Ragnarok

"The thin child thought that these stories-- the sweet, cotton-wool meek and mild one, the barbaric sacrificial gloating one, were both human make-ups, like the life of the giants in the Riesengebirge. Neither aspect made her want to write, or fed her imagination. They numbed it. She tried to think she might be wicked for thinking these things. She might be like Ignorance, in Pilgrim's Progress, who fell into the pit at the gate of heaven. She tried to feel wicked. But her mind veered away, to where it was alive."  pg. 12

This passage shows an aspect of religion, and the teaching of it, that has never sat well with me. In Sunday school, one of the first places that small children are exposed to religion in a way that they can comprehend it, there is clearly a lot of emphasis on the good that comes from accepting the teachings. But there is also an ulterior agenda of grooming behaviors that reinforce this commitment to religion until they are old enough to be making the conscious decision to be followers, and make the necessary sacrifices and lifestyle choices. This means that questions about religion are often avoided, redirected, or simply left unanswered-- in hopes that the urge to critically analyze is dropped for good. This creates a sort of taboo of discourse about religion between everyone, and between adults and children especially. It feels wrong to ask questions, and it creates the illusion that there is something wrong with questioning your beliefs; as if there is weakness in not blindly and boldly accepting what is fed to you your whole life. Children feel alone in their doubt, like there is something wrong with them, and this spawns feelings of shame and a misunderstanding of what one's relationship with religion should be. I believe that if people are truly so concerned with forming lasting faith in children, they should allow them to explore and ask questions and analyze, and to see the value in the way critical thought can reinforce your own beliefs. Instead of creating a hostile, tight-lipped environment for curious young minds, why not use this as an opportunity to let them form their own informed opinions? This discourse could be exactly what is missing from religion, exactly what is needed to make minds 'come alive.'

Ragnarok

"She read the introduction about the retrieval of the old Germanic world, with its secrets and wonders...  She was puzzled of the idea of the Germans. She had dreams that they were Germans underneath her bed, who, having cast her parent into a green pit in dark woods were sawing down the legs of her bed to reach her and destroy her. Who were these old Germans as opposed to the ones overhead, now dealing death out of the skies."

This passage comes quite early on in the book and refers to when the thin child comes across the book Asgard and the Gods and starts to read it. It refers to the child realizing  how this book is filled with many mysteries, apparitions, and illusions. The thin child also comments how this book was written by Germans and how it reminds her of the shrouded Germanic culture and its secrets. I also found it very interesting as to how she comes to the conclusion that she is afraid of Germans. She doesn't explicitly say this but says that she thinks they're Germans underneath her bed, who are trying to claw their way to her and destroy her. As a young child I would also be afraid of whats under my bed or in my closet, and I found it intriguing how the thin child made Germans to be her bed monsters. This probably has a lot to do with the time and setting of the story because parts of it refers to World War II and the bombings over England and how German's are doing this by "dealing death out of the skies."

Ragnarok

"When the bond round the earth was loosed, other bonds broke. The hell-hound, Garm, snapped his chain and leaped out to join his wolf kindred. The sun in her chariot, and the moon in his, whipped up their horses in their everlasting rush round the sky. But the tireless pursuing wolves, joined by Garm, with crimson eyes and gullet, knew that their time had come, galloped faster, and fastened their teeth in the haunches of the silver horse and the swarthy. The horses screamed and swerved, and light in the world went mad, black, blazing white, dark as hell, lurid red."-A. S. Byatt, Ragnarok, pg. 136

Passages like this one exemplify the fragility of the system which keeps the earth in balance and keeps entropy at bay. The "bond around the earth" which sends the earth into chaos in Ragnarok is the giant serpent and her destructive forces. This phrase can also be seen in light of human unity as the great global link of a common cause. once this common cause is lost, whether it be environmental struggles, global economy, or peace treaties, can lead to the rapid descent of humanity and the earth into complete chaos in which everything is wiped out by opposing forces and there is nothing left, represented by the two battling armies that wipe each other out and take out all of the world with them. This chain-reaction apocalypse that Byatt describes in Ragnarok is not entirely impossible to replicate with the world powers today, and was especially possible during the time of World War II, when this was written. It seemed almost certain that the world powers would take each other out.

Ragnarok

'I know that I hung on a windy tree

nine long nights

Wounded with a spear dedicated to

Odin

Myself to myself, on that tree of which 

no man knows

From where its roots run.

No bread did they give me nor drink 

from a horn,

Downwards I peered;

I too up the runes, screaming I took

them

Then I feel back from there.

Nine mighty spells I learned. . . 

Although this is a relatively short passage, I found much relevance in it. From my understanding it is describing the torture that the God Odin went through which in turn strengthened him. While reading about Asgard, I saw a connection between Odin and what the Christian faith would call a demon. There was no surprise that later on in the text he was described as the God of Death and Battle, which I find ironic in itself. In the text it is mentioned that Odin accepts human sacrifices in a pretty gruesome way, and that is obviously where he got some of the ideas from. 

Ragnarok

“Baldur went, but he did not come back. The thin child sorted in her new mind things that went and came back, and things that went and would not come back. Her father with his flaming hair was flying under the hot sun in Africa, and she knew in her soul that he would not come back. She knew it partly because of the things tangibly unsaid when the family at Christmas raised small glasses of cider, and drank to him, and the hope that next Christmas he would come back. There were stories that ended, instead of going in circles and circles, and the story of the beautiful god was one of those, and she found it grimly satisfactory. Though her readings and rereadigs at all times of the year gave it a kind of eternal recurrence. The story ended, but she began it again.” (77).

This quote is important because it tells a deeper truth about the importance of religion and mythology in our society. The fact that the “thin child” rereads the myth of Ragnarok to cope with her world in the apocalyptic state of war was very interesting. It shows that apocalyptic literature offers an escape from the daily apocalypses and tragedies we experience. The child truly thought that her father would not come back, and in the story of Ragnarok, Baldur died and did not come back. The child couldn’t do anything about the state of her father, but she could reread Ragnarok and control whether or not Baldur came back. Although such stories of apocalypse are not uplifting, and sometimes make us dwell more on our own tragedies than distract from them, they can function almost as a support system.  This is true for modern religion as well. In the same sense that Baldur “went, but he did not come back”, so too do Christian religions believe that Jesus died on the cross, never to come back until the final judgment day. Although biblical stories such as the life of Jesus end, throughout the course of the year, the same story is repeated, and has been repeated for hundreds of years. This recurrence offers stability that humans need.

Ragnarok

"...There were stories that ended and instead of going in circles and cycles, and the story of the beautiful god was one of those, and she found it grimly satisfactory. Though her readings and rereadings at all times of the year gave it a kind of eternal reoccurance. The story ended, but she began it again.
     These gods, she understood, were apprehensive gods, fearful gods, right from the beginning. Asgard had defensive walls and sentinels on watch. There was an expectation of doom..."

I thought the first part of this passage was interesting because of the way that she kept the stories alive by simply rereading them. I've heard people say things like this when talking about Harry Potter books, like if you read them again all your favorite characters are alive again because JK Rowling decided to kill them all off one by one. I thought it was a good description of that feeling when you reread a book.

The second part of this passage was interesting to me because of the way it described the "gods" in the story. I mean to me these creatures don't really seem god-like, they're more like greek mythological "gods" in that they have flaws and they have fears. To me that would also just make it seem like they aren't really similar to God at all. They may have powers beyond human capacity, but I don't think that means that much if they have fear.

"Ragnarok" Passage

This is an excerpt from pg. 113 of "Ragnarok," by A.S. Byatt:

"Loki was interested in things because he was interested in them, and in the way they were in the world, and worked in the world. He was neither kind nor gentle, not anyway when he inhabited the world of myth. In the world of folktales he was a fire demon, mostly benign, providing warmth for hearths and ovens. In the world of Asgard he was smiling and reckless, a forest fire devouring what stood in its path."

This passage explains the conditional perceptions of Loki's nature among humans and gods, respectively. On the one hand, humans view Loki as a fire-god who has power over the fires in their hearths and ovens that provide them with warmth and food, yet on the other hand he is seen a tormentor among the gods. This effectively plays into Loki's "trickster" nature: humans can view him in a positive light while those who know him better can be more wary of his devious ways. This passage also touches upon Loki's inherent curiosity, which may be the fuel for his clever fire. By studying things simply to know how they work, Loki can figure out how to use those particular things to his advantage later on. He is a manipulative god with a knack for harmful pranks, acting almost as a child in certain scenarios. In Asgard, Loki is renowned for his ability to mess things up for other gods who are deeply invested in a certain outcome, thus making him more of an agitator than an altruist. It is certainly interesting how Loki is associated with fire and mischief simultaneously, because fire is mentioned in the word, firebrand--meaning, "a person who kindles strife or encourages unrest; an agitator." I wonder if this word is somehow derived from Loki, since he is both the god of fire and of mischief. All in all, I think this passage is interesting because it analyzes two perspectives of one god, therefore providing a more well-rounded view of what that particular god is supposed to represent.