Nine Keys to the Text: Using the Valknot to Lead to a Deeper Understanding of Heathen Writing and Poetry with the Example of Lokasenna
By Jennifer Culver
Most people would agree that the heathen path is not an easy one. Few traditions welcome their newcomers with a horn and suggested reading list filled with historical and academic references. For some, this is a daunting thing. People come into heathenry with various backgrounds and interests. Credentialed degrees aside, many do not know how to read higher-level texts. When the average newspaper is written at a middle school level and sound bites are being treated as more information than some want to know, approaching some of these texts can be intimidating.
This piece is focused on helping readers evaluate the lore itself – the poetic and prose Eddas, the sagas, and other primary sources within heathenry. Using standard literary techniques with a heathen slant, more can be gleaned from the lore and the reading can become a more fulfilling, and possibly enjoyable event. The basis of these techniques and philosophy behind it will be explained first.
The human brain is an organ with a natural function – its job is to learn and the brain does this with an amazing capacity to distinct patterns, make approximations, store many types of memory, learn from experience and create and synthesize into a new form[1]. Content is inseparable from context and trying to remove this does not make the connections the brain needs to make a lasting impression. Just as wyrd shows in outward ways as what is becoming is harvested from what has been, our memories also alter our brain, making each brain and, therefore, each learner unique[2]. Also important, however, is the idea that the learner cannot learn alone something that s/he cannot handle. Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development details the learning process in a cooperative way in which the learner begins with material that s/he is familiar with and moves, with guidance and approximation, into building (or scaffolding) onto this material to make new connections and meaning, thereby raising the zone and creating new expectations for learning[3]. The problem within heathenry can be that many people place themselves too highly within the zone and do not see the importance of starting in an effective way.
Finding deeper meanings in literature is not a simple task. Literature is far from everyone’s favorite task. Some consider it honorable to have made it through high school without reading any of the required readings. Others take the minimum college courses for their degree and hope that they never have to see another heavy piece of literature again. Some of these people turn away from fiction forever, finding reading pleasure in academic and other informational texts. Now faced with the Eddas, this reader is faced with a struggle. Comprehension is usually not the problem – many can comprehend the basic narrative – but analysis and evaluation is lost. Having never applied reading strategies effectively, these readers are faced with knowing the surface level and then hearing others interpretations of text, only to say, “Wow! How did you get that?” Left feeling inept and inadequate in something as crucial as finding application and meaning of faith, the learner then returns to the texts, sometimes with a hostile and frustrating bent, only to leave again with surface level comprehension. They have “downshifted”, a process that happens when the brain feels helpless[4]. Learning does not occur when one has downshifted, but in a state of “relaxed alertness” (low threat/high challenge) for then the brain is ready to enter into new connections and outcomes. Too much downshifting can make the learner revert to the old ways, feeling completely inadequate to try the new material[5]. The Eddas and lore should be open to us all.
The technique below will follow brain-based learning, recognizing that the search for meaning is innate and occurs through patterning and organizing information[6]. Learning occurs when certain conditions are present for the mind. Cambourne lists the conditions of learning as: immersion, demonstration, engagement, expectations, responsibility, employment, approximations, and response[7]. Immersion, the first condition, can be the hardest met out of a classroom setting, but can be done in what is referred to as “orchestrated immersion”[8]. Immersion is the state of being saturated by what is to be learned[9]. Orchestrated immersion for the self-learner can be done. It involves taking the information off the page and bringing it into life as reading, writing, speaking, and acting cannot be separated. Finding groups of others to read and reflect with would be optimal, but is not always possible. Demonstration refers to the ability to observe actions and artifacts[10]. Just as one learns how to make a sandwich by watching others, the best way to learn how to delve deeper into the lore is to see how others have done the same. Engagement, the next condition, asks for active participation from the reader[11]. It is not enough to read and note the interpretations of others; learning begins to connect when the brain is “actively processing” and reflect its own take on the material[12].
Getting the learner more involved leads to expectations, the next condition[13], in which specific outcomes are laid out. This can be intrinsically done or externally. When reading and studying the lore, expectations can be made on the self to work through a certain piece within a certain time. Once the expectation is laid out, the learner must accept responsibility for the task at hand. In working towards meeting these expectations, the learner needs to know that s/he can take risks. This is where approximations come in. Some connections that are first made are later found, upon discussion with others or in further reading, to be inaccurate at best. For example, one new, over-enthusiastic reader decided that Odin usurped Tyr because the gods lost faith in his ability to lead without his hand. How the group handles this approximation is crucial. Cambourne suggests that enthusiasm should be warmly received and there should be no anxiety. This is not saying that misconceptions should be allowed to remain, but the handling is delicate. For as the learner is working on “creative elaboration”[14] and trying to contemplate and reperceive the information, the learner could downshift without the appropriate resources or with too much negative criticism. Employment means that the learner has a chance to “use” the information. Be it finding practical applications for a heathen life or a chance to express ideas on a heathen mailing list, if the information is not “used”, it is lost. Finally, response refers to the feedback or information from the world to the learner[15]. This includes getting feedback from others more knowledgable in a timely, relevant, and nonfriendly way[16]. This makes literacy an activity and the text a piece of reality that, once internalized, can make true meaning and make a difference in a life[17].
While this sounds difficult, the interesting fact is that proficient readers do this naturally. Cambourne found that some students who were not proficient in some things were learning in other arenas. Video games, for example, contained within them the conditions for learning in a non-threatening way[18]. Proficient readers naturally do all or some of the following cognitive strategies[19]:
· Activate relevant, prior knowledge (schema) before, during and after reading the text to evaluate and store new information (Pearson, et al. 1992)
· Determine the most important ideas and themes in a text (Baumann, 1986)
· Ask questions of themselves, the authors, and the texts they read (Brown and Palinscar 1985)
· Create visual and other sensory images from text during and after reading (Pearson, et. al 1987)
· Draw inferences from text to make critical judgments, draw conclusions, and form unique interpretations (Anderson and Pearson 1984)
· Retell or synthesize what they have read, attending to the most important information and clarifying the synthesis itself (Brown and Day 1983)
· Utilize a variety of fix-up strategies to repair comprehension when it breaks down to solve a given problem in a given reading situation (Garner 1987)
While readers may not be aware of the techniques that they naturally use, metacognitive thinking can assist in helping a reader find out how s/he reads best and; therefore, learns more material[20]. These strategies are incorporated into the valknut strategy, which will be explained.
The first triangle: Comprehension
Before one can get to higher level thinking, basic comprehension must be clear. Comprehension is the building block for further analysis and evaluation. The first triangle, therefore, is based on comprehending the piece at hand.
· Pre-reading – This first step must be taken on before the reader even delves into the text. It is meant to access prior knowledge. Pre-reading can occur in many ways. A reader inherently brings with him/her prior knowledge and experience, and accessing this can help with comprehension[21]. This can come in the form of keeping a chart such as the one below to help the reader keep focus:
K
(what do I already know) W (what do I
want to know) L (learned)
Filling in this “K” column is searching our brain for prior knowledge and finding a way to relate it to what we are about to read. This helps to “activate mental files” before jumping into a text cold[22].
· Connecting – While reading the text, the reader should never stop thinking. Less proficient readers make reading a passive activity, forcing the text to do too much of the work. Other readers actively read informational texts but do not know how to do this with literature. Creating connections while reading forces the reader into a more metacognitive state. There are a few ways to do this. One way is to read with post-it notes. This is called stop and jot. While interacting with the text, write down significant insights and connections to the text on a post-it and place it near the relevant information. This is especially good for library and other borrowed books that cannot be marked in for some reason. Some insights could include revelations of personal connections, “This reminds me when ………..”, textual connections, “I saw this in ………” and global connections relating to character and theme, “The ideal of hospitality is shown here by………….”[23]. There is no room on a small note for an essay, and that is also the beauty of this technique. It is meant to be meaningful but not distracting. Another way to connect is with a dialectic journal. A dialectic journal is a notebook that a reader keeps with the text. On one column is a notation from the text. Next to it in a corresponding column is the insight that caused the reader to note the passage. It would look something like this:
Passage
Notes Response
“… I know that I hung on a windswept Why did he do it?
Tree/Nights of all nine….” Why did he have to
stay there so long?
The number 9 appears
A gift for a gift
As you can see, the responses can vary. They can contain questions, reflections, observations, etc. This technique is great for readers who have a hard time returning to the text and finding relevant points to discuss. With a dialectic notebook, the points are already there. A third way of making connections is actually marking in the text: highlighting with notations or metacognitive text marking. Text marking can include symbols for different insights and points to remember[24].
· Retelling – This stage is asking for a basic summary before moving on to a deeper understanding of the text. Who were the actors? What is the plot? What is the scene (setting)? How do these things interact and shape the other within the story itself? These are parts of Burke’s Pentad and meant to take the reader into a contemplative frame of mind about the reading[25].
The second triangle: Analysis
Analysis is the second triangle in the reading strategy. One should not move to this triangle until s/he has mastered the elements of the one before it, as they should build on one another. Even though the language you are reading the text in may be English, as it has been translated by another, this step requires the reader to, in a sense, translate the text for yourself to make meaning. Dr. Rainer Schulte states that, “Applying the translator’s eye to the reading of a text changes our attitude toward the reading process by dissolving the fixity of print on a page into a potential multiplicity of semantic connections[26].” A shaky foundation in comprehension can lead to a faulty analysis. This section is to help discover not only what was said, but how the author said it and why the author chose this way to do so.
QRY ybE MY\Yh$-*zF
W{o L]O< F Here are the three triangles and main questions associated
with them on one sheet for easy use:
Before showing the strategy at work with a piece of lore,
let’s go over some troubleshooting tips. Remembering that proficient readers
stop and fix problems as they read, other readers can see themselves in the
description of the reader that plows through the text without bothering to be
sure that understanding and meaning is achieved while reading. Example of Reading Strategy – Discovering Lokasenna Finally,
the reading strategy above will be shown using Lokasenna from the Poetic
Edda. Keep in mind that some of the analysis and interpretations will vary from
person to person, as each person brings different prior knowledge and reasons
for reading. There is room for many ideas in discussing the lore, and most will
be found sound as long as there is something in the text to support the
argument. Many of the comments and insights are here as an example for
demonstration purposes.
First triangle Loki has been an Why
does Loki turn on ambiguous
character at best his friends, even his Loki at some point does oath brother? cause the death of Balder How will I know what to Loki seems to do things that
believe re: his charges? look bad at first then are not How will this help me in my heathen life? Does
the dating of this make a difference? Here I have directed the focus of
my reading to Loki’s intent and the charges he makes. I am reading (or
rereading the text in this case) to find out why he does what he does and what
he says. I also am curious to find out how I, the reader, will be able to
determine what is and is not a valid charge. This is a question that I may not
be able to completely answer just from reading Lokasenna, but some
questions are that way. I’ll return to
fill in the last column later as a reflective tool. Loki slew
Fimafeng (intro) Why? Why
would Loki care if the servant Was
being praised? “their ale I
shall mix with evil” 3 This
reminds me some of Grendel, who does what
he does because he does not like the merriment
in Heorot. Loki reminds
Odin of his Did the
gods forget hospitality or was the promise and can stay 9 slaying
enough to keep him away? Loki hails
all gods but Bragi 11 Is this
symbel? Are we seeing here clues for what
should happen when symbel goes bad? Idunn and
Gefjon try to keep This
reminds me of Weltheow the
peace 16, 18, 19 Loki
accuses Odin of letting the Many
cite this as Odin being an oath- wrong
one win wars 22 breaker Frigg tells
them to keep some Here Frigg
clearly acknowledges that some of
their less respectable of these
challenges are correct deeds
secret 25 Pattern
seems to be for Loki There
is a rhythm to this that makes me accuses,
the person wonder if
there is something more behind responds,
Loki says the intent of
this poem other than a story. more,
another chimes in Loki
accuses Freya of being a This
also seems to be a pattern among the whore
32 women –
what is the message here? Sif
approaches Loki in a more Why
does she think that she will be friendly
way 53 different?
This is something I do a lot. Thor
threatens Loki to leave The
number three is significant in the lore. four times 57,
59, 61, The first three times
Loki ignored him. It took him more than that to get Loki to leave. PLUS the
first two lines are repeated each 63 time
– this has to have deeper levels of meaning
and has dynamism inherent in it. Loki is
bound (after) Is this foreshadowing for Ragnarok? Loki
writing is the source of What
is the mythological significance of Earthquakes
(after) this
explanation? As you can see, some of the connections are personal, some
to other stories, and some to larger themes. Actors – most of the known Aesir and Vanir are
present. Some servants are mentioned, which is significant in the sense that
the killing of a servant started problems. Frey’s servants also broke into the
conversation, which I would have thought to be unusual. While some would see
this as a later piece and reflecting post-conversion attempts to stain the gods
and goddesses, Loki is being Loki according to Dumezil (Anderson). This will
also relate to purpose, which is discussed below. Scene – the scene is a feast (possibly a
symbel) at Aegir’s hall. Plot – Aegir’s feast is going well until Loki
kills a servant. He is thrown out, only to return demand to be admitted. Odin
allows for him to take a seat, but then when Loki gets a horn he begins to
insult Bragi. One by one the gods defend each other, only to be insulted in
turn. After a time, Thor shows up and has to threaten to pound him four times
with his hammer for Loki to leave. Loki is then bound for eternity with a snake
dripping venom onto him. His wife holds a cup to catch it but when she has to
pout it out, Loki writhes and this is the cause of an earthquake. As far as interrelation, there are some aspects that may be
important. Loki has always seemed to me to be the kind of figure that can dish
a lot out, and I would think that the gods would be used to that. If, however,
this were a more ritual setting, I could see that this would be completely
inappropriate. There is a personal connection here, as I have been in a symbel
where Freya was practically cursed. People may make jokes and say things
outside of ritual, but a certain form of decorum is expected within the rite itself.
The gods and goddesses here are not always acting in character, and, as
Hollander says, their “seamy” side is coming out. This shows in the plot as
they react to Loki’s insults. The ending here, as it is not in verse as the
beginning was not, may be placed to be foreshadowing for the problems to come.
Second Triangle There is also a
significant pattern here in the discourse. Someone speaks, Loki retorts, the
person responds, Loki insults further, another speaks to defend the first,
which is what qualifies the piece as a senna, or verbal duel[44]. Most of the stanzas are written in a “chant”
or “song” meter, which lulls the listener/reader a bit and then surprises
him/her with the full hit of the last line[45].
There are some stanzas; however, that are written in galdarag, which is
more of a “magic song” meter. Those stanzas are spoken by Loki and could be his
attempt to use magic and increase his power and influence[46].
These stanzas are 13, 54, 62, and 65; mainly with Thor but, as can be seen, it
does not work with him. The tone is very
hostile and tense, and could also be reflecting a mannjafriad, or
matching of heroes of sorts, a more spiritual duel in which deeds done replace
blows (such as seen in Orvarodd’s saga with Odd), with this being more to the
negative than the positive[47].
This is because of the poet’s use of Loki as the main speaker and instigator[48].
It is through Loki’s eyes that we are being told of the deeds of the gods and
goddesses, and this colors the content[49].
It is amplified in Loki’s verb choice of “mix” for their mead and harm in
stanza 3[50].
The answer given to him continues with the verbal metaphors in stanza 4 as he
is told that if he continues with his bent to cause trouble they will “wipe it
off on you”[51].
Because of the language and tone, some consider this piece mythological
invective or lampoon[52].
Part of this is because there is some sparse narration and development, but
this is really a frame for reciting information[53]. While this piece
is not typical in its internal structure, because Loki is not simply having a
dialogue with one person (such as in The Lay of Harbarth) but taking on many,
there is a predictable pattern in the discourse[54]. It is clear that Loki is not bringing out
the best of the company and exposing things at least Frigg would prefer to be
kept hidden[55] using
“myth abbreviations”[56].
Because this is poetry, looking at sentence structure will not always get as
much meaning as if it were prose. For other
figurative language, there are specific instances to look at. On stanza 6, Loki
is called Lopt (Hollander translates this as possibly the Lofty [57]).
Odin also calls him the Wolf’s Father in stanza 10, referring to Fenris. Odin
is referred to as Vithrir (possibly lord of the weather) in stanza 26. He is
also referred to as Sigfather (father of victory) in 58. Uses of certain forms
of kennings are rare in the Poetic Eddas[58],
but there is one interesting use here in stanza 57 when Thor threatens Loki the
first time “thy shoulder-cliff/shall I cleave from thy neck.” Loki also turned himself into a salmon, a
fish that swims upsteam, which may symbolize that even he knows the futility of
trying to escape. It has also been noted that salmon are afraid of thunder,
which is also significant[59]. Note: Going to eddic commentary is
one thing that can be done to keep a reader from feeling that s/he is not able
to understand deeper insights. This is a solution to the pragmatic problems
listed above. As can be seen, several scholars have interesting views on the
structure and symbolism of the piece and it is good information. While I did
not agree with one, I still considered the opinion and thought about why I felt
differently. While part of the purpose of this piece
may have been to enumerate bits of lore and myth, this does not appear to be
the whole purpose. As can be seen in the references above, Loki does not always
tell the whole story in the bits that he is speaking. This makes some things a
matter of perspective. Of course, some feel that part of the reason that Loki’s
arguments are effective[61],
as he is citing real instances for much of his flyting. Some of the reasons for this has been discussed
already, the idea that the piece was created to relate pieces of the lore in a
frame context. Chisholm, though, in his writing after his translations,
encourages us to look deeper. He writes that the pieces have a narrative, natural,
and initiatory level. We have analyzed the narrative and now need to go deeper.
The
frame story that the author creates to enumerate the lore is an interesting
one, a ritual feast. The idea of the “feast of the gods” has been discussed by
scholars such as Dumezil and breaks down into the following structure[62]: The idea that feasts in the Norse
tradition were ritual events is not unique to Lokasenna. There is a
passage in Heimskringla regarding Hakon gothi’s attempts to introduce
Christianity to the farmers[63].
Banquets and feasts were meant to be solidarity-inducing events centered around
the drink, the “essence of worship”[64].
This also provides context to Grimnismal. If this was to show the structure and drama
present at a divine feast, this would explain the repetitive patterns and other
speeches in the text. This format is seen later in pieces such as Gawain and
the Green Knight when the Green Knight comes in to challenge the feasters
in Arthur’s court. It is also seen in the Swedish fairy tale “The Queen” when
Adelgunda refuses to lift her veil at a feast and show her eyes to a prince[65].
She refuses to do this because her eyes are famed far and wide for being able
to show the truth about a person. She has fallen in love with the prince and
does not want him to know. Her refusal to show her eyes disrupts the evening,
the prince leaves offended, and the conflict of the story continues. This may answer some of the natural level of
interpretation. But
why Loki? Why have Loki be the one to disrupt the feast and create such
problems? Why does he continue to incite to the point that his doom is sealed?
Some feel that, in some ways, this was Loki’s role all along. That is why there
has been a “problem of Loki” for some time. One idea is that Loki was
manufactured by, not created by, poets to draw out the “demon”, bring
antagonism to a head, and prepare for victory[66].
Dumezil felt that he had a lack of mythological function but did not think that
he did not have a significant function[67].
K
(what do I already know) W (what do I
want to know) L (learned)
Notes Response
