JUDGES 5 – REDUX.

              

 

Deborah and Jael – a Biblical retelling

(A CANAANITE PERSPECTIVE)

 

A rainy day in Canaan. Two charioteers of King Jabin’s army enjoy a couple of beers in a local pub. One of the men has just returned from battle and relates his tale to his comrade.

               “Once again we had to deal with those bloody Hebrews and their new-fangled god. One god to take care of that lot; how’s that even possible. Everybody knows they breed like rabbits and live for donkeys years. We never seem to learn do we? What with their disrespect and unwillingness to integrate and accept our gods and traditions, we continue to take them under our wing and instruct them in the ways of the true faith. It’s like banging your head off a pyramid for all the good it does. There’s no helping some tribes – there really isn’t!”

               The comrade nods – the charioteer continues.

               “Rebellion seems to be the curse of their nation. Never trust a Hebrew that’s what I say. Look where it gets you. Nowhere that’s where! Though we allow them to enjoy our  lands and to partake of our culture, imbibing them with the wisdom of modernity, and allowing them to move freely amongst us, they just can’t help themselves. More blood is spilt because of one god than any other reason I can think of. In fact, I would go as far to say that every war we fight is about religion.

               The comrade nods sagely.

               “A more deceitful, warlike, blood lusted, people has never before inhabited these lands. I swear to you, that so long as the Hebrew and their God persists in these provinces there will never be peace. Never – not till the end of time!”

               The comrade looks up briefly, ogles a bar wench, and then goes back to his beer.

               “There we were servicing those new metal chariots – which by the way seem to be far more problematic than the old wooden ones we had – when out of the blue we were surprised by a band of Hebrew insurgents. There was probably a couple of hundred of them at most, but given the condition of our equipment and the suddenness of their ambush we were forced to flee. Gave a good account of ourselves though. I tell you comrade, that after the battle the plain, although soaked in our own blood, was steeped in theirs. They won’t be back in a hurry. They claim to be freedom fighters, but anyone who turns on their adopted nation and kills their brothers is little more than a terrorist in my scroll. Crucifying is too good for them if you ask me.

               The comrade as though in pain, grimaces agreement.

               “A vagabond group led by some she-devil called Debbie, and a half breed by the name of Barak. Why they let women into the service I’ll never know. It will be the ruin of the Army, mark my words. They were a motley bunch, I tell you, little more than land-pirates out to feather their own nests at the expense of hard working, law abiding, gods fearing Canaanites.”

               The charioteer continues.

               “Anway, discretion being the better part of valor we withdrew up by Mount Tabor to regroup. They’ll be sorry the next time we meet. Accompanied by our idols, soothsayers, and true gods we’ll give ‘em hell. Bit of a blot on the old copy-book though as we left a couple of the boys on the field, and you know that’s a bit of a no-no. Not good for the old esprit de corps to leave the wounded behind. In our haste old Sissera sprung a puncture, fell out of his chariot, and was captured by the blaggards.”

               The comrade looks up mildly interested, belches and goes back to his beer.

               “Taken prisoner he was, but given their professed Christian values we expected there would soon be a parley and an exchange. Little did we know that it would be the hand of a woman that did it for him. Tricked and lured by some witch called Jael he was. As I heard it he was sleeping in a tent when the old woman sneaks in while he’s sleeping, and sticks him in the head with a spike. Bloody murder that is! And they pretend to be better than us. A bleeding liberty’s what I call it. Goes to show, that once a bleeding Hebrew always a Hebrew. There ain’t no changing them animals. Go ask the Palestinians if you don’t believe me. They’ll tell you the same thing!

               The comrades eyes glaze over as he slowly slips from his bar stool.

 

 

 

The Book Of Samuel – Bronze Age reality in two parts.

The Divine Comedy, which is the Bible, relates the trials and tribulations in exactly the same way a contemporary reality show is portrayed on television. The actors are given a definitive set of rules that must be obeyed. If they adhere to those rules then life will run smoothly, but not necessarily easily. As soon as there is deviation from the plan, or suddenly the actors think they know better than the producers then enmity ensues. We then as viewers are allowed to enjoy twelve weeks of ordinary people trying to survive together, who can’t even live together, in glorious Technicolor. This is analogous of God’s curse. Without the spirit of God, there’s nothing but mayhem, confusion and ultimately retribution.

Saul is a chosen man rather than an anointed King. Selected not because of his heart or spirit but because he fits the idea of what a king should be. Saul is the Charlton Heston of the Hebrews, who thanks to his good looks, stature, and possibly dimpled chin, is elected. God takes offence at the notion of earthly kingship, as being the jealous Supreme Being that he is declares himself the true monarch, and therefore the only one his people should worship. God uncharacteristically relents, knowing as he does that the tribes should be careful for what they wish, and so through Samuel allows Saul to become god on earth. As always total power – even where sky gods are concerned – corrupts totally, and we see Saul suffer the slings and arrows of human folly, demonstrating himself to be a vain, jealous, malicious mortal – not dissimilar in fact, to the Christian God himself! God as we have seen in the past chooses those he sees fit to advance therefore Saul, in classic Bronze Age foreshadowing, is doomed before he ever wears the crown.

Saul is the traditional flawed character whom we all love to hate. He cannot suffer the military successes of his son Jonathon and who despite his initial love for David eventually comes to hate him as well. A “Napoleon” figure who thinks he knows best, who time and again ignores the will of God, and who eventually loses God’s spirit; a presumptive Mafia boss whose lack of respect for the god-father eventually leads him to sleep with the fishes.

God it would appear is neither fair nor unfair; it is simply his way or the highway. Pressured or perhaps disenchanted by the will of the people he allows them an experience of totalitarian power in order to teach them a lesson. Saul is the fall guy, who as in most tragic literature offers darkness in order that people can recognize the light when they see it. Without Saul there wouldn’t have been a David, and therefore in God’s infinite wisdom it was necessary for the Hebrews to suffer before they could finally find grace. It is Saul who is the biggest loser and who is voted off the island, and David who is invited to come on down. It’s God’s casino and one chooses to play the tables at one’s own risk.

 

 

Who Done It- Rappaccini or God?

             

“RAPPACCINI’S DAUGHER AND GENESIS”

 

  In attempting to examine a father’s love Hawthorne uses Biblical analogy to compare and contrast the intermingling themes of “Genesis” with his own work “Rappaccini’s Daughter.” There is no malice aforethought within either story, simply an unintended consequence of short-sighted beneficence that once initiated is unpreventable.

               Both fathers want the best for their offspring despite the questionable conditions to which they are subjected. Beatrice grows to maturity within the confines of the poisonous garden and so is ignorant of the outside world. For her the garden holds no danger, unlike Rappaccini who must protect himself from his own creation and use his daughter to perform certain tasks. He is aware of the perils – dressing in protective clothing – and therefore unlikely to jeopardize his daughter. He creates for his child an immured Eden, a walled paradise where no harm can befall her. It is the interaction of exterior forces beyond his control that cause Paradise to fall rather than Rapaccinni’s own negligence.

               Could he have perceived of what would happen, and if so does that make him responsible? These are questions which Hawthorne deliberately leaves unanswered. By drawing comparisons with “Genesis” and God’s creation of man he causes the reader to not only formulate a personal conclusion but to question that which they may hold to be true; a literary test of faith perhaps?

               Adam is created and given the freedom of an earthly paradise – not unlike Beatrice in her garden – where he is free to live and roam in safety. It’s for the love of his creation that God creates woman, and therefore unwittingly – although perhaps with forethought being that he is God and not an Italian scientist – brings about the destruction of his own child. Despite creating all things necessary to enhance the life of Adam, it is the one thing the garden lacks that eventually destroys it.

               Hawthorn marries the “Genesis” story with his own but rather than ascribing direct relations with any one character, he creates a mélange in which different traits can be found in different people. God, to some degree, is recognizable in all of the characters, just as Beatrice is recognizable in Adam. Hawthorne deliberately takes a well-worn myth and applies it in a modern context where the mistakes and faults of man can be examined alongside those of original sin. Although not deliberately pointing the figure at any of his characters, it is left to the reader to employ Biblical association in defining who is guilty and of what crime. Likewise in “Genesis” it is the ambiguity of misconduct that causes one to question the complicity of Eve or the faithlessness of Adam. Hawthorne by using “Genesis” to color his own story strengthens what in essence is a morality tale if not a Christian “who-done-it.”