I preface this article by examining why Jim Morrison may be discussed in the discourse of religious studies. I suggest four possibilities. The first is the place of religion in late modernity; that is, as individualized, subjectivized and deinstitutionalized. These factors contribute to the circumstances in which Morrison can be understood in religious terms because of the conditions they create. Religion may be deinstitutionalized (Luckmann 1967; Bibby 1990), but people remain religious (Chaves 1994). This allows religion to exist in other ways; one solution is to go through a deceased celebrity. In an article titled “Is Elvis a God?” Cult, culture, questions of method", John Frow (1998, 208-209), after discussing the apparent failure of the secularization thesis1, remarks: ". . . religious feeling. . . has migrated to many strange and unexpected places, from New Age trinkets to manga films to the cult of the famous dead. . . we must take religion seriously in all its dimensions because of its central place in the modern world. Furthermore, religion as individualized and subjectivized (Hervieu-Léger 2000) allows individuals to create their own systems of meaning and transcendence. The deceased celebrity, taking Morrison as an example, is a system. The second possibility follows from the first. Regarding the changing nature of religion in the 1960s, religious studies scholar Gail Hamner (2003: 447) wrote that "popular culture became prone to deification or at least spiritualization." Although this article does not aim to account for the process by which certain celebrities were sacralized in the 20th century, it should be noted that there is literature on the subject. A seminal work, in this regard, is The Work o...... middle of paper ...... supplemented by relevant scholarly literature and popular biographies of Morrison. It's with these four possibilities, religion in late modernity, about religion and celebrity, how we think about and define religion, and Riddell (2008), who I think of as Jim Morrison and religion. There is little academic literature on Jim Morrison, but a reasonable amount of popular literature, which I engage with in my assessment. Research into the fandom of deceased celebrities has progressed over the past decade; however, in 1998, John Frow (1998: 200) asserted that "we almost completely lack the tools to make sense of [the process by which deceased celebrities are sacralized]." I hope that by describing Morrison's role in the self-propagation of his own myth, combined with posthumous documentation of this process, I will contribute to the literature on deceased celebrity fandom..