness, the ability to fly under its own power, and, many times, magic… but at a terrible cost to itself at its creation. It’s ugly, cold blooded, and can’t fully understand humanity – due to its,alien nature Its treasure and greed represents things it can never have without stealing them: beauty, inherent value, and something that can’t/ won’t be corrupted by time.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      griz 6 months ago

      @Jear77
      That’s some very valid input from the dragons’ perspective. There’s some good things there that I hadn’t considered.

      Try the same experiment from the human perspective, and most notably from the Hero perspective.

      One hardly ever finds a dragon of chaos archetype, without an accompanying overcoming hero archetype.
      (Kind of redundant, as they would not be a hero unless they triumphed!)

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 6 months ago

        @griz two words: they’re evil.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 5 months ago

        @Jear77
        Too simplistic.
        Try exercising the same depth you did delving into the dragon’s perspective. It should be easier to exercise a Human’s perspective.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 5 months ago

        @griz uhm… there isn’t much more. People tend to kill monsters in stories for 2 reasons 1) they’re a bother, therefore evil and 2) they’re there, blocking them somehow.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  2. luftballooneyegouge 6 months ago

    In the case of dragons, it’s an insurmountable obstacle in the way of a better something or other.

    In the case of the Serpent in the Garden, it’s just some misogynistic not-very-post caveman bullshit almost as bad as the one about storks bringing babies or apollo riding his super shiny chariot across the sky.

    What a slow-poke boring god. He only does one thing,…. every day,… & it takes him all freakin’ day.
    Apollo was overrated! I give him 4 mehs outta 5.

    This Apollo,… way better…
    https://youtu.be/xfLnyZ81Wic

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      griz 6 months ago

      @luftballooneyegouge
      The dragon of chaos represents an unknown unknown. (For comparison a human villain is a known unknown.)
      Sometimes the dragon tands in the way of something genuinely good (a society’s freedom from its rampages). But in a lot of cases it’s not actively threatening the society.

      Trying to classify vast tracts of past Human experience as “just hate”, is woefully simplistic.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 6 months ago

        @griz
        I think bullshit can be hate free.
        ….like pop music sung by really pretty people.

        The whole apple story is pretty much blaming all of men’s woes on women while at the same time explaining why women don’t plop out babies with gleee and ecstasy,… like hopefully when the little bundle of …joy was being made.
        ……unless you take it as a historical event.
        :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 5 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        No so.
        What religion tries to call “the fall” is actually a story of Humanity’s coming to self-aware consciousness. It came through Eve because women tend towards greater trait-openness than men (by a full standard deviation), meaning that they are far more open to new ideas. But it also tends to make them more gullible. Consider how easily they are preyed upon by salespeople. Or a man “with all the right moves”, but the base personality of a dog.

        My file of citations for medical studies has become ungainly of late so I don’t have the citation of this study handy and not a lot of purchased time left online at truckstop tonight. But there’s been a study done, duplicated with same results, that show all children have limited connections between the amygdala (primitive center of emotions) and the cortical speech and reasoning centers. If you ask them how they’re feeling, they really cannot articulate it.
        But in the late teens, girls start to develop more connections between the amygdala and the cortex. Essentially a part of their emotional processing becomes “cortical”. Not so with boys. They maintain a distinct separation between emotions and rational thought.

        In the story of the Garden, the serpent’s appeal was essentially one relying upon emotions clouding reason. It had to be Eve, because Adam could not have been as easily swayed by an emotional argument.
        The same with Pandora.

        This is biology — not woman-hating.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 5 months ago

        @griz
        I think it’s amusingly ironic that you find a woman seeking knowledge as an emotional moment of clouded thinking, while at the same time running around saying you’re seeking knowledge.

        …and then the PURCHASED TIME AT THE TRUCK STOP!!!!! :rolf:

        Oh & thanks for telling me the story of Adam & Eve is actually a biology lesson.
        ….never woulda thunk it

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 5 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        It could be just is amusingly ironic that you don’t understand the nature of the species as it maps into the two sexes.

        Consider that because of your past you want it to be something that it biologically is not; so self blinding happens. The full picture is denied.

        All stories have many aspects to them, especially archetypical or mythical ones. That’s why they persevere for so long. To say that they do so just because of hate, is itself a function of self-hate. (Hating ones own biology sociology or history; for they all are a very real part of Who You Are)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 5 months ago

        @griz
        You say, “All stories have many aspects to them.”
        Then why do you deny the misogynistic aspect of this story?
        Would you agree it’s very open to misinterpretation if it wasn’t meant to place all men’s woes at the hands of a woman?

        My wording must’ve been too poor, as I never meant to say any story had one aspect, & I don’t think I really did, but that’s a trail to nowhere anyway.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 5 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        I don’t deny it because sex-based hatred is always there, and going in both directions. But it is most certainly not the determinant factor.

        I simply pointed out that trying to make everything entirely a function of hate cannot render a valid (or healthy) picture of reality.

        Only a hateful one.
        A twisted lens produces a twisted picture. One needs to ask themselves why they would want a twisted picture? Probably to match a twisted agenda.

        Remember that the primary currency in post-modernism is power.

        Not knowledge. Knowledge is just something to be twisted for the sake of gaining power.

        And the victimhood identity groups are very prone to mishandling knowledge just so they can render a simplistic verdict of hatred against them, to wield as power against anything/anyone they don’t like.

        And the self-blinding happens in presuming everyone else is doing the same.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 5 months ago

        @griz
        You should follow your own path.

        Your repetitiveness seems to be less about getting a point across to someone else, than reinforcing programming, by repeating someone else’s ideas over & over & over & over.

        Oh, & you did indeed deny the misogynistic aspect:

        I flippantly said not expecting I’d have to defend the notion:
        “In the case of the Serpent in the Garden, it’s just some misogynistic not-very-post caveman bullshit almost as bad as the one about storks bringing babies or apollo riding his super shiny chariot across the sky.”

        your response…
        @luftballooneyegouge
        No so.
        What religion tries to call “the fall” is actually a story of Humanity’s coming to self-aware consciousness. It came through Eve because women tend towards greater trait-openness than men (by a full standard deviation), meaning that they are far more open to new ideas. But it also tends to make them more gullible. Consider how easily they are preyed upon by salespeople. Or a man “with all the right moves”, but the base personality of a dog.

        My file of citations for medical studies has become ungainly of late so I don’t have the citation of this study handy and not a lot of purchased time left online at truckstop tonight. But there’s been a study done, duplicated with same results, that show all children have limited connections between the amygdala (primitive center of emotions) and the cortical speech and reasoning centers. If you ask them how they’re feeling, they really cannot articulate it.
        But in the late teens, girls start to develop more connections between the amygdala and the cortex. Essentially a part of their emotional processing becomes “cortical”. Not so with boys. They maintain a distinct separation between emotions and rational thought.

        In the story of the Garden, the serpent’s appeal was essentially one relying upon emotions clouding reason. It had to be Eve, because Adam could not have been as easily swayed by an emotional argument.
        The same with Pandora.

        This is biology — not woman-hating.”

        BAM
        not so
        not woman hating

        …& I’m not wasting any more time on this just so you can throw ‘post-modernism’ & ‘archetype’ into conversations ad nauseum….

        Like I began,
        You should follow your own path.

        Your repetitiveness seems to be less about getting a point across to someone else, than reinforcing programming, by repeating someone else’s ideas over & over & over & over.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 5 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        The “programming” or agenda I seek is only the quest for Truth. Not power; and knowledge is just a means to an end and not the end to itself.

        Correction, I denied that misogyny was the causal factor as you were asserting. (Without even an explanation iirc. At least I tried to explain and give reasons why it was likely not the causal factor!

        In what context could pointing out biological realities, be “woman-hating? Consider that feminism points out biological realities they construe as “weaknesses” in men all the frickin’ time without you calling misandry! Come on man! Get with your own program! :wink:

        I use the terms because they have meaning to the conversation. You advance a lot of postmodernist theory, perhaps without conscious recognition of what it even is.
        And an archetype is merely a story demonstrating sufficient “Truth” to persevere in the Historical narrative of our species for a very long time. It was the precursor to recorded History as we’ve learned to do in just the past few hundred years.

        “Truth” is not owned by any person or group. It is part of the ineffable underlying substrate. (It is what both the interpreter and the interpretation exist upon). That it manifests as powerful is something postmodernism recognizes, and in a way fears as “overpowering” (which is why such efforts are expended to defame it). But postmodernism stops there, presuming that because Truth is powerful, it is a power in an of itself that can be co-opted for various power-games.

        But Truth goes beyond that. Arguably, into realms postmodernism cannot even acknowledge the existence of. (Hence the fearful dismissive response).

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

©2018 Soul Sequel | All Rights Reserved

 
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account