posted by ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
revdorothyl at 05:41pm on 25/03/2004 under fandom research
revdorothyl at 05:41pm on 25/03/2004 under fandom researchSisabet's theological reflections on the Bible as the history of God's "Wacky Schemes" in her March 22 LJ entry (arguing that much of what we read in the Bible could be explained if we consider how bored God must have been before cable TV) suggested a really intriguing line of inquiry for biblical scholars. The academic teaching of the Bible may never be the same again, after this (at least, not for my students!). Here are excerpts of comments that particularly struck me:
renenet:
So, basically, God's number one Wacky Scheme was giving humans free will (Adam, Eve, snake, etc.) and then when they use it and fuck up and piss Him off with the aforementioned free will, he has to introduce various follow-up Wacky Schemes (i.e. the Flood) to smite them? It seems clear that God just desperately needed scriptwriters. He shouldn't have been messing around for all those eons with that reality TV shit. Cheap Bastard! Hire some You-damned writers! The writers of the Bible don't count. That's just fanfic or fannish transcriptions or, at best, a cheapie mass-market novelization of God's reality programming.
sisabet:
OMIGOD!!! God was Chris Carter!!
No wonder he had such a madonna/whore complex.
revdorothyl:
...You may have just totally revolutionized the way I teach the Bible to my Southern Baptist undergrads. Wow! The Bible as FANFIC. Yes, I can see that -- it makes so many things much clearer!
renenet:
The Synoptic Gospels: Fanon or Plagiarism?
Bible PWP: Porn with Piety?
Paul: BNF of the New Testament?...
revdorothyl:
...I've always thought of the Song of Solomon (aka "Song of Songs") as the Bible's PWP (porn without plot), ever since I first learned that term. But you make me realize that there's so much more to this idea.
Would the Gospel of John then be better classified as an AU story, since John reinterprets the canon (or at least the fanon) in so many significant ways and changes chronologies, etc.? Does the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical book of Judith qualify as a "Mary Sue" story? Are the Psalms just a record of many centuries of "filking" among God's fans? Is the book of Acts an attempt by Luke to write a "season 8" after Jesus' earthly contract ran out and he retired to heaven to work on "developing other projects", leaving his fans demanding that the story continue, nonetheless?...
------------------------------
The world of Biblical studies may never be the same!
If the Bible IS the world's first Fanfic, where, oh where, is the 'canon'? Does this explain the fact that most people who say they believe in the bible hold to a de facto 'canon within the canon' (some passages which are clearly felt to be canonical and authoritative for all time, while others which seem dated or of lesser authorial merit are conveniently forgotten)?
In the bad old days before VCR's and DVD's, we classic 'Trek' fans were in a situation which may be slightly analogous to that of the biblical authors: except for occasional re-runs in syndication, we had no access to the canon itself -- just the novelizations of the canonical episodes (by James Blish), the books by fans and writers who'd witnessed the making of the canon ("The World of Star Trek," "The Trouble with Tribbles", "Star Trek Lives", etc.), and the mimeographed fanzines we wrote ourselves, trying to recapture the spirit and feeling of what we'd witnessed and the profound changes it had caused in our outlook.
Anyone who's carefully read the Pentateuch (Genesis through Deuteronomy, a.k.a. the Torah) will have noted the signs of occasional 're-runs' or syndicated repeats of presumably canonical events (Abraham using the same trick to pass off his wife as his sister over and over, and their son Isaac pulling the same ruse with his wife Rebekah, for example, or the re-telling of the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy). The whole book of Joshua could be read as AU wish-fulfillment, when compared with the book of Judges ("what we wish we could have and should have done", vs. "what actually happened when we came into this land"). Perhaps the flood story could be an early 'crossover' attempt -- introducing God's heroes into the popular near-Eastern story of the world-ending deluge.
I need to go get some dinner. Much of the above musings may simply be the result of being light-headed with hunger!
renenet:
So, basically, God's number one Wacky Scheme was giving humans free will (Adam, Eve, snake, etc.) and then when they use it and fuck up and piss Him off with the aforementioned free will, he has to introduce various follow-up Wacky Schemes (i.e. the Flood) to smite them? It seems clear that God just desperately needed scriptwriters. He shouldn't have been messing around for all those eons with that reality TV shit. Cheap Bastard! Hire some You-damned writers! The writers of the Bible don't count. That's just fanfic or fannish transcriptions or, at best, a cheapie mass-market novelization of God's reality programming.
sisabet:
OMIGOD!!! God was Chris Carter!!
No wonder he had such a madonna/whore complex.
revdorothyl:
...You may have just totally revolutionized the way I teach the Bible to my Southern Baptist undergrads. Wow! The Bible as FANFIC. Yes, I can see that -- it makes so many things much clearer!
renenet:
The Synoptic Gospels: Fanon or Plagiarism?
Bible PWP: Porn with Piety?
Paul: BNF of the New Testament?...
revdorothyl:
...I've always thought of the Song of Solomon (aka "Song of Songs") as the Bible's PWP (porn without plot), ever since I first learned that term. But you make me realize that there's so much more to this idea.
Would the Gospel of John then be better classified as an AU story, since John reinterprets the canon (or at least the fanon) in so many significant ways and changes chronologies, etc.? Does the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical book of Judith qualify as a "Mary Sue" story? Are the Psalms just a record of many centuries of "filking" among God's fans? Is the book of Acts an attempt by Luke to write a "season 8" after Jesus' earthly contract ran out and he retired to heaven to work on "developing other projects", leaving his fans demanding that the story continue, nonetheless?...
------------------------------
The world of Biblical studies may never be the same!
If the Bible IS the world's first Fanfic, where, oh where, is the 'canon'? Does this explain the fact that most people who say they believe in the bible hold to a de facto 'canon within the canon' (some passages which are clearly felt to be canonical and authoritative for all time, while others which seem dated or of lesser authorial merit are conveniently forgotten)?
In the bad old days before VCR's and DVD's, we classic 'Trek' fans were in a situation which may be slightly analogous to that of the biblical authors: except for occasional re-runs in syndication, we had no access to the canon itself -- just the novelizations of the canonical episodes (by James Blish), the books by fans and writers who'd witnessed the making of the canon ("The World of Star Trek," "The Trouble with Tribbles", "Star Trek Lives", etc.), and the mimeographed fanzines we wrote ourselves, trying to recapture the spirit and feeling of what we'd witnessed and the profound changes it had caused in our outlook.
Anyone who's carefully read the Pentateuch (Genesis through Deuteronomy, a.k.a. the Torah) will have noted the signs of occasional 're-runs' or syndicated repeats of presumably canonical events (Abraham using the same trick to pass off his wife as his sister over and over, and their son Isaac pulling the same ruse with his wife Rebekah, for example, or the re-telling of the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy). The whole book of Joshua could be read as AU wish-fulfillment, when compared with the book of Judges ("what we wish we could have and should have done", vs. "what actually happened when we came into this land"). Perhaps the flood story could be an early 'crossover' attempt -- introducing God's heroes into the popular near-Eastern story of the world-ending deluge.
I need to go get some dinner. Much of the above musings may simply be the result of being light-headed with hunger!
(no subject)
No, sweetie. The Psalms are the community's official posting board. Liken them to the original official BtVS board—The WB's/Apollo's The Bronze—as there seems to be VIP contact.
We get the imprecatory Psalms when the story is angering fans. The praise Psalms are akin to the "and a big S.O. to JM, AH, NB, ASH and SMG" school of posting; and the enthronement Psalms map to the "Joss is g-d" school of posting, we'd get after triumphs like Becoming, and Once More, With Feeling.
Why didn't I see that before?
This sheds new light for me on the whole range of "Lament" Psalms, which so often go into great detail about how "everything sucks now," drawing unfavorable comparisons with the way things USED to be, but almost invariably end up with some "but I'm going to keep watching, anyway, because I just know it's got to improve soon, and sucky as I may think it is right now, nobody else better start bad-mouthing it, 'cause it's still better than the rest of the drek that's on."
And I can't believe how apt your "enthronement" Psalm analogy is! This is beginning to make way too much sense to be just an idle fancy. I sense synchronicity at work, friend.
Re: Why didn't I see that before?
I've always understood why some Psalms were in the canon (like 23), but the inclusion of the ones that accused God of abandonment, and the inclusion of those Psalms of the smite mine enemies 'til the maggots eat their entrails [okay, so that wasn't even a paraphrase, but you get the picture] variety was always beyond me.
Then I started reading The Purpose Driven Life during Lent. In it, Rick Warren's position is that we were created by God, for God's purposes. Have you heard of it? If not, I'll tell more, but in case you have, I'll cut this short. At any rate, worship (one of the five main purposes) is more than just attending church, singing, etc. We're intended for—were created for—friendship with God. Warren cites God's relationship with Adam and Eve (before the fall) as the ideal human relationship to the divine.
The next chapter (I think these were chs 10 & 11) continue on this theme of friendship with God. Warren notes that the people in the Bible singled out as God's friends were honest with him. God allowed Abraham to question and challenge him. He commended Job for his bitter honesty, while reprimanding Job's friends for their fake piety. Moses basically told off God, with the "Hey wait a minute, you lead us out here into the middle of nowhere and now you're going to abandon us, with no one to lead? I don't think so," when God was fed up with the Israelites' behavior.
Warren then made it a point to cite David's many accusations of unfairness, betrayal, and abandonment. Suddenly, the Psalms clicked for me. They're canon, because they're a great example of what we should say to God (i.e. everything). Warren characterizes the Psalms as instruction in how to be candid—honest with God.
Anyhow, it was a minor epiphany for me. I'm not sure about the putting it into practice, but now I understand why so many of the less pleasant and "good" Psalms are in the canon.
Re: Why didn't I see that before?
However, that epiphany it gave you about the Psalms seems right on, to me. Especially for those of us who've known what it is to be in UNhealthy relationships, where you DON'T dare speak your mind or be honest with the person you supposedly love and trust, realizing that even at their ANGRIEST and most GRIEF-STRICKEN moments, the authors of the Psalms and Job and Jeremiah, etc., had the faith to speak their anger and grievances directly TO God is a life-changing discovery. Even Psalm 22 ("My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?...") is spoken TO God, clearly implying that the Psalmist still believes God is listening and CARES what he/she thinks and feels.
I wonder if the same thing is true with fan forums? Are there some fandoms where the fans have enough 'faith' in the Powers That Be and their ultimate talent and goodwill to address even their most outraged or tearful feedback TO the PTB? And are there some fandoms where the fans feel so separated from and ignored by the Powers, that no one bothers to even pretend that those in authority are listening, and all complaints are phrased in the 3rd person, griping ABOUT so-and-so rather than TO so-and-so?
Re: Why didn't I see that before?
The Bible quotes are all end noted, and there's an appendix with the cites. Warren uses something like 15 versions (translations and paraphrases) of The Bible. His rationale for using so many versions is that we are so accustomed to hearing/reading some verses, that we don't think about the words. As I've read chapter of his book, I've written the Bible reference next to the verses (they're italicized and easy to spot in Warren's text) so I can run them all down, when I'm done reading. I haven't noticed anything misused yet, but I'm behind where I should be. Ideally, I would finish reading at Easter, but it's not going to happen.
Probably. In fact, there are probably sub-communities within individual fora, that act that way. It's a human thing, I think. I'm sure there's a more eloquent and thoughtful way to answer this question, and I'd intended to try to give it, then two of my kids woke.
(no subject)
He never met Jesus, never heard him preach, yet his whole life was changed, adn he went about starting churches and writing endless letters to them.
(Did the Ephesians ever write back?)
They never write, they never call . . .
However, you're absolutely right about Saul of Tarsus -- whose BNF status is supported by the fact that we mainly remember him by his fan/badge-name "Paul" rather than by his mundane name. If Peter and the other 11 apostles (after they'd found a replacement for Judas from among their long-time gofers) were the organizers of the first big conventions (and their experience on Pentecost in Acts 2 bears many striking resemblances to Joan Winston, et al, describing their first 'Star Trek' convention in STAR TREK LIVES -- with the Holy Spirit like Ticketron massively over-selling convention registrations, and the Sanhedrin threatening like the New York Fire Marshall to step in and close them down, in the interests of public safety and order), then Saul/Paul is the guy who was dragged to a convention against his will, found his life unexpectedly changed by an encounter with the source material, and ended up becoming the convention-organizer and Fan GoH par excellence. He even dared to criticize the Original Fans for lack of faithfulness to the source material, when he takes Simon Peter/Cephas to task in Galatians for bowing to 'mundane' pressures and prejudices, rather than displaying the egalitarian spirit to be expected of the True-Fen, those who truly live the "Federation ethic".
And Paul's INTERPRETATION of the source material (the Gospel) apparently became 'canon' before any of the Gospel-writers got around to penning their novelizations of the eye-witness accounts that had been circulating in rough drafts and fan-lore, so Paul's 'fanon' shaped our reading of the 'canon' for all time (sort of the way my early fanzine readings helped to mold my view of the 'Star Trek' episodes -- a view which was then solidified by reading the early Trek novels of Diane Duane). The parallels are getting eerie!
Re: They never write, they never call . . .
Much as the church has (had) decided that Mary Magdelene was the adulteress Jesus saved from stoning—even though The Bible never says she was—I think Paul's works have often been taught by Christians, from a non-Christian (and I am being literal there—in other words, non-Christian=unlike Christ's) perspective.
Hmmmm. To illustrate this with an example from Mutant Enemy works and fandom....
Let's use Spike, because his fanbase really mirrors religion. You have pro-Spike fans, Spike accepters, and anti-Spike fans. There's a huge continuum for both the pro- and anti- groups, with the extreme ends being rabid about their view of Spike being the one true view. Their enjoyment of/hatred for BtVS and now A:ts rises and falls on each word and action that pertains—even tangentially—to Spike.
After the attempted rape in Seeing Red I actually saw people post that if Buffy had just 'let him' she would have enjoyed (!!!) it. After Spike won his soul, and even to this day, there are fans who believe the soulquest and achievement have no significance at all, that it was all an accident (even when they've gotten word from on high (aka the writers) to the contrary—stating he was seeking a soul from the moment he left his crypt at the end of Seeing Red). They further claim the character is being written as lying (through the present day) about having gotten the soul on purpose. They fanwank the First's mocking of his soul in Lessons, and all mentions of it throughout BtVS S7, and A:ts S5, such that he is hiding the fact that he got the soul only by accident. They take scenes out of context, and misquote interviews and con-reports, to support their POV. Sound familiar?
I liken the Gospels (even John, it's just a different form of Gospel, like Hush, The Body, Restless*, and Once More With Feeling are different types of episodes) canon to BtVS canon. Acts and everything thereafter is more akin to A:ts canon. Where Peter, John, etc. (one of the 11) have written a post-Gospels book or epistle, we have a situation akin to those A:ts episodes written by (now former) BtVS scribes. The church's (historical and worldwide) teaching is the fanon. Sometimes it is right and insightful. Sometimes? Not so much.
*Restless is also fandom's version of The Book of Revelation. Some people can't make head nor tails of it. Some people are upset by it. Some people are enthralled by it. Some people think everything is in it.
Re: They never write, they never call . . .
As compared to religion in general? Or to interpreters of Paul's writings, in particular? Either way, the familiarity does comes through.
As I've noted elsewhere (in the comments on Superplin's reflections on the Bible and fandom from March 26), I have my own favorite sections of Paul, and other sections (even those from the indisputably authentic Pauline letters, like I Corinthians) that I tend to discount. Like the extremists in the Pro-Spike and Anti-Spike camps -- or like those who use Paul to beat justify misogyny, homophobia, or slavery, in what seems to me a very un-Christ-like spirit -- I make my own 'canon within the canon', cherry-picking the bits that agree with my viewpoints and pooh-poohing the parts that support an opposing interpretation. Like many of Paul's greatest fans among women theologians and biblical scholars, I'm tempted to put his "women should be silent in the churches" comments in I Corinthians 14:34-36 and elsewhere down to Paul having an "off" day, or being too rooted in his own particular history and culture to realize that this might NOT be God's eternal word for his people. How else to explain that the guy who wrote I Corinthians 13:1-13, or Galatians 3:28 ("There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus") could also come out with a groaner like that? Meanwhile, my opponents cherry-pick and pooh-pooh to arrive at the opposite conclusions -- that the "no girls allowed in the pulpit" rule represents the REAL Paul, and anything to the contrary is just taken out of context.
"I liken the Gospels (even John, it's just a different form of Gospel, like Hush, The Body, Restless*, and Once More With Feeling are different types of episodes) canon to BtVS canon. Acts and everything thereafter is more akin to A:ts canon. Where Peter, John, etc. (one of the 11) have written a post-Gospels book or epistle, we have a situation akin to those A:ts episodes written by (now former) BtVS scribes. The church's (historical and worldwide) teaching is the fanon. Sometimes it is right and insightful. Sometimes? Not so much."
I think you may be on to something, there. I have no trouble at all accepting the extra-biblical teachings and traditions of my own or any other branch of the Church as 'fanon' -- and therefore only authoritative in so far as they seem to reflect the real canon. The Gospels as the BtVS canon and Acts-through-Jude [is that the last Epistle before Revelation? I don't have my Bible with me at the moment] as the AtS canon makes sense in terms of who's supposed to be interpreting and building upon what. But given the fact that most of Paul's letters, at least, pre-date the earliest Gospel to be written down and circulated, the chronological angle doesn't quite work out. However, if we liken the first three seasons of BtVS to the SOURCE materials the Gospel-writers are presumed to have used (a proto-Mark, the "Q" source shared by Luke and Matthew, and the individual resources reflected in each of the finished Gospels), then BtVS seasons 4 thru 7 (minus "Restless"!) could be argued to be analogous to the finished Gospels and AtS seasons 1 thru 5 to Acts and the Epistles. Maybe. I suspect I'm way over-thinking this.
"'Restless' is also fandom's version of The Book of Revelation. Some people can't make head nor tails of it. Some people are upset by it. Some people are enthralled by it. Some people think everything is in it."
LOL! That's a perfect analogy!
Re: They never write, they never call . . .
Both, really.
Yes, Jude is the last one before Revelation (the Peters, then the Johns, then Jude).
Argh. I thought I had time to say more. My kids are not so amenable to that ideas. Maybe in the morning. I am glad to read you're feeling a bit better, and that your folks are around to help you out.