Between reading and writing I have
to say that I much prefer reading; it's so much easier, a fact
which I have become all too keenly aware of since taking up writing
in earnest. But there's a little more to it than that.
When you're reading, you're in someone else's head; when you're
writing, you're wandering around in your own. And since you're
already pretty much aware of what's in there, it's easy to tire
of it. It reminds me of that scene from the movie, The Rainmaker,
when Katherine Hepburn stood in the doorway and said, "I'm
so tired of me."
I missed reading so much that I decided to take a break from writing
and put together this little offering of selections from a few
of my favorite books.
But I had done so much reading that I had to come up with something
more than just favorites. If I had done that, I'd have ended up
wrestling with a tome. So I decided to cull some of my top choices
that were not just enjoyable to read, but that'd had a noticeable
effect on my life as well. I firmly believe, for example, that
Hemingway's, The Sun Also Rises, is the greatest novel
ever written. But I can't honestly say it's had a major influence
on my headset, and neither have my other favorite novels, Tom
Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, Treasure Island,
Robinson Crusoe or The Martian Chronicles.
I've gone back to those books again and again, but they haven't
had a significant impact on what I believe. They just
take me to places I thoroughly enjoy going to.
I selected instead, writings that were not strictly for entertainment
(although, to be sure, they're highly enjoyable), but more for
the direction, or perspective, they offered, for the ideas they
had put in my head, ideas that helped me formulate answers to
those nagging little questions that seem forever more to be appearing
on my path.
With one exception: Gargantua and Pantagruel. I do not
return to Rabelais's marvelously raunchy creation (all besmattered
with shitting and debauchery that it is) for answers to hard questions,
but simply to laugh, which means I turn to it for therapy. I figure
if you can laugh at such bawdy and irreverent humor that you can't
possibly be taking yourself too seriously, which is probably one
of the main reasons that so many people are in therapy in the
first place. So maybe, in its own way, it is a kind of answer
to one of life's challenges, at least for me.
Introduction:
Change is good. It’s a soothing balm for the pain of boredom.
Heraclitus believed that everything was in a constant state
of flux, that you couldn't step into the same river twice, which,
if true, would seem to suggest that things are changing whether
we want them to or not, and indeed they are. The only thing that
is not changing is the change itself. Then again, there's that
French proverb that assures us that the more things change the
more they remain the same.
Reading has the power to change us in more enduring ways. Like
the changing that is not changing, it can't help but have this
effect on us. The act of reading something creates a memory, which
we keep till we die.
But some reading changes us more than others.
I've read Tom Sawyer at least three times, mostly for
pure enjoyment. Every time I read it, it seems to change me only
while I’m reading it. Once I'm finished with it, I'm face
to face again with the same ennui that drove me to it in the first
place. It's pleasant to think about camping on that island in
the middle of the Mississippi, but it's merely a temporary fantasy.
It doesn't contain a lasting power to dispel the boredom that
is ever encroaching on the room of my consciousness.
The book of Ecclesiastes is another matter. Its power
endures. It is not a work of fantasy, but a product of contemplation,
a profound contemplation. It remarks on the human condition. That
means it faces that condition squarely (unlike Tom Sawyer,
which tries its best to get away from it). The same is true of
Gargantua and Pantagruel, although from a much more humorous
(if not downright bawdy) perspective.
All of the writings in this book resonate with a similar force.
They have the power to effect a change in the way you think about
something.
Ecclesiastes, The Story of Abishag and the Sermon on
the Mount are all from the Bible, a book that nearly everyone
believes to be the inspired word of God. The selections offered
herein may move you to consider some doubts on that score. At
very least, you will surely begin to wonder what the Bible is
really about. On the Nature of Things will underscore
those doubts. You may want to consider re-thinking your whole
cosmology after reading it.
Creative Evolution will prompt you to take a hard look
at the way you think, period, as will Zen and the Art of Motorcycle
Maintenance; and once you read Erich Fromm's the Art
of Loving, you will find it difficult (for the rest of your
days) to resist sniggling every time you hear someone in a movie
(or in real life) talk about falling in love.
Finally, Moby Dick has the power to make you change
your reading habits altogether. You'll be amazed at the treasure
it contains, which, if you're like most people, you completely
missed at its first reading. It may also goad you into thinking
about poetry, specifically, what it is.
Introduction to The Story of Abishag
The book of Kings is a record of the reigns of the various monarchs
who sat on the throne of Israel, (and later Judah). The three
best known kings were the first three: Saul, David and Solomon.
After them, you sort of lose interest. It kind of reminds me of
our presidents; you remember Washington, Adams and Jefferson,
but can you name the next three or four, in order?
The following selection is taken from the first chapter of the
first book of Kings (commonly called First Kings), and
the story it narrates took place in a transition period, that
between David and his son, Solomon.
One thing that may occur to you, especially should you decide
to read further, is its similarity with the modern world. It's
like reading an old newspaper about current events, with political
intrigue, power positioning, backstabbing, sex, violence, lying,
cheating, stealing, you name it.
And it's interesting to note that the next two books after Kings
(First and Second Chronicles), basically rehash
the whole monarchy thing all over again, only from a point of
view slightly more favorable to David. Talk about beating a dead
horse.
Studying biblical history can definitely change you. It is a pursuit
(if undertaken with academic honesty) that time and again turns
believers into non-believers.
What would you think, for example, if you were married to Miss
Universe, and someone more rich and powerful than you not only
took her away from you, but conspired to have you killed to make
sure he could have her all to himself; and then, later, much later,
like in the next life, when you're in heaven, just hanging around
talking about the stuff you did when you were living your life
on earth, you found out that God said that that man (the one who
had you killed, remember) was a man after His own heart, which
was God's way of saying that He really liked him?
Well, it just so happened that there was this guy named Uriah,
who was married to a Miss-Universe babe, and King David saw her
bathing one night from his roof top. To make a long story short,
he sent for her and had sex with her and then had his top general
(Joab) place Uriah in the heat of battle to make certain he'd
be killed. Then, some time later, in New Testament times, Paul
the Apostle, speaking before a synagogue in Pisidian Antioch,
made a comment about God saying that David was a man after His
own heart. So you start thinking about stuff like this, and try
as you might, you just can't fathom an omniscient God saying something
like that about a man who not only took another man's wife, but
actually had the man killed, which means that he was basically
a murderer. Somehow, you just can't make it work. And it gets
even uglier, so ugly that I don't want to talk about it. If you're
interested, you can read about it yourself in Second Samuel (the
book right before First Kings), chapter 11.
The Story of Abishag
Now king David was old
and stricken in years; and they covered him with clothes, but
he still couldn't stay warm. So his servants said to him, "Let
there be sought for my lord the king a young virgin, and let her
stand before the king, and let her cherish him, and let her lie
in thy bosom, that my lord the king may stay warm. So they sought
for a fair damsel throughout all the coasts of Israel, and found
Abishag a Shunammite, and brought her to the king. And the damsel
was very fair, and cherished the king, and ministered to him:
but the king knew her not.
Comment. Nearly everyone I share this little story with
is surprised (and that's putting it mildly) to learn that it's
even in the Bible. Basically, an elderly King David gets a young
teenage hottie for a teddy bear.
There is no question that Abishag was a looker; the passage unabashedly
tells us that she was "very fair." And considering the
way things were in those days, there's also no doubt that she
was very likely only twelve or thirteen years old, if that. After
all, they sought out a virgin! And if she was as attractive as
the story seems to make her out to be, it is unlikely in the extreme
that she would be much older than that and not already be taken.
It was less than a hundred years ago that young women were marrying
at age twelve. And if they were doing it a mere hundred years
ago, we can only imagine what they were doing over 2,000 years
before that.
Now it's true that the story makes it very clear that there was
no sex between them ("but the king knew her not"), but
still, what's the point? If he had trouble staying warm (a fairly
common thing with older people) why didn't they just throw some
more logs on the fire? Why did they go to the trouble (and expense)
of searching for a fair damsel “throughout all the coasts
of Israel,” of finding a nubile twelve-year-old (or possibly
even younger) cutie to lie naked in bed with him?
I've read this passage a number of times, and searched various
commentaries for some kind of meaning for it. The only reason
it seems to be mentioned at all is because Abishag is referred
to again, in the following chapter. Adonijah, (Solomon's older
brother) asks Solomon for her hand in marriage. For some inexplicable
reason, Solomon makes the assumption that Abishag was his deceased
father's wife, and perceives Adonijah's request as somehow threatening
to his own authority. He responds to the whole thing by simply
having Adonijah (did I mention that it was his brother?) killed!
Confused? You're not alone.
To make some kind of sense out of it, let's begin by listing the
cast of characters.
King David
Abishag
Bathsheba (one of David's wives, and a rather notorious one at
that. She was the one he observed bathing from his rooftop, and
ultimately had her husband, Uriah, killed so he could have her
all to himself. Evidently, she was quite a hottie herself)
Adonijah (David's handsome, impetuous, roustabout son by a woman
named Haggith, and older than Solomon, which, in most minds, would
make him the rightful heir to the throne; at least that's the
way the system of primogeniture is supposed to work)
Solomon (David's son by Bathsheba, and renowned for his wisdom,
and the one who ultimately gets to be king)
Now let's see if we can sort it out. As near as I can figure,
it goes like this:
David was getting old and feeble. Now ordinarily this really
wouldn't matter so much. It is perfectly normal to get old and
feeble. But with David it was different, and for a very good reason:
he just happened to be the king! And apparently things are different
with kings than with common ordinary folk. A king it seems somehow
embodies the entire ethos of the country. And it is important
to keep in mind that this applies to all countries. The same sort
of thing might have happened in Assyria for all we know. Anyway,
what it means is that as the king goes, so goes the country.
And if the king is impotent, well, I think you see where it's
going. It's the reason that all those oriental potentates had
so many wives. It was a symbol of their potency. If the king was
strong and virile, the country, at least the thinking went, was
supposed to be the same.
So the king's supporters try to find the sexiest young thing they
can get their hands on to see if she can light a fire in him.
Well, it turns out that she can't (he knew her not), and that
meant only one thing: it was time for him to step down. The last
thing that any country wanted in those days was an impotent king.
It just didn't set right. Know what I mean?
And you know what's really ironic about it? While the king was
at liberty to have sex with as many women as he could get his
hands on (even if it meant he had to kill a husband now and then),
the general population was still expected to conduct their lives
in the normal fashion, one man, one woman, in holy matrimony.
Go figure. But are you beginning to see the real difference between
being a king and an average joe?
So after they figure that king David has had it, they approach
him about naming a successor. Remember, you just can't have an
impotent king sitting on the throne. I mean, what would people
think? And apparently the knowledge of his impotency was public.
Can you imagine? It seems that Adonijah knew of it. He was out
celebrating his own ascension to the throne, basically throwing
a big party, with sacrifices and everything:
Now Adonijah, whose
mother was a woman named Haggith, tried to put himself in the
limelight. He said, "I will be the king now." And he
got a bunch of chariots and horses ready, and fifty men to run
ahead of him. He behaved this way because his father had basically
allowed him to become spoiled rotten. He never once approached
him about his actions.
This is of course my own paraphrase.
Needless to say, this does not set too well with Bathsheba. She
wants her own son to be king. So she goes to David and asks him
whether or not Solomon is to take the throne.
But I've got to tell you, she really doesn't come up with this
idea on her own. You see, there's another character who I haven't
told you about. His name was Nathan, a prophet and major confidant
of David, and one wily individual I might add. It was he who approached
Bathsheba and told her about what Adonijah was doing, and advised
her to act quickly to save her life and the life of her son, Solomon.
Apparently there was some bad blood between them. And if Adonijah
had succeeded in setting himself up as king, it was very likely
that he would indeed have had Solomon executed. What Nathan said
to her was,
"Haven’t
you heard that Adonijah has become king without our lord David’s
knowing it? Listen to me. I’m going to give you some advice
about how to save your life, and Solomon’s. Simply go to
the King and say to him, 'My lord the king, did you not swear
to me your servant saying, "Surely Solomon your son shall
be king after me, and he will sit on my throne?” Why then
has Adonijah become king?’ And while you’re still
there talking to him, I will come in and confirm what you’ve
said.”
Now after Bathsheba and Nathan finish presenting their case
to David, he exclaims,
"As the LORD liveth,
that hath redeemed my soul out of all distress, Even as I sware
unto thee by the LORD God of Israel, saying, ‘Assuredly
Solomon thy son shall reign after me, and he shall sit upon my
throne in my stead,’ even so will I certainly do this day.”
And he does it. He directs the right people, the priests, prophets,
generals and so on, to carry the whole thing out, and Solomon
becomes king.
To the utter consternation of Adonijah!
When word of it gets to him he panics and seeks sanctuary in the
temple:
"But Adonijah,
in fear of Solomon, went and took hold of the horns of the altar."
When word of this gets back to Solomon he sends someone to reassure
him that no harm will come to him as long as he behaves himself.
Like I said, there was some bad blood between these two. Solomon
was like a bookish, nerdy type, never in trouble once in his entire
life, and Adonijah was your basic pretty boy, running around all
the time, chasing the ladies, always talking trash. Yeah, Solomon
hated him.
And it doesn't take long for him to find an excuse to kill him.
Shortly after all this transpired, and after David had passed
on, Adonijah approaches Bathsheba (Solomon's mother, remember?)
and asks her to go to Solomon and ask him if he (Adonijah) might
have Abishag to marry! Now based upon what we've read so far,
there doesn't seem to be any harm to this. I mean, it clearly
says that king David "knew her not." And it's nowhere
mentioned that she was one of his wives. But for some reason,
Solomon acts as if she were. He basically blows his top and has
Adonijah executed over it.
"Why do you request
Abishag the Shunammite for Adonijah? You might as well request
the kingdom for him - after all, he is my older brother - yes,
for him and for Abiathar the priest and Joab, son of Zeruiah!”
Then King Solomon swore
by the LORD : “May God deal with me, be it ever so severely,
if Adonijah does not pay with his life for this request! And now,
as surely as the LORD lives - he who has established me securely
on the throne of my father David and has founded a dynasty for
me as he promised - Adonijah shall be put to death today!”
So King Solomon gave orders to Benaiah son of Jehoiada, and he
struck down Adonijah and he died.
Seems a bit harsh to me, but then again I guess you had to be
there. Oh, and by the way, do you remember the book of Ecclesiastes?
Solomon wrote it. At least most people seem to think so.
|
