LITERARY ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN MYTHOLOGY. 
33 
literary workmanship and one in which they have. What signi- 
ficance is there in the existence of these two types ? Why has 
not one, for instance, displaced the other, and what exactly is 
the relation of the one to the other ? It seems to me that the 
answer to this question is simple, the one represents the myth as 
folk-lore, the other as literature. The one is static, of the nature 
of formulae toward which the individual takes a passive attitude; 
the other is dynamic, of the nature of free elements with which a 
specially gifted individual plays and which he endeavours to weld 
into a literary unit. In other words, the first type of version 
represents our fairy tale. Fairy tales we know have no real 
plot, but consist of a series of incidents strung together in an 
indefinite way. All the incidents, themes, and motifs which 
belong to the general foikloristic background are to be found in 
them. Owing to the fact that they have become largely for- 
mulaic in character, they are handed down in much the same 
way from generation to generation. 
The relation of the myth as such to the myth as novelette is a 
very direct one. J ust as among the Greeks, so among the Indians, 
the main subject matter of their literature is based on their my- 
thology. There is, it is true, a not inconsiderable bodvofreal tales 
among the Indians, consisting of specific happenings that have been 
cast into a literary mould, but with these we have no concern here. 
However, in thus bodily taking over their mythology for their 
literary themes, the Indian author-raconteurs took with them a 
large amount of the lack of coherence and poor motivation of the 
myths and only in cases of fairly perfect workmanship has this 
been eliminated. Similar things have taken place in our own 
literature. In the dramas of Shakespeare, especially in his early 
work, we find at times a number of situations that are quite 
out of place and poorly motivated, explained when recourse is 
had to the sources from which he drew his plots . 1 
The novelette, then, is generally only a myth cast in an im- 
perfect literary mould. The contrast between the myth and its 
novelette form is not anything like as great as that which existed, 
1 Two such situations come to my mind: one, the seemingly incongruous fact that Romeo 
is represented as being in love when the play opens; the second, Hamlet’s failure to kill his 
uncle when he finds him in prayer. Both these situations are poorly motivated and can be 
most intelligibly explained when the original sources of the plots are consulted. 
