Rowland offers a helpful synthesis of the defining characteristics of myth in rhetorical discourse. But his insistence on too rigid an approach to mythic criticism risks diminishing the importance of the critical method and impoverishing the perception of rhetorical artifacts. Root metaphors in Rowland's thinking distort the nature of rhetoric and the work of the critic.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michael Osborn (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: