Many types of mythology follow the folowing principle of composition.
Mythological features are imposed on something based in reality.
It is very likely that there were either giant serpents, or enormous dinosaur survivors of the sea variety.
When do we notice a creature? When it does something major to disrupt us.
An enormous creature was most lkely to disrupt with its very presence and superiority a sea voyage.
What we fear, we mythologize, bestowing various powers upon it.
Thus a dragon is born.
By association with its environment, it slowly gains prominence over the body of water.
Since the body of water continues to be important for trade, the dragon’s influence grows stronger.
As the dragon grows in importance, it gest to be incorporated into the lore of astrology and from there its popularity expands as well.
Since the sea has a seemingly dual nature, it takes lives but gives bounty, the same nature is conferred onto the dragon controlling it.
This way, a seemingly simply predator becomes almost deified and becomes synonymous with its very environment.
There are many complicated psychological processes involved in mythology.
Fears and need for rituals.
The need to relate to the incomprehensible larger through the accessible smaller.
The need to control by conceptualizing.
The need to bargain with something greater.
The need to isolate the great into something alien, partly familiar, partly not.
There is a reason that Freud, however wrongly, turned to mythology for the location of psychological truths.
When one needs to understand what made the Chinese dragon so influential, or the development of any cultural myth, one only needs to look for general patterns of mythologizing, which can always be established with a careful look at human psychology.
The Grey Cat, the fabled witches familiar has a long and dignified history, so we(Morticia and Gomez) simply had to get one for ourselves, in a plush form.
If you are into old lore like ourselves, you could find him here, on etsy:
Solomon Kane, the movie(2009), presents an intriguing version of the original based on Robert E Howard’s classic.
In a sense, the movie Kane is more psychologically consistent.
The background story given him explains his motivation amply, although it changes the conflicted and tormented look of him we get from the stories.
His humanity is accentuated through his relationship with the good Puritan family in the movie, a feature utterly lacking in the original stories. There he is shown to have friends, allies but they are always addressed in the context of his mission.
The magical/supernatural elements are properly dispayed in the movie as well, although the famous staff of Kane is conspicuously missing, the producers were probably hoping to rectify it with a sequel that is not planned at this point.
The movie could have benfitted from being turned into a mini series. Too many events were crammed into it, making it somewhat long and perhaps for that reason less popular with the viewers.
The setting was often appropriately Gothic, except where it was appropriate pastoral to highlight the Puritan element.
The actor playing Solomon, James Purefoy, also known to us from the Following, was a powerful presence, dynamic and, equally important here, with a resonant voice.
Overall though, the movie differed from the original in more than one respect.
The “real” Solomon seemingly failed to find his redemption, had a different, less defined family history, and, honestly, a less attractive appearance.
[If you want to compare, check out our Solomon toy for instance which is closer in looks to the original
To some degree, Solomon is made more human in the film.
The story Kane, is a different matter.
Despite fighting for humans all of his life, he has remained as alienated from them as the Elder gods written about by Howard’s best friend and mentor H P Lovecraft.
But with my usual disclaimer, don’t expect the same, expect a different version loosely based on the original, the movie was actually very decent on its own.
The question was, what does it mean to dream of a romantic relationship with someone you only know online.
My answer was this:
“Some dream interpreters would claim the very literary explanation to be the true one.
They would say “you are dreaming about such a person because you have seen their writing online and it made an impression on you.”
That is a plausible explanation and I understand those for whom it would suffice and who would wish to stop reading my answer at this point
On a symbolic level, it is significant that the one you dream about is the one you don’t fully know.
Dream people are generally considered to represent different aspects of yourself.
The conclusion that seems almost obvious is that the person online represents a part of you, or a skill, even you are barely aware of, but would not mind exploring.
The skill could be artistic, such as writing, drawing, pottery etc
It may also connote certain self expressive elements.
Sometimes the best way to work through something is to talk it out, to describe it to yourself or others. Any skill that suggests to you self expression could be implied in a dream.
The element of a romantic relationship has its own associations.
In a dream it suggests exploration, fascination with the unknown, a willingness to take bold steps towards the unfamiliar.
A romantic relationship implies among other things an investment of your time.
That is also true for the skill, or the hobby, the symbol represents.
It is likely a skill you have heard of but may not associate with yourself or your abilities.
It is a skill that would allow you to express yourself nonetheless. To clear the mind, and, pardon the lofty words, the heart.
The primary skills of such kind are writing and singing, one or both could be implied in the dream.
Overall the dream may symbolically suggest the following: you are drawn to something new, as tantalizing as it is frightening.
Just like a romantic relationship, it would require from you some commitment, persistence and willingness to compromise when needed.”
The Q/A site Quora gave me a question, what does it mean to dream of being deaf in one ear. For those interested in learning dream interpretation based on associative logic, rather than a drema dictionary, here is my reply:
“It could imply being stuck with a problem, or a particular mode of thinking.
If there has been a situation where a new solution or perspective is required, then the dream bodes well for new ideas.
The immediate future may hold some new insights for you.
If there is not immediate problem that needs solution, the dream may present a symbolic warning that you are not seeing everything you should.
In this case, not properly observing the situation could take away from the quality of life”
I, Gomez, was asked this question on the Q/A site Quora and here is my response:
I always prefer the sentient dragons.
I think that modern fantasy made some improvements over the classical mythology.
In mythology the dragons always seemed bound to a particular task and did not appear to hold much of their own personality.
So many dragons dedicated to Ares appeared to almost be mindless beasts, guarding this, that or the other, and always lunging at every hero just because they could.
I think Gaea’s dragons were a degree above, they were more sophisticated but still, only as a tool.
Most notably in Medea’s scene of escape, or in that oracular shrine that Apollo may have eventually appropriated from Gaea.
Honestly, I don’t truly see a purpose to a dragon if it only labors to serve a human, or even a god.
I think Robin Hobb brilliantly showed us what a dragon is truly like.
Her distinction between sea serpents that had some skills but were more akin to an infant, and dragons as adult beings with distinct personality was simply breathtaking for me.
Or John Gardner’s rendition of the Beowulf dragon in Grendel. What astounding depth, what philosophy.
I don’t even have a bias between Western and Eastern dragons.
Naomi Novik’s Temeraire is just as noble and fascinating as his Western counterparts.
My point being this.
A dragon is not supposed to be just another beastly creature, there are various serpents for that.
I see a dragon as a higher being, a creature as physical as it is magical, and above all, noble.
And only modern fiction I usually read presents the dragon the way I like.
As a, possibly faulty creature, with weaknesses that can be exploited. But also as a being of magic, mystery and intellect.
The way, I feel, it is supposed to be.