tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13734864.post7561104954853104865..comments2024-01-04T08:02:29.500-05:00Comments on Attempts: Fruitful InconsistenciesStephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16524368948187746248noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13734864.post-6112446879572042282006-11-14T08:12:00.000-05:002006-11-14T08:12:00.000-05:00Of course, the difference between novels and relig...Of course, the difference between novels and religious texts is that religious texts are purporting to claim something about reality in (usually) a very direct way. Viewed from this light, internal inconsistencies are signs that something's wrong, right? Of course, if you read them as novels, then yeah - but there is also a difference, I think, between stories that have various not-terribly-important-to-the-overall-story inconsistencies, and stories that pivot about inconsistancies. This, for me, generally brings to mind some class of "untrustworthy narrator". <br /><br />I don't know if I'm making sense or not, and I don't have the mental capacity this close to lunch to step back think and return. Boo for me.Stephen Lavellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06196127397721259722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13734864.post-57866654664846748332006-11-03T13:20:00.000-05:002006-11-03T13:20:00.000-05:00Holly, thanks for the fascinating comment, and the...Holly, thanks for the fascinating comment, and the link. To reply to the simplest part of your comment (while I digest the rest): I have picked up -- in the sense of bought a copy of -- Armstrong's <i>History of God</i> (thank FSM for the <a href="http://www.booksale.org/">Ithaca booksale</a>!), but have not yet picked up -- in the sense of started to read -- it. I intend to; it looks extremely interesting; but I haven't gotten to it yet.<br /><br />By the way, in case it wasn't clear, I <i>loved</i> the nitpicking of Superman at Shabbos dinner -- just as I loved that it existed at all, loved the nitpicking <i>of</i> the nitpicking -- all of it. That entry was meant as pure appreciation, albeit somewhat in a Sontagian Camp mode. I'll admit that I might feel differently about works of art I like a lot -- and, for me, <i>Angels in America</i> is definitely in that category (then again, I think Kushner probably was more accurate with his Jews than his Mormons!) -- then for a work of art I haven't read. But that nitpicking was glorious; I did not mean to disparage it. Chas v'shalom, as we Red Sea Pedestrians might say.Stephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16524368948187746248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13734864.post-88249986341601057932006-11-03T08:04:00.000-05:002006-11-03T08:04:00.000-05:00Very interesting essay. I confess I'm one of the ...Very interesting essay. I confess I'm one of the people who is bugged by the type of inconsistencies you mention in Hamlet: I think they point to a lack of imagination, or sheer laziness: what's so hard about doing some fact checking, or rereading your work and looking for errors? (It's one reason I'm not a fan of <i>Angels in America</i>: Kushner didn't do his homework as far as Mormon women go--Harper and "Mother Pitt" [no Mormon woman would ever go by that name--"Sister Pitt" maybe] are simply not believable characters to me. And I realize that by admitting that I might be allying myself with the person who nitpicked with Superman at a Shabbos dinner, but there it is.)<br /><br />Anyway, I can read individual works with glaring errors and even enjoy them, but I sort of have to grit my teeth and <i>just deal with it</i>, in a way that inflames all my obsessive-compulsive tendencies.<br /><br />That said, I find it easier to forgive such inconsistencies in Buffy, in part because it's a serial, and there was no way to go back and redo Season 1 when Joss et al realized there was this more interesting approach to the issues that they'd rather explore later on. Because I appreciate its willingness to deal with gray areas, I can remain loyal to the show and interested in what it does, even though by the end I find Buffy insufferably pompous and will always be upset that Willow never has to pay for her murder of a human being (admittedly a really awful one) the way, say, Faith does, or that Xander isn't held more accountable for his hypocrisy and crappy treatment of Anya. (Both of which to me aren't gray so much as shit-brown.)<br /><br />And as for the contradictions in religion.... Have you picked up Karen Armstrong yet? Because she deals with the issue in some really interesting ways, and argues that for the most rigorous theologians, the inconsistencies are not only fruitful, but absolutely necessary to a full appreciation of our inability to grasp the mystery that is the divine.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com