After spending most of last night debating whether or not to go to san fran or wait and maybe go to London, I took some time today to just blow off some steam. I watched a movie, finished my book, and surfed the internet. One mildly interesting thing I found somewhere talked about directors using the same actors in their most recent films, about the bond they shared. One of the people was Scorcese and DiCaprio. Then I thought about how earlier in their careers, Scorcese made a few movies with DeNiro. I would argue two of these, Taxi Driver and Raging Bull, are classics and a third, Mean Streets, is very good. Anyway, then I got to thinking about other Scorcese movies and The Last Temptation of Christ popped into my head. I never saw this movie, so I'll be referring to the book.
Anyway, I remember a whole lot of negative press about the movie when it was released because it has an unorthodox view of the Christ mythology. Basically, Judas is often vilified for having sold Christ for 30 pieces of silver (quick aside, but I never got the purpose of 30 pieces of silver. There were 40 days in the flood, 12 disciples, some number of generations between I think abraham and Jesus, etc - 30 never comes up. It's like in science when a weird number arises, and it doesn't mean anything but sometimes you see a formula and it equates to 0, infinite, pi, or something else and you just believe it has to be correct, that the order of the universe is defined. I always believed the number 30 was made up in the Bible. I base that on nothing really, it just feels like it doesn't fit). I believe the Bible says Judas actually feels so much guilt he actually hangs himself. I asked my pastor when I was being confirmed whether Judas went to Heaven or Hell because without him, rather without Christ and the cross and dying "for us," there is no Christianity. My pastor said he chose hell. Very clean, very simple.
However, Kazantzakis, who wrote the novel Last Temptation sees it a bit differently. In the book, building up to the betrayal, Jesus and Judas are the most intimate of the disciples, the closest confidants. Jesus has chosen Judas to betray him because Judas is the strongest and most likely to actually follow through and do it. I suppose this is one of Kazantzakis major sins, although earlier in the novel Jesus was in love with Mary Magdeline but never does anything. The other major, very major, issue is that Jesus has sex in the book and bears children. That, as you might imagine, made a lot of christians very angry because without the crosswhat is catholicism? I think it's judeism. The problem is, even in the book, Jesus doesn't actually have sex or produce children.
What happens in the book is this (and this isn't a spoiler since you probably already sort of know the story. It's a great book, even though I am giving away the ending, and I highly recommend it): Jesus is on the cross, and it is hot and he passes out. This I believe happens in the bible, at least one of the gospels, because vinegar or something is placed under his nose to revive him and shortly after, he passes away. During the time he is passed out, Kazantzakis imagines another temptation. The Bible talks of a first temptation, when Jesus is alone in the desert or on a mountian and was tempted by the Devil. He resists temptations of power and such, casts off the devil, and has at that moment, for all intents and purpsoses, chosen his path. In the hallucination, he is not crucified. Instead, he saves himself. He frees himself off the burdon of the cross and our sins, ultimately living with Mary Magdelene and her sister (or cousin maybe), procreating with both of them!, and living what we would consider a fairly normal life and growing old. There is another child who always lives with them, who is an obvious representation of the devil. I would think this obvious representation of the devil (they speak of it's presence and how it never ages) and having lived with this jesus throughout his life would be sign enough that Kazantzakis doesn't think it would have been a good idea. At some point, the disciples come by where Jesus is living and they hate him. They hate him for leaving the cross and forsaking his destiny, which ultimately is their destiny and if you are so inclined, all of our destinies. Judas hates him for running away, for being the coward. Jesus, again, in this hallucination, wonders if he has done the right thing by following the devil, abondoning the cross, and living like us.
Ultimately, he is given the vinegar, wakes up on the cross and realizes he was strong enough to withstand the final temptation, and he dies. His soul goes to his father in heaven and the prophesy of the redeemer comes true. I never understood why people were so angry about the book and the movie. True, the Christ of Kazantzakis is more tortured than normal depictions of Jesus. He is unsure of what he should do, what his role is, what the world is looking for from him. Ultimately, he is portrayed as human, and doubts as we all doubt. But finally, this Jesus chooses sacrifice and condemns himself to death on the cross for us. I would think a realistic portrait of what he might have gone through to become our saviour would be powerful, relatable. But we like things clear and simple. If he was truly here as a man, why not portray him as such? Christ was the son of god, always understood what that meant, knew Judas would betray him and be punished, and now we can all live forever. That will be 15% off the top and no letting your mind drift down there unless you are married! Nature, His creation, be damned. It never made any sense to me.
Do you think people in London know the answer?
No comments:
Post a Comment