|
Jest in Literature - Mental Gymnastics
|
Gunjan Saraf
|
Jul 08, 2002 08:51 PDT
|
..........................................
JEST in LITERATURE
-----------------------------
8th July 2002 # 015
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blasphemy? No, it is not blasphemy. If God is as vast as that,
he is above blasphemy; if He is as little as that, He is beneath it.
- Mark Twain, a Biography
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
IN THIS DIGEST :
A Quick Word -
~ The Doc
Mental Gymnastics
~ The Doc
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---------------- MESSAGE -----------------
'Great Speaking'
If you're interested in good Public Speaking Tips
and Tips on using Humor in your presentations,
I strongly recommend Tom Antion's 'Great Speaking'
newsletter. With over 1,15,000 subscribers and
fantastic fee structure (It's free) wouldn't you
say it's definitely worth a try? Check it out at
http://www.listpartners.com/cgi-local/subscribe?2606
---------------------------------------------------------
====> Note
Back and semi-recovered, I am here to prove that short-term
prescribed drug ingestion has no effect whatsoever on the truly
focused mind. In this issue I will be comparing a possibly
blasphemous book and movie, a comic book hero, and one of
the greatest tragedies ever written. If those gymnastics aren't
enough to excite you, then consider the purpose for this little trip:
preparation for a look at book banning, and spotting possibilities
for creative themes in a space where nothing exists.
(I just re-read that opening paragraph. Uh, Gunjan, perhaps we
should provide seatbelts with this issue.)
== Short Break ( While you put on your seat belts ;-) ==
Want a little spice to break up the monotony?
Have one to three adult cartoons delivered right
to your mailbox one or two days a week.
mailto:JudysToons4-@yahoogroups.com
=======================================
Present your brain scans as you enter, and take a seat where
ever you like. There aren't any seats anyway. Here we go.
Today, I found my thoughts drifting off to a novel which, when
made into a movie, became one of the most controversial items
related to Christianity since the Scopes Monkey Trial. The book
I was thinking about is Nikos Kazantzakis' The Last Temptation
of Christ. The book deals with Satan's last tempting offer to Christ
as a dream-like sequence that occurs just prior to Christ's last
utterance on the cross: "It is accomplished."
Kazantzakis' portrayal of Christ was the first I had ever seen that
dealt with the "human" side of the Christian god. I later discovered
that this is not the first time this has been attempted, but it was my
first encounter. Supposedly, by being born of a woman, Christ
became the part of the Triune God that man would be most able
to relate to in terms of how to live and how to eventually become
sanctified.
Christianity tends to tread pretty lightly on this ground, apparently
preferring to hold its god high enough up to be almost (actually,
completely in some cases) out of human reach. The duplicity of
demanding that "men" are created in "god's image," who sends
his son to earth by way of a human birth to pay the debt for all
men's sins, and then raising a cry and hullabaloo when that god
is portrayed as having human frailty seemed, at first, a bit
argumentative. Research indicates, however, that the arguments
are sound, and, to be honest, I find myself treading rather lightly,
also, because it's scary to look for too much humor in so loaded
a topic. (And if you've paid any attention since, oh, say the
Crusades, then you know that riling up Christians sometimes
has undesired results.)
Kazantzakis's Christ is depicted during his first thirty-one years
as a man who has not yet come to the full realization that he is
"god." For all he knows, he's a carpenter, and that's all he is.
But as he nears that time when he must proclaim himself and
thus become a certain martyr, he finds himself suffering wrenching
headaches whenever he tries to deny his godliness and just be
a man. Not a lot of free-will involved in the issue, really.
He finally dons his true garb, sets about proselytizing, and heads
for his unavoidable dance with death. It is his "victory" over death
that creates of him the role-model for Christians. However, while
that is often taught, it is Nikos Kazantzakis who wrote the novel
that tries to find a different perspective on what that victory means.
The arguments stem from the method he creates to make this
examination more than the examination itself.
He poses a good question - "What is the value of victory when
we are not privy to the details of the battle?"
What is very intriguing about the way Kazantzakis deals with
this self-posed question, is he moves himself outside all biblical
time-references that could be used to validate or refute him. He
picks that moment of time which Christianity has been content to
deal with by not considering that something could have occurred,
and he writes his story inside that small moment. In essence, he
takes a two or three second period of time just before Christ
dies on the cross, and steps into those few seconds to create an
entire new universe.
Unlike the Thrilla from Manila or the Fight of the Century, Christ's
last temptation presented to him by his arch nemesis and rival is the
last thing I would have expected. Not glitter or gold, not wanton
women or delightful perversions, not even contentment and bliss,
the last and mightiest thing that Satan tempts Christ with is a
choice between defeating death and resurrecting to heaven
( a pretty intense dedication which offers him no real relief) or
living a full and complete human life which will be satisfying, but
will not complete his "mission."
This novel is beautifully wielded and crafted. It deals with some
difficult philosophy which gives credit to other philosophies as well -
notably existentialism and Buddhism - and allows some
thoughtfulness about a belief system with which you may be familiar,
may ascribe to or may deplore, but by which you are affected no
matter what you believe or who you are. Much of the world's
history has been written by the march of Christianity.
Martin Scorcese is the director of the movie of the same name.
When word of the movie hit the streets, it polarized much of the
American public because it was touted by some Christian groups
to be blasphemous. Universal Studios loved the publicity, but
polarization usually leads to some outrageous acts, and this proved
to be no exception.
There are two reasons I have explained this much: one is that I would
like to deal with the topic of book banning in future issues; second is
that I would like to deal with this literary technique of looking at an
historical record and finding an unguarded moment which could
contain the fruit for an entire novel that creates a universe inside
the moment of another universe. Oh, yea, that was just as easy to
explain as I thought it would be.
There's a comic book hero named "The Hulk." I haven't seen the
comic book in years, but he is a monster of a monster who is
orange colored, and sometimes has thoughtful reflections. Who
knows? In one of the stories I recall, the heroine sheds a tear.
During the time it takes for that tear to travel down her cheek
and slowly dry, the illustrator creates a microcosm inside that
salty medium in which a universe is born, evolves, goes through
its entire history, and implodes. There is an evolution of plant and
animal life, the formation of a race of thinking beings (I forget their
color, but I think it was motley), the development of an
understanding of natural laws that governed their existence -
"We seem to be developing a serious trend toward global
drying out...." - and a final ending that was apocalyptic. I haven't
a clue whether the author/illustrator of that issue (I think it is a
Stan Lee publication) realized the existential nature of his creation
or not. It was a comic strip, for heaven's sake, not a
religious/philosophical treatment, so what does it matter? But, man,
talk about a perspective on a futile and meaningless existence!
"The Hulk." Pretty heavy stuff for a comic book. "The Last
Temptation of Christ." Pretty heavy stuff, too. It was put on the
banned reading list for Roman Catholics, the author was
ex-communicated by the Greek Orthodox Church, twenty-five
thousand people protested the opening of the movie in the
Universal parking lot. The comic book barely escaped similar
fate by having its message completely ignored apparently by
everyone except myself. The weirdest stuff sticks in my brain.
I am enamored of the idea of the comic books' method of giving
as good an example of the Theory of Relativity as I have ever seen.
I am intrigued by the notion of entire universes being created and
destroyed in the most innocuous of places and by the most
serendipitous of means. The people in the tear-universe had just
begun to question the meaning of their existence when the tear
dried up and left both them and me without an answer. It left me
wondering whether we might be encapsulated as well in a
streaming universe cascading down an even larger face, and so
on and so on. The product of all these universes in tears and
larger and larger faces would only be fitting if at the end of it
all it turned out to be the creation of someone drawing a
comic book though, wouldn't it?
Okay, buckle up! Here I go, making another ridiculously
tangential leap. If the one from Christianity to the Hulk
stretched credulity, I'm blindly leaping now smack into the
climax of Hamlet with nary a glance sideways at how
ridiculous I might seem. If you are reading this in the early
hours of the day, this maybe should be one of those days
that you begin by drinking, because you need to loosen
the nuts on your brain pan to muddle about in what makes
seeming sense to myself, a deluded and potentially harmful
tick fastened to the jugular of life. (I hope it's not just a
garden hose.)
"Conversely," he shouted, apparently attempting to make some
play toward normality while guiding the Good Ship Lollipop on
this fateful voyage, "Themes, plots, and perhaps even pizza
toppings can be found in those moments where a hole appears."
Most of the audience exited at this point thereby missing the
startling argument presented to support this outlandish statement.
Those few who stuck around became totally mesmerized by the
fascinating and logical process by which this
shouter-at-an-almost-empty-room managed to actually pull tight
these seemingly unrelated topics into a tight fitting icon which
represented a new way of seeing things through the same old
eyes. This dog had learned a new trick.
In the case of "The Last Temptation of Christ," we have a new
and argumentative translation of a singular event. The argument
is not about the event itself and whether and how it happened.
The argument is in how to interpret the event. From a singular
moment, different perspectives.
In "The Hulk," we are presented with a moment that would
otherwise go almost unnoticed - a single tear shed for some
reason - and we are led into that moment to be fascinated by
a "what if" type of proposition which a reader can take to any
extreme he desires.
Now, to tug in something that is the turning point of what is
arguably, but certainly worthy of argument, the finest tragedy
that Shakespeare has written, Hamlet, allow me to point out
what might be one of the most fruitful places for one of you
driven people who could write the greatest play ever but lacks
that focusing moment that would propel you: The turning point
in Hamlet is missing!
Ye gads, and I thought I should only be afraid of the Christians.
I simply have to assume that most or all of you at least have read,
seen some rendition, or have gathered enough gossip in your
lifetimes to have a little working understanding of that play. I'm
not going to go back over any of it, but I do want to point out
this simple, yet shocking notion.
The main characters in plays, books, and movies often undergo
a change. If they don't, circumstances do, but merciful heavens,
something has to happen to get around that last post and on the
home stretch or nothing would ever end. That thing, when it
occurs, is often called the turning point. That's that little moment
when something happens to refocus the hero, change him, make
the situation different, or something. By studying the aspects of
the turning point, we often can determine what has changed, be
it in the character or the circumstances. From there, we have a
good chance of working to an understanding of the overall
thematic statement. But, in Hamlet, the turning point is missing!
I don't often use the old exclamation point, so please pay attention
to it. Four hundred years that play's been around, studied by critics,
afficionados of art, and students who are forced to eat what's good
for them, and I can't find a single mention of the fact that this
incredibly important event is nonexistent.
Time's running out, but I won't leave you hanging entirely. Consider
this - Hamlet, until that moment when he returns from his aborted
voyage to England - is a complete ass. He is abusive, self-consumed,
selfish, thoughtless, and pretty much uncaring. When he hits the shore
and leaps into Ophelia's grave site, he is changed. He is completely
different.
Up to this point, Hamlet has consumed himself with questions. He
questions everything that happens, could happen, might happen, and
didn't happen, and he tries to put some sense to it all.
After he returns from the England voyage, and to the end of the play,
he doesn't ask a single question, rhetorical or otherwise. He instead
offers solutions, possible answers, and a different way of looking at
those events which so plagued him up until then.
This is a completely different person, he's just wearing the same
clothes. Now, just as in the two seconds before dying on a cross,
or in the amount of time it takes a tear to cross a check, so, too,
is there endless bounty in filling in the gaps that exist in even the
most highly held plays and books. That period of time that
accomplishes this complete change in dramas most colorful,
enigmatic character, is completely missing from Hamlet. If there's
not a book, a movie, or a play in there, then I'm not Osiris, and
you are not an Oreo cookie.
Belts on, seat backs up, and you there, take your hands out of
your lap. Prepare for landing, but be ready for a bit of depth
on these things next time when I shall, I promise, manage to
draw the final connections to include considerations of book
banning, the return of the mini-skirt, and why edible panties
are still not a main staple at drive-through restaurants.
Comments or Questions :
mailto:li-@workinghumor.com?Subject=MentalGymnastics
==========**********O**********==========
Announcing: The Easiest Ways to Get More Customers For
Your Business or Practice...
Never worry about getting more customers again -- guaranteed!
Click here to visit the dynamic site everyone's talking about.
==> http://morecustomers.com/a277.html
==========**********O**********==========
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Winding up Cartoons
Don't get it!
http://jokeworm.com/AToons/Ad331.shtml
Don't get it ! (Part 2)
http://jokeworm.com/AToons/Ad332.shtml
Party Game
http://jokeworm.com/AToons/Ad334.shtml
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you know someone who would be interested in reading
'Jest in Literature' please forward this entire message to them.
Better still invite them to subscribe. Thank You!
________________________________________________
IMPORTANT ADDRESSES:
Jest for Pun site: http://www.jestforpun.com
Archives : www.topica.com/lists/lit/read
TO UNSUBSCRIBE
Send blank email message to:
lit-unsu-@topica.com
TO SUBSCRIBE
Send blank email message to:
lit-sub-@topica.com
Thanks
JD Lentz
Gunjan
gun-@workinghumor.com
|
|
 |
|
