Friday, December 4, 2015

Advent Calendar Day 4: Uriel and Lil' John the Baptist

Over the next month, I'll be offering thoughts on the Nativity set model (a large papercraft crèche that you can find and download here:

https://gumroad.com/l/ThkR



Uriel and John the Baptist:

Jesus’s cousin John, who will later grow up to be the wild-eyed desert mystic and prophet of the Gospels, is probably about six months older than Jesus, and thus presented a problem for theologians who accepted the version of events in which Herod ordered the slaughter of all Hebrew children under the age of two (a deliberate echo by the writer of the Gospel of Matthew to Pharaoh’s edict thirteen hundred years earlier).  Why wasn’t John killed?

The story that evolved was that he was spirited away to join the Holy Family whence they had fled in Egypt, and the vehicle of his deliverance was the angel Uriel. You can see a version of this story in the DaVinci painting Virgin of the Rocks.

Uriel is, according to Rabbinic tradition, one of the four archangels (the four that we’ve culturally come to accept are Uriel, Gabriel, Raphael, and Michael, listed by name in the Book of Enoch, composed between 100 and 300 BCE).

Angels are tricky.  We often take “Messenger of God” mentions as being angels, though context makes it unlikely that they looked inhuman, and rarely is there anything contextual (though theologically there is opposition to this idea) to conflict with the idea that the messengers ARE men, used by God for His purpose.  When angels are identified as such and described, often in the apocalyptic genre with books like Daniel and Revelations, man, they are out there. 
Uriel here takes his design partially from Daniel 10 (dressed in linen, belt of gold, eyes like torches, face like lightning, skin like burnished bronze) and partially from Ezekiel, where I pulled the four-faces thing (though this springs up in plenty of other books and in other forms).  I gave him human feet instead of calf hooves, though.

Lil’ John here hints at his future in the wilderness, with his filthy matted hair and casual feral nudity.

Thursday, December 3, 2015

Advent Calendar Day 3: James

Over the next month, I'll be offering thoughts on the Nativity set model (a large papercraft crèche that you can find and download here:

https://gumroad.com/l/ThkR


James, as depicted here, is Joseph’s youngest biological son, still part of his household, and, as such, likely to have traveled with them to Bethlehem.  I have him gathering firewood, as I assume he’d have been the one to run errands, get food, etc, as Joseph stayed near Mary for the sake of both safety and propriety.  

In church and narrative tradition, James serves as a counter to Paul in the early church, treating Christianity not as a new religion but as a sect within Judaism.  He and Paul are at odds over whether Christ’s message is for the Jews or for the entire world.  The apostle Peter serves as their negotiator, espousing a middle path of compromise.  James, in a dual role a high priest of the temple AND a bishop of the early Christian church (not, at the time, conflicting stations) serves as a kind of Chief Justice for early church decisions, and accepts Paul’s dogma-shattering recommendation that gentile converts needn’t behave according to Jewish social contract, but with the caveat that certain other behavioral law be implemented.

 It’s James, I think, from whom we get the legalistic tradition of Christianity, at least symbolically.  Sure, any religion is going to codify behavioral principles over time, but James’ influence directly steers the notion of distinct cultures maintaining their practices in full while still converting to this new faith into what we instead eventually get, which is the desire on the part of the church that the faithful homogenize into the existing Christian culture.  I don’t know if this is a widely-held view, or if it’s held at all, but it’s my take on the fella.


Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Advent Calendar Day 2: Joseph

Over the next month, I'll be offering thoughts on the Nativity set model (a large papercraft crèche that you can find and download here:

https://gumroad.com/l/ThkR



Day 2: Joseph

This version of Joseph is influenced by the Gospel of James, or the Protevangelium, written about 60 years after the Gospel of Matthew, and he was probably created/developed in order to support the pet theory on the part of some early Christians that Mary remained a virgin throughout her life.  There are a few bits of scripture that run afoul of this concept, but outside of semantic wording there’s still a really big obstacles on this notion:  Jesus’s brothers and sisters.

Centuries later there have been plenty of other explanations proffered, but the easiest one (and the one latched on to by early adherents) was that Joseph had been married before he was engaged to Mary, and that the six siblings of Jesus mentioned in the New Testament –Simon, Joseph Jr, Judas (a different one), James, and two unnamed sisters (do they number two in the gospels? I can't remember, but the plural "sisters" means at least two) – are technically Mary’s stepchildren.

So here’s the story: The priests at the Temple know Mary needs to get married off, but because of the special circumstances surrounding her birth they want to make sure that whatever match occurs is good in the eyes of God.  So they summon all of the bachelors in good standing (Joseph, at this point, is a widower), and perform a ceremony to try and discern who God would wish to be Mary’s husband.  Joseph goes out of religious obligation, but doesn’t really want to be there.  He’s old in his own eyes.  He’s had a happy marriage and he misses his wife and he has a bunch of kids, some of whom are already grown, and he doesn’t want to be an old dad with a wife not much older than his youngest child.  So he just pays lip service to the ceremony and when all the men are supposed to present their staffs he keeps his at his side.  Nothing happens, and the priests do the ceremony again (“we’re not leaving here ‘til God gives us a sign”).  One notices that Joseph is basically lip-synching, and they insist he participates.  When he does, a dove flies over and lands on his staff.  

So Joseph is stuck.  He doesn’t want to marry this kid, but the priests insist that it’s his religious obligation.

In some later versions of this story, Mary comes to live at Joseph’s home during the engagement (not unlikely; she wouldn’t have been able to continue living at the temple), learning to run the household and helping to raise (babysit) James, a few years her junior.

Now we get to the Gospel version, which I think finds greater depth via the prequel-reluctant-husband story.

Joseph is engaged to Mary and discovers that she’s pregnant.  And he chooses to quietly divorce her (the marriage is pretty much in play once the engagement is solidified; it’s the consummation that finalizes it, held off in this instance because of Mary’s youth) rather than make public her condition or insist on punishment.

Joseph has always been my favorite character in the Bible, and it’s because of this.  Even before the story has him learning of the divinity of her pregnancy, he harbors no ill will to her, no desire to reclaim honor by vengeance, no chastisement, nothing of the social barbarity (by our/my standards) that speaks to the time and place and culture from whence he sprung.  And from the time I was a kid, I found more nobility in that than near on anything else in the whole book.

 The version of Joseph espoused by the early church may have been crafted to explain this calm and measured and merciful side, much at odds with his legalistic predecessors.  Joseph is older, so he has the wisdom of experience to recognize and forgive youthful mistakes.  He has children, so the usurpation of his bride’s babymaker by another sire doesn’t threaten his bloodline.  From a pragmatic fatherly standpoint, his teen biological sons may be at risk of fatal punishment were they suspected of the adulterous union, the most likely paramours given household proximity.  And Joseph was a reluctant bridegroom in the first place, so he would likely see Mary’s pregnancy as a blessing, a means by which to remove himself from the engagement through no abandonment of responsibility on his part.

 In The Gospel of Matthew Joseph is told in a dream that Mary’s pregnancy is divine, and that God wishes him to wed her.  

Though some dogma insists that Joseph was wholeheartedly faithful in his belief of this (there’s even a school of thought championed by St. Thomas Aquinas in which Joseph never suspected any hanky panky and knew that Mary could only have conceived divinely and that the divorce was because he thought himself unworthy, which is such a stretch as to boggle my noggin), but I like reflecting on the perpetual doubt that Joseph must have felt.  I prefer my religious figures humanized, and Joseph is at his most admirably human when he discards suspicion, and it doesn’t matter whether that acceptance is rooted in fervent belief or simply the possibility of that belief.  That he opts to wed, that he chooses to raise the child as his own, this is the first example we get of the direction that the New Testament will take, this sense of throwing off the legalism of the previous generations for the love and mercy that will be at the heart of Christianity.

 My version here has a super fancy staff, much grander than his station would suggest, that I figure he might have made himself as a hobby project, because, you know, carpenter.


Tuesday, December 1, 2015

Advent Calendar Day 1: Mary

Over the next month, I'll be offering thoughts on the Nativity set model (a large papercraft crèche that you can find and download here:

https://gumroad.com/l/ThkR

Day 1: Mary


My version of Mary is influenced by The Gospel of the Origin of the Blessed Version and the Childhood of the Savior, now generally known as The Gospel of Psuedo-Matthew, written in the early 7th century for a Christian community clamoring for Jesus prequels, and from the Protevangelium, written about fifty years after the Gospel of Luke was laid down.  Both were important sources for medieval sacred art.  

 Mary is was the only daughter of Joachim and Anna, two extremely righteous people who found themselves childless in middle age.  Despite his piety and charity, Joachim (much like Job) was suspected of wickedness by his neighbors, here because God had opted to refuse them children.  We see echoes of the many other late-in-life-miraculous pregnancies in the Bible here, as their prayers are answered, and Anna becomes pregnant with Mary.

 They dedicate Mary to the temple where she goes to live and serve, but as she nears menstrual age the temple priests start to fret.  She has to leave before she gets her period, which would defile the holy place.  So, with much ceremony to determine a match suitable for such a miraculous child, the priests arrange an engagement between twelve-year-old Mary and Joseph, at whose home she goes to live until she reaches fourteen, at which point their marriage will be consummated.

 Now we get to the canonical Gospels, and Mary receives word from the angel Gabriel that she will be with child from the Holy Spirit.

 Her soul doth magnify the Lord, yeah, but she’s also barely a teenager and I expect that the attention of the visitors is a little overwhelming, so I drew her curled up, trying to process the magnitude of the whole thing.

 

Advent Calendar Introduction

Over the next month, I'll be offering thoughts on the Nativity set model (a large papercraft crèche that you can find and download here:
https://gumroad.com/l/ThkR

Religion has always been a lightning rod for fanfiction and headcanons.  Just like folks have spent the last hundred years writing Sherlock Holmes pastiches to explain inconsistencies in the stories or focus on a mentioned case never brought to light, religious scholars have filled scrolls and codexes and manuscripts and books with stories meant to better illuminate those found in scripture.  Some of these stem from a desire to explain away questions that inevitably arise from close readings (Genesis’s Lilith, Numbers’s floating water rock, etc), some from cataloguing stories that sprung up in folk tradition or from an absence of enough narrative to satiate the public’s desire for more (the Infancy Gospels).



When it comes to Christmas, we see a lot of this.  For example: the inkeeper who turns away the Holy Family but permits them to stay in the stable?  Not in the Bible.  He (or she) is a narrative invention, filling the gaps in the story.  It doesn’t conflict with the Gospel, it adds to it, and allows for another hook upon which to hang specific theological messages (and the innkeeper is the recipient of some specific ones).  Over the centuries, many characters have been added, expanded upon, or codified in order to give the story more depth, clarity, or meaning to those who have told it.

The first nativity crèche, assembled in 1223 by St Francis of Assisi, was created in an atmosphere in which there was a great deal of post-biblical tradition assigned to the stories of Jesus, some of it now long-abandoned in mainstream American Protestantism.  In the write-ups that I’ll be doing over the next few days, I’ll pull from a variety of sources to present a nativity in the spirit of those medieval sentiments, using the Bible, apocryphal scripture, regional tradition, narratives, and carols.  These were in the forefront of my mind when designing my versions of the characters, and I hope that they succeed in my purpose: to make the familiar story of Christmas unfamiliar, and remind those who wish to reflect on it just how strange, magical, ancient, and foreign a story it is.

I want to convey my thanks to writer, scholar, fellow Kentuckian, and renowned Christmas pundit Benito Cereno , to whom I reached out when undertaking this project.  Benito suggested some of the characters that I included in the series and I likely wouldn’t have known about them (or at least their cultural connection to the Nativity) without his guidance.

Monday, November 30, 2015

Christmas Creche! A Papercraft Nativity Model

I was finally able to make the time this year to do something I've wanted to do for the last few Christmases: make a ready-to-assemble creche.



I've set it up as a print file that you can download and print out yourself.  The set comes with almost forty figures and a three-dimensional manger scene.


The figures included are: Mary, Joseph, Jesus, James, five shepherds, sheep, a donkey, oxen, Balthazar, Melchior, Caspar, the Magi’s retinue (four more Magi, a camel driver, two camels, and two horses), the midwife, the druggist, the Caganer, the Little Drummer Boy, Salome, Amahl, the innkeepers, a stable boy, the Archangel Uriel, lil’ John the Baptist, a Roman soldier, the tempter, La Befana, Jeanette, Isabella, the cherry tree of Bethlehem, and the Heavenly Host (Archangels, Seraphim, and Cherubim).




Over the month of December 2015, I’ll be doing a write-up about one character each day here and on social media (@schweizercomics).

At our house, we’ll be using the set like an advent calendar with my daughter, introducing one new figure each day. If you’d like to do the same, I welcome you to use these write-ups as your guide for which characters to introduce in which order, with the write-up to give context.

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Veterans Day: The Whiskey Rebellion


This Veterans Day, I chose to depict two veterans:

The first, a soldier in one of the first federal forces mustered under the constitutional United States.  The second, a Revolutionary War veteran who he was sent to fight.

The very first United States veterans, soldiers who had fought against the British in the American Revolution, were also the first veterans to be institutionally screwed over.

Paid in I.O.U.s during the war (I.O.U.s accepted on the hope/faith that the Colonies would be victorious), those who returned to their farms or found new land to work discovered themselves high and dry when Pennsylvania (previously a bastion of democratic economic policy) insisted that they pay taxes on their land, but refused to accept the I.O.U.s as payment – a decision enacted by lender, war profiteer, and predatory inside-trader Robert Morris*, the first and last Superintendent of Finance of the United States.  Morris, with the goal of driving up a huge national debt that would force a reluctant congress to enact federal taxes with his bank serving as its operating arm (and middleman), concocted a scheme in which insider speculators would buy the now seemingly worthless I.O.U.s from the veterans for pennies on the dollar and cash them in at face value, resulting in government payouts that would cripple the national coffers and inevitably lead to a universal federal tax, disproportionately paid by the just-swindled non-financial class.  This federal tax (which was to include poll taxes, limiting the poor’s ability to vote in those states too progressive to not insist on land ownership requirements) was not designed to support infrastructure, cover the costs of the military, or do much at all for the public good, but was first and foremost intended to pay the regular six percent interest on Morris’s and his friends’ bonds, which would ever after, by design, account for the majority of the national debt.

The veterans, many of whom had turned to farming, saw clearly how the financial institutions of our fledgling country were stacked against them and rigged so that those making the rules were the ones who benefitting from them, and they wanted none of it.  Opposed in the first place to a binding constitution that was sure to wrest from them their sovereignty and place it into the hands of either conformity-insistent New Englanders, fiscal consolidators in New York, or despotic Southern aristocrats, they simply opted out.  Some, like the settlers in what is now eastern Tennessee, officially seceded, creating the Republic of Franklin.  Kentuckians raised hell in a decentralized and ultimately strategiless fashion like we always do.  Others, like those in western Pennsylvania, simply found their own currency to use, free from the machinations of speculators and market manipulators and beyond the reach of new laws against states creating legal tender:

Whiskey.

Farmers, long in the habit of distilling their excess grains, found that whiskey served as a workable medium of exchange.  Unlike grain, it didn’t spoil – it could last virtually forever.  It was easily portable, its quality could be immediately measured, and people always had use of it, both recreationally and medicinally.  Also, because western farmers were prohibited from shipping their grain down the Mississippi to eager customers in New Orleans, it was the most financially feasible way to get their crop to the Eastern ports.

Morris’s protégé Alexander Hamilton*, desiring a national economy similar to and therefore competitive with that of Britain, wanted to remove the individual farmer from the equation, consolidating agricultural business into a small group of conglomerates with previously independent farmers working as tenants and employees, thus driving up prices across the board.  He desired the same for manufacturing… including the manufacture of spirits.  So he proposed and saw enacted an extremely unpopular tax (a tax rescinded as soon as the more democratic-minded Jefferson took office): a tax on the manufacture of whiskey.

Favoring big business, Hamilton offered the large commercial distillers in the east a sweet deal: a flat yearly rate, further discounted by about 25% if it were paid in cash.  The farmers, however, were not permitted this offer; they had to take a per-gallon rate at an estimated 9 cents per gallon (the selling price of which was anywhere from fifty cents to a dollar).  Not an exorbitant amount (roughly 9-18%), EXCEPT that they weren’t taxed for the gallons that they produced.  They were taxed based on their CAPACITY to produce, based on the yield of their stills.  Since these farmers were not full-time distillers, using it only as a supplemental income, this meant that the tax could, for many families, exceed the total cash-equivalent yield of their whiskey.  For those who were still capable of producing, they would find their prices drastically undercut by the commercial distillers who reaped the benefits of Hamilton’s overtly regressive tax.

Add to this that the tax must be paid in coin, and you had a huge and crushing problem.  These farmers, having eschewed the financial system that swindled them and having little access to its yields anyway, didn’t have coin.  Barter and whiskey were their dealings, and with fines for unregistered stills that exceeded yearly incomes and no way of paying the taxes, they were, by design, screwed.  Farms would be foreclosed and scooped up by the eastern financiers, working towards the Hamiltonian vision of the country's resources and output being controlled by a few influential businessmen.

As had been the case in the lead-up to the Revolution, the region, aggrieved and despairing of the rights it had fought for (without pay, thanks to Morris, who steered the wartime funds to his bond-holding cronies) only a few years earlier, banded together to thwart the attempts of what they deemed an outside government to collect a tax they considered exploitative and unfair.

When a U.S. Marshal came to serve warrants on those who hadn’t paid the tax, the farmers protested his arrival at the tax inspector’s mansion and demanded to see him (likely to cover him in feathers as they did with most captured tax officials).  The tax inspector shot one of the protesters, and the farmers mustered more than five hundred armed men in response, burning the mansion.

Long story short, George Washington called on state militias to provide a national force, thirteen thousand strong – the first ever in our constitutional nation to be deployed against its own citizens (though certainly not the last; at least in this instance they were fighting for the principle of national sovereignty rather than the interests of monopolists and mine owners).


Faced with these overwhelming odds, or, perhaps, wary of killing young men whose lives and situations were separated from their own by little more than a decade, the farmers disbanded, preventing what could have become a very bloody confrontation during our nation's early unstable years.

*Whereas Morris was a greedy, swindling toad who did all he could to stymie democracy, exploit the country and its people both, rigidly enforce a class system by removing economic and political opportunities from those not already possessing them, and do his best to prolong the fighting and dying of soldiers in the Revolution in order to better his financial returns, Hamilton was at least motivated by ideological principle rather than lining his own pockets.