So, today, I was reading Laurence Coupe’s book on myth, and he writes about how myth is what you read it to be. Essentially, as we all know, it is about hermeneutics. I like the idea of interpreting the theme park experience using the methods of literary criticism. Reader response, close reading. Cassirer suggests utilizing the tools of etymological study in order to understand language and myth and the interchange between the two. But, blah…I still feel like I am in the midst of the deep, dark forest, hopelessly trying to figure out HOW to develop a methodology for this project…How do you pick a lens, when the subject seems to be peeking out at you from all of the different lenses at the same time? Do I section it off? Writing one section from one point of view, and then another from another point of view, and at the end weave it all together? I think I need to read more. And, it needs to be something other than these obscure philosophers who write the way they think, with no desire for absolutes or tight connections between sections of their prose.