Showing posts with label "Bel and the Serpent". Show all posts
Showing posts with label "Bel and the Serpent". Show all posts

Sunday, April 8, 2007

Post 32: "Bel and the Serpent": Playing the Devil's Advocate

The focal character of "The Poisonwood Bible" so far has been Nathan. Although his intentions are well intended, his method of trying to spread Christianity are unorthodox. By this I do not only mean that he tries to force religion on everybody without understanding their culture as Brother Fowles does, but also that he is willing to push aside his family's feelings for his own sake (and it is for his sake, since the reason he wants to baptize everybody in Kilanga is to wash himself of his "sins", if you will, as he is trying to baptize more people than men in his company who were killed). Even as his own daughter, Ruth May, was killed, after a short period of mourning and silence on his part, he was back out there baptizing children in the rain: "'The Lord spoke to the common people gathered at the well,' he said at last, in his old booming voice that allowed no corner for doubt" (373). This quote signifies how little pain he evidently felt from her death. To me, he is by far the worst preacher I've ever seen. However, playing the devil's advocate, I will try to prove that he is the best preacher in the world.

Now, some may say that being indifferent to your own child's death shows how little you cared about that child, and also how little regret you feel about coming to Kilanga is horrible since that was the sole reason that Ruth May was killed. However, I argue that that makes him the best preacher ever. The reason which I base this controversial stand on is that Nathan is so in touch with God that he realizes if God did not choose to protect her from that snake, good riddance! It's best that we be rid of a sinner in our family, Nathan would think. Also, relating this concept to a movie, "A Walk to Remember," when Jamie, Landon's newly wedded wife passes away, he states, "Her love is like the wind: I cannot see it but I can feel it." Perhaps Nathan thinks the same way about Ruth May, that she was finally freed from this world of sin. In this way, he is the most selfless preacher in the world, since he is willing to give up his child, trusting that God has a greater purpose for her.

You may argue that he is completely throwing aside his family's wanting to leave Kilanga and only caring about his own work. That is completely correct, for he knows that his family compared to the new, better, God influenced lives of those in Kilanga are much more important than his own family.

Hats off to Nathan, a man who truly understands what God wants him to do.

Sunday, April 1, 2007

Post 29: Literal and Metaphorical Interpretation of a Quote

Throughout the book, each character seems to evolve and form their own voice. This voice is characterized by the events which each character experiences. For instance, when Rachel witnesses Leah shooting down an antelope, and proceed to skin the antelope, "starting out by slitting itts belly and peeling back the skin over its back with horrible ripping sounds" (350), Rachel decided to become a vegetarian (though that was short lived). Orleanna was once a happy woman married to Nathan, which all changed when he decided to salvage as many souls as men died in his platoon during WWII. Leah, once thinking her father's words were all true, and that he was a benevolent man, now completely defies him, calling him ugly, and saying that it is hard to believe she ever believed anything he said was true. The only character which I think does not change throughout the book is Nathan, who even shortly after Ruth May died started baptizing kids playing in the long-awaited rain: "'The Lord spoke to the common people gathered at the well,' he said at last, in his old booming voice that allowed no corner for doubt" (373). What father who dragged his family unwillingly to the Congo for over a year and a half (and counting), would be that indifferent to his child's death? What father who ever loses a child, no matter what the cause or where it happened would be so emotionless about it?

To me, one quote from "Bel and the Serpent," can wrap up many themes in the book centered primarily around Nathan. This takes place when Ruth May had recently passed away, and was laid out on a pseudo altar which Nelson constructed in the Price's yard, wrapped in a shroud of mosquito netting:

"Several women from the village had already come. Mama Mwanza arrived first, with her daughters. A few at a time, the others followed. They fell down at the edge of our yard when they came, and walked on their knees to the table. All of them had lost children before, it dawned on me through my shock. Our suffering now was no greater than theirs had been, no more real or tragic. No different" (370-371).

Literally, Ruth May had passed away, and many of the villagers went to pay their respects, and shortly after sing a mournful bilala song. Metaphorically speaking, this wraps up the family's ignorance to what is truly painful. The whole time the family resided in Kilanga thus far, they have witnessed death, which has been so nonchalantly narrated. Although I would certainly contradict this myself, they have all complained about non-necessities, such as a cake mix for Rachel's 16th birthday, or Rachel breaking her mirror. When compared to the first glimpses of each character's personality, this quote shows the maturity which all of them have gained through hardships, but more so of Nathan's arrogance which resonates throughout the book. Nathan's daughter had just died, and people who he has insulted for being naked when they remained ignorant that the Bible prohibits this kind of behavior mourn the loss of his child more than him. Nathan stood up for himself when he remained ignorant that the villagers are resistant to getting baptized in the river because a small girl was eaten by a crocodile previously. I see no difference in these two situations, yet from a non-biased standpoint, in Nathan's view of things, he is completely blameless for this ignorance. For once, Nathan is correct: he actually is blameless for this ignorance of his, but what gives him the right to put down others with the same ignorance toward the Bible? Similarly, as Nathan has never lost a family member before, he didn't realize how much it hurt until it actually happened. I haven't ever heard Nathan give condolences to anyone who has lost a family member before, yet when he loses one, he finally is silenced from his preaching.

Nathan may think that he has the best view of the world, for God will guide him, and God's teaching will govern his actions, but nay, he out of everybody he's accused of being ignorant remains the best example of ignorance himself.