Alan Dundes: the symbolism of the Mythopoetic Male
In "Earth Diver: Creation of the Mythopoetic Male," folklorist Alan Dundees offers a wildly different, psychological (i.e. Freudian) view of the Earth Diver creation myth. According to Dundes, previous scholars' analyses of Earth Diver are too "literal" and "study myth in monocultural context" whereas his interpretation offers "transcultural universalism."
​
According to Dundes, there is "remarkable stability in oral narratives" which suggests "symbolic", "universal meanings" with "unconscious content." Dundees sees Earth Diver as exemplifying male's subconscious dreams of "pregnancy envy" and "cloacal (or anal) theory of birth" - in other words, Dundees concludes "the common denominator is the male myth of creation whereby the male creator uses various aspects of the only means available, namely the creative power of the anus (Bronner 2007, 327-328, 331-339, 346)."
​
Still defending himself 34 years later in "Madness in Method Plus a Plea for Projective Inversion in Myth," Dundees repeats that his analysis of Earth Diver exemplifies a deeper "symbolic (with "projective inversion)" as opposed to a "literal (with "simple projection")" interpretation of myth. In a male dominated society, such a myth allows "normal biology to be contravened through myth - by creating a male myth whereby women was said to come from a man's body" and a "male deity creates males in his image (Bronner 2007, 347-349).
According to Dundees, BOTH the Native American Earth Diver myth and the Christian Genesis story offer examples of male creation fantasies through "projective inversion (Bonner 2007, 349)."
Parallels between Native American Mythological and
Christian Biblical Views
Poop?
Both Seymour Parker and Marta Weigle offer criticisms of Dundees' analysis of Earth Diver ...
Parker accuses Dundees of making "rather presumptuous assertion[s]," engaging critics with a "particularly obnoxious form of [verbal] gamesmanship", and "neatly disposing of the "evidence" problem," and goes on to point out three major flaws in his reasoning (Parker 1963, 913-915).
Weigle accuses Dundees as offering a "skewed notion of creation" laced with "ethnocentrism and androcentrism (Weigle 1987, 426)."