1 00:00:05,524 --> 00:00:10,404 Now is an opportune time to return to the idea of our toolbox. 2 00:00:10,404 --> 00:00:14,608 You recall a few lectures ago, we introduced the idea of functionalism. 3 00:00:14,608 --> 00:00:18,458 And I told you that we'd use that as a tool, pick it up out of our box, 4 00:00:18,458 --> 00:00:22,715 tinker with myths when we ran into something that we needed some help with, 5 00:00:22,715 --> 00:00:25,690 and see how that worked and put it back in our box, and 6 00:00:25,690 --> 00:00:28,351 eventually, we'd start to fill that box up. 7 00:00:28,351 --> 00:00:32,629 Although, I want to add another tool to our toolbox with this lecture, and 8 00:00:32,629 --> 00:00:34,771 that's the tool of structuralism. 9 00:00:34,771 --> 00:00:37,580 Structuralism. 10 00:00:37,580 --> 00:00:40,258 It comes to us from a man named Claude Levi-Strauss. 11 00:00:40,258 --> 00:00:45,364 His dates are 1908 to 2009, a towering figure in the last century. 12 00:00:45,364 --> 00:00:48,944 Of pivotal importance in the field of anthropology, 13 00:00:48,944 --> 00:00:53,478 also important in lots of other fields, psychology, sociology, 14 00:00:53,478 --> 00:00:57,311 literary studies, and surely also in the study of myth. 15 00:00:57,311 --> 00:00:59,759 What the structuralists are interested in is, 16 00:00:59,759 --> 00:01:02,707 as you would guess from the name, structures of things. 17 00:01:02,707 --> 00:01:06,507 And sometimes people will immediately start thinking about the structure of 18 00:01:06,507 --> 00:01:10,200 cultural forms or the structure of narratives, that kind of thing. 19 00:01:10,200 --> 00:01:15,100 But we need to start with the first structure in order to get a grip on what 20 00:01:15,100 --> 00:01:19,660 they're telling us, and that's the structure of this thing, the human mind. 21 00:01:20,670 --> 00:01:25,488 Structuralist noticed that all of human culture is the product of this thing, 22 00:01:25,488 --> 00:01:30,384 and therefore, it should reflect the structure of the thing that produced it. 23 00:01:30,384 --> 00:01:33,040 How then does the human mind work? 24 00:01:33,040 --> 00:01:37,801 Well, Levi-Strauss, in an incredibly prescient kind of observation, 25 00:01:37,801 --> 00:01:42,561 said that the most salient characteristic of how we process information as 26 00:01:42,561 --> 00:01:47,546 human beings with this amazing organ that we have, the mode by which this organ 27 00:01:47,546 --> 00:01:52,408 works the way it does at its most core elementary level is a mode of binaries. 28 00:01:52,408 --> 00:01:57,351 It works according to on, off, yes, no, pairs of opposites that we use 29 00:01:57,351 --> 00:02:01,340 to structure our basic understanding of the world. 30 00:02:01,340 --> 00:02:04,440 All the other more complex forms of understanding that we have 31 00:02:04,440 --> 00:02:08,280 are the result of extra binaries layered on top of binaries. 32 00:02:08,280 --> 00:02:12,258 So, for example, some folks will say not everything is black and white. 33 00:02:12,258 --> 00:02:13,790 Yeah, indeed, there's lots of shades of grey. 34 00:02:13,790 --> 00:02:16,784 But every single shade of grey is made up of certain amounts of black and 35 00:02:16,784 --> 00:02:18,430 certain amounts of white. 36 00:02:18,430 --> 00:02:22,151 And as if we needed anymore proof that a binary language can encode lots of 37 00:02:22,151 --> 00:02:23,798 cultural information, well, 38 00:02:23,798 --> 00:02:26,974 my goodness, look at the format we're working in right now. 39 00:02:26,974 --> 00:02:30,287 It would be impossible to do what we're doing right now 40 00:02:30,287 --> 00:02:35,160 if a binary language wasn't capable of carrying very subtle messages. 41 00:02:35,160 --> 00:02:38,180 In this case, we've got a lot of information that's coming 42 00:02:38,180 --> 00:02:42,440 through the sounds that's being encoded into binary language sent out over 43 00:02:42,440 --> 00:02:45,300 wires through the internet to your speakers. 44 00:02:45,300 --> 00:02:48,462 The light that's being emitted from our studio 45 00:02:48,462 --> 00:02:53,374 here going into the camera lens made into a binary code and sent out to you. 46 00:02:53,374 --> 00:02:56,034 So we, living in the computer age that we do, 47 00:02:56,034 --> 00:03:00,094 have seen this very pressing observation of Claude Levi-Strauss in 48 00:03:00,094 --> 00:03:03,387 the middle of the last century proved absolutely true. 49 00:03:03,387 --> 00:03:08,511 That binary languages are indeed capable of very subtle kinds of expressions. 50 00:03:08,511 --> 00:03:13,527 So, Levi-Strauss was really interested in this, what he said was 51 00:03:13,527 --> 00:03:18,551 the moment of binary origination of information in the human mind. 52 00:03:18,551 --> 00:03:21,916 Now let's take a thought experiment, one that Levi-Strauss himself did not do, but 53 00:03:21,916 --> 00:03:23,170 might be electritive. 54 00:03:23,170 --> 00:03:29,578 Think of a human infant, its world is probably a pretty rudimentary one. 55 00:03:29,578 --> 00:03:34,153 We'll let our colleagues out there in infant psychology make this picture much 56 00:03:34,153 --> 00:03:35,048 more complex. 57 00:03:35,048 --> 00:03:40,773 But imagine the infant's world, that is at some point in its life, 58 00:03:40,773 --> 00:03:46,801 notices that there's this creature out there that seems to have eyes, 59 00:03:46,801 --> 00:03:51,923 and has emotional responses, and engages with the infant, 60 00:03:51,923 --> 00:03:58,474 and brings food, and brings the sounds and all kinds of fascinating things. 61 00:03:58,474 --> 00:04:02,079 And when that figure is around, the infant's life seems to be enriched, and 62 00:04:02,079 --> 00:04:04,581 wonderful, and quite exciting, and interesting. 63 00:04:04,581 --> 00:04:07,040 And then sometimes, that figure's gone. 64 00:04:07,040 --> 00:04:09,344 My goodness, what just happened? 65 00:04:09,344 --> 00:04:14,060 The world is now all of a sudden a completely different place. 66 00:04:14,060 --> 00:04:16,551 That figure that was there is now all of a sudden gone. 67 00:04:16,551 --> 00:04:19,020 Well, what have we just experienced? 68 00:04:19,020 --> 00:04:22,854 Well, Levi-Strauss and the structuralists would tell us 69 00:04:22,854 --> 00:04:27,377 we have here hit on a core anchoring binary of an infinite experience, 70 00:04:27,377 --> 00:04:31,685 that is sometimes there is mommy and sometimes there is not mommy. 71 00:04:31,685 --> 00:04:37,998 That core binary is in experiential moment that lies at the center of 72 00:04:37,998 --> 00:04:44,107 an expression of an obviously very rich and complex set of ideas. 73 00:04:44,107 --> 00:04:46,748 But it starts its origination and 74 00:04:46,748 --> 00:04:50,718 its expression in that kind of rudimentary form. 75 00:04:50,718 --> 00:04:55,018 Now all of cultural stuff, according to the structuralists, 76 00:04:55,018 --> 00:05:00,046 is going to be expressed, and at its core, it's going to have some binary 77 00:05:00,046 --> 00:05:04,994 opposition that is coming through no matter how complex, and elegant, 78 00:05:04,994 --> 00:05:09,807 and rich, and strange, and subtle, and nuanced the story might be. 79 00:05:09,807 --> 00:05:11,185 Our myths at their core, 80 00:05:11,185 --> 00:05:16,600 all of them are going to have some binary opposition that's driving them forward. 81 00:05:16,600 --> 00:05:20,920 And if you'll have a look at our friend over here, you'll realize that yes, 82 00:05:20,920 --> 00:05:26,000 indeed, we have already snuck in a structuralist reading in our class. 83 00:05:26,000 --> 00:05:31,120 When we had a look at books 9 through 12 and claimed that what we saw was a set of 84 00:05:31,120 --> 00:05:36,720 myths, anchored around a pair of opposite ideas between what counts as food and 85 00:05:36,720 --> 00:05:41,460 what counts as not being food, we were indeed doing a structuralist reading. 86 00:05:41,460 --> 00:05:44,080 Now, let's go back and reverse engineer that just a little bit and 87 00:05:44,080 --> 00:05:49,770 try to figure out how it is that structuralism goes about its work. 88 00:05:49,770 --> 00:05:54,532 First of all, a structuralist is not going to be interested in the temporal 89 00:05:54,532 --> 00:05:56,807 diachronic dimensions of a myth. 90 00:05:56,807 --> 00:06:02,095 The way a narrative unfolds, the back and forth of the time as it goes forward, 91 00:06:02,095 --> 00:06:06,521 the diachronic dimension of things, is not of interest to them. 92 00:06:06,521 --> 00:06:11,138 Instead, they're interested in the structural pieces, 93 00:06:11,138 --> 00:06:15,307 the atoms that make up the molecule of the narrative. 94 00:06:15,307 --> 00:06:17,190 They break them apart and say, 95 00:06:17,190 --> 00:06:21,247 okay, which of these is a representation of one side of a binary and 96 00:06:21,247 --> 00:06:25,240 which of these is a representation of another side of the binary? 97 00:06:25,240 --> 00:06:27,815 The order in which they come, the sequence of events in an area, 98 00:06:27,815 --> 00:06:31,540 that's not something that a structuralist really necessarily cares about. 99 00:06:31,540 --> 00:06:36,595 Instead, it's just which aspects, which parts of the narrative reflect 100 00:06:36,595 --> 00:06:41,908 one theme and which parts of the narrative reflect the opposite theme, okay. 101 00:06:41,908 --> 00:06:47,599 Secondly, a structuralist is interested in the myth, 102 00:06:47,599 --> 00:06:52,803 and makes the claim that a myth will have a meaning, 103 00:06:52,803 --> 00:06:57,887 not in so far as its particular details give us some 104 00:06:57,887 --> 00:07:02,851 complex expression of some cultural forum, but 105 00:07:02,851 --> 00:07:08,470 instead, in the relationships among these details. 106 00:07:08,470 --> 00:07:13,384 So, we're not going to look at how it is that the voyage of Odysseus moves from 107 00:07:13,384 --> 00:07:18,468 one kind of culture to a different kind of culture to another kind of culture. 108 00:07:18,468 --> 00:07:23,020 Or how he gets involved in the relationships that he does with 109 00:07:23,020 --> 00:07:25,431 the different kind of people and 110 00:07:25,431 --> 00:07:30,400 creatures that he runs across as he's making his voyage. 111 00:07:30,400 --> 00:07:34,090 But instead, we're going to look at the relationships among those features. 112 00:07:34,090 --> 00:07:38,611 How does the one feature over here relate to the other feature over there? 113 00:07:38,611 --> 00:07:43,299 And you can see as we've done in the reading of food and not food, it's not so 114 00:07:43,299 --> 00:07:47,691 much what is being eaten or not eaten in one spot and what is being eaten or 115 00:07:47,691 --> 00:07:49,399 not eaten in another spot. 116 00:07:49,399 --> 00:07:53,527 It's that, that of that distinction between something that's okay to eat and 117 00:07:53,527 --> 00:07:57,484 something that's not, that's the one that's the most important thing. 118 00:07:57,484 --> 00:08:02,245 So the relationship among the items in the story is the most important thing, 119 00:08:02,245 --> 00:08:05,698 not the details of any particular element in the story. 120 00:08:05,698 --> 00:08:07,186 Now, there's going to be, for 121 00:08:07,186 --> 00:08:10,837 a structuralist, a certain kind of universality that's reflected in myth. 122 00:08:10,837 --> 00:08:14,756 But the universality is not going to have to do with the specific details of 123 00:08:14,756 --> 00:08:16,661 the themes that are talked about. 124 00:08:16,661 --> 00:08:21,309 So, some people when they look for universalities will say, oh, 125 00:08:21,309 --> 00:08:24,546 yes, all human beings think of water in x way or 126 00:08:24,546 --> 00:08:28,954 all human beings code the sun as being a certain kind of symbol. 127 00:08:28,954 --> 00:08:33,826 The structuralist, when the structuralist goes through a process of pressing 128 00:08:33,826 --> 00:08:38,549 toward universals, what we always do is, and not with that sort of looking at 129 00:08:38,549 --> 00:08:42,691 a single item and talking about it as having some specific meaning, 130 00:08:42,691 --> 00:08:47,230 as if there's like a dictionary of symbols or something like that. 131 00:08:47,230 --> 00:08:52,112 Instead, what they claim is that human beings tend to put the same pairs in 132 00:08:52,112 --> 00:08:55,361 opposition from culture to culture to culture. 133 00:08:55,361 --> 00:08:58,721 And that's where we're going to look to find the universality of them. 134 00:08:58,721 --> 00:09:02,954 What kinds of pairs of opposition are we going to find in this? 135 00:09:02,954 --> 00:09:04,903 Well, according to the structuralists, 136 00:09:04,903 --> 00:09:09,080 we're going to find some that are consistent across many different cultures. 137 00:09:09,080 --> 00:09:10,504 This leads us to our next point. 138 00:09:10,504 --> 00:09:13,120 What counts as a structuralist binary pair? 139 00:09:14,150 --> 00:09:18,660 Well, what a structuralist winds up doing, almost always, 140 00:09:18,660 --> 00:09:22,570 is hunting for some pair of opposition that is anchored 141 00:09:22,570 --> 00:09:27,550 in some biological part of our experience of being human. 142 00:09:27,550 --> 00:09:32,386 It's not going to be a structuralist pair based on a complex cultural form, 143 00:09:32,386 --> 00:09:36,846 something that resides in the very specific nuances of how one culture 144 00:09:36,846 --> 00:09:40,491 negotiates its way through the question of being human. 145 00:09:40,491 --> 00:09:45,298 It's going to be a binary that's anchored in basic fundamental 146 00:09:45,298 --> 00:09:49,464 human experience at a level of our biological cells. 147 00:09:49,464 --> 00:09:53,330 So for example, things like food and not food. 148 00:09:53,330 --> 00:09:57,856 That's a kind of example of the binary pair that a structuralist goes to, 149 00:09:57,856 --> 00:09:59,978 has a biological dimension to it. 150 00:09:59,978 --> 00:10:01,115 Questions about habitat. 151 00:10:01,115 --> 00:10:04,190 What kind of environment do people live in and thrive in? 152 00:10:04,190 --> 00:10:07,701 Questions about reproduction, a basic biological process. 153 00:10:07,701 --> 00:10:11,801 These are going to be fertile ground, pardon the pun with reproduction, 154 00:10:11,801 --> 00:10:12,895 fertile ground for 155 00:10:12,895 --> 00:10:17,418 finding binary pairs of oppositions that structuralists are interested in. 156 00:10:17,418 --> 00:10:19,647 Things like kinship relationships. 157 00:10:19,647 --> 00:10:24,519 So, as human beings, we come from somewhere, and we have mothers, 158 00:10:24,519 --> 00:10:26,034 and we have fathers. 159 00:10:26,034 --> 00:10:29,570 And, we try to find relationships among all those groups. 160 00:10:29,570 --> 00:10:32,118 There are also things like siblings and cousins, aunts, and uncles. 161 00:10:32,118 --> 00:10:38,644 These kinship relationships get expressed in universally across human cultures. 162 00:10:38,644 --> 00:10:41,908 And, this is the point at which the structuralist is going to start to get 163 00:10:41,908 --> 00:10:43,570 interested in them. 164 00:10:43,570 --> 00:10:48,193 So biological pairs of oppositions are the pairs of oppositions that we're going to 165 00:10:48,193 --> 00:10:52,146 be most interested in, as structuralist are going to be anchored in some 166 00:10:52,146 --> 00:10:54,761 biological aspects of what it is to be a human. 167 00:10:54,761 --> 00:10:58,170 Final point about our oppositions, for structuralist, 168 00:10:58,170 --> 00:11:03,850 the opposition between the two things that we're looking at does not reconcile. 169 00:11:03,850 --> 00:11:08,616 It's not as though the myth was made in order to happily bring these two binary 170 00:11:08,616 --> 00:11:10,532 pairs of opposites together. 171 00:11:10,532 --> 00:11:11,205 Well, gosh, no. 172 00:11:11,205 --> 00:11:15,711 Remember what happened in our previous reading of the myths and books, 173 00:11:15,711 --> 00:11:19,370 stories and books 9 through 12 of the Odyssey? 174 00:11:19,370 --> 00:11:22,241 We're not talking about making it okay for food and 175 00:11:22,241 --> 00:11:24,259 not food to kind of blend together. 176 00:11:24,259 --> 00:11:30,154 No, the whole point for the structuralist is the anxiety that the possibility 177 00:11:30,154 --> 00:11:36,050 of these two things coming together creates these binary pairs of oppositions 178 00:11:36,050 --> 00:11:41,156 are things that you and I, as humans, declare and insist are true. 179 00:11:41,156 --> 00:11:45,498 Sometimes, we were into experiences where that existence of truth is of 180 00:11:45,498 --> 00:11:47,641 rounds up against a question mark. 181 00:11:47,641 --> 00:11:48,916 And we say, wait a minute, 182 00:11:48,916 --> 00:11:52,204 maybe these two opposite things are actually not entirely opposite. 183 00:11:52,204 --> 00:11:53,504 Maybe they come together. 184 00:11:53,504 --> 00:11:55,664 Maybe there's some gray area in between them. 185 00:11:55,664 --> 00:11:57,243 Maybe it's not black and white. 186 00:11:57,243 --> 00:11:59,599 When the binary pair is threatened, and 187 00:11:59,599 --> 00:12:04,608 there is some reconciliation between the two, that's just when the anxiety comes. 188 00:12:04,608 --> 00:12:08,510 And the anxiety for the the structuralist is behind the myth. 189 00:12:08,510 --> 00:12:11,740 It's like an oyster being bothered by a grain of sand, and 190 00:12:11,740 --> 00:12:15,160 when that oyster is bothered by a grain of sand, that's when you get the pearl. 191 00:12:15,160 --> 00:12:19,767 A structuralist says, when a human being walks through its life with a very stable 192 00:12:19,767 --> 00:12:22,840 pair of oppositions anchored to its biological self, 193 00:12:22,840 --> 00:12:25,938 that it thinks are a core piece of what it is to be human. 194 00:12:25,938 --> 00:12:30,017 And then all of a sudden there's some piece of its reality that says that you 195 00:12:30,017 --> 00:12:34,614 know that binary pair of opposition that you think is very firm, strong, hard, and 196 00:12:34,614 --> 00:12:35,744 fast distinction? 197 00:12:35,744 --> 00:12:38,358 Well, here's some examples, or it seems a little funny, or 198 00:12:38,358 --> 00:12:39,581 it's a little bit strange. 199 00:12:39,581 --> 00:12:41,290 That causes anxiety. 200 00:12:41,290 --> 00:12:44,751 And then anxiety is then filled in, it's not really papered over and 201 00:12:44,751 --> 00:12:47,568 it doesn't disappear, but it's filled in by a story. 202 00:12:47,568 --> 00:12:50,290 When people get nervous, they talk. 203 00:12:50,290 --> 00:12:53,750 Same thing is happening according to a structuralist when myths are being 204 00:12:53,750 --> 00:12:54,264 created. 205 00:12:54,264 --> 00:12:59,157 When we're getting nervous about whether the distinction between food and 206 00:12:59,157 --> 00:13:03,744 not food could really actually be one where there's a lot of gray area, 207 00:13:03,744 --> 00:13:08,866 we start telling stories about places where that gray area is being exhibited, 208 00:13:08,866 --> 00:13:12,001 and that, yes, indeed, it gets overcome, and 209 00:13:12,001 --> 00:13:16,694 we get reminded of the importance of keeping these two things separate. 210 00:13:16,694 --> 00:13:21,379 So the structuralist is not going to go about trying to reconcile the opposites. 211 00:13:22,540 --> 00:13:25,211 So, how to be a structuralist, what are you going to do? 212 00:13:25,211 --> 00:13:30,721 Well, there's a basic thing that you want to do which is we go binary hunting. 213 00:13:30,721 --> 00:13:35,011 You head out and you try to read a myth that's in front of you. 214 00:13:35,011 --> 00:13:39,122 First of all, get rid of that narrative part, toss out the logic of the story, 215 00:13:39,122 --> 00:13:41,698 look at all of the features that are in the story. 216 00:13:41,698 --> 00:13:44,080 What are the elements that make it up? 217 00:13:44,080 --> 00:13:49,190 Break them apart, try to find columns in which they line up, and find columns that 218 00:13:49,190 --> 00:13:55,140 have opposite dimensions into which we can pair all the pieces of the myth. 219 00:13:55,140 --> 00:14:00,150 The best structuralist reading is the one that provides two opposite categories 220 00:14:00,150 --> 00:14:06,380 into which the largest number of features in the myth can fit, 221 00:14:06,380 --> 00:14:11,230 and that does so in a way that leaves no remainder. 222 00:14:11,230 --> 00:14:13,635 So, we explain all the important pieces of the myth, 223 00:14:13,635 --> 00:14:16,741 all the most important piece in the myth through our two categories. 224 00:14:16,741 --> 00:14:19,531 We find places for all the features of the story. 225 00:14:19,531 --> 00:14:23,735 These are anchored in opposite pieces of what it is to be human from a biological 226 00:14:23,735 --> 00:14:24,508 inflection. 227 00:14:24,508 --> 00:14:27,854 And then, we claim that we have found the myth. 228 00:14:27,854 --> 00:14:31,124 There's a kind of ta-da moment when your structuralist says, yeah, 229 00:14:31,124 --> 00:14:32,168 I've figured it out. 230 00:14:32,168 --> 00:14:35,040 This is what's making this myth tick. 231 00:14:35,040 --> 00:14:38,171 Unlike a functionalist, for a structuralist, 232 00:14:38,171 --> 00:14:41,464 there is a kind of secret key at the core of any myth. 233 00:14:41,464 --> 00:14:44,300 And that key is a binary pair of oppositions. 234 00:14:44,300 --> 00:14:49,426 And to read the myth, to interpret it properly is to find the key. 235 00:14:49,426 --> 00:14:52,143 The key is going to be in the form of the right pair of binaries. 236 00:14:52,143 --> 00:14:55,718 Now, some people are going to say, wait a minute, does that mean that there's 237 00:14:55,718 --> 00:14:59,400 one single pair of binary oppositions at the core of any given myth? 238 00:14:59,400 --> 00:15:02,434 Well, for a structuralist, the answer is pretty much yes. 239 00:15:02,434 --> 00:15:05,260 There is going to be a single pair. 240 00:15:05,260 --> 00:15:08,584 It could be that there are several different kinds of 241 00:15:08,584 --> 00:15:13,493 pairs that work pretty well, but the structuralists will claim that there is 242 00:15:13,493 --> 00:15:16,677 some core anchoring one at the base of all of them. 243 00:15:16,677 --> 00:15:19,101 And when one person proposes one pair of oppositions, 244 00:15:19,101 --> 00:15:22,958 another person proposes a different one, they start, and they have a conversation. 245 00:15:22,958 --> 00:15:25,256 And they say, okay, you think it's this, well, 246 00:15:25,256 --> 00:15:27,242 this other thing seems to work pretty well. 247 00:15:27,242 --> 00:15:30,439 And then there's a conversation where they say, actually, 248 00:15:30,439 --> 00:15:34,036 what we realize is that there's some further anchoring pair of binaries at 249 00:15:34,036 --> 00:15:36,457 the very core of both of these statements of ours. 250 00:15:36,457 --> 00:15:40,941 A conversation about which binary is the most fundamental is the way we 251 00:15:40,941 --> 00:15:44,450 evaluate how a structuralist reading works. 252 00:15:44,450 --> 00:15:45,970 Okay, so all of this, 253 00:15:45,970 --> 00:15:51,651 according to this structuralist reading is going to reflect this kind of opposition. 254 00:15:51,651 --> 00:15:55,683 This opposition is traced back to the most important structure that structuralism is 255 00:15:55,683 --> 00:15:58,320 interested in, that's what's up here. 256 00:15:58,320 --> 00:16:01,670 And myths, as products of what's up here, 257 00:16:01,670 --> 00:16:05,118 are going to reflect how what's up here works. 258 00:16:05,118 --> 00:16:07,416 So go off, be structuralists. 259 00:16:07,416 --> 00:16:09,367 Go binary hunting. 260 00:16:09,367 --> 00:16:13,006 When that tool is useful to you, and when it isn't put it back in the box and 261 00:16:13,006 --> 00:16:16,707 pull out another one, maybe it's going to be functionalism, and maybe, 262 00:16:16,707 --> 00:16:19,675 one of the other ones we introduce as the course goes along.