Definately have an open mind when reading this book. Quickly goes from Freud to the Great Mother Goddess, and some of the themes can be a bit left field to the unknowing reader. Morales is clearly knowledgeable about the classics, anyone who loves the Greco-Roman myths will learn and pick up cocktail party material. I can't agree with all her points, which seem a bit speculative at points, but she backs them up with copious evidence. Best approached as an insightful essay that is a primer to the "historiography" of myths. ( )

Interesting but not what it says on the tin. A guide to the concept of mythology rather than a guide to classical mythology. If you are looking for a short introduction to the stories of classical mythology this is not the book. ( )

Discusses the uses to which mythology was and is put, and how those uses are what turn stories into myths. I found it more useful and credible than many academic theories treating myth as though it were an organic category. The first five chapters are quite good. Scattered through them is discussion of the coalescence of what is now considered classical mythology, and the reciprocal development of scholarly interest in it. The historical consumption of myth (e.g., as allegory) receives far more attention than scholarly inquiries into the original functions of myths, many of which seem inductive rather than empirical. One chapter considers the importance of myth to psychoanalysis, and implicitly considers the possibility that Freud was just talking out of his backside (the fact that they acknowledge this as a possibility gives the entire argument that much more credibility). It left me thinking that, had he lived today, he'd be considered a quack. The last two chapters (politics of sex; hippies' use of myth) are muddled and weak. The first of them, I think, is so simply because of a paucity of VSI-appropriate research to summarize; the latter, I think, is so because pastiche is form without substance and there just isn't much to be said about it. ( )