I guess I'm going to have to face the fact that I no longer have much of an interest in philosophy, theology, or, writing about religion and myth. I might occasionally read religious texts—the Mahabharata is on my list—but analysis mostly leaves me cold. I think the last thing I enjoyed on the subject was The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels, long long ago.
There's really no one on the subject I'm more disposed to like than Joseph Campbell; I remember really digging his PBS talks. But I think now that mostly what I liked was when he described something that sounded interesting in and of itself, like the Tibetan Book of the Dead. Some of his analytical points here I agree with, some I don't; none interest me. (I got really annoyed in this book when he started in with the numerological bullshit. I really hate that magical number-counting nonsense.)
Can't really say why I'm so blah about this. I'm all for recognizing the parallels between Indian and Navajo mythology. I'm in sympathy with the grand sweep of his argument for the mythic and against the literal. It's just not compelling reading to me.