Bird Jaguar IV and the Great Skull Legacy

[This is the republication of an epigraphical research project I conducted as part of my undergraduate studies in Spring 2011.]

Bird Jaguar IV and the Great Skull Legacy:

An analysis of Yaxchilan Lintels 13 & 14.

            The ancient Mayan city of Yaxchilan occupies the area in Mexico known presently as Chiapas. During the Late Classic period of Maya civilization, Yaxchilan was a thriving autonomous polity which carved a swath of political hegemony along the Usumacinta river region (Sharer, Traxler 2005:239). Yaxchilan cast a modest sphere of influence and possessed the resources and power to wage war with equally prestigious (or even more powerful) rivals like Hix Witz and Piedras Negras. The mid-to-late Eighth Century would see the city of Yaxchilan reach its apex of power, with successful military victories over longtime rivals, widened political consolidation, and an array of new constructions venerating the same. The two lintels analyzed here—lintels 13 and 14 of Structure 20—were created during this rising crescendo of Yaxchilan and epitomize precisely these aforementioned events that were of supreme importance for the ruler of the time, Yaxuun B’alam.

            Lintel 14 hangs over the northwest doorway on the south side of Structure 20 and was first “discovered” by Alfred Maudslay in 1882. Maudslay was enthralled by the number of ruins present and he compiled a list of stelae, lintels and structures, as well as the first map of the Yaxchilan area (Tate 1992:5). The Peabody Museum describes the physical condition of Lintel 14 as follows:

[The lintel is] in pristine state. [It is comprised of] fine yellowish limestone. The carved surface is flat; the edges are parallel. The border of the sculptured area is by no means rectangular, although the slanting upper and curved lower margins conform well to the masonry jambs upon which the lintel rests. (Peabody 2011:1)

Lintel 14 is of modest size, with a mean width [MW] of 0.91 meters, a carved area measuring 0.78 meters tall [HSc] by 0.80 meters wide [WSc] and a mean thickness [MTh] of 0.32 meters (Id.). It is incredibly well-preserved, and every detail of its iconography and the entirety of its glyphs remain discernible.

            Lintel 14 bears a date of 4 Imix, 4 Mol, and the long count date for this lintel is 9.15.10.0.1. Using the GMT correlation constant, this date converts to Sunday, June 29^th, 741 CE (Famsi 2011). At this point in Mayan Late Classic history, Itzamnaaj B’alam (Shield Jaguar III) still ruled as Ox K’atun Ajaw, but was old and only a year away from his impending death in 742. The subsequent ten-year period, from 742 to 752 CE, is well-documented by Proskouriakoff and other Mayanists as an interregnum period, where various entities were vying to fill the political vacuum (Martin, Grube 2008:127). The combination of this power vacuum, Bird Jaguar IV’s own obsessive insecurity and the ailing condition of Itzamnaaj B’alam III renders the 9.15.10.0.1 date highly suspect as a useful reference for the lintel’s manufacture. This is clearly evidenced when an accurate interpretation of the lintel is scrutinized within the context of the period.

            When Yaxuun B’alam (Bird Jaguar IV) acceded to lordship in 752, his legitimacy was questionable. During his father’s reign he had been rather unremarkable, a minor underlord at best, with little claim to greatness. His mother, Ixik Ik’ Cham (Lady Eveningstar) was Itzamnaaj B’alam’s third wife, and was apparently so insignificant as to warrant no mention during his father’s entire reign (Martin, Grube 2008:126). In order to solidify his position, the recently acceded Yaxuun B’alam immediately went to work fabricating a fictitious history. He erected many series of stelae and lintels which served several purposes. Some, like Stela 35, were designed to embellish the prominence of his mother (Id.). Others, like Stela 11, had the purpose of cementing his own legitimacy as king. By portraying the necessary rituals between himself and his father, such as the flapstaff dance, Yaxuun B’alam was able to falsely render his claim to heir apparency in recorded historical fact (Id.). The three-panel series of lintels 12, 13, and 14 were likewise intended to bolster this fictitious history, by strengthening political solidarity and raising the prominence of Yaxuun B’alam’s bloodline, paving the way for his son (Itzamnaaj B’alam IV) to succeed him.

            A sign which now stands at Yaxchilan Structure 20, erected by the Mexican Institute of Anthropology and History, tells with brevity the events depicted in lintels 12, 13 and 14:

There are several sculptural monuments associated with [Structure 20]: Lintels 12 (today at the Museum of Anthropology), 13 and 14, plus Hieroglyphic Stairway 5. Lintel 12 shows a scene from one of Shield Jaguar I’s conquests. On 13, one sees Shield Jaguar II’s parents, Lady Large Skull and Bird Jaguar IV, commemorating the ruler’s birth with a “vision of the snake” ceremony. Lintel 14 also portrays Shield Jaguar II’s parents, but in a ceremony of self-sacrifice connected to the “vision of the snake” (see Appendix A).

As is further established by the subsequent transcription detailed in this paper, there are numerous mistakes with the INAH summary of events. Contemporary understandings of Mayan Late Classic history reveal that Bird Jaguar IV’s father was Shield Jaguar III, not Shield Jaguar I as the INAH summary indicates. Likewise, Bird Jaguar IV’s son was Shield Jaguar IV, rather than the second. Though perhaps only a minor semantic matter, current scholarly work also interprets Bird Jaguar IV’s wife as Lady Great Skull, rather than “Large Skull” as understood by INAH. A closer epigraphical look at lintel 14 reveals a significant misinterpretation of the events depicted thereon.

            At first glance, the iconography of lintel 14 looks nearly identical to that of lintel 13, and it is easy to see how the two might be interpreted as featuring the same individuals performing the same (or a similar) ritual. In both lintels, two prominent individuals face each other, the more dominant figure on the right, in typical Mayan fashion. The two wield bloodletting knives and bowls from which a nawal, or Maya vision serpent, is invoked. The major differences are between the identity of the individuals appearing in each lintel, respectively, and the overall context of what is being depicted. These differences are explicitly stated in the glyphs.

            Using Ian Graham’s drawing and corresponding labels (Appendix B), Lintel 14’s text begins with the series of 12 glyphs marked D1 through F4. The reading order is standard, dual-column. In Mayan, this series reads: “Kan Imix, Kan Mol, tzakaj k’awil, Kab Ajaw [alt. Muwan], Chanaal-ij, chakb’ay kan, u wayaj, Ch’ul Ixik, Ixik Chak Cham, Ixik Sajal, Yaxuun Ajaw” (Appendix C). The English gloss is “4 Imix, 4 Mol: is conjured the god of generations, He [or Bird] of the Earth, in/from the sacred space, the great image serpent, her nawal, Holy Woman Lady Great Skull, she who serves, mother of the lord” (Id.). The lintel then proceeds to glyphs A1, B1, and C1, In Mayan: “[ch’ul] U b’a, Ch’ul Ixik Kab Ajaw, Yax Ixik” (Id.). This phrase translates to “Her [divine] image, Holy Woman of the Earth, First Lady” (Id.). The final passage is the five-glyph series G1-G5, which in Mayan reads “U b’a Yax Chit Chan Aj Tuubayeet, Chak Cham Sajal U Ajaw” and glosses in English as “His image, First Father, Captor of He of Tuubayeet, Great Skull, elite subordinate to his Lord” (Id.).

            Taken in its entirety, Lintel 14 identifies Lady Great Skull and Great Skull Sajal, not Bird Jaguar IV as the INAH summary states. The two have bloodlet and summoned Lady Great Skull’s vision serpent, most likely an ancestor. The deeper purpose behind the ritual itself is not explicit, but the event’s depiction is important because it establishes the prominence of the Great Skull lineage. Bird Jaguar’s repeated emphasis on his wife, Lady Great Skull, seems to exemplify his determination to prevent her from falling into obscurity, as occurred with his own mother. By maintaining her high status in Yaxchilan’s history during his own reign, Yaxuun B’alam is ensuring that his heir, Shield Jaguar IV, will avoid the problems of legitimacy that plagued the former in his attempt to accede.  

            Lintel 14 also reveals the elite status of Great Skull himself. He is referred to as “First Father,” referencing him as the founder of the Great Skull bloodline (Schele 1990:288). Though their relationship is not known with certainty, Great Skull is likely the Uncle of Lady Great Skull. That he bears the title “Captor of” reinforces the known fact that he was the favored sajal (subordinate) of Yaxuun B’alam IV. It should be noted that the G3 glyph, glossed here as “He of Tuubayeet” is speculative. As is the case with obscure glyphs, its meaning is determined by the surrounding context and is subject to change as scholarly understanding of Mayan history and epigraphical analysis improve.

            The date of 741 CE on lintel 14 begs repeated emphasis. If the purpose of lintel 14 was to strengthen the appearance of political solidarity and promote the Great Skull lineage, it was not enough for Bird Jaguar IV to simply erect monuments depicting them. In order to create lasting legitimacy, Yaxuun B’alam needed to manipulate the historical record in truly Orwellian fashion. By bestowing lintel 14 with the date of 741 CE, Bird Jaguar’s heirship was given legacy and depth. Moreover, since that date precedes the death of Itzamnaaj B’alam III, the depicted events and Great Skull lineage are granted the appearance of de facto consent and legitimacy from the former ruler himself. This act alone reveals the brilliant political savvy of Yaxuun B’alam IV.

           

            Lintel 13 (Appendix D), though iconographically similar to lintel 14 as previously stated, depicts Lady Great Skull and Bird Jaguar IV. The Peabody Museum describes the scene as follows:

This lintel depicts Bird Jaguar IV and his wife or consort Lady Chak Chami wielding hafted bloodletters and other bloodletting paraphernalia. A large serpent disgorges the probable form of their child, the future Shield Jaguar IV (the figure's headdress touches a reference to Shield Jaguar IV's birth in the main text, at A3). The scene is probably a metaphorical one, though many key textual passages remain eroded and obscure. (Peabody 2011:2)

Overall, the Peabody description of lintel 13 is quite good. This is indeed a ritual venerating the birth of Itzamnaaj B’alam IV, and despite the greater degree of erosion and the number of obscure glyphs, the context remains clear.

            The reading for Lintel 13 (Appendix E) begins with the five-glyph passage A1-B1 and reads in Mayan as “Jun Chikchan, Oxlajun Pop: Sijya Chelte’ Chan K’inich,” which glosses in English as “[on] 1 Chikchan, 13 Pop, Chelte’ Chan K’inich is born.” The text then proceeds to the 12-glyph panel C1 through D6. In Mayan, this section reads “[Ch’u] U b’a, Ch’u Ch’ok K’oj, ?-Ixik Ixik Chak Cham, Ixik Sajal, Ox K’atun Ixwaate Aj ?-n, Aj Oxlajun Bak, ?-chan, Pachaan.” Accordingly, the English gloss is “She, her [divine] self, her divine youthful image, holy woman Lady Great Skull, She who serves, 3 K’atun Tree Lady, She of ?, She of 13 Captives, ?-sky, split-sky.” Several of the glyphs in this passage are obscure and as title glyphs, are difficult to transcribe with surety. Despite the above gloss generally agreeing with that provided by the Peabody Museum, portions remain specious.

            One major point of contention lies with the two titles which begin with “Aj.” This affix is extremely common throughout Mayan writings and is always understood to represent the male agentive. It seems rather unlikely that this glyph would be employed here as an exception for Lady Great Skull, despite Bird Jaguar’s inclination to build his wife’s prominence. Another possible interpretation that still works within the contextual framework of lintel 13 would gloss the D4 glyph as Ix yete’—“Lady in the company of.” This would entail that the following two title glyphs correspond to her unknown companion, who is presumably male. One possibility might be that this is a reference to Great Skull Sajal, though this remains purely speculative on the author’s part. Another similarly speculative possibility is that the titles refer to the ancestor which has been summoned in the form of a nawal. Glyphs C6 and D6 are eroded and open to interpretation (particularly the former), though D6 almost certainly represents the phonetic spelling of Pachaan (“split-sky”), seen frequently throughout Yaxchilan in the Late Classic and featured in one of the Polity’s emblem glyphs. These final two glyphs of this passage might also be referencing the name of the ancestral vision serpent. At this point in time, however, these interpretations must be relegated to the realm of conjecture.  

            Lintel 13 continues with the sequence E1-E4 and F1-F5, both of which pertain to Yaxuun B’alam. The first sequence reads in Mayan as “U b’a Jun Chan, Yaxuun B’alam, Aj K’al Bak” or “His image, 1 Sky, Bird Jaguar IV, He of 20 Captives.” This is followed by the customary title sequence “U Chan Aj Uk, Ox K’atun Ajaw, Ch’u Pa’chan Ajaw, B’akab’,” which is glossed in English as “Captor of He of Uk, 3-K’atun Lord, Divine Lord of Yaxchilan, the Standing One.” These last two lines are transparent and typical to monuments of this time, where Yaxuun B’alam consistently touts his preeminence.

            Taken as a whole, Lintel 13 continues to further the agenda of Yaxuun B’alam in establishing his legitimacy through his heir, Itzamnaaj B’alam IV, who is herein referenced by his youthful name, Chelte’ Chan K’inich. Again, this depiction reveals Bird Jaguar’s intent to preemptively annihilate any potential question of his son’s political authority, sparing him from facing the same challenges of obscurity the father had incurred. In contrast to lintel 14, there is no apparent reason to believe that the date of 9.16.0.14.5, or February 12^th, 752 CE, is a falsification. This was the year that Yaxuun B’alam acceded and his legitimacy would have already been—fictitiously—established for nearly a decade before. In this case, it was important that Itzamnaaj B’alam be venerated, but there was no practical reason to manipulate the past as was necessary for Bird Jaguar IV to solidify his own legacy.

            Ultimately, although Lintels 13 and 14 appear facially similar, it is important to distinguish the differences of detail in their depictions. By understanding what each scene represents independent from one another, we can discern with greater clarity the over-arching goals of Yaxuun B’alam IV and the importance of the monuments in Structure 20 as a continuum of significant events. The keen political maneuvering of Bird Jaguar not only insured that his lineage would retain power in Yaxchilan after his death, but also inevitably began a chain of events which saw the polity’s resurgence and subsequent rise to a height of hegemony, culminating in the conquest of longtime rival Piedras Negras in the early 9^th century (Sharer, Traxler (2006:431) and a “golden age” which would last until the larger decline of the Maya empire.       

    

REFERENCES

FAMSI. “Date Conversion.”

   Retrieved on May 7^th, 2011. http://research.famsi.org/date_mayaLC.php

Martin, Simon; Grube, Nikola

   2008  Chronicle of the Maya Kings and Queens. London: Thames and Hudson Inc.

Montgomery, John

   2002  Dictionary of Maya Hieroglyphs. New York: Hippocrene Books Inc.

Montgomery, John

   2002  How to Read Maya Hieroglyphs. New York: Hippocrene Books Inc.

Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. “Corpus of Maya Hieroglyphic Inscriptions.”

   Retrieved on May 7^th, 2011.

   http://www.peabody.harvard.edu/CMHI/detail.php?num=14&site=Yaxchilan&type=Lintel

Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. “Corpus of Maya Hieroglyphic Inscriptions.”

   Retrieved on May 8^rd, 2011.

   http://www.peabody.harvard.edu/CMHI/detail.php?num=13&site=Yaxchilan&type=Lintel

Schele, Linda; Freidel, David

   1990  A Forest of Kings. New York: William Morrow and Company Inc.

Sharer, Robert; Traxler, Loa

   2006  The Ancient Maya 6^th Edition. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Tate, Carolyn

   1992  Yaxchilan: the Design of a Maya Ceremonial City. Austin: The University of Texas 

   Press.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A—INAH Sign at Yaxchilan

Retrieved on May 2^nd, 2011. http://mayaruins.com/yaxchilan/a1_531.html

APPENDIX B—Drawing of Lintel 14 by Ian Graham, 1974.

APPENDIX C – Reading Order and 6-line transcription for Lintel 14

READ: D1-E4, F1-F4, A1,B1,C1,G1-G5

D1 TIV.500a[501] KAN.IMIX Kan Imix Four Imix “4 Imix”	E1 TIV.581v KAN.MOL Kan Mol Four Mol “4 Mol”	F1 Tnn.1000b:32 ?.IXIK:CH’UL Ch’ul Ixik Holy/divine woman “Holy woman”
D2 T714.181 TZAK.ja Tza[h]k-aj PASS – Conjure “is conjured”	E2 T1030c K’AWIL K’awil Deity name “God of generations”	F2 T1000b.109:736v IXIK.CHAK:CHAM Ixik Chak Cham Lady Chak Cham “Lady Great Skull”
D3 T526.747v (or 744v) KAB.AJAW (MUWAN) Kab Ajaw Earth Lord  (Bird) “He of the Earth”(?)	E3 T86:409[561]:314 NAL:ni?[CHAAN]:ji Chaanal-ij (?) Heavenly location(?) “Heavenly place”(sacred space	F3 T1000b.630[140v].181 IXIK.sa[la].ja Ixik Sajal Lady sajal “She who serves”
D4 T109:501:126.25:764 CHAK:B’A:ya.ka:CHAN Chakb’ay Kan Great head/image serpent “Great image serpent”	E4 T1:539:125.181:126 U:WAY:ya.ja:ya U wayaj 3A -- Spirit; portal; nawal “Her nawal”	F4 T126.168:756b Ya.AJAW:xu(na) Yaxun Ajaw POSS. – Mother; Lord “Mother of the Lord”

A1 T1.60:757:? (Ch’u?) U.B’A:? (CH’U?) U b’a (Ch’ul U b’a?) 3A – image “Her (divine) image”

B1 T32:1000b.168:526 CH’UL:IXIK.AJAW:KAB Ch’ul Ixik Kab Ajaw Holy lady Earth lord “Divine Lady of the Earth”

C1 T1000b.16:181[178] IXIK.YAX:-laj Yax Ixik First lady “First Lady” (?) (title?)

G1 T1.757v:? U.B’A:? U b’a 3A – image “His image”

G2 T16:580.108:764 YAX:CHIT.cha:CHAN Yax Chit Chan First Father Captor/serpent “First father, captor of?” (?)

G3 T12: 91:501.710:103 AJ:tu:b’a.ye:ta Aj Tuubayeet He Tuubayeet “He/Lord of Tuubayeet”

G4 T109:736v.1004v:178 CHAK:CHAM.sajal:la Chak Cham Sajal Great Skull Elite Subordinate “Great Skull Elite Subordinate”

G5 T1.168:nn U.AJAW:? (AJAW?) U Ajaw His Lord “[to] His Lord; of his Lord”

APPENDIX D—  Drawing of Lintel 13 by Ian Graham, 1974.

APPENDIX E– Reading Order and 6-line transcription for Lintel 13.

READ: A1-B1, C1-D6, E1-E4, F1-F5

A1 TI.500[764] JUN.CHIKCHAN Jun Chikchan One Chikchan “1 Chikchan”	B1 T561v:23.316:184 CHAN:na.ku:K’INICH Chan K’inich Chan K’inich “Sun-eyed Sky” (name)
A2 TXIII.551:130 OXLAJUN.POP Oxlajun Pop Thirteen Pop “13 Pop”
A3 T740:126.181v SI:ya.ja Sij-ya INT – Born “is born”
A4 T148.188:87v Che.le:TE’ Chelte’ Chelte’ “Tree?“  (name)

C1 T1.45:757 U.ju:b’a U-b’aaj 3A – Himself “He himself/His image”	D1 T36v.758:220.217:1009b Ch’u.CH’OK:k’o.k’o:jo Ch’u ch’ok k’oj Divine youthful image “Divine Youthful image“ (title)
C2 T?.1000b:32 ?.IXIK:k’u ?-Ixiik Divine/holy woman “Holy Woman” (title)	D2 T1000b.552v? IXIK.? Ixiik-? Lady “Lady”
C3 T109.736v:173 CHAK.CHAM:MI Chak Cham “Great Skull”	D3 T1000b.630.181:78 IXIK.sa.ja.la Ixik Sajal Female subordinate elite “Lady Sajal; She who serves”
C4 TIII.25.528.25:548 OX.K’ATUN Ox K’atun Three K’atun “3 K’atun”	D4 T130:1002v.87 Wa:IX.te Ixwaate Lady tree “Tree Lady”  (title)
C5 T12.nn:23 AJ.?:na Aj ?-n He/lord of ?-n “She of –”	D5 T12.XIII:570 AJ.OXLAJUN:B’AK Aj Oxlajun B’ak Lord thirteen captives “She of 13 captives?”
C6 T?:?:?.561a:764 ?:?:?.CHAN:CHAN ?- Chan ?-sky; four, snake “?- Sky” (name/title?)	D6 T602?:520v.561:23 pa?:cha.CHAAN:na Pa’chaan Split-sky “Split-sky” (title)

E1 T1.60:757 U.B’a U-b’a 3A - Image/Doing “His image”	F1 T1.228:764 U.cha:CHAN U-chan 3A – Captor “Captor of”
E2 TI.764(?) JUN.CHAN Jun Chan One sky/snake “1 Sky” (title?)	F2 T12.513:528 AJ.U.ku Aj Uk He/lord Uk “He of Uk” (title)
E3 T126.236:751 Ya.YAXUN:B’ALAM Yaxuun B’alam Yaxuun B’alam “Bird Jaguar IV”	F3 TIII.25.528.25:747a OX.K’ATUN:AJAW Ox k’atun Ajaw Three k’atun lord “3-K’atun Lord”
E4 T228.683v:111 AJ.K’AL:B’AK Aj K’al Bak He twenty captives “He of 20 Captives” (title)	F4 T38.168:562 CH’U.AJAW:PA’CHAN Ch’u Pa’chan Ajaw Divine split-sky lord “Divine Lord of Yaxchilan”

_

The Charge of Man

     "In the vast domain of living things, there reigns an obvious violence, a kind of prescribed rage that arms all creatures to their common doom. As soon as you leave the inanimate kingdom, you find the decree of violent death written on the very frontiers of life. You feel it already in the vegetable kingdom: from the immense catalpa to the humblest herb, how many plants die, and how many are killed! As soon as you enter the animal kingdom, the law suddenly becomes frighteningly obvious. A power at once hidden and palpable shows itself continually occupied in demonstrating the principle of life by violent means. In each great division of the animal kingdom, it has chosen a certain number of animals charged with devouring the others: thus, there are insects of prey, birds of prey, fish of prey, and quadrupeds of prey. There is no instant or time when some living thing is not being devoured by another. 

Above all these numerous animal species is placed man, whose destructive hand spares nothing that lives. He kills to nourish himself, he kills to clothe himself, he kills to adorn himself, he kills to attack, he kills to defend himself, he kills to instruct himself, he kills to amuse himself, he kills to kill: a superb and terrible king, he needs everything and nothing resists him. He knows how many barrels of oil he can get for himself from the head of a shark or a whale; with his sharp pins he mounts for museum display the elegant butterfly he caught in flight on the summit of Mount Blanc or Chimborazo; he stuffs the crocodile and embalms the hummingbird: at his command, the rattlesnake dies in preserving fluids to show itself intact to a long line of observers. The horse carrying its master to the tiger hunt struts under the skin of this same animal. Man demands everything at the same time: he takes from the lamb its entrails to make his harp resound, from the whale its bones to stiffen the corset of the young girl, from the wolf its most murderous tooth to polish his pretty works of art, from the elephant its tusks to make a child's toy: his tables are covered with corpses. The philosopher can even discover how this permanent carnage is provided for and ordained in the great scheme of things. But will this law stop at man? Undoubtedly not. Yet who will exterminate him who exterminates everything else? Man! It is man himself who is charged with slaughtering man." ^[1]

 1. Maistre, Joseph Marie (comte de). Translation by Richard LeBrun.
      Soirées de Saint Pétersbourg. Paris: 1821.

_

Terse Review: Ender's Game

Book Title: Ender's Game
Author: Orson Scott Card
Publication Year: 1985 (Tor Publishing)
Genre: Science Fiction

Synopsis: In a future where humans have barely survived two devastating invasions by a mysterious race of aliens referred to as "Buggers," the International Fleet monitors and recruits young children in the search for a perfect commander. Ender Wiggin, the "third" child in a world where population is strictly limited, seems promising enough that he is taken into formal training at the age of six. There he is forced to endure a battery of increasingly-challenging battle simulations and tests, with the hope of humanity resting on his ability to overcome all the odds.

Opinion: In his introduction, Orson Scott Card distinguishes science fiction from fantasy by noting how "Tolkien disciples far too often simply rewrite Tolkien," but in sci-fi the ideas are "fresh" and presented in new and "startling" ways. While this may or may not ring true of the genre, Ender's Game doesn't seem to bring any startlingly new ideas to the table. You have the improbable and essentially good-natured hero who is tempted by his own darkness (in the vein of Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader), but is ultimately victorious and redeeming. It's Joseph Campbell's Hero with a Thousand Faces. While some of the concepts of null gravity and battle-room games described in the book are unique, the "training to be the best" build-up is cliche. In this case, it comprises the bulk of the story. Imagine Luke Skywalker or Rocky Balboa training sequences meshed with military squad tactics and you have the basic idea. The only thing missing is montage music. One of the strangest things about this novel is the use of children as the main characters. It's a weird contradiction, because the characters all think and act like brilliant adults, to the extent that the reader often forgets they aren't, but then there are times when Ender or his sister wistfully yearn to live as "normal" children. It seems like the author is using age in an attempt magnify the effects of war and violence, but often the device just comes off as absurd.

Where Card's story succeeds is in his ability to convey Ender's emotion. He does an excellent job of fleshing-out the character and begging the reader's sympathy. He uses Ender as a conduit through which we see human relationships at their most demanding, their most dysfunctional, and their most depraved. Card also aptly brings to life the great human struggle between a desire to remain pacifistic and the necessity of violence for survival. Overall, Ender's Game is an easy read, even for adolescents, but still engaging and fun enough for adults to enjoy. While it offers a few keen observations on human nature, I believe the book is a little overrated.

Score (1-10):  7.7

Favorite Passages:

"We're the wicked witch. We promise gingerbread, but we eat the little bastards alive."

"It isn't the world at stake, Ender. Just us. Just humankind. As far as the rest of the biosphere is concerned, we could be wiped out and it would adjust, it would get on with the next step in evolution. But humanity doesn't want to die. As a species, we have evolved to survive. And the way we do it is by straining and straining and, at last, every few generations, giving birth to genius. The one who invents the wheel. And light. And flight. The one who builds a city, a nation, an empire."

"What else should you be? Human beings didn't evolve brains in order to lie around on lakes. Killing's the first thing we learned. And a good thing we did, or we'd be dead, and the tigers would own the earth."

"Welcome to the human race. Nobody controls his own life, Ender. The best you can do is choose to fill the roles given to you by good people, by people who love you."  

_

Kafka on Society, Part I - Die Verwandlung

[1]

     Franz Kafka's works the Metamorphosis and the Trial are both unified by a theme of transformation, where the protagonist awakens to suddenly find himself the victim of some terrible event. In the Metamorphosis, it is Gregor Samsa who has spontaneously changed into an ungeheueres Ungeziefer, or "monstrous vermin." In the Trial, Josef K. is inexplicably arrested "one fine day" (the morning of his thirtieth birthday, no less) and subjected to the indefatigable will of law. Both works provide ample room for myriad interpretations, but the two elements of interest here are the concepts of tenuous social status and rites of passage. 

    For Gregor Samsa, right up until the point of his metamorphosis, he has lived his life "correctly," in accordance with society's expectations. Despite maintaining a tedious and lonely occupation, he exemplifies outstanding work ethic. Mr. Samsa subordinates his own fantasies to the mores of his time, working his life away to support his family. Once the change has occurred, however, the delicate strands which bind him to society begin to unravel. Repulsed and confused by his sudden change, the family restricts him to his room. He is unable to communicate, but remains capable of understanding the speech of others. In their disgust and apprehension, the family too undergoes a sort of metamorphosis. The once-frail father is forced to take on employment, which has a reinvigorating effect. As the story progresses, the father seems to resume a sort of alpha role, defiantly driving back Gregor in several incidents, and occasionally verging on murderous violence. The mother personifies fear, praying that her son will somehow revert to normalcy. She is never able to cope with the bizarre event which has transpired, and physically shuts down at the sight of Gregor. Even his sister (with whom he is closest) eventually loses her patience and demands that the family kill or drive out this monstrosity, before he destroys their own livelihood. 

    The motif at play belies the assumption that social bonds are robust. The changed relationship of Gregor to his family, his employer, and to strangers, is a poignant statement on the fragility of social status. Despite his impeccable employment record and the personal sacrifices he has made for the sake of his family, Gregor becomes a pariah overnight, his contrast too alien to be suffered. The treatment of Gregor is a reminder that, no matter how firmly cemented we believe our own social positions to be, there is always a limit to society's tolerance of nonconformity. Status is dynamic. Eventually, if one is aberrant enough, no bond (even familial) will hold. The offensive variance will be exiled or crushed, so that the social group can maintain its strict cohesion. 

     In the Bantam Classics version of the Metamorphosis, Stanley Corngold provides an excellent collection of explanatory notes to the text [2]. Among his observations, he stresses Kafka's intentional use of the term ungeheueres Ungeziefer (monstrous vermin). He explains the etymological grounding in late Middle High German, where the term originally referred to an "unclean animal, unsuited for sacrifice." Corngold refers to ungeheueres Ungeziefer as "a word in which the undertones of the uncanny, the supernatural, the daemonic, and also all possible conceptions of taboo vibrate in resonance" [Ibid.]. 

    In cultural rites of passage, the process generally consists of three stages: Separation, Liminality, and Reintegration. Liminality is routinely punctuated by elements of uncertainty and danger. For example, when a girl of the South American Nambicuara tribe begins puberty, she is immediately quarantined from the rest of the tribe and placed in a "menstruation hut," where she remains for months. Thus begins the liminal phase in her rite of passage. During this period, the girl is not allowed to speak, nor to leave her hut. She is, in a sense, held in spiritual limbo, and at this time there is a high risk that if she were to be seen outside the hut, a great bird of death might swoop down and devour her. The situation's peril is further heightened by the fact that her condition (and associated risks) are contagious; her misfortunes could be spread to her people. So severe is this term that, even in times of war or disaster, fleeing tribesmen will carry the entire structure, the young woman still inside, to their new destination. 

    In the Metamorphosis, Kafka employs the moment between dreaming and waking life to serve as the inception of this liminal phase. Something has gone wrong, however, and the dangers of liminal vulnerability have been actualized. Reintegration is impossible, and so the social separation continues and magnifies, until the schism can only be resolved through Gregor's death. The etymological root is particularly interesting to this aspect, because it so eloquently describes the change in Gregor's position. Where before the transformation he was a sort of martyr, a creature of tedious routine who sacrificed his own bliss for his family's well-being, after his metamorphosis he is "unclean" and no longer fit for sacrificial duty. 

    Die Verwandlung works well as a narrative analysis of social machinations, emphasizing the limits of social acceptance and the power of taboo. Kafka's use of liminality conveys the tenuousness of social relationships, illustrating that these bonds are easily broken when the "peril" of nonconformity becomes too great a risk for the collective. In Der Process, Kafka likewise exposes the frailty of society's bonds, but does so through a rather different, "top-down" approach. This theme will be dutifully examined in Part Two of this post. 

REFERENCES

1. Metamorphosis of Kafka by James LeGros. Acrylic on Watercolor Board.   

     http://fineartamerica.com/featured/metamorphosis-of-kafka-james-legros.html 

2. Kafka, Franz. The Metamorphosis. Translated and edited by Stanley Corngold. 

     Bantam Books: New York. 1972.

_

Prometheus Revisited

QUAE SUPRA NOS NIHIL AD NOS

"That which is above is nothing to us."

Alternately, 

"What lies above is none of our business." 

[1]

[2]

[3]

     Alciato's allegory of Prometheus bears the same admonishment echoed by myths and religions for millennia: that man should remain servile and ignorant, with eyes cast toward the ground. It is a warning against Faustian knowledge, and though mankind's technology has surely advanced, the animal himself has changed little. The myth is perpetual. What the snake of Genesis is to Adam and Eve, Science is to contemporary humanity. The atavistic nature of superstition surfaces anew in each generation. It hisses in the ear, sowing seeds of doubt and paranoia: perhaps this will be the year that a terrible threshold is crossed. It maintains a vague sense of impending destruction, always assuring us that the next step we take will be one too far, one we will not be able to pull back from the brink. Details may change, but ever present is the suggestion that our curiosity, our limitless inquiry, is an assault on mystery inviolate. To a certain extent, the suggestion is true. With every advance in understanding, our power increases. The mysterious unknown diminishes. The ability to split atoms, to see across galaxies and peer into molecules, the graduation from genetic memory to silicon history; indeed, our science has begun to make us godlike, in any sense meaningful to our ancestors. Perhaps the crux of Prometheus' warning is not whether "what lies above" is any of our business (for men will always make it their business), but whether or not we will be wise enough to understand it before destroying ourselves in the process. 

REFERENCES

1. Alciato, Andrea. Emblemata. Paris. 1584.

2. Alciato, Andrea. Emblematum Liber. Augsburg. 1531.

3. Alciato, Andrea. Emblematum Libellus. Woodcuts by Mercure Jollat. Paris. 1534.

_