Yeah, it's not going over real well in the Bible belt.
David
"If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it
costs when it's free
"If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it
costs when it's free."*---P. J. O'Rourke*
On 4/4/2014 10:19 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Valuable review of the new movie about Noah and the Deluge.
However, from my perspective the film completely misses the point
inasmuch as the original Flood stories predate the Biblical account by
at least 1000 years and are all Sumerian / Mesopotamian.
The easiest to access is the version found in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
The version in Genesis has its charm but nothing can replace
the originals.
Billy
-----------------------------------
*Deseret News*
April 3, 2014
Jeff Bradshaw
A Noah like no other before: A look at the latest biblical film from
an LDS perspective
When Cecil B. DeMilleâEUR^(TM)s movie epic "The Ten Commandments" was
released in 1956, the opening credits proclaimed: âEURoeThose who see
this motion picture âEUR¦ will make a pilgrimage over the very ground
that Moses trod more than 3,000 years ago ... in accordance with the
ancient texts of Philo, Josephus, Eusebius, the Midrash and the Holy
Scriptures.âEUR?
While not explicitly identifying his sources, director Darren
Aronofsky seems to have done something similar in his new movie "Noah"
by silently weaving Jewish traditions from outside the Bible into
scripture and the threads of his own imagination to produce a film
version of Noah like no other.
Close encounters of the pseudepigraphal kind
The Jewish traditions from outside the Bible that appear to have
influenced Aronofsky are of two main sorts: 1. pseudepigrapha,
writings that attained their current form between about 200 B.C. and
A.D. 200 but that usually claim authority from Old Testament figures
living much earlier (e.g., Enoch, Abraham, Moses); and 2. midrash,
later compilations of scripture commentary by Jewish rabbinic sages.
Scholars differ in their opinions about the value of pseudepigraphal
and midrashic literature. However, some believe that authentic
traditions as old as those found in the Bible may be preserved in such
manuscripts, mixed with other material of lesser worth. Thus, it is
not unthinkable that Aronofsky could draw from some of these
traditions in the film. LetâEUR^(TM)s explore a few examples.
After brief reminders of mankindâEUR^(TM)s seemingly inevitable
propensity for evil (the temptation in Eden, the murder of Abel), the
film segues to the violent death of NoahâEUR^(TM)s father, Lamech, at
the hand of the ruthless earth-waster Tubal-Cain. This provides a
first example of the twists to tradition because the older stories
depict a (different) Lamech who kills Tubal-Cain rather than the
reverse (see Genesis 4:22-23; Moses 5:47-50; Midrash
Tanhuma-Yellamedenu, Bereshit, 11).
In another example that recalls the flood dreams of the wicked in
Jewish tradition (e.g., Midrash of Shemahzai and AzaâEUR^(TM)el; Book
of the Giants), Noah is informed about the deluge not by the voice of
God but through a series of apocalyptic nightmares. As NoahâEUR^(TM)s
family builds the ark, they are protected by repentant
âEURoeWatchers,âEUR? shadowy characters of legend that are here
depicted as gigantic spirits encased in stone for their wickedness
(see, e.g., 1 Enoch 6-16, 85-88, 106; Jubilees 4:15, 5:1-2; Midrash of
Shemahzai and AzaâEUR^(TM)el).
In 1 Enoch 106-107, Methuselah travels to the âEURoeends of the
earthâEUR? to counsel with Enoch about the birth of Noah. The film
converts that story into a visit by Noah to his grandfather
Methuselah, an eccentric cave-dwelling shaman with potions, magic
seeds and healing power.
Of course, even lavish interpretation of Jewish tradition does not
prevent Aronofsky from the exercise of pure cinematic license, adding
fanciful elements directly from his own imagination. For example, we
are shown a forest that springs up from a magic seed to provide timber
for the ark. We also witness the marvelous effects of a smoky
concoction that handily puts the animals to sleep for the duration of
the sea voyage. (By way of contrast with the script of the film, we
read in midrash that Noah and his family did not sleep a wink on the
ark because all their time was spent caring for and feeding the animals.)
There are certain motifs from ancient sources present in "Noah." For
instance, in a scene that has left many viewers and reviewers
scratching their heads, Tubal-Cain deprives Lamech of a sacred
birthright heirloom in the form of a snakeskin. Later, Ham takes it
from Tubal-Cain. Students of midrash will recognize this as a
variation on the story of the stolen garment âEUR" a gift from God to
Adam, and an object of envy for the jealous Satan. This same garment
was said to have been handed down to Noah, stolen by Ham, inherited by
Nimrod, taken by Esau and put on by Jacob in order to obtain
IsaacâEUR^(TM)s blessing (e.g., Midrash Rabbah 4:8; Midrash Tanhuma
1:24; Pirke dâEUR^(TM) Rabbi Eliezer, 24). Traditions diverge on the
animal that was the source of the skins, naming dozens of species the
hide of which could have been used. "Noah" settles on a snakeskin,
poetic revenge on the beast that incited Adam and EveâEUR^(TM)s
transgression (e.g., Pirke dâEUR^(TM) Rabbi Eliezer, 20; Targum
Pseudo-Jonathan of Genesis, 3:21).
One ancient allusion that will catch the attention of sharp-eyed LDS
viewers is Tubal-CainâEUR^(TM)s relentless quest to amass wealth
through the mining of a luminous mineral called "tsohar." The meaning
of this obscure term is debated, but some readers interpret tsohar as
a reference to a shining stone that was said to have hung from the
rafters of the ark in order to provide light (see, e.g., Midrash
Rabbah of Genesis, 31:11; Pirke dâEUR^(TM) Rabbi Eliezer, 23). Readers
of the Book of Mormon will not miss the similarity to the story of the
shining stones the brother of Jared obtained to provide light for his
barges (Ether 3:1-6, 6:3).
The greatest story never told
In contrast to the BibleâEUR^(TM)s version of NoahâEUR^(TM)s pre-flood
career as a long-suffering âEURoepreacher of righteousnessâEUR? (see
Moses 6:23, 8:19-25), AronofskyâEUR^(TM)s Noah quickly dismisses hopes
of redemption for the wicked. Resembling a frontier sheriff in a
classic Western, NoahâEUR^(TM)s single sermon is short and unsweet:
âEURoeThere is no escape for you and your kind. Your time is done.âEUR?
Genesis tells us about Noah, a man who was âEURoeperfect in his
generationsâEUR? (Genesis 6:9) and who, like Enoch, âEURoewalked with
GodâEUR? (Genesis 5:24, 6:9). Aronofsky tells us about a more ordinary
Noah, the last of the good guys, who must perform an impossible task
that results in great pain for members of his own family.
The mainspring of Aronofsky's plot is driven by the introduction of a
non-biblical element into the storyline. In short: Noah decides to
execute a just and final solution to the problem of the
worldâEUR^(TM)s violence and corruption by deliberately making sure
that the line of humanity will end with his immediate family (Shem
marries a wife who cannot conceive; HamâEUR^(TM)s intended bride is
deliberately left behind by Noah; Japheth is never given a chance to
marry). It is from this knotty problem, designed from scratch by
Aronofsky, that the primary chain of story logic unfolds, leading
inexorably to a final denouement.
God, or âEURoeThe CreatorâEUR? as he is always called, is distant in
"Noah." He is seen only through what he does. He gives Noah
apocalyptic nightmares. He makes the flood storm and later, we are led
to assume, supervises the display of a surreal rainbow.
However, in contrast to the Bible, Aronofsky's "Noah" forbids God to
speak for himself; he speaks only through others. For example,
although NoahâEUR^(TM)s sons say little of consequence to their father
(except to signal obedience or defiance), Aronofsky's depiction allows
qualities of innate goodness to shine through the words of the women
in NoahâEUR^(TM)s life âEUR" his wife, his daughter-in-law, his twin
granddaughters and even the potential daughter-in-law he left behind
to die. Their strong voices eventually persuade Noah to temper his
passion for âEURoejusticeâEUR? with the unstrained quality of
âEURoemercy.âEUR?
At a moment of self-doubt, Noah cries out to God, in the single prayer
shown, âEURoeWhy do you not answer me? Why?âEUR? And though, in the
aftermath of that experience, NoahâEUR^(TM)s resolve to do what he
thinks he must is strengthened, there is no visual sign of
enlightenment on his face, no âEURoewindows of heavenâEUR? moment to
indicate that Noah received an answer. Indeed, viewers are eventually
led to conclude that for most of the movie, Noah was completely
mistaken about GodâEUR^(TM)s intentions for humanity.
Because God does not speak in the film, he cannot give commandments.
Thus, it is Noah, not God, who must do the speaking at the renewal of
the commandment to Adam and Eve: âEURoeBe fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earthâEUR? (contrast Genesis 9:1). In the Bible, Noah
performs the priestly ordinance of animal sacrifice not just once, but
multiple times, laying âEURoeevery clean beastâEUR? and âEURoeevery
clean fowlâEUR? upon the altar (Genesis 8:20). Such a scene would be
unthinkable for this movie. In the film, the rainbow, which God
established as a âEURoetoken of the covenantâEUR? he made with Noah
and his posterity (Genesis 9:12), becomes nothing more than a vague
hint of benediction from the far-off sky after Noah reconciles with
his family.
Borrowing the words of Eugen Drewermann from another context, we might
say of AronofskyâEUR^(TM)s "Noah" that âEURoeevery religious symbol,
especially those having to do with eternity, immortality and the
survival of love, becomes nothing more than nostalgic memories of lost
hope ... too weak to call forth the reality it evokes.âEUR?
NoahâEUR^(TM)s guilt or glory?
Genesis 9 tells the story of NoahâEUR^(TM)s planting of a vineyard and
his drinking of the wine made from it. An odd inconsistency can be
interpreted from the Bible in way of NoahâEUR^(TM)s seeming portrayal
as a saint before the flood and as an inebriated vintner afterward.
What aspects of this enigmatic portrayal are the result of divergent
traditions, textual misunderstandings or the abbreviated nature of the
account is difficult to ascertain. But some scholars have described
the perceived inconsistency as part of a deliberate effort by ancient
religious sectarians to denigrate the character of Noah.
The film explains NoahâEUR^(TM)s behavior after the flood in terms of
âEURoesurvivorâEUR^(TM)s guiltâEUR? and shame for his failures âEUR"
though there is no hint of this in the Bible. Noah, we are told in the
official movie novelization, âEURoedrank to forget. His thoughts were
nothing but darkness, and his heart was heavy with shame and regret
and sorrow ... Now he had lost everything.âEUR?
Had Aronofsky read a little deeper into Jewish tradition, he might
have encountered ancient sources suggesting the possibility that this
episode instead describes the crowning blessing of NoahâEUR^(TM)s
life, a fitting reward for a life of faithfulness.
In this regard, it is significant that other flood accounts from the
ancient Near East describe the climax of the story as being the
founding of a temple over the source of the floodwaters, an idea
hinted at in Jewish sources (Zohar, Noah 1:73b; compare Lekh Lekha
1:80a, 184a). Moreover, some versions of the story go on to suggest
that NoahâEUR^(TM)s drinking of the wine should be seen as a ritual
preparation for his receiving the highest ordinances of the
priesthood, and not merely as a spontaneous indulgence that occurred
at the end of a particularly wearying day (e.g., Genesis Apocryphon
12:17; Jubilees 7:2; compare JST Genesis 14:25-40; Testament of Levi
8:4-6).
Consistent with this interpretation, Joseph Smith is remembered as
saying that Noah âEURoewas not drunk but in a visionâEUR? (Diary of C.
L. Walker, 12 May 1881), an idea echoed in the Genesis Apocryphon
(13:8-15:20). Modern scholars Y. Koler and Frederick E. Greenspahn
concur with this idea, concluding that HamâEUR^(TM)s sin was in
âEURoelooking directly at God (while Noah was) in the course of
revelation.âEUR? Fittingly, Shem, who did not look, was afterward
given a blessing to enjoy the immediate presence of the Lord, like his
father had just experienced: âEURoe(M)ay the Glory of His Shekhinah
(GodâEUR^(TM)s presence) dwell in the midst of the tents of ShemâEUR?
(Targum Neofiti 9:27).
'Should I see the movie?'
Though I canâEUR^(TM)t recommend this movie, I donâEUR^(TM)t think
there is too much harm in it âEUR" so long as the viewer doesn't
confuse it with the story in the Bible. The cinematography, acting and
special effects are outstanding. Though flawed in its conception and
execution, the movie is not deliberately disrespectful in its intent.
There is a certain morality in the film, though it never rises above
an earthly level to provide a view from heaven. When the story
concludes, there is more bleakness than blessedness in the atmosphere.
In 1962, President David O. McKay responded to noisy complaints about
the U.S. Supreme CourtâEUR^(TM)s decision that barred the recital of
government-written prayers in public schools as follows: âEURoeThe
real tragedy ... is not that we have permitted the Bible to slip out
of our public schools, but that we have so openly neglected to teach
it in either the home or the ChurchâEUR? (Relief Society Magazine,
December 1962, p. 879). President McKayâEUR^(TM)s comment applies with
even more force today. As a constructive response to this neglect, we
can reread the sophisticated and spiritually sensitive stories of
Genesis âEUR" slowly and carefully âEUR" to find out what the Creator
intended us to learn from them.
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
