"Having tasted the fruit of this tree, he might say to himself, 'I have eaten at the gods' own tree of knowledge and therefore know as well as they how to rule the world.'" (162)
The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, painting by Lena Karpinsky
In order to write about this DB, i felt that it was necessary for me to research the story of Genesis a little bit. I'm fairly familiar with the story, but not being Christian, I figured I needed to check up on the specifics. However, that made me think... and I realized: I have no idea what Quinn is trying to say. He uses this story of Creationism, and yet, takes for granted that all readers will believe in Evolution. Honestly, I would have appreciated if he'd given a recap of the generally accepted story of Genesis before interpreting his own version.
What I have a problem with is this: Quinn proposes that religion is fanciful mythology, and yet he is here explaining the story of the Takers, thought up by the Leavers, through religion. Through his own interpretation, Quinn writes of many gods, not just One. These several gods bicker amongst themselves about how to rule the world until the eat from the Tree of Knowledge of GOod and Evil, which tells them precisely how to rule the world. By eating the fruit of this tree, they recieve the real divine knowledge: what is good, and what is evil. Then, upon creating Adam, they bicker again over how to show him to the Tree of Life - should they baby him and present the Tree of Life to him? Or encourage him to search it out on his own? What if he accidentally consumes fruit from the Tree of GOod and Evil instead? How would he react? Would he be presented with that knowledge? Would he delude himself into thinking he'd been provided divine secrets?
THis whole fact that the gods are squabbling presents a questionable situation. The gods clearly don't have the answers. Personally, through my own belief in Islam, I have always thought of God as being an all powerful, all-knowing, supreme being. Clearly, everyone will have their own personal thoughts in regards to the concept of "gods," "God," or just a lack of gods. But in general, a divine being ought to have all the answers, right? How can a being be a god if he cannot even rule his own creation without consuming fruit from a tree? This presents the argument that really, the Tree, or I suppose, Trees, have the divine knowledge. They, in essence, are more powerful than these supposed gods which created the planet and the creatures on it together.
I am not at all convinced by Quinn's version of Genesis.
However, I did find fascinating his interpretation of the story of Cain and Abel.
Cain watching Abel's offering to God
One of my favorite books is East of Eden by John Steinbeck, and it is based off of the story of these two ill-fated brothers. Quinn's proposition that Cain and Abel were actually representative of the Takers and the Semites is an interesting one that merits some thought. In Islam, the story is literally about the two sons of Adam, but it is an fascinating symbol to use in telling the history of Man. I wasn't certain what Islam had to say about this particular story, so I decided to look it up in the Quran. It isn't as detailed as the Bible, I think, but I like the resulting message:
"Because of that We ordained
for the Children of Israel
that if anyone killed a person,
other than for murder
or corruption on earth,
it would be as if he killed
all the people.
And if anyone saved a life
it would be as if he saved the lives
of all the people." (This is from the Chapter called The Table, verse 32)
I guess it all comes down to greed really. Murder is evil, justice is not. I think greed and selfishness, thinking only of oneself, is what is causing most of the problems that we are reading about. Maybe if we could step outside of ourselves, and begin to care for the others around us, the planet around us, the people around us, the creatures around us... it may just lead to a peacable society.
No comments:
Post a Comment