"The latest page I've been working is about the organization of the pantheon of the gods. Who's indebted to whom, how they are related, who screwed whose uncle or grandmother, all of that"

Ben Nicholson addresses the intricate and often convoluted relationships among the gods in a pantheon, highlighting the complex tapestry of mythological connections that define divine hierarchies. The pantheon, as described, is not merely a list of gods and their titles; it is presented as a living web of obligations, relationships, and betrayals. This approach reflects the human tendency to project social and familial structures onto their deities, attributing to them debts, loyalties, grudges, and even scandalous affairs.

Nicholson’s mention of "who’s indebted to whom" points to the idea that gods, like mortals, are bound by exchanges, oaths, or unfulfilled promises, shaping the power dynamics within the pantheon. Such debts might represent favors owed, ancient bargains, cosmic agreements, or the moral price of power. It evokes the turbulent interactions seen in many mythologies, where conflicts often arise not just over territory or mortals, but also over past wrongs and promises.

The phrase "how they are related" acknowledges the importance of genealogy in mythic accounts. Divine relationships are frequently familial, with lineages that trace back to primordial ancestors and branch out into vast family trees. These kinships are often the origin of both harmony and strife within the pantheon, as issues of succession, rivalry, or inheritance arise.

With his raw reference to "who screwed whose uncle or grandmother", Nicholson underscores the often messy, scandalous, and, by mortal standards, taboo aspects of divine interactions. Myths are rife with stories of gods engaging in morally ambiguous or outright shocking relationships, further complicating the nature of the pantheon and creating a narrative filled with intrigue and drama.

Nicholson’s description emphasizes that the organization of a pantheon is not static or neat, but rather fluid, dynamic, and deeply influenced by the same passions and political machinations that characterize human societies. The account transforms the gods from distant, impersonal figures into vivid characters with motives, secrets, and histories, a portrayal that both humanizes divinity and illustrates the timeless fascination with the gods’ personal lives.