The Top 10 Celebrity Scientists

scientiaThey brought us black holes and great whites, gorillas and chimps, footprints and evolution… and weren’t shy about it. Say hello to the Top 10 Celebrity Scientists.

Jacques Cousteau
“From birth, man carries the weight of gravity on his shoulders. He is bolted to earth. But man has only to sink beneath the surface and he is free.”

Along with engineer Émile Gagnan, Cousteau perfected the aqualung, which for the first time allowed divers to stay underwater for hours. With his French accent, and from his boat the Calypso, he hosted the popular TV series “The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau,” which was renowned not only for its amazing deep-sea creatures, but also for the awe-inspiring underwater filmmaking. It also showed us the dire implications of pollution in our seas.

Richard Feynman
“I’m smart enough to know that I’m dumb.”

Richard Feynman was never one to follow along with the pack, a trait that helped him solve the mystery of the Challenger explosion. While the research commission dismissed the idea that a cold launch morning caused the explosion, all Feynman had to do was drop a rubber O-ring — the crucial piece that sealed the rocket boosters — into an ice-cold glass of water, and let Congress watch as it flattened out.

Dian Fossey
“The man who kills the animals today is the man who kills the people who get in his way tomorrow.”

She overcame an unhappy childhood in San Francisco to champion the cause of gorillas in Africa. Thanks to her they were no longer Kong but rather mammals, very much like us. But as much as Fossey publicized the gorillas’ plight, she also launched a campaign against the dual enemies of poaching and zoos — both of which brought gorillas to the brink of extinction. Her beliefs, according to some theories, may have brought about her tragic ending: Dian Fossey was murdered on December 26, 1985, and the guilty parties have never been found.

Stephen Jay Gould
“The most erroneous stories are those we think we know best — and therefore never scrutinize or question.”

An ardent Darwinist, Stephen Jay Gould wasn’t shy about sharing his beliefs. And the public ate them up, as his many books — and their highly readable style — became runaway best-sellers. Gould also tackled the IQ testing industry in his book “The Mismeasure of Man,” shared his dismay over the fact that baseball hasn’t had a .400 hitter in more than 60 years in Ken Burns’s “Baseball,” and even guest-starred on “The Simpsons.” But it is evolution that he is most known for — and the fact that he would never back down from a creationist fight.

Jane Goodall
“The greatest danger to our future is apathy.”

Jane Goodall changed the way we look at chimpanzees — and ourselves. Only a few decades ago, the consensus was that humans were the only animals that could use tools. That changed when Jane Goodall saw chimps poke twigs into a termite nest and eat the termites they collected. After she reported her findings to famed anthropologist Louis Leakey, he said, “Now we must redefine ‘tool,’ redefine ‘man,’ or accept chimpanzees as humans.”

Stephen Hawking
“God not only plays dice, He also sometimes throws the dice where they cannot be seen.”

Largely due to “A Brief History of Time,” the book that allowed ordinary people to talk about black holes and quantum gravity, Stephen Hawking is the best-known physicist alive today. His appearance — in a wheelchair due to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and with a mechanical voice generator due to a tracheotomy — only adds to the incredible nature of his achievements, which include a model depicting why the universe knows no bounds.

Mary Leakey
“She stops, pauses, turns to the left to glance at some possible threat or irregularity, and then continues to the north. This motion, so intensely human, transcends time.”

Though she participated in countless digs, and was the matriarch of a renowned family of archaeologists, Mary Leakey is probably best known for a set of footprints she discovered in 1976, in Tanzania, Africa. More than 3 million years old, these footprints — two sets side by side, about 80 feet long — are among the earliest evidence of upright, bipedal walking. One set was made by a larger Australopithecine, the other by a smaller. Were they male and female? Mother and child? Only time will tell.

Carl Sagan
“In order to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe.”

Born in Brooklyn with an eye toward the stars, Carl Sagan brought the universe to our living rooms with “Cosmos,” a 13-part television series that influenced a new generation of astronomers with its down-to-earth approach to science. Sagan was also the author of over 20 books, including “Pale Blue Dot” and the novel “Contact,” which became a film in 1997. What might not be as widely known, however, are his discoveries about Venus (it was a scorched world, rather than a tropical paradise as popularly believed), which tied into his predictions for dangerous global warming here on Earth.

Watson and Crick
“Francis Crick and I were both in trouble at various times in our careers, but that never really stopped us, because we always found someone to save us.” – James Watson
“We’ve discovered the secret of life.” – Francis Crick

On February 28, 1953, the team of James Watson and Francis Crick did the unthinkable — they were able to determine the structure of DNA. Only through its double-helix structure could DNA “unzip” itself, making copies that become the building blocks of all living things. The base pairs — adenine, thymine, guanine and cytosine — became the key in decoding the rungs to this curved ladder. It’s a find that’s almost taken for granted today, but shook up the genetic world over 50 years ago. It also brought fame to its finders — American Watson and British Crick — and the Nobel Prize.

The Science Channel

Published in: on July 6, 2009 at 9:03 am Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , ,

Origins of Modern Gothic Culture

gothicangelGoth is actually much more than the sum of its parts, and, depending on who you ask, you can get a bewildering array of contradictory answers, many of which are valid parts of a much larger subculture. It is more than a label or description. Goth is at once a lifestyle and a philosophy that has its roots firmly embedded both in the historical past and the present.

The central Ideal that characterizes Goth is an almost compulsive drive towards creativity and self-expression that seeks to reach out and ensnare its audience using our current society’s covert but deeply rooted fascination with all things dark and frightening. This act can be either subtle and seducing or nightmarishly terrifying, but it must play on what society secretly knows but cannot acknowledge to itself about its duality. The mediums of self-expression and creation can be anything from a mode of dress to novels or music. Imagination and originality have always been key elements in Goth.

As a lifestyle, Goth is as diversified as its adherents. There really is no true unifying stereotype or dress code as it were. Not all Goths are depressed, nor do they all wear black, listen to the same music, or employ the same modes of self-expression. This tends to make Goth-spotting a little tricky and creates part of the tangled confusion over what it is to begin with, but this diversity also is one of the defining factors.

So how does one identify a real Goth if they are all so different? Now we reach part of the heart of the counterculture! You see, as mentioned earlier, one of Goth’s defining characteristics is the need to take the underlying darkness that is in all of us and bring it into the light in such a way as we can recognize it as what it is – an integral part of all of us, for better or for worse.

To better understand what Goth really is, it is essential to know where it came from. It has been with us for much longer than the label we have given it. This is a subculture that has appeared, flourished, then died, only to rise again in many eras and in many societies. Its adherents have always been the young intellegensia, frustrated and bored by the parent culture. The parent cultures were usually restrictive, highly stratified into rigid caste structures, and intolerant of diversity in schools of art and thought. Because of this, nearly every manifestation of this particular type of counterculture was greeted with suspicion, hostility, and sometimes active aggression on the part of its parent culture. Only rarely was this brand of subculture welcomed and allowed to flourish, as it was during the Italian Renaissance.

Goth, as we currently know it, has its roots in Western Europe and North America during the late seventies and early eighties. The counterculture was, and still is, dominated by dissatisfied youth hailing from the middle classes, which were at that time just entering a new period of prosperous stability. The children of these newly wealthy were left, unlike their parents, with a strong feeling of instability and lack of identity. They were unable to reconcile the new values their society was trying to impress upon them with their newly fragile sense of self. The tightening lines of social restructure were separating them from their accustomed peers in both the upper and lower classes.

Responding to the confusion and theft of identity, a few of the brightest and most creative children of these newly prosperous families began to create their own social structure. It was a counterculture based on a synthesis of historical elements, leaning heavily on dramatic traditions, philosophies, and schools of thought such as were popular in Byronic England, World War Two Germany, and American Beat. They first dubbed themselves the New Romantics, then swiftly settled on Gothic as the counterculture grew and became more stable.

Always more than a little bipolar in nature, Goth split into two distinct factions, one Apollonian and the other Dionysian in its approach, by 1981, when it had reached its peak. Each faction was a personification of the mixed fear and fascination the Goths felt for the darker side of their parents’ legacy of materialism, elitism, and false sense of moral superiority. The difference lay in their ways of expressing their sense of alienation and abandonment.

The more Apollonian faction were mainly concerned with the artistic and philosophical facets of Goth. They were, for the most part, fairly nonconfrontational in their means of self-expression. They were in most cases all but obsessed with the act of creation and the appreciation of literature, art and music. A number of them attempted to legitimize their subculture in the eyes of the parent culture with very little success. Because they were regarded as harmless, if morbid dreamers, they were tolerated.

The more Dionysian faction of Goth passionately embraced the more hedonistic and sometimes self-destructive facets of the movement. Their contributions to Goth were more ephemeral and less easy to define in traditional terms as creativity, but still were vibrant with the haunted, dark spirit of the counterculture. Some of the more prominent Goth musicians and thinkers belonged to this faction. Being more confrontational in their self-expression, they were regarded by the parent culture as dangerous and undesirable.

The modern stereotype of Goth is a twisted caricature of the more Dionysian faction that captures its decadence and tendency towards self-destruction while entirely missing its subtle artistry and depth, not to mention the entire point of Goth as a whole.

By 1987, both factions of Goth had almost completely vanished, absorbed back into the parent culture as their members were forced to accept conformity to ensure individual survival as adults. A marginal percentage of the original Goth community were able to adapt to adult life remaining essentially and visibly true to themselves, while still managing to keep the income necessary to maintain the rising price of living in the style to which they had become accustomed. By this time, the new generation of disaffected youth had already begun to imitate what they perceived of the Dionysian Goths. They had embraced the dark and dangerous style of dress and felt that the lonely, arrogant music was written just for them. The stereotypical lifestyle was adventurous and daring enough to spark their already bored and world-weary imaginations.

The “kindergothen” were met by rejection and almost knee-jerk disapproval by their parent culture and the remainders of the Goth community alike with almost no exceptions. Those few original Goths who tried to embrace the new groups were usually met with cold hostility and anger by those who had already either been rejected by others or had heard of the rejection. The schism between the Olde School and the new was widened even more by the labels of “Poseur” and “Faux Goth” that were bandied between the sides.

By the nineties, the artistry and philosophy that drove the Goth culture had been by and large replaced with attitude, posturing and dress code. The few remaining Olde School Goths and their protégés had gone underground and were not a part of the new rise of Goth, refusing to have much to do with what they considered shallow, inarticulate upstarts that paid too much attention to what the media thought was Goth. They saw the new Goth as little more than a group of image driven drug addicts that had nothing better to offer than a dress code and a bad attitude. The New School’s opinions of the originals wasn’t much better.

In the last few years, both Olde School and New have embraced the Internet. It has become both a medium for self-expression and a battleground between them. Oddly enough, the advent of easy access to the W3 has revealed in the New School an increased drive towards the creativity and self-expression that the Olde School Goths hold in such high esteem. The New School Goths, or Goffs as many of them have begun to call themselves, have become more like the originals than either side of the schism seems to wish to admit. Hopefully this trend will continue to thrive on the Web, bringing fresh blood and a new outlook to Goth’s grasp on the dark undercurrents of our society’s imagination. After all, the sweetest of flowers always did have a tendency to rise from the darkest and least savory of soils.

Azhram, 1997-1998 © Feel free to distribute, mirror, or otherwise reproduce this either in part or in its entirety. I ask nothing but credit for its making. That I will insist on. Strenuously. Last Updated: 04 July 1998

Published in: on July 5, 2009 at 10:49 am Leave a Comment
Tags: ,

Goth With a Sledgehammer

gothWhat is Goth?
Ignoring historical references to European barbarian tribes and architectural, literal and art styles, Goth is a subculture. It started in the late 1970’s both in Europe AND the United States OUTSIDE of the club/music scene. The culture was comprised of INDIVIDUALS with very little in common but their artistic drive, insatiable curiosity, extreme intellectualism, and the socially unacceptable need to be and express themselves. In a nutshell, Goth is very much like 70s Punk with a brain and good manners. (In other words, it shares the underlying feeling of disgust and seperation from normal everyday culture that the 70s Punks espoused, but expresses its alienation and disenchantment with modern society and its values in a more intelligent and less destructive manner.) The label Goth itself is very much a descriptive reference to the literary genre and architectural style both of which characterize and evoke the mood and to a certain degree, mindset that is generally idealized by modern Goth as a cultural group.

How do I become Goth?
I hate to break it to you, but Goth is not something you can just learn. Gothic people grew up that way. Most people do not have the genuine sense of wonder, creativity, talent, open-mindedness, and appreciation of the duality of existence, nor of themselves and their abilities that makes a person genuinely Goth. While some of these things can be learned over the course of years, most of it can only be emulated. To emulate something strongly implies that the action is neither original nor genuine. That is just not Goth.

How do I know if I’m Goth?
This is a VASTLY more reasonable question. It’s sort of odd and sad at the same time that a lot of actual Goths don’t know that they are. This is unfortunately the work of massive media stereotyping and misinformation from ignorant but rather noisy wanna-bes. It seems that the bulk of available information on Goth comes from those two sources. Never mind that.

If most (10 or more) of the following statements are true, it is VERY likely that you are Goth. If the first statement is false, you aren’t Goth. No, not even if all 16 of the rest are true. Of course, you would be readily accepted and most welcome amongst Goths for your strength of individuality and ability to appreciate the culture in general and themselves in particular.

* You feel the need to spend a lot of time creating things (music, art, poetry, philosophies, stories and the like)
* Your creative efforts are often described as dark, shocking, scary, morbid or strange
* You like museums and cultural centers
* You understand and even enjoy Shakespeare, Shelley, Browning or some other similar work without having to read the Cliffe Notes
* You know the difference between nihilism and existentialism, even if you don’t really live by either
* You really, truly enjoy music of many kinds
* You are a very sensual person (aware of color, texture, sound, taste and scent)
* You don’t understand why the people around you spend so much time watching TV
* You don’t feel comfortable looking just like everyone else you know
* You do feel comfortable just being yourself, even if no one else around is anything like you
* You wonder “why” a lot, and come up with some interesting answers
* You wonder “how” a lot, and often figure it out on your own
* You don’t just reject something because you don’t understand it
* You base your opinions of people on who they are and what they do rather than what they look like
* You are not afraid of the unknown
* You are not afraid of the dark
* You are afraid of mediocrity

Laura Lemay says that to be Goth I have to be angsty and wear a lot of black. Is this true?
NO. Black and angst are not necessary to be Goth. True Goth defies stereotyping and does not adhere to dress codes. Too much angst or other negative emotion stifles a person’s ability to learn, think, and create. Most actual Goths are psychologically pretty well-adjusted people. They just have a different set of cultural and social blueprints than your average person. Ms. Lemay knows a lot more about web authoring than she does about Goth, even if she refuses to practice good web design on her own personal site. But she DID get one thing right when she said, “Try not to take yourselves so seriously.” Granted, that’s a little out of context, but it’s good advice just the same.

So, this brings up a whole new can of worms… the most common tidbits of juicy misinformation about Goth. In almost two decades of watching people’s perceptions of Goth, I have found that never has there been so much inaccurate information as there is now. It’s time to break out the hammer and start banging.

Let’s take a look at the most commonly distributed misinformation about Goth, shall we?

Ten Gothic Stereotypes We All Love To Repeat
* All Goths must wear black. Color is not Goth.
* Goth is a subculture based on a musical style.
* All Goths listen to the same music.
* All Goths are fixated on death.
* All Goths drink a lot/do drugs.
* Goth came from the hippie movement.
* Goths don’t laugh except to mock others.
* Goths all have tattoos and piercings.
* Goths always wear a lot of makeup.
* Goth and Freak are interchangeable terms for the same culture.

I know that a lot of so-called “Goth” people accept these things to be facts. I see it on the Web and I see it on what passes for a scene. I also know that this list of statements and quite a few others like them are just so much bull****. So what is the truth? Here, let’s go back through that list and correct things, eh? You might be surprised, or you might be another Olde Schooler, in which case, you’ll be greatly amused.

All Goths must wear black. Color is not Goth.
I can see where this one might have some heavy support, since the scene is filled with cookie-cutter, black clad people who generally avoid the few daring individuals who might wear white, or gods forbid *gasp!* include color in their wardrobe. This lack of individualism strongly suggests to someone who doesn’t really understand Goth that we have a uniform look or worse, that we are conformists. What people fail to grasp is that most people on the Goth scene are either skin-Goths (poseurs), demi-Goths (people who might make fine Goths if they could just get over what other people thought of them) or second and third generation Goths who just honestly never had any contact with other Goths who knew what the movement is all about. This is one of the things that created the paradox of a culture that was based on individualism and creativity but just the same had a rigid conformist dress code. Truth is, Goth is rabidly individualistic and we wear whatever we d*** well please. Color is not an exception. You just don’t recognize us when you see us outside of the stereotype.

Goth is a subculture based on a musical style.
I can also see how a lot of people might get this impression. A lot of otherwise decent sources of information on Goth and its more recent history offer this myth up to us as fact. It may even very well be part of the truth for some Gothic orgins in some parts of the world, but it is predated by the emergence of Goth as culture rather than Goth as musical genre in America (at the very least). The media (read record labels and associated musical rags) started this, and I find it disgusting that so many people feel the need to perpetuate this myth that the musical genre started Goth as opposed to Goth starting the genre. Many sources including the Usenet’s alt.gothic group even go so far as to say that the actual cultural origins of Goth were a later fable added after the supposedly music-based trend happened. This is absolutely false. Before there was a so-called Goth sound, we had dropped the title of New Romantics and firmly settled on calling ourselves Gothic. The culture pre-dates the musical genre by a good two years. I should know. I was there. Honest.

All Goths listen to the same music.
Yah. Sure we do. Actually that’s not highly likely. Even the skin-Goths have a semi-diverse musical taste. This is one of those ridiculous stereotypes that is glued onto every single culture that exists. It is true of none of them, and is just as untrue for Goths. I won’t waste any more breath on this one.

All Goths are fixated on death.
Okay people. Repeat after me: Goth is not about death. Good. Now go to your local institution of higher learning and enroll in art history and English lit classes. Learn about symbolism and metaphor. Maybe take a few philosophy classes. This stereotype is usually caused by being uneducated or ignorant. Goths are by and large more fixated on the concept of beauty as an abstract, creative endeavors (both their own and those of historical origins) and simply trying to get ahead in a society that doesn’t share their individual aesthetics, values and principals. If you have a decent fine arts education, an ounce of perceptiveness and know the difference between a real Goth and a skin-Goth, you know that Goth, while often dark and eerie, is NOT obsessed with death. Regular American culture is.

All Goths drink a lot/do drugs.
I realize that this is a pretty deeply ingrained idea about Gothic culture, but it’s wrong. Goths are not all completely cleancut, sqeaky-clean sober types, but we aren’t all into drugs. Granted, most young people go through an experimental stage with sex and drugs, and the bulk of Goth is made up of young people, but let’s face it, Goths don’t do any more drugs than your average person. Drugs aren’t a requirement in being Goth, even if there are a lot of irresponsible people out on the scene who are hellbent on telling you otherwise. We have a word for those types. Maybe you’ve heard it… Junkie. Just remember Goth does not equal Junkie.

Goth came from the hippie movement.
This is more media stereotyping. It is also completely false. Goth has nothing to do with the hippie movement. There are no similarities either. Alt.culture has a really interesting but completely inaccurate write-up on Goth that mentions this, and people are entirely too fond of repeating this rancid little tidbit of misinformation. I’d like to say STOP IT right now. Just cut it out. Goth came from neither Hippie nor Punk. If it came from anything at all, it was a new outlook on Beat.

Goths don’t laugh except to mock others.
This is just too pretentious. I’ve been a Goth for two decades and I spend a lot of time laughing at a lot of things that have nothing to do with the misfortunes or lack of taste of others. I am not the exception. Most Goths have a well-developed sense of humor that is really quite healthy. Certainly we don’t all laugh at the same things or make the same kinds of jokes, but that is a given, isn’t it? It seems that a huge number of people that claim to be Goth also claim that we don’t share in the common human arena of emotion, but common sense alone should tell you that this is, like so many other things, a posturing load of unmitigated bull. Yes, I know that there are flocks of people who claim to be Goth that will demonstrate personally and in the most uncomfortable fashion that we are nasty, sociopathic bastards who live to laugh at your misfortunes and will excuse their unacceptable behavior by claiming that it’s the Goth way of acting. I’m sure you’ve seen them in IRC and Usenet and that they seem to be the unpleasant majority, but if you take a few minutes to think, it may become apparent that at least online there are entirely too many people claiming to be something other than they are and that people in general (online and off) are frightfully nasty towards one another if they feel that they can get away with it. Sure, we Goths have a different view of things socially, but then again, so do the Japanese, and no one accuses them of not ever laughing non-maliciously. Do they?

Goths all have tattoos and piercings.
More stereotyping. Tattoos and piercings have become very trendy these days. Stereotypical Goth has also become very trendy. So you are going to see a lot of skin-Goths running around with a lot of very obvious tattoos and piercings. You will also see a lot of Ravers, Rednecks, Indie Kids and other people who have nothing to do with Goth running around with tattoos and piercings a-go-go. You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to deduce that one. Just remember, Goths are individuals. We will do what we think looks right on us, and if having no ink or metal imbedded in our skin feels right, we will do with or without and still be indisputably Goth.

Goths always wear a lot of weird or scary makeup.
No, not at all. This, again, goes back to the central idea that Goths are individuals and all exercise their own judgment on how they feel like looking. Sure, makeup is pretty cool, and its application can be a fun pre-outing ritual, but again, it is far from necessary.

Goth and Freak are interchangeable terms for the same culture.
This is ridiculous. It is almost as silly as saying that grunge kids and rednecks are the same cultural group. Sure, there may be some similarities in the stereotypical outward appearance to the grossly unobservant or the painfully ignorant, but it is still radically untrue. Anyone who would ever mistake one for the other after observing for a few minutes is either blind, high, or completely unaware of the actual social and ideological dynamics of both groups. I am thinking that if we are going to continue to live in a society that needs to categorize, stereotype and label, that perhaps we should more carefully analyze the people and things we are labeling before we slap a name on them. Don’t just call someone something because they look a certain way. Visual stereotyping is a terribly inaccurate method for classifying people in real practice these days. Most often you will be wrong, and vastly poorer for it.

*Hefts the sledgehammer and grins*

So, hopefully some of this has made some sort of impact on some of you. Maybe you might even be a little more interested in Goth as a culture and individual Goths as people with something more meaningful and valuable to contribute to both society in general and yourself in particular than bad attitude, poor taste and drugs. Who knows, you might even realize that you are Goth. Or that the black-wearing scary kids who have been giving you a hard time because you can’t recite every album produced by Christian Death before Valor took over aren’t anything but trendies, bullies or jocks.

Or maybe not. Maybe you ARE one of those T B or Js, trying to impress your loser friends by pretending to be something exotic that you don’t understand. In that case, you are probably gearing up to flame my uppity self. Go right ahead, but be warned: I am not easily embarrassed, frightened, or hurt. And I give as good as I get. So take your best shot and pray that I decide to ignore you.

Either way, I’ve said what I needed to say. It’s time to hop off of the soapbox and pray I land feet-first again. This rant is over. Stay beautiful, stay graceful, and stay you.

Azhram, 1997-1998 © Feel free to distribute, mirror, or otherwise reproduce this either in part or in its entirety. I ask nothing but credit for its making. That I will insist on. Strenuously. Last Updated: 04 July 1998

Published in: on July 4, 2009 at 10:47 am Leave a Comment
Tags: , , ,

The Cyber-Gospel of the Matrix: Part II – Processing

gospelThe Matrix is a modern cyber-parable of the Christian gospel – the Good News that although this world sometimes seems hopeless and meaningless, there is another world we can reach out for. In Part One of this analysis, we saw Neo come to the place where he had to choose which world he would live in – the dream world or the real world:

“This is your last chance, Neo,” warns Morpheus. “After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill, the story ends. You wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.” Neo takes the red pill and begins the process of Awakening.

As Neo’s conversion begins, he sees a mirror, with a fractured reflection of himself. As he gazes into the mirror, it becomes clear and he sees an unfractured portrait of himself. He reaches out and touches it and it takes him over. The reflection becomes him, so that no matter what part of him he looks at, he sees himself. In the Bible, Paul says “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I shall know fully, just as I also have been fully known” (1 Corinthians 13:12). Neo begins to see himself clearly for the first time. He sees his sin – the cracks in his facade, but he also senses the beginning of the healing process – the cracks are already disappearing. As Neo’s conversion begins, he becomes aware that he now has the capacity to look honestly at himself.

Now Neo literally begins the process of being born again. As he’s jacked in and dialed out, he wakes up in a womb-like tank, connected to numerous tubes which have been spoon-feeding him the bare essentials to live, but also sucking the life out of him (and millions of others) to feed the energy of the Machine. He is freed from the tubes, ejected from the “womb” and flushed down a tunnel (birth canal) and deposited (baptized) in a pool, which washes off the gunk of his former existence, and also virtually drowns him.

As Paul says, “Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? We have been buried with Him through baptism in death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life” (Romans 6: 3-4). Baptism is the symbol that we have put to death our old life, and we rise out of the water into a new life, a new reality, a new Kingdom. Neo’s dream-like existence is now dead, and unconscious of what he is about to experience and become, he is lifted up into in the light, into a new world, a new consciousness, as a new man. He is no longer Thomas Anderson (the name the Matrix gave him), but truly Neo – born anew.

As Neo wakes to the new world, at first he is confused and disoriented. He is helpless as a baby. He must learn to walk again. His muscles (his will) have atrophied and must be stimulated to work as they should. His senses are so sensitive, it’s painful to use them: “Why do my eyes hurt?” he asks. “Because you’ve never used them before,” replies Morpheus. Neo has been awakened, but he must learn to function again. He must learn to feel and walk and run, and to truly see the world around him for the first time. And this will take training. At first Neo’s new world seems rather UN-real to him, and he begins to doubt that he has entered a new world at all. “This can’t be…” he begins to protest. “Be what?” Morpheus responds. “Be real? How do you define real? If you’re talking about what you can feel and smell and taste and see, then real is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain. This is the world you knew… it exists now only as part of the neural-interactive simulation we call the Matrix. You’ve been living in a dream world, Neo. THIS is the real world. Welcome to the Desert of the Real!”

What Neo sees is a post-apocalytic scene of dark destruction. The surface of the planet has been completely devastated. Man has virtually destroyed the “real” world – the only way they can make it tolerable is to live in a dream world, a fantasy of success and comfort. Ultimately, Neo must face the truth of his devastated life, before he can hope to restore the desert of his soul to any semblance of real life. This is why Jesus says, “I came that you might have life, and have it more abundantly” (John 10:10).

Morpheus begins to train/disciple Neo. His training takes place on the Nebuchadnezzar – a ship named after a pagan king who became a believer once his dreams were properly interpreted to him. He is being trained to return to the Matrix. Like the disciples at the Transfiguration of Christ (Matthew 17), it is tempting to cling to a state of spiritual euphoria. As much as we may want to move straight to heaven (Zion), we must first complete our destiny in the world. We are disciplined and trained to fulfill our destiny and the will of God – which is to find and rescue others from the Matrix. Back into the world we must go.

Morpheus takes Neo to a simulated training matrix to teach him how to move in the Matrix (the world) again. “None of this is real. It is a basic construct like the Matrix. Your hair, your clothes – they are what we call a ‘residual self-image’- it is how you saw yourself in the dream world, the Matrix,” explains Morpheus. Many of us come into the Kingdom with this residual self-image – old tapes of who we believed we were, with all the limitations and doubts and fears and failures. If we are going to succeed as new creatures (2 Corinthians 5:17), we must learn to refashion that image and see ourselves as God sees us – with all the gifts and potential and destiny He gave us and intends us to use.

After Neo fills his head with the basic training manual (the Bible), he wakes up to a startling revelation: “I know Kung Fu!” This is not ordinary combat – this is not ordinary warfare. Neo is learning spiritual warfare (Ephesians 6). He must learn to operate in the Matrix without being bound by its laws – of gravity, time, materialism, or power. He must learn to be “in the world, but not of it” (John 17). This is what Paul meant when he said, “For though we walk in the flesh (the Matrix), we do not war according to the flesh (the Matrix), for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh (the Matrix), but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses/the pulling down of strongholds” (tearing down false constructs – the Matrix) (2 Corinthians 10:3-4).

Neo begins to learn a number of lessons about life in this new reality. He must learn not to let his old reality limit his new one. “I am trying to free your mind, Neo. But all I can do is open the door. You have to walk through it.” We cannot inherit anyone else’s faith. We cannot simply live on the expectationsof others for the rest of our lives. We must experience God for ourselves. We must grow ourselves and become Christ-like in our own way, at our own pace. “Were you looking at me, Neo? Or were you looking at the woman in the red dress?” Like Peter when he walked on the water, but was distracted by the waves (Matthew 14:25-33), Neo has some faith – he even begins to walk on water (defying gravity and time in the training room). But the bright, sensual attractions of the world can still distract him from his spiritual focus and power. The key to discipleship is discipline. And certain disciplines cannot be dispensed with, if we are to survive spiritually in the Matrix.

Although Neo is superbly gifted, he cannot make the leap of faith that is required of him during his first test. Although he has already taken great strides, his fears keep him from going as far as he is capable. (The fear of heights he experienced earlier in the movie still plagues him.) Faith does not come from acknowledging the possibility of faith. It comes from living and experiencing faith in the crucible of life. Believing is not merely mental assent or wishful thinking. This is not the Little Train That Could. Believing is knowing. And Neo does not yet know.

One final thing Morpheus imparts to Neo is his role and his destiny. Morpheus believes that Neo is the One. “The Oracle prophesied His return, that His coming would hail the destruction of the Matrix, end the war, and bring freedom to our people. That is why there are those of us who have spent our entire lives searching the Matrix, looking for Him. I believe that search is over….” As in our world, the Oracle (the prophets, the Scriptures) predicts the coming of a Messiah that will free people from the slavery of the Matrix. But we must find the One.

So Neo is brought to the Oracle to see if he is the One. He is brought into a room with other ‘potentials’. They seem to represent other religions/philosophies: a Euro/American girl, two Jewish girls, a child reading an Arabic (Muslim?) book, and a Hindu/Buddhist/Zen boy who tells him: “You can’t bend the spoon. That’s impossible. Instead, try to realize the Truth.” “What Truth?” Neo asks. “There is no spoon,” the child replies. The fact that this is too Zen for some, does not remove it from the actuality that there is a metaphysical element to true spirituality, and to true Christianity. To ignore this, is to give in to the deception of our old life in the Matrix.

The Oracle seems to confirm Neo’s reservation that he is not the One. “Being the One is like being in love. No-one can tell you you’re in love. You just know it, through and through, balls to bone.” Neo is told he has the gift, but he seems to be waiting for something. At some point, he will have to make a choice between his life and Morpheus’ life. “One of you is going to die. Which one, will be up to you. I hate giving good people bad news. But don’t worry about it. As soon as you step outside that door, you’ll start feeling better. You’ll remember you don’t believe in any of this fate crap. You’re in control of your own life. Here, have a cookie….”

Discovering Neo’s true destiny and his role in his new world occupies the rest of the film – and proves to be his greatest adventure. He is also going to learn about the Agents – the Enemy – the demons of the Matrix. But what he thinks he knows about them is nothing, until he actually encounters them face to face. That is the focus of Part Three: Access Complete.

Dave Hart of Sanctuary

The Cyber-Gospel of the Matrix: Part I – The Construct

matrixcodeI think I would have been more surprised by the premise of this film if I had not been sitting in a psychology class back in 1979, listening to some pre-alternative type questioning his existence. “How do we know what’s real and what’s not? I’m not sure I actually even exist. Lately, I’ve been feeling like I’m part of someone else’s dream!”

The popularization of drugs and Eastern mysticism in the ’60s seems to have opened America up to exploring alternative realities as a cultural preoccupation. In the past 30-35 years, there has been a growing cynicism about government conspiracies and cover-ups; disenchantment with science as our messiah (cloning); paranoia about the prominence of computers in our lives (Y2K) and aliens who walk among us (”Trust no one!”); and a deepening nihilism that’s been given emotional context in the music of everyone from Nirvana to Nine Inch Nails. The world was ripe for a film that seems to challenge our very existence and asks us to throw away our dreams. Oh, well. I don’t listen to the messages in these movies, anyway. I just go for the special effects.

The Matrix (from the Latin word for “womb”) opens in Room 303, with the police converging on some kind of lone-gunman computer hacker. The film offers that sparse, bleak ambience used to convey the sterility of the cyber-industrial future in every movie from Aliens to Dark City. (This film adds blue and green textures to the usual shades of brown and grey, to make it a bit more interesting to the eye.) The Men in Black show up, claiming the hacker is more dangerous than the police understand. What follows is a get-away by the hacker (whose name turns out to be Trinity) that seems to defy time and gravity in ways that leave us concluding that she is an alien or from the future. Neither conclusion is exactly correct, but both are not far from the truth. The scene ends with us shaking our heads, not quite understanding what we’ve just seen, or why, or whether Trinity escaped or was smashed into a bloodless oblivion. Patience. The mysteries will be revealed.

We are then introduced to Neo, an independent computer pirate (played by the usually lifeless Keanu Reeves – either he’s becoming a better actor, or the film was so good, even he couldn’t detract from it!) Neo is being drawn to meet a mysterious underground figure named Morpheus. The Men in Black (called “Agents”) get to him first, but Trinity and the crew rescue him and bring him to Morpheus. Neo is then told his world is not real, and they can help him escape his unseen prison. Neo chooses to join them, and is instructed in living life in a bleak, but free, alternative universe. Morpheus is convinced that Neo is the One, some kind of Messiah that will deliver all the dreamers from their sleep and destroy the fabric of the Matrix, but no-one else seems quite certain, including Neo.

Despite betrayal by a character named Cypher, Neo leads a phenomenal special-effects laden mission to rescue Morpheus from the Agents. Everyone gets out, except Neo, who ends up in a show-down, battling an Agent who just won’t die; running for his life, and returning to Room 303, he catches a bullet in the chest and dies. But, surprise! Trinity’s love brings him back, at which point, he fully realizes his potential and blows away the bad guys. Neo IS the One, after all. The movie ends as he begins his mission to set the captives free from the Matrix.

I’ve heard numerous comments and assessments of the film: great special effects; a rip-off of Geiger’s art-form or Gibson’s cyber-punk ideas; interesting social-political implications; great special effects; Trinity was cool; couldn’t sit through a movie with Keanu Reeves in it; great special effects! Somehow, I always see more. [And whether it's actually there, I put it there, or God put it there for me... well, that's just another way to question the reality of my existence, I suppose.] In this case, I saw a cyber-industrial parable of the gospel that has already led me to see the film three times in less than a month – something I didn’t even do with Star Wars!

The Matrix is a metaphor (a parable) for the contrasting realities of the material world and the spiritual realm (which we call the Kingdom of God). We are first led in this direction by the interesting use of names: Trinity (obvious); Zion (the last human city – salvation); Neo (new, born-again, or first-born); the ship is called the Nebuchadnezzar (a pagan king who became a believer through the proper understanding of his dreams); Morpheus (the Greek god of dreams); Cypher (meaning zero, empty, a person of no significance, a non-entity).

Trinity reflects a number of Godly qualities (strength, assurance, faith, loyalty, grace and love), but in her first meeting with Neo, she represents a disciple of God – a witness – who builds trust with him by sharing the experience (testimony) they hold in common: “I know why you’re alone, Neo. And why night after night, you sit by your computer. You’re looking for Him. I know, because I was once looking for the same thing. And when He found me, He told me I wasn’t really looking for Him. I was looking for an Answer. It’s the question that drives us mad. You know the question, just as I did. (Neo: “What is the Matrix?”) The answer is out there, Neo. It’s looking for you. And it will find you. You know it.” Morpheus often fills the role of God, the Holy Spirit – the teacher, the enlightener, the comforter. He takes the Search one step further: “You may have spent the last few years looking for Me, Neo. But I’ve spent my entire life looking for you. Are you still looking, Neo? (Neo: “Yes.”) Then go to the Adam(s) Street Bridge….”

Neo is a Seeker. In fact, when we first see John Anderson (Neo), his computer is on search mode. He is drawn to Morpheus, whom he has never seen. Like all true Seekers, Neo is looking for more from life than the empty existence he has experienced so far. And although he is a bit of a misfit, a rebel, and a sceptic, deep down he is searching for the Truth. What is the Matrix? What is the meaning of Life? What is his purpose? What is the point?

His compulsion is explained and confirmed by Trinity. She is a Seeker too, but she’s found her Answer. Or rather, it found her. And she gives Neo hope that he will find his Answer, as well. The goal of the true disciple/witness is not to force the Gospel on the unsuspecting or unwilling, but to seek out the Seekers, and confirm to them that their search is not in vain.

Jesus is the answer, but He knows that every one is asking the question in their own way. Morpheus emphasizes that the search is actually prompted by God. We may be seeking Him. But He is searching for us, like the Father in the story of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11 ff). We seek, because He first sought us. We love, because He first loved us (1 John 4). Neo gets a call from Morpheus warning him that the Agents are closing in on him. As long as he listens to Morpheus, he succeeds in eluding his captors. But he is frozen by his fear of the heights, of the difficulty, and of the apparent flimsiness of the scaffold (the Cross) to save him. He drops the phone, loses his connection, and falls into the hands of the Enemy.

Gracefully, God is persistent and patient with us. Neo gets another chance, if he will meet Trinity at the Adam(s) Street Bridge – the foot of the Cross, the nexus of the cross-roads in his life. This is the place where God offers a bridge between Man (Adam) and Himself. But Neo is treated a bit roughly – the Gospel is harder than he anticipates. And he wants to back out. Trinity stops him with this warning: “You don’t want to go down that road again, Neo. You know exactly where it ends. And I know that’s not where you wanna be.” Like the Israelites, Neo is tempted to return to Egypt as soon as things get a bit rough. But in his heart of hearts, he knows there is nothing back there for him. Trinity and the disciples then help Neo remove a bug from his system. He is surprised to find the bug is real. He thought it was just a product of his imagination. Like sin, it became so much a part of him, he didn’t even know it was there.

Neo finally meets Morpheus face to face, and is confronted with the difficult Truth of his reality. Trinity warns him to be honest. It is the only way to really hear God. Morpheus proceeds to tell Neo what he has been trying to get at in his seeking: “Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know, you can’t explain. But you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life – that there’s something wrong with the world. You don’t know what it is, but it’s there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that’s brought you to Me. Do you know what I’m talking about?” (Neo: “The Matrix?”)

“Do you want to know what it is? The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window, or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the Truth. (Neo: “What Truth?”) That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else, you were born into bondage – born into a prison that you cannot smell or taste or touch. A prison for your mind.”

This is the heart of the gospel. We are NOT alright. The world is not alright. Something is terribly wrong and it drives us mad trying to get at it. The world is not what it seems. We are not what we ought to be. We are living in a dream, a delusion, and we are slaves to the deception. We cannot wake ourselves from the nightmare, but if we are willing to take the risk to face the Truth, He will wake us up to a new world. Like Neo, each of us must make a choice. Neo is offered a blue pill that will allow him to return to his delusions, or a red pill that will change his life forever.

“This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill, the story ends. You wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.”

Neo takes the red pill. He is not sure what lies ahead. But he is certain he does not want what he’s left behind. What choice will we make? To sleep? Or to live?

Dave Hart of Sanctuary

Post-Romantic Romance: Guy Gavriel Kay’s Tigana and A Song for Arbonne

ggkayJudged by any of the standard genre definitions, Guy Gavriel Kay’s Tigana is high fantasy, but A Song for Arbonne is not: it is a hybrid, a meta-fantasy bred from the root stock of nineteenth century historical romance, and crossed with late twentieth century cynicism about the politics of art, sexuality, and religion. Kay’s subversion of the innocent tropes of High Fantasy began in The Fionavar Tapestry with a very non-traditional interpretation of the sexual politics of the Arthur, Guinevere, Lancelot triangle, set within what would otherwise have been a conventionally structured fantasy trilogy. In Tigana, the structure of high fantasy remains, but the emphasis is directed towards a direct analysis of the human aspects of sexual and religious machination in a dangerous world whose politicians may wield superhuman power. There is no magic in A Song for Arbonne, where the fantasy structure is self-reflexive, and the gods have been further distanced both by the historically grounded setting and the absolute human focus on the political permutations of sex and religion.

Since it is a truth universally acknowledged that historical fiction, fantasy, and science fiction all employ essentially the same methodology, extrapolating from close research the details that bestow plausibility upon fictionally re/created cultures beyond the immediate experience of the reader, this hybrid form does not signal a major shift in approach. The change is one of emphasis.

Both Tigana and A Song for Arbonne reflect the late twentieth century sense of innocence lost. This is an inherently ironic position for the writer of high fantasy, arguably the most romantic of the speculative genres. It is a position that derives, at least in part, from a recognition that the Romantic belief in the essential value of human identity, the keystone of countless quest fantasies, has been eroded, in the latter part of this century, by the pervasive construction of an individual subjectivity that no longer expects transcendence. Kay’s fictional worlds are inhabited by urbane adults: Line by line, he maintains the sentence structure, the ambience, the style of nineteenth century romance, yet he repudiates the cosy certainties and overt patterning of much current fantasy in order to concentrate on extrapolation of some quite caustic ideas concerning political, social, and sexual power, particularly as these relate to the arts.

This increasing sophistication is most evident in the changing representation of the belief systems of Kay’s created worlds, which show a clear progression from myth through faith to religion. In mythic Fionavar, there is a universe of Homeric interaction between gods and mortals. In Tigana, there is a less naive world where, although the gods are yet present, and may occasionally intercede for their worshippers, there is also overt political manipulation of myth for purely secular purposes – as occurs, for example, in the Ring Dive of Dianora. In A Song for Arbonne, the gods remain completely off stage in a world where religion has replaced faith, and the clergy of opposing organizations deal in the artificial manipulation of the laity through carefully designed theatre which reinforces political positions – we learn, for example, that the ‘arrow of the goddess’, “crimson dyed, fletched with crimson owl feathers” [p.512] which flew arching through the sky to kill the debauched king Ademar in the midst of battle, was in fact the product of a little pre-emptive religious engineering by Beatritz, High Priestess of Rian.

The secondary world of Tigana is a true world of High Fantasy, with its own geography, religion, politics and social systems. The story is set in the various provinces of a land mass known as the Palm, together with its nearby islands. It encompasses a highly developed pre-technological civilization, and although its complex social structure is overtly reminiscent of Renaissance Italy, it is also a world in which magic functions as a part of the natural order, and is accepted as a matter of course by those who live with it. As with all natural resources, the human value ascribed to magic in Tigana can be measured in political and social terms: it exists in direct correlation with the psychological strength of those who are able to harness it, responding, impartially, to the will of the wielder. In Fionavar, magic is externalised in talismanic objects which function as symbolic signifiers of association with the gods of the fictional world. This is not the case in Tigana, where the two groups of magic users, sorcerers and wizards, are vying for secular power. Sorcerers, concerned with politics, are able to access an inner strength that is used, primarily, for controlling the minds of others: they dominate the Palm, ruling through force and fear, dealing in death. Brandin, for example, whose personal sorcery gives him almost god-like power, places a spell of exile over an entire province, and is shown holding a hostage in a ‘mind and body lock’, and using his ability to alter perceptions as a military weapon of terror. Opposed to the sorcerers are wizards, who wield a more constructive social power for healing and shape-changing, drawing their strength from the land itself: in order to gain full power, they sever the two little fingers of the left hand in a ritual binding to the earth that re-shapes the anatomy to mirror the geographical shape of the Peninsula of the Palm.

In A Song for Arbonne, Kay has moved firmly into historical fantasy, depicting a civilization drawn directly from the identifiable world of the medieval Provence of the troubadours, with emphasis upon the social intricacies of the Court of Love. This is a world of political power struggles between cultures with opposing religious codifications. There are no wizards or sorcerers, though there remains a vestigial idea of human access to superhuman power through the personal sacrifice of physical maiming, represented by the traditional blinding of the High Priestess of Rian to gain ‘inner sight’ [as also occurs, for example, in David Zindell's Neverness]. Even this has been reduced to an optional ritual, reinstated by Beatritz in a bid to touch the receding power of the goddess: her blinding has granted her a power of very limited use – visions are true, but clear only within the boundaries of the sacred island. The political uses of such religious customs are never far from the surface. This ritual blinding is cruelly parodied by Galbert, the fanatical high priest of Corannos, who tortures, maims and blinds Arbonne’s beloved troubadours in a most unmagical act of precursive psychological warfare.

One of the hallmarks of High Fantasy is the fictional validity of the tenets that underpin the world in which the characters move and act, and one of the most difficult areas in which to achieve this is the system of religious belief that guides the imagined society. In Tigana, the political and social structures are informed by the pervasive religious beliefs of the various inhabitants of the fantasy world. Kay’s mythology is complex: a conflation of myths modified to make contextual sense. The world of Tigana has two moons [a silver and a blue] and one sun, complemented by a triadic religion of two goddesses and one god – Eanna, Morian and Adaon, respectively ruling sky, underworld, and sea – Eanna of the stars, Morian of portals, goddess of the dead, and Adaon of the waves. The basic belief is that humankind was created from the initial incestuous union of divine mother/sister and brother.

The mythological basis for Tigana’s Triad recalls the story of the love of the mother-goddess Ishtar for the youthful Tammuz, whose yearly death and resurrection revives the natural world. In Greek mythology, this is the story of Adonis, beloved of both Aphrodite and Persephone and shared between them, until his death while hunting a boar. This has been further conflated with the story of Actaeon, whom the moon-goddess Artemis turned into an antlered stag to be hunted to death by his hounds – a myth which is itself one of the many variations on the ritual fate of the Horned King. The association of the Triad with fertility rites is spelled out in Adaon’s ritual death, occurring annually in the traditionally observed Ember Days of autumn: here, the god is slain on his mountain as the promise of spring to come, reborn to be again beloved of the moon-goddesses.

The religious observances of the Triad are part of the very fabric of life in the world of Tigana, and are inextricably bound up with the politics of power. The various interpretations of the death of Adaon are a case in point. If the celebration has evolved into a symbolic foot race in cultured Chiara, its observance is more literal elsewhere: in the matriarchal province of Quileia, the variation on the myth in which Artemis took a yearly consort who became the Oak king, ritually sacrificed at the end of his term of office, has been specifically re-enacted. A major political and social change occurs when one Marius, having overcome his attackers in the Oak Grove for the seventh time in succession, despite his ritual maiming, has decided that: Seven is sacred… By allowing him this latest triumph the Mother Goddess has made known her will. Marius has just declared himself King in Quileia, no longer only the consort of the High Priestess. [p.37] This shifts the sexual balance of power associated with the province’s religious affiliations: “I thought [comments one character] they had a matriarchy there.” “So [replies his interlocutor] did the late High Priestess.” [p.37] This is an action of the utmost political consequence in the text, and crucial to the military strategy of Alessan and his allies against the sorcerer Brandin.

Although the text of A Song for Arbonne maintains the structural fiction of Tigana’s solar system, the triadic mythology has been replaced by the more orthodox medieval dialectic opposition of female and male principles, represented by the life-giving mother goddess, Rian, sacred in Arbonne, and the life-denying war god Corannos, worshipped in Gorhaut. Again the method is one of conflation: the female associations with fertility and gathering of the dead are telescoped into the representation of Arbonne’s goddess, Rian, whose name is a linguistic diminution of Tigana’s Morian. Again, the emphasis here is more overtly historical. Kay’s alignment of the cult of the troubadours, exponents of ideal earthly love, with the worship of Rian as avatar of transcendent idealized love, places Arbonne’s official religion in the position of the Cathars, whose Church of Love was founded on the feminine principle, the mother of Logos. In this way the depiction of Rian resembles the historical appropriation of the fertility aspect of Artemis with the role of Mother as intercessor for the dead, evident in some medieval worship of the Virgin Mary as she was adored in the rituals of courtly love: themselves influenced by Sufist representations of the idealized Garden of Love.

Opposed to the music of “goddess ruled Arbonne” is Gorhaut, whose official religion is that of the masculine god Corannos – a conflation of the warrior cult of Mithras with dour Christian piety into a priesthood dedicated to the destruction of any form of female power. Historically, Gorhaut is aligned with the position of medieval Rome, whose distrust of the intellectual freedom and female power of the Courts of Love led to the accusations of Albigensian heresy, and thence to a bloody crusade of persecution that wiped out the offending female centered courts – whose passing was mourned in the lyrics of the troubadour Sicard de Marjevols.

In Kay’s Arbonne, the symbolic uses of mythology have also become, appropriately for this society, much more stylized. Rian is associated with both moons, represented in devices such as the crescent knives carried by her priestesses, and in her sacred owl of wisdom: but she is also associated with the civilized warmth of Arbonne, as patron of its music, its courtly festivals and its olive groves. Corannos, however, is associated only stylistically with the sun – in the heraldic device of the kings of Gorhaut – he is the unforgiving god of the cold, hard northern men who seek to overrun the warmer lands of the south. The opening attack in this invasion is indicative of the obsessive hatred of Rian that drives Gorhaut’s High Priest of Corannos to destroy an unarmed village: “Three guardsmen in a tower, a hamlet of shepherds and farmers, eight priestesses raped and set on fire. A scourging of the god.” [p.354]

I should probably confess, at this point, that Guy Kay and I disagree about the detail of this reading. He maintains that, while Gorhaut is single-mindedly masculine in character, Arbonne represents a healthy duality in the worship of both female and male deities. I am sympathetic to this narrative intention, but my close reading of the text does not confirm it. Corannos is included in Arbonne, but in a very minor way: there is only one shrine, functioning as a plot device in the story of Blaise; and although children here have godparents representing both deities, Rian is supreme in Arbonne. This dichotomy is constantly reiterated in the textual patterning: Corannos’ men rule Gorhaut, Rian’s women rule Arbonne. The authorial intention is that Gorhaut should eventually return to societal health through reintegration with Arbonne, each state containing both male and female elements. But the strength of Kay’s representations of the struggle between the sexes in the course of the novel is such that the political balance achieved by the ultimate arranged marriage between Blaise and Rinette suggests a more traditional sexual union between male and female principles, resulting in a different kind of symbolic reunion.

A further indication of Kay’s movement from the mythic towards historical fantasy can be found in the ways in which the triadic structures of Tigana are resolved into a more conventional narrative dualism in A Song for Arbonne. In Tigana, the triadic religion is complemented by the three main strands of narrative action that are plaited into the tale – the storylines cross, touching briefly, each following its own logic, always being woven towards a single outcome. In A Song for Arbonne, the narrative is focused upon the balanced tensions between the male and female gods and upon the two resulting sets of opposing political intrigue. Both tales are concerned with political power struggles between nations, but differ markedly in the ways in which these tensions interact with religious power: in Tigana, the tyrant-tyrant Brandin is the central figure, and the squabbling sub-sects of the different religious orders devoted to the three deities of the Triad are exploited by secular leaders; in Arbonne, the position is reversed, as Galbert, the Machiavellian High Priest of Corannos, controls both the weak King Ademar and his court, manipulating the political action in the name of the god and forcing Arbonne to respond in defence of its lands and its goddess.

This shift in narrative patterning is also evident in characterisation. In Tigana, the protagonists are linked with particular deities, and their fates reflect the aspects of the Triad that they themselves have invoked. Alessan, Prince of Tigana, is descended in direct masculine line from the god Adaon: he is directly associated with Adaon in his role as the hunted stag king; he plays, with consummate skill, the Tregean pipes sacred to the god; he has inherited the right to be king when Brandin’s death releases his land, and so is able to use the gift of Adaon to bind Erlein the wizard to his service. Brandin is also associated with Adaon, but by choice rather than by inheritance: In choosing to run the Chiaran race of Mt. Sangarios on the first of the Spring Ember Days, Brandin has identified himself as the human incarnation of Adaon, to be slain for the land’s better thriving next autumn. This prefigures his death at the autumn battle that frees Tigana to be regenerated by Alessan, the next of the Adaon kings.

The association of power with sexual politics is strong in both books. In Tigana, it is linked with those who follow the gods Morian and Adaon, who know of death and corruption. The strongest of the sexual politicians is Brandin, whose prowess is legendary in the saishan. His chosen lady Dianora is a dark beauty whose name identifies her closely with the moon-goddess Diana: she follows the path of Morian, death aspect of the goddess. Dianora is herself a politician of consummate skill, acting smoothly within a courtly atmosphere of deadly intrigue. Her incestuous relationship with her brother Baerd mirrors the action of the Triad goddesses, and her intention to redeem Tigana by killing Brandin results in her path toward both death and dark sexual experience. She submits herself to prostitution to earn her living until she is captured for Brandin’s saishan by Rhamanus [recalling Rhadamanthus, one of the judges of Hades]; and her fate is sealed when, by finally admitting her love for Brandin, she adopts the one course of action that will lead to his death. Dianora is the only protagonist specifically redeemed by one of the Triad, when Morian of Portals herself appears to grant Dianora grace at the moment of her drowning.

Also associated with the darker aspect of the goddess, and with Morian, is Alienor, embodiment of female sexual power. The raven-haired Alienor enjoys a lonely personal and political freedom – her control of castle Borso is reflected in her power to seduce and enjoy the men of her choice. Her conquests form a counterfoil for those of Brandin, and she functions in the text as the mother-goddess in her role as sexual initiator for the men of Adaon’s Tigana. She, too, is a guardian of gateways: the strategic position of castle Borso enables her to aid Alessan and give refuge to Eleanor of the Night Walkers.

Balanced against these strong, sexually mature women are Tigana’s younger protagonists, Catriana and Alais, associated both with Eanna of the Lights and with the virgin aspect of the white goddess. Alais remains innocent though competent; Catriana has two politically motivated sexual encounters essential to the plot. Red haired and associated with light, Eanna’s Catriana is finally wed to Adaon’s Alessan. Interestingly enough, all of Tigana’s major characters have been involved in sexual triads that involve death and loss: for the survivors, these triads are finally replaced by pairs: Alessan and Catriana; Devin and Alais; Baerd and Eleanor.

While mythic conflations produced Tigana’s characterisations, the process in A Song for Arbonne is an historical one. This is a less innocent, more secular text, where the plottings are those of political survival ungarlanded by personal myth. Kay’s meticulous research into troubadour history is evident in his creation of characters such as the duke Bertran de Talair, who recalls both Bernard de Ventadorn, in the bird motif of his love songs, and Bertran de Borne [whom Dante met wandering in the Inferno] in his fierce eulogy of war and his reputation as a famous lover and pursuer of the ideal woman. Other famous troubadours are woven into the text: the passion of Jafre Rudel for the image of Melissande is transposed into the passion of Rudel Correze for the infamous Lucianna; the complex style of Arnaut Daniel is reflected in the lyrics of Aurelian and Remy, and so on.

The colour symbolism of darkness and light has been retained in Arbonne’s female characters. The raven haired queen of the Court of Love, Arianne de Carenzu [namesake of the troubadour Lady Carenza], wields a large measure of personal and political power in Arbonne; and she too functions as sexual liberator for the emerging hero. Arianne is aligned with another dark lady, Beatritz, High Priestess of Rian, since both are keepers of different aspects of the goddess of love – the secular and the divine. Similarly dark haired, but more closely aligned with death, is Lucianna d’ Andoria [fictional cousin to Lucrezia Borgia], the chief sexual predator of the text, whose bedroom tastes, like Alienor’s, run to serious bondage. These dark women of power are balanced in Arbonne by the golden power of Signe d’Barbentain [modelled, I think, on Eleanor of Aquitaine], and once again in the pivotal roles of light haired younger women, especially Rosala and the troubadour Lisseut.

The politics of sexual liaisons in Kay’s works can also be seen in the ways in which children of the politically powerful are used as pawns in matters of state. In Tigana, the core of the plot is Brandin’s revenge on Tigana for the death of his son, Stevan, in battle: Brandin had attacked the province to create a kingdom for his son, and when the young man was killed by the defending Valentin, Prince of Tigana, Brandin responded with total war, wiping out the people, destroying their culture, and cursing them to historical annihilation by placing a spell over the whole peninsula: the very name of Tigana cannot be heard, much less spoken, by anyone not born in the province before Stevan’s death. Brandin also controls his fertility so that he will not produce another heir.

In A Song for Arbonne, the politically motivated fate of children is again at the centre of the text. In Arbonne, political events are informed by the hatred between the powerful dukes Bertran de Talair and Urte de Miravel, arising from the defiant last acts of Aelis de Miravel, who set events in motion by telling Urte, on her childbirth deathbed, that Bertran was the father of her just delivered son. Urte has guaranteed his own safety by withholding knowledge of the fate of the boy, thus condemning Bertran to a hopeless search for his heir [a position reminiscent of Dunnett's Francis Crawford of Lymond, whom Bertran resembles in many ways, especially in his skills as musician and military strategist]. In Gorhaut, the tyrannical Galbert de Garsenc manipulates the lives of his own sons, and, having driven his son’s wife, Rosala, to flee to Arbonne in order to preserve both herself and her unborn child, Galbert uses the resulting political situation as the excuse to declare war on that province. The social differences between the two states are underlined in the finely written scene of the birth of Rosala’s son: a lady well versed in politics, she makes her son as safe as he can be from Galbert by binding Signe, Countess of Arbonne, and Bertran to his protection by naming them his godparents. There is a further twist, in that Rosala, aware of the political necessity to produce an heir to Garsenc, has deliberately seduced her husband’s younger brother, Blaise [now pretender to the throne], to beget the child [since Ranald is impotent].

Just as in ‘real life’, it is impossible to disentangle the political implications of sex and religion. In both of these texts, sexual relationships are a measure of the political strength of the protagonists: compare, for example, the mature responses of Dianora to the private sexual domination of the powerful Brandin in Tigana, with Rosala’s disgusted response to the overtures of the debauched king Ademar, whose political weakness in A Song for Arbonne is revealed through his cruel and public use of sexual humiliation as a way of controlling his courtiers. Brandin controls his priests and priestesses, reducing the impact of their plotting, whereas Ademar is controlled and out-manoeuvred at every turn by the high priest of Corannos.

A Song for Arbonne retains the romantic form of fantasy, using an historical mode of presentation with which some of the mythic and archetypal dimensions of Tigana have been conflated. It marks a self-conscious move into a more worldly narrative structure that should prove interesting when Kay’s next novel, The Lions of Al-Rassan, is released in 1995.

Copyright © Janeen Webb 1994. All rights reserved. This article first appeared in The New York Review of Science Fiction, No.77, January 1995.

The Heist of the Hoard

dragonetsThese two dragons have nothing to do with the content of this post; I just found them cute, so there.

I fully admit to a level of paranoia. My hoard (perhaps that’s my link with dragons, after all?) is knowledge, and I have lost, due to vagaries of cybertechnology, almost as much as I have gained out of it. So excuse the twitchiness. I can’t possibly back up my material too much.

After LJ downsized from a staff of 28 to 8, I started the arduous procedure of moving my personal blog here, plus acquiring a separate blog for my translations and original fiction. Now Multiply seems shaky, and although I don’t actually write there, I have collected so much interesting and useful material on my site that I can’t possibly allow a blip to vanish it for good. Not to mention that I have settled very nicely here and I’d love that material to have the exposure it deserves.

So, from tomorrow onwards and for as long as it takes, I will be reposting material written by others (properly credited) and originally posted on my Multiply site, alternating with original posts like those I’ve been (mostly) doing these last few months. Stay tuned!

Published in: on June 30, 2009 at 11:08 pm Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , ,

Knowledge and Closure

f-h3When I packed up and relocated to the UK, just over two years ago, I predicted I would miss a lot of things, not least the language. So I arranged subscriptions to two of the magazines I consistently bought back there. At least a monthly or bimonthly dose of Greek would make up for not having my entire Greek library with me.

At the beginning of June I got an email from the publisher informing me that one of the magazines was folding. Granted, it was a niche publication, a bimonthly review dealing with obscure aspects of history (Nightbird would have loved it), and it was close to miraculous that it managed to run for 15 issues. Anyway, the party is over, and now I have the complete set of material to start translating for that writing project of mine on WordPress, that has been lying dormant for far too long…

To the publisher’s credit, they informed me that they owed me back €46, the whole of my prepaid subscription, and invited me to choose something else from their catalogue to cover it, since they could not refund the actual sum. So I plumbed for a few special editions that the same magazine had been bringing out – quarterly collections of papers on even more obscure topics. They arrived in the post today. I love 96-page magazines that can genuinely freak out anyone curious enough to read over my shoulder on the bus (which has happened more than once, back in Athens *snickers*). And I love doing business with people into good accounts.

Published in: on June 29, 2009 at 9:26 pm Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , ,

The 50 Book Challenge

pileFrom the Shelfari group:

Steve Jobs said: “The fact is that people don’t read anymore…”

Shelfari’s 50 Book Challenge said: “Fie! Steve Jobs,” (We say Fie because we read a lot and we know a lot of words.) “Fie! Steve Jobs! We read 16,892 books in 2008.”

To elaborate: When asked about the new Amazon Kindle product, Steve Jobs CEO of Apple computer had this to say:

“It doesn’t matter how good or bad the product is, the fact is that people don’t read anymore,” he said. “Forty percent of the people in the U.S. read one book or less last year. The whole conception is flawed at the top because people don’t read anymore.”

Welcome to the the 50 Book Challenge, where we fly in the face of Steve Jobs.

Basically …. the challenge is to read 50 books in one year. OR … establish a goal for yourself more or less, it’s up to you, just because we say 50 books doesn’t mean that has to be your goal too.

Start a thread, WITH YOUR NAME IN THE SUBJECT OF YOUR ORIGINAL POST, and log your books. It is a very good idea to bookmark (when in your post, add it to your internet browser’s favorites) your post for easy location for future updates. Things move quickly around here.

If you haven’t been keeping track of the books you’ve read, start when you join.

Thanks for being here and have fun.

I joined the challenge on June 26, 2008, the day my son was born. I wanted to see how much I could bring myself to keep using my mind to understand adult things, through the haze of sleepless nights, emotional upheavals, and the all-consuming, 24/7 on-call job that is motherhood.

Naturally, I didn’t manage to read 50 books through this year, and most of those I did read were in fact tiny things between 60-90 pages. But that doesn’t really matter. What matters is – I kept reading. I’ve had people comment on my log thread that they hadn’t picked up reading again until the child was in preschool. Now, that’s sad.

I’m just giving myself a pat on the back before I start on this second year of challenge (and I’d be glad to see some of you over on Shelfari as well).

ADULT FICTION
01. Jim Butcher – Small Favour
02. MFW Curran – The Secret War
03. Yasmine Galenorn – Witchling
04. Yasmine Galenorn – Changeling
05. Yasmine Galenorn – Darkling
06. David Gemmell – Waylander II
07. DCI Gene Hunt – The Future of Modern Policing
08. Andrew Lang – A Collection of Ballads
09. Kate Mosse – The Cave
10. Liza Palmer – Conversations With the Fat Girl
11. Adele Parks – Playing Away
12. Lynda La Plante – The Red Dahlia
13. Terry Pratchett – Sourcery
14. Terry Pratchett – Wyrd Sisters
15. Alexander Pushkin – Boris Godunov
16. John Shirley – Subterranean
17. V/A – Mystery Tales
18. V/A – Supernatural Tales

CHILDREN’S FICTION
19. Adam Blade: Beast Quest: Sethir the Storm Monster
20. Terry Deary & Martin Brown – Groovy Greeks
21. Joseph Delaney – The Spook’s Tale
22. Neil Gaiman – Odd and the Frost Giants
23. Rick Riordan – Percy Jackson and the Sword of Hades
24. Andy Stanton – Mr Gum in The Hound of Lamonic Bibber
25. Mark Walden – Interception Point
26. V/A – The Compendium of Vampyres and Other Perilous Creatures

NONFICTION
27. Pamela J. Ball – Natural Magic
28. Clarissa Pinkola Estés – Women Who Run With the Wolves
29. Danu Forest – Nature Spirits: Wyrd Lore and Wild Fey Magic
30. Liz Fraser – The Yummy Mummy’s Survival Guide
31. Annabel Karmel – The New Baby and Toddler Meal Planner
32. Amy Sophia Marashinsky – Mermaid Magic
33. Mother Mary & Archmandrite Kallistos Ware – Psalter According to the Septuagint
34. Fr. Andrew Phillips – Orthodox Christianity and the Old English Church
35. Fr. Andrew Phillips – A Practical Guide to the Worship of the Orthodox Church
36. Steven Saunders – Mind Tricks Ancient and Modern
37. Tara Ward – The Healing Handbook
38. Trinny Woodall & Susannah Constantine – The Survival Guide
39. Trinny Woodall & Susannah Constantine – Who Do You Want to Be Today?
40. V/A – Birth to Five

Published in: on June 26, 2009 at 11:02 pm Comments (3)
Tags: , , , , ,

Charity

charityA big thumbs-up and high-five to WordPress for teaming up with SocialVibe to raise money for charity, and a big thank-you to Seshat for drawing my attention to it. (I admit, I don’t read the ‘news’ here. I find out about new stuff after I see them on other people’s pages.)

I get such a sense of satisfaction by contributing to causes I feel strongly about that, if the situation at home were different, I’d be out doing volunteer work full-time. As things are, I revel in aiding through such initiatives. I maintain my account on myYearbook mainly in order to raise ‘lunch money’ to donate to their causes. And now, naturally, the question was not if I would put on the SocialVibe widget but which cause I’d choose. Decisions, decisions…

Please, casual reader, if you’ve just stumbled upon this page, take a moment before you leave it to click on the badge (halfway down the sidebar) and help. Thank you.

Published in: on June 24, 2009 at 9:41 am Leave a Comment
Tags: , , ,