The Book of Genesis Illustrated by R.
Crumb is an illustrated version of the Book
of Genesis, as the name would suggest. The
Book of Genesis is the first book in the Hebrew Bible, as well as the
Christian Old Testament. The book deals with the creation of the world and the
issues with early mankind. Since the text is so old, it is possible for people
to see different meanings of certain aspects of the text. These debatable
changes in meaning can change how the entire work is viewed. In the sixth
chapters, Crumb depicts a scene of people being thrown to the ground and tied
up. We can also see other people being held with hands behind their back, as if
they were being put in hand cuffs, as woman bent over with her hair being
gripped by a man, a man on the ground with another man’s foot on his head. The
way that R. Cumb depicted this scene influences how the rest of the text is
read. If he depicted this scene differently, the view on God in the text could
change dramatically. This can be broken up into the region around the section
and the rest of the book.
R.
Crumb’s depiction of the scene at the beginning of the sixth chapter defines
how people view God in this section of the text. The specific line associated
with this brutal image is “And the Lord saw that the wickedness of the human
creature was on great on the Earth, and that every scheme of his heart’s
devising was only perpetually evil”. Cumb decided to depict this scene with
people being shoved to the ground, bent over and gripped by their hair, having
their head stepped on, and with their hands behind their back. Aside from
depicting wickedness of human’s, we have no context for this specific image.
The way that Crumb depicts this scene, makes the decision for God to wipe out
all man on Earth. However, if Crumb depicted this scene differently, we may
question God views on what is evil enough to destroy all the creatures that
were created. If the picture was of human’s going out and hunting animals,
which could easily be defended as for food, would God’s decision of wiping out
majority of life on Earth have made as much sense. The depiction of this scene
shapes our views on God the rest of the chapter and the next section on Noah’s
Ark.
The
depiction of this scene also influences our views on God in other sections of
the book. On the previous page, Crumb takes a literal view on the text when
depicting a man kidnapping a woman to be his wife and most like rape. It is
possible to argue that this moment is when God should have wiped all the
creatures rather than a few frames later, when things appear to be worse.
Neither image is depicted in a matter that shows mankind positive. The question
then becomes which image is more evil. With the image of the kidnapping, it is
obvious that the woman is being taken against her will or anyone’s in the
background. With the image of the people being thrown to the ground, they could
be being punished for their actions. The way that Crumb depicted these images
allows for the reader to question why God thinks kidnapping is fine, but an
image that could possibly be just punishment is evil. Another time in the book
that we question God’s intent is after Cain kills his brother Abel. God’s
punishment to Cain was that he was to become a wanderer. By itself this
punishment seems somewhat fair, but God also makes it so that whoever kills
Cain will suffer as well. Since so far, only Cain has killed somewhat, this
seems like a fair punishment, but you could also argue that God should have
wiped all creatures at the first signs of evil instead of letting it get out of
hand. The same aspect could be given to the blatant disregard to authority in
the when Eve at the fruit off of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The
depiction that Crumb gives for the image in the sixth chapter gives the reader
something to compare against other regions of the book, which sparks the
question of why is one thing more evil than another, or why allow evil to reach
a certain point.
Crumbs
depictions of any scene in the book allows for the reader to view the book
differently. If he used different images, the reader’s views on God can change
dramatically. If the image towards the beginning in the sixth chapter were
depicted differently, we would be able to question God’s reasons for wiping all
creatures on Earth. On the other hand, the way that Crumb depicts these images
allows us to question what is more evil or why evil was allowed to reach a point
of no return. Since this in an illustrated book of old religious texts, it is
possible to view the scenes in multiple ways. Crumb’s depictions shapes the way
we see the rest of the book.
I like when you discuss how Crumb's depictions influence how we view and compare the relative evilness of different actions. However, you seem to be circling around the point that the way Crumb illustrated people's evil actions influences how readers view God. It would be beneficial for you to argue exactly what view of God readers come away with, rather than stating that they do. It would be interesting to explore how these depictions of evil cause viewers to judge God's actions. Further more, examining the image of God that Crumb, subconsciously or purposefully, wanted viewers to extract from the illustrations would make for an interesting essay. Lastly, although you state your point several times, I think it would be helpful if you had a clear thesis to guide people in reading.
ReplyDeleteKat covers most of the important ground here. This is repetitive, and although you have the start of an argument, you don't have the substance of one. Crumb's choices have meaning, yes, but what is the meaning? You get rapidly scattered as the essay progresses, raising questions which have perfectly reasonable answers without bothering to answer them - the identity of the "man" who does the kidnapping is one perfect example. You need to pay attention to the details and think about whether your questions have answers.
ReplyDeleteSo, on a basic level, how could this have been improved?
What characterizes the evil that Crumb shows? It is organized, systemic, political violence. There are winners and losers. The winners are practically in ecstasy; the losers are being systematically humiliated. What does this mean? Does Crumb's notion of evil focus on warfare? On the state? Is this a fundamentally political argument about the nature of evil? That's only a suggestion for a starting point, but you need to start *somewhere*.