readings

Yesterday, I was noting down a lot of Mircea Eliade’s ideas on the form of early Judaism in general, and the story of the binding of Isaac in particular. Deep and worthy ideas, but unengaged. Campbell discards all of Judaism out of hand, but he is personally engaged with it — as an antagonist, at least. The bias is easily seen in his books, and it distorts the value of his views.

The dispassionate is more useful, but I miss the passion. Shouldn’t one care about his work? Maybe that’s the reason Campbell has become so popular… he cared.