Analysis of ‘Friday the 13th’

I’m going to focus on the first two films of the franchise, since I’m primarily concerned with the relationship between Pamela Voorhees (Betsy Palmer) and her son, Jason, as well as the implications I see in it. Also, by the third film, the format for all of them has been established, and has thus become too redundant to go over the storyline of every movie.

We all know the format: either Jason or his mother (or copycat killer Roy Burns), violently kills off a number of young adults at or near Camp Crystal Lake, or at Chris Higgins‘s local homestead, or in a halfway house where Tommy Jarvis is, or in Manhattan, or in a spacecraft in the future, or in the Springwood, Ohio setting of the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise. Where the killings happen doesn’t really matter, as it’s all just an indulgent blood-fest, typically with the final girl trope.

Let’s be frank: the films are good mindless fun and entertainment (emphasis on mindless), but the critics are right to deride them. They’re schlocky slasher films, intended only to capitalize on the success of far superior slasher films like Halloween, Black Christmas, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, or Psycho, the sequels even more so meant to capitalize on the success of the first Friday the 13th.

Still, however, there must be a way to explain how popular these films are with the masses so that one doesn’t insult the intelligence of Friday‘s fans. I’d like to attempt such an explanation, with an understanding that the basic elements are there, if so unconsciously, to make a good premise…if only the execution, as well as the development of the themes I’m about to discuss, was done better, without such an emphasis on just kill, kill, kill…ma, ma, ma.

I’m a strong believer in the power of the unconscious mind, and while I’m sure the screenwriters of these movies only consciously meant to create simple stories of a killer on a bloody rampage, with the intent of gaining maximum box office success, I believe there are archetypal elements deep inside the collective psyche that got put into these films (especially the first few, before things got too self-indulgent) regardless of conscious intent.

To uncover what these elements are, we first need to examine the motives behind Pamela’s and Jason’s bloodlust. In dialectical contrast to their murderous hatred of anyone they meet, they have the deepest, most intense mother/son love you could imagine…and mother/son love has already been traditionally idealized as the greatest love of all.

The evil comes in, however, when we consider how the love of this mother/son dyad is a narcissistic one, based on a feeling that each of them is just an extension and mirror-reflection of the other. The two are trapped in Lacan‘s Imaginary, incapable of and unwilling to go out into the healthier social and cultural world of the Symbolic. Hence, anybody else out there, the Other rather than the other, is just to be killed.

Other rationalizations for the killings include a moral abomination of the ‘sinfulness’ of the camp counsellors–enjoying premarital sex, smoking weed, the public indecency of playing strip Monopoly or wandering around outside in one’s panties. Tied to this sinfulness is a belief that the children at summer camp won’t be adequately watched–hence, Jason’s drowning.

Thus, Camp Crystal Lake must never be reopened, and any attempt to do so by these sinful camp counsellors will necessitate their deaths. OK, apart from the Lacanian stuff I mentioned above, we all know this–I’m just reviewing the basics here…but what does it all mean?

Here’s where my interpretation comes in. Now, since art, properly understood, is a dialogue between the artist and the audience–not just an artist saying his or her ‘only meaning’ for the creation, but a meaning evolved and developed between the artist and audience through a back-and-forth of creation and interpretation–I feel free to interpret the meaning of these movies in my way. (I also hope my interpretation can elevate the movies a bit…if at all possible.) Here goes…

Ever notice how Jason could be heard as a pun on Jesu (as in “Joy of Man’s Desiring”)? You should see where I’m going with this, Dear Reader.

Note how the superstition behind Friday the 13th is associated with the Last Supper, in which Judas Iscariot is often considered the 13th guest, and the day after was Good Friday, when Christ was killed. Judas betrayed Jesus, as the camp counsellors betrayed Jason (in his mother’s opinion, at least).

Camp Crystal Lake (the name being a pun on Christ) can be associated with the Garden of Eden, where sin lost us paradise. Naked Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit has been seen as symbolic of sex, just like the camp counsellors taking off their clothes and going about publicly in their underwear (think of Genesis 2:25), or having sex. If Adam and Eve eat of that fruit, on that day they shall surely die (Genesis 2:17); they die metaphorically on that day, losing their innocence; the counsellors die literally on that day for publicly undressing, having sex, and smoking pot. Steven Christy (Peter Brouwer), who would suffer the little children to come unto him (Mark 10:14), that is, to come to his summer camp, has a surname that is another pun on Christ.

The point I’m trying to make here, which should be obvious to you by now, Dear Reader, is that Mrs. Voorhees and her son are a perverse Madonna and Child. That deep love between a mother and her son is epitomized in all of that old Christian iconography.

By seeing Jason as an evil Jesus, I’m not calling him the Antichrist of the Book of Revelation (Go to this horror movie for that.). I mean instead that Jason and his mother, in murdering sinners rather than preaching repentance and forgiving them, represent the oppressive, authoritarian aspects of the Church. Jesus saves, but Jason slays. Some call Mary the Co-redeemer, but Pamela Voorhees is, if you will, the Co-reddener.

If Camp Crystal Lake is the Garden of Eden, then she and her son also represent the cherubim, their knives, axes, and machetes representing the flaming sword to keep the sinners out of paradise (Genesis 3:24). The purity and innocence of the place must be protected from fornicators and pot-heads, for the sake of children like Jason.

The rationalization for the Voorhees terror, therefore, is to protect children from danger and death, yet this ‘protection’ hypocritically involves danger and death. The Voorhees’s ‘Church’ is really just a front for the most reactionary of conservative thinking. The camp counsellors aren’t even moderate leftists: they’re just liberals who want to be able to relax and have a good time every now and then. Pamela, like any far right-winger, expects the staff of Camp Crystal Lake to be working non-stop to ensure the safety of the kids. If the staff slacks off at all, then like Amon Göth, she’ll pick them off one by one, but with a knife or axe instead of a rifle.

When I speak of a ‘perverse Madonna and Child,” I don’t mean it as a comment on religion and spirituality per se, but as representative of reactionary, conservative authoritarian thinking, how religion is used (if only symbolically in these movies) to justify power and control over others. The year the first film came out, in 1980, as well that of as its first sequel, 1981, is fitting given these were the first of the reactionary Reagan/Thatcher years.

Going into the mid-1980s, there was a debate on CNN’s Crossfire about whether or not PMRC censorship of popular music’s racier lyrics was valid; opposed to it, Frank Zappa also warned of the US moving in the direction of what he called a “fascist theocracy.” The two conservatives he was debating scoffed at him, but he didn’t say the US was already a fascist theocracy at the time: he said that “the Reagan administration…[was] steering us right down that pipe.” (Reagan, incidentally, had fundamentalist Christian beliefs and supported the religious right.)

Well, look at the US today, under Trump, with Roe vs Wade overturned (to protect the unborn child, ostensibly, but actually to curb ‘fornication’ and to control women’s reproductive systems), and with masked ICE men violently removing people from the ‘Camp Crystal Lake,’ if you will, of the US, and shooting in the face anyone who resists. How like Jason’s violence, with his goalie mask and murder weapons.

The notion of the deep love and connection between Mary and the Christ child is not, of course, limited to Christianity. Pagan notions of a mother-goddess and her son/consort abounded in the ancient world, in such forms as Isis and Horus. The relationship is archetypal…and narcissistic. Robert Graves dealt with the idea in The White Goddess when he said, “Woman worships the male infant, not the grown man: it is evidence of her deity, of man’s dependence on her for life.” Pamela’s undying love for Jason, which involved an unending quest to find new victims in whom to avenge his death, is an extension of her own narcissism.

Similarly, Jason in the sequels saw in his mother a metaphorical mirror of himself. He endlessly avenges her death, with new victims, as she did his. She and he are spiritually inseparable, just as the authoritarian leader and his mindless, jackbooted soldiers are, as ICE are for the US government. Properly understood, the son is virtually indistinguishable from the mother (at least in terms of will and motivation, if not in terms of other things, which I’ll go into soon enough), just as the mindless ICE agents do only the will of their fascist government, with no individual will of their own, obeying orders uncritically.

So indistinguishable is Mrs. Voorhees from Jason that at the beginning of Scream, Casey Becker (Drew Barrymore) confuses mother with son, incorrectly naming Jason as the killer in the first Friday movie and forgetting that he didn’t show up until the sequels. The same “ki, ki, ki, ma, ma, ma” echoed, reverberated whispering is heard in most of the films, regardless of whether mother or son is the killer.

That whispering–so often misheard as “chi, chi, chi, ha, ha, ha” because of the heavy echo, reverb, and distortion resulting from the whispering of “ki, ki, ki, ma, ma, ma” by film composer Harry Manfredini into a microphone, then running it through an Echoplex machine–is short for “Kill her, Mommy.” Pamela hears Jason saying this over and over in her head, her imitating the child’s high-pitched voice as she chases Alice Hardy (Adrienne King) during the climax of the first film. There are variations on the whispering in the sequels: in Part Two, for example, one usually hears only “ki, ki, ki,” and only occasionally “ma, ma, ma.”

The sameness or variation in the whispering doesn’t ultimately matter: the continuity underlines how Jason and his mother are spiritually, if not materially, one and the same person. The same is true of the ruling class and their thuggish soldiers (as I see them represented by the murderous mother and son), who often use religion and its priggish morality to justify their authoritarian grip on power.

So, when Mrs. Voorhees dies, Jason is to take over the killing duties. Accordingly, two months after her decapitation by Alice, Jason kills her in her kitchen with an ice pick in her temple after she sees the severed head of his mother in her fridge. Just as his mother avenged his death, he avenges hers.

Here’s the problem, though: if Jason never drowned, but she only thought he did (as the story was ret-conned), wouldn’t she have learned he never died soon enough? She had over twenty years to learn. If she knew the whole time, or much of or most of the time, wouldn’t that have deflated her rage enough not to kill (so many)? Also, how was adult Jason able to find where Alice was living?

I propose a different explanation, one that takes into account the Mary/Jesus symbolism discussed above, and which allows for the unavoidable supernatural element in these movies. He was resurrected, given an adult body, and had the clairvoyance to find where Alice was.

Why not resurrected? He was certainly resurrected in a number of the other sequels, and his ability to keep on living after other injuries, ones that should have been fatal, strongly implies supernatural abilities. I’d say Mom raised Jason from the dead, just as God raised Jesus from the dead (Romans 10:9). Similarly, just as the resurrected Christ had a spiritual body (1 Corinthians 15:42-44), one “imperishable” and “raised in power,” not weakness, so does Jason have an imperishable, powerful body, one whose growth to adulthood seems even to have been accelerated.

To get back to “ki, ki, ki, ma, ma, ma…”, who is saying it, really? Does Jason’s ghost say it to his mother in the first film, her imitating his voice as I described it above? In the sequels, does her ghost chant it in Jason’s mind, implying not only a psychic link between the two killers, but also that her chanting “ki, ki, ki, ma, ma, ma” in his mind’s ear means she’s calling him “Mommy,” thus further cementing my idea that the identity of the two is of only one spiritual presence?

In any case, as we know, Jason doesn’t talk at all: his voice is in his murder weapons (recall that amusing guest appearance he made on the Arsenio Hall Show to promote Jason Takes Manhattan).

His muteness, from a psychoanalytic viewpoint, is linked to his social isolation. Recall what I said above about his dyadic relationship with his mother, as a reflection of his being stuck in the narcissism of the Imaginary Order. To enter the social and cultural world of the Symbolic, one must use language. The Symbolic is the healthy world of human relationships.

That a deformed, mentally disabled child would have extreme difficulties being a part of the Symbolic and joining normal society would be an understatement. His drowning in the lake complicates matters further: it’s representative of not only never leaving the Imaginary, but also of being trapped in the traumatic, undifferentiated, inexpressible Chaos of Lacan’s Real Order.

The non-differentiated, formlessness of the lake is symbolic of the cosmic ocean, where all begins and ends (i.e., the Great Flood; consider also the rain storm in the first film as associated with the Deluge, after which the ‘sons of God’ lay with the ‘daughters of men’…that is, fornicated). Jason died in the lake, and Alice’s Carrie-like nightmare of him coming up at her in the boat and pulling her down in the water is also to be associated with the cosmic ocean as bringing us all back to death at the end of the world.

Just as Jason has supernatural abilities as I described above, and just as his mother is intolerant of sexual indulgence, so were Carrie and her religious fanatic mother respectively, hence how fitting it was to add Alice’s Carrie-like nightmare to the end of the first movie. As for Part III‘s ending, it’s fitting for Chris Higgins (Dana Kimmell) to have a similar nightmare of Mrs. Voorhees coming up from the water and dragging her from her boat into it, even though Chris doesn’t seem to know (oddly, considering how close she is to Camp Crystal Lake) who Jason or his mother are. The point is that it further reinforces how Jason and his mother are one, especially in the undifferentiated, traumatizing Chaos-Real of the water.

At the climax of Part II, Ginny Field (Amy Steel) discovers Jason’s shrine of his mother (how like one of these, if you will!), with her severed head. Knowing the ‘legend’ of him seeing Alice decapitate his mother and him seeking revenge (as she had for him), Ginny stands before Pamela’s head to block its view from Jason, her wearing Pamela’s old sweater. Using her wits and knowledge of child psychology, Ginny takes a gamble impersonating Mrs. Voorhees, appealing to his sense of filial duty and obedience to his mother (“Jason, Mother is talking to you!”). The only human relationship he can understand is one of power and authority. The only reason he’ll listen to her, and not kill her, is that she, as his mother (and also as a reflection/extension of himself), has absolute power over him.

Mindless killers like him (police, the military, ICE, etc.) similarly see human relationships only in this hierarchical sense. If you’re ‘beneath’ me, I can beat and kill you; if you’re ‘above’ me, you can beat and kill me. There is no sense of reciprocity, no mutuality, no connection, no communication.

Within my framework of Jason and his mother as a perverse version of Jesus and Mary, it’s ironic that ‘the Word made flesh’ speaks no words in these movies. (“Ki, ki, ki, ma, ma, ma” would just be the voice of a ghost ringing in his head, not him talking.) Instead, Jason, in his Oedipal relationship with Mrs. Voorhees, speaks only in the primitive, pre-verbal form of communication–as Wilfred Bion conceptualized it–of projective identification and negative containment (as symbolized by all the stabbings and slashing).

Normally, a mother contains her baby’s agitations and distress through a soothing process Bion called maternal reverie. The container, ♀︎, is yonic in symbolism; the contained, ♂︎, is phallic. This is a calming, positive containment. In pathological parent/child relationships, though, as in the case with Pamela and Jason, the containment of the child’s agitations and distress is the opposite of soothing and calming. Traumas aren’t processed–they’re aggravated, intensified, leading to what Bion called a nameless dreadnegative containment.

Jason, thus, unable to develop a normal ability to think, to process external stimuli, and to grow in K (knowledge), he cannot speak and express himself verbally. He can only communicate in that primitive, non-verbal way, which involves projecting onto other people. And since all he can communicate is projections of pain, he does so through negative containment, in which the phallic contained is a knife, machete, axe, or pitchfork, and the yonic container is a stab or slash wound.

This kind of mindless, violent communication is also typical of the hired thugs of a fascist state. The bloody, brutal way in which we see the victims killed in these movies (as demonstrated by the special makeup effects of people like Tom Savini) also leads, disturbingly, to a desensitization to violence. As I said above, it’s an interesting coincidence how this franchise began in the 1980s, with the rise of Reagan/Thatcher neoliberalism and Zappa’s fears of a movement in the direction of a fascist theocracy, and yet here we are, with at best minimal outrage from politicians at the ongoing Gaza genocide, the murder of Renee Good, the state of perpetual war around the world ever since 9/11, and the kidnapping (on baseless charges) of the president of Venezuela and his wife. Atrocities in the real world have been reduced to mere entertainment.

As the sequels of the franchise go on, we notice that the setting shifts farther and farther away from the Eden of Camp Crystal Lake: first, to places nearby (in the novelization of Part II, Alice has returned to the town of Crystal Lake, where Jason kills her–page 6), then to Tommy Jarvis’s halfway home, then to Manhattan, to a spaceship in the future, to Freddy Krueger’s Springwood…and like Jesus, Jason even harrows hell! By analogy, the American settler-colonial state massacred the Native Americans, then engaged in imperialist war and plunder…often, and to a significant extent at least, killing in the name of Christ.

And just as Jason’s mindless, pointless killings seem to go on and on forever, in all their perpetual brutality, so do those of the US empire, to this day, both locally and internationally.

As I said at the beginning of this analysis, I’m not saying that the writers of the films of this franchise intended the allegory that I’m formulating here; that’s all my invention. They were just dragging out a gore-fest to make a maximum amount of money, which by the way is what capitalism and imperialism by extension are all about. The associations I’m making reflect unconscious ideas we all have floating around in our minds, for such is the heritage of our collective unconscious: religious iconography representing our lofty moral ideals, lashing out violently when those ideals aren’t lived up to, violence as a form of control, self-righteous narcissism, parental authoritarianism expanding into state authoritarianism.

As a result, every day feels like an unlucky day.

The Tanah: Proverbs

[The following is the thirty-second of many posts–here is the first, here is the second, here is the third, here is the fourth, here is the fifth, here is the sixth, here is the seventh, here is the eighth, here is the ninth, here is the tenth, here is the eleventh, here is the twelfth, here is the thirteenth, here is the fourteenth, here is the fifteenth, here is the sixteenth, here is the seventeenth, here is the eighteenth, here is the nineteenth, here is the twentieth, here is the twenty-first, here is the twenty-second, here is the twenty-third, here is the twenty-fourth, here is the twenty-fifth, here is the twenty-sixth, here is the twenty-seventh, here is the twenty-eighth, here is the twenty-ninth, here is the thirtieth, and here is the thirty-first–about a fictitious discovery of ancient manuscripts of a religious text of narratives and magic spells. Its purpose for my readers and me is to provide a cosmology and mythography on which I am basing much, if not most, of my fiction–short stories and novels. If anyone is interested in reading this fiction, he or she can use these blog posts as references to explain the nature of the magic and universe in my fiction.]

Translator’s Introduction

This set of pithy maxims was not thought to be requiring a magical ritual, involving the use of the four elements personified by the Crims. The words were thought to be magically effective in themselves: the original language uses such musical elements as metre, alliteration, assonance, consonance, and rhyme felt sufficient to influence the feelings of those in the tribe and to deter them from using magic in aid of sinning, by curbing unhealthy emotions.

They are to be chanted repeatedly, louder and louder, and with more and more emotional intensity.

  1. Pride is the father of shame.
    Humility is the mother of honour.
  2. Anger is a moment of madness.
    Calm keeps sanity everlasting.
  3. Envy is admiration and hate embracing.
    Its lack looks on without malevolence.
  4. Greed never grasps enough.
    Giving never gets empty-handed.
  5. One getting fat while many starve
    reverses how food should be shared.
  6. Lust loves the flesh and hates the heart.
    Lovemaking gives life, never taking.
  7. Despair hates all the outside world,
    because it hates all that’s inside.

Commentary

It’s fascinating how this ancient tribe, through these proverbs, seems to have anticipated the deadly sins of the Church.

Analysis of ‘Phantasm’

Phantasm is a 1979 supernatural horror film written and directed by Don Coscarelli. It stars A. Michael Baldwin, Bill Thornbury, Reggie Bannister, Kathy Lester, and Angus Scrimm. The film was independently produced, being financed by Coscarelli, his father, and local investors; the cast were mostly amateurs and aspiring professionals.

Following its expanded theatrical release, Phantasm would become a box office hit, grossing $22 million internationally. It got mixed reviews from critics, but in the years since its release, Phantasm has become a cult film. It’s on several critics’ lists of the best horror films, being praised by film scholars for its surrealistic qualities and themes of mourning, loss, and sibling relationships. JJ Abrahams is a fan of the movie.

Here is a link to quotes from the film, here are links (<<< this second one’s really bad) to the full movie, and here is a link to the (only first nine chapters, unfortunately, of the) novelization.

Since mourning and loss are major themes in the movie, I think it’s useful to go into the psychoanalysis of mourning. It’s also useful to examine the difference Freud saw between mourning and melancholia. In mourning, the painful process of dealing with the loss of a loved one is eventually gone through, and the mourner can redirect libido to objects other than the lost one; we can see Jody Pearson (Thornbury) largely getting over the loss of his parents and redirecting his feelings towards friends, bandmates like Reggie (Bannister), and women.

Things haven’t been so easy for Jody’s 13-year-old kid brother, Mike (Baldwin), who I would say is experiencing a repressed, unconscious form of melancholia, which involves not only a failure to accept the loss of his and Jody’s parents, but also involves the absorbing of their lost parents into his ego to make them internal objects (which in turn is the basis for object relations theory).

Furthermore, this internalizing also involves taking in those aspects of Mike’s parents that he doesn’t like, and so since those aspects are in him now, he dislikes himself for those aspects. His way of dealing with those disagreeable parts is to split them off and project them into the external world. These expelled objects would be what Melanie Klein called the bad father and the bad mother, those aspects of one’s parents that are frustrating and withholding of gratification.

These would be the Tall Man (Scrimm) and the Lady in Lavender (Lester), symbolically speaking, of course. Her sexual allure is symbolically in the Oedipally-desired parent, and his creepiness is symbolically in the Oedipally-hated parent. Since both are aspects of the same phantasm, they can also be seen to represent Klein’s notion of the combined parent figure, in which a child sees or imagines, in the primal scene, his mom and dad engaging in violent sex, which traumatizes him.

These phantasies (or phantasms) are the unconscious basis of all of the terror that Mike is experiencing as he continues failing to accept the loss of his parents. He’s been having nightmares ever since they died. Since part of him felt the usual frustrations any kid feels towards parents who don’t always do as a kid wishes, he imagines that he somehow ‘willed’ their deaths, and so he’s racked with guilt and self-hate over having ’caused’ their deaths–hence his being terrorized by the Tall Man, or the internalized bad father object, as his punishment for having ‘wished for’ the deaths of his parents. The terror he’s going through is all in his head.

Note that “phantasm” can mean both “spectre” and “fantasy,” or “figment of the imagination.” The Tall Man can be understood in both of these senses. He is a ghost terrorizing the Oregon town in which the film is set, and he is a fantasy in Mike’s mind. That fantasy comes from the internalized object of the bad father in Mike’s mind.

His conflict (and to a lesser extent, Jody’s conflict) with his mom and dad stem from the universal, narcissistic trauma of his love/hate relationship with them. They drove him crazy (presumably with their list of dos and don’ts) while alive, and now he can’t bear to lose them, now that they’re dead. He keeps them present and alive in his mind, in the unrecognizable forms of the Tall Man and the Lady in Lavender, for such is the way that repression works: feelings are pushed into the unconscious mind, then they return to consciousness, but in unrecognizable forms, hiding in plain sight.

What’s good and bad in Mike’s parents is split, in what Klein called the paranoid-schizoid position (“schizoid” referring to this splitting). The Tall Man, as Mike’s bad father, terrorizing him represents the persecutory anxiety the boy feels (“paranoid”) as a result of having rejected (and, as he imagines, having unconsciously wanted the death of) his father.

As with A Nightmare on Elm Street, Phantasm blurs the distinction between dream and reality. Because of this blurring, we can see the supernatural horror and the surrealism of Phantasm as being an allegory of the inner workings and conflicts of the unconscious mind. The dreamlike state that permeates not just this film, but also its sequels (generally regarded as inferior), explains to a great extent their many plot holes and inconsistencies.

The film begins at night, with a young man named Tommy making love with the Lady in Lavender in Morningside Cemetery. She takes a knife and stabs him to death, then changes into the form of the Tall Man. The juxtaposition of sex and death (or of Eros and Thanatos), as well as of the Lady in Lavender (or bad mother transference) and of the Tall Man (or bad father transference) allegorizes and personifies the unconscious processes described above.

Tommy has not just had the Oedipally-desired mother transference, he’s also experienced the combined parent figure, whom he penetrated and was penetrated by with a phallic knife (Indeed, in the novelization, the stabbing is described thus: “Quickly she sank [the knife] as hard and fast into his heart as he had plunged his body into hers.”). He later can be understood to be a kind of brother-figure for Mike, the way Reggie will be understood to be by the end of the film when we learn of Jody’s death, since we learn that Jody, Reggie, and Tommy were supposed to be a kind of Crosby, Stills, and Nash-style band of singers and guitar strummers (“It’s a hell of a way to end a trio,” Jody says of Tommy’s death to Reggie on the day of the funeral). The togetherness of the three young men suggests a tripling of Jody for Mike.

Because of the trauma Mike has suffered from his and Jody’s parents’ deaths, the boy has terrible fears of abandonment, and so he follows his older brother everywhere around town. Jody in fact plans on leaving Mike in the custody of his aunt, which of course the boy will hate, but Jody wants his freedom to pursue making music with Reggie, and leave that dull town.

Part of Mike’s fears of losing Jody the way he lost their parents can be seen as expressed in nightmare form: the stabbing of Tommy, and later of Reggie, the two victims being symbolic brothers. Mike’s unconscious mind is thus displacing the status of brother onto two men who aren’t his biological brothers, in order to ease the anxiety of facing up to the loss of his actual brother, Jody.

Mike’s melancholia, expressed musically through the haunting synthesizer theme in E minor, demonstrates the self-hate Freud wrote about in his paper on the subject (link above) in how the boy subjects himself to dangerous situations. His hanging out in the cemetery at night where the Tall Man’s crushed dwarves are, his going in the mausoleum, and even his rather precocious (for a 13-year-old) riding around on a motorbike (and, at one point, driving Jody’s car) all demonstrate at least potentially self-destructive behaviour, indicative of Freud’s death drive, something people who hate themselves might do, because they have bad internal objects haunting them.

After Tommy’s funeral, his death understood (but not believed, according to the novelization) to be a suicide, and it’s understood just how heavy his coffin is, Mike comes to the cemetery and sees the Tall Man pick up, carry, and put the coffin in a hearse all by himself. Mike is so amazed at the mortician’s superhuman strength that he whispers, “What the fuck?” and wants to tell a local fortune teller (played by Mary Ellen Shaw) about it. The height and strength of the Tall Man (especially as compared with the height of his dwarves) reinforces him being representative of the bad father, who from the point of view of a child, is much bigger and stronger.

The fortune teller, who has reassured Mike that if Jody leaves, they’ll go together, is an old lady. As such, she is as much a symbolic mother to Mike as the Tall Man is a symbolic father. (Her granddaughter, played by Terrie Kalbus, is a symbolic sister.) That the fortune teller is amused at Mike’s fear from feeling his hand trapped and hurt in a magic box indicates that she, like the Lady in Lavender, is a bad mother figure, too.

That the box seems to be taking away Mike’s hand and is scaring him (the losing of his hand would have been a symbolic castration) is indicative of castration anxiety, and castration at the hands of the bad father (or here, of the bad mother) can in turn be representative of corporal punishment. To overcome his melancholia, Mike must overcome his fear and unconscious hate of his dead parents. Only then will their bad internal objects stop tormenting him. Hence, the granddaughter (Sarah in the novelization) tells him not to be afraid, and only when he controls his fear does the box, a yonic symbol, release his hand.

The old and young women want Mike to understand that it’s fear itself that is his problem. A funny thing, though, happens soon after, for the granddaughter goes to the cemetery and enters the mausoleum; and when she finds a room in it with containers holding the Tall Man’s crushed dwarves (as we’ll eventually learn), she finds herself overcome with terror, and screams. We don’t see or hear from her again. The fear she warned Mike about became her very problem.

While she’s at the cemetery and mausoleum, Jody is at home, singing and playing his electric guitar on his porch, and Reggie arrives in his ice cream truck with his acoustic guitar and joins in playing the new song Jody has been working on. He’s singing of his lady having left him, and I can’t help linking that idea with how his parents’ death must have felt like an abandonment (hence, Mike’s fears of abandonment). The unconscious Oedipal attachment to Jody’s mother could have easily been displaced to his lady leaving him (his local girlfriend [see the novelization], or his coming sexual encounter with the Lady in Lavender). An expression of his displaced grief in song is one way Jody has been successful in overcoming his grief and loss–something Mike can’t do.

The novelization points out in Chapter Two that Tommy sang and played guitar just like Jody and Reggie–hence I say their trio would have been like Crosby, Stills, and Nash, especially judging by the mellow style of the song we hear the surviving two musicians working on. They only need to work out the vocal harmonies, which would have been three-part had Tommy still been alive, like the harmonies of CSN. As a trio, they would again be a tripling of brothers for Mike, an unconscious wish-fulfillment for a boy so scared of losing any more of his family.

When Jody and Reggie finish playing the song, Reggie takes out a tuning fork and strikes it, then touches it with his fingertips to stop the ringing sound. Immediately after that, we see Sarah, the fortune teller’s granddaughter, walking through a hall in the mausoleum towards the door to the room with the dwarf containers, where she’ll scream.

We learn towards the climax of the movie, when Jody, Mike, and Reggie find that room, that there’s a pair of metal bars sticking up from the floor. These look like a giant tuning fork, but without the connecting bottom. Mike will put his hand between the bars and see it disappear, just as when his hand disappeared in the box; he’ll discover what Sarah must have seen–a hot, hellish world of slave dwarves toiling away for the devil Tall Man. Reggie later will touch the tops of those bars, just as his fingertips touched the tuning fork. This causes a vacuum in the room from which he narrowly escapes.

We are left wondering what connection there could be between the tuning fork, the bars, and the box. Since as I said above, the events of Phantasm are an allegorizing of the goings-on of the unconscious mind, there will be an association of various images that we see, all signifiers of some kind meant to represent certain mental concepts. Since the magic box is a yonic symbol, the tuning fork and metal bars can be seen as phallic. Putting one’s hand in the box or between the bars makes the hand disappear, a symbolic castration.

Touching the tuning fork or bars, and putting one’s hand in the box, is symbolic masturbation. The threat of castration, symbolic of corporal punishment, is parental discipline against a child’s indulgence in forbidden pleasures.

Furthermore, the tuning fork and metal bars can be seen as both phallic and yonic, the spaces in between the “phalli” being yonis; therefore, the tuning fork and metal bars can be associated with the combined parental figure. That Mike’s hand disappears in the in-between “yoni” as well as that of the magic box indicates the vagina dentata of a punitive bad mother, one every bit as threatening as the bad father of the Tall Man, disciplining a child for his Oedipal urges. Recall how the Lady in Lavender, knife in hand, is ready to stab Jody just outside the mausoleum as Reggie is about to touch the bars and cause the vacuum in the room and the storm outside.

All of these elements in combination reinforce the idea that Phantasm is all about unconscious paranoid anxiety that the hated, internalized mother and father are out to punish Mike and Jody for wanting them dead and gone, however repressed that wish may be.

We learn from Chapter Seven of the novelization that Jody doesn’t want to take over his father’s bank. One can imagine some nasty argument between Jody and his parents over whether or not he should pursue a career in music rather than take over the family business. Jody’s wish to be free of his parents’ dictates surely contributed to an unconscious wish on his part to be rid of them…and so their deaths would have been a source of unconscious guilt for him as well as for Mike.

While Jody is visiting the bank in Chapter Seven of the novelization, he’s in the suit he had on during Tommy’s funeral, and apart from giving the management of his dead father’s bank to George Norby until Mike is old enough to take over, Jody also has a brief, intimate moment with Suzy, an employee there who likes him in that suit and, being of a traditional woman’s mindset, hopes her boyfriend will be the new boss of the bank. One of the film’s outtakes shows her with him in the office that was his dad’s.

Being an aspiring musician, though, Jody doesn’t want to be part of the money-obsessed, capitalist world. As I said above, I imagine his dad being upset with him for not wanting to do that. This conflict can be linked to the later scene of Mike seeing the slave dwarves in that hellscape beyond the metal bar portal in the room with the dwarf containers. Jody doesn’t want to be a slave to capitalism, angering his father, and so his and Mike’s unconscious is showing them the infernal punishment their devilish bad father (the Tall Man) has planned for them.

You see, Jody has a bit of paranoid anxiety of his own, though it’s not as intense as Mike’s is. Jody, too, has a nightmare, one of dwarves grabbing him and pulling him away into hell, just as Mike has a nightmare of the Tall Man standing over his bed with his arms out, ready to grab the boy, and the dwarves all then do.

With the blurring of the line between dream and reality, we don’t know for sure how much of Phantasm is actually in waking life. For all we know, it’s all a great big, unending nightmare, Dante’s tour of the hellish unconscious with Virgil. For this reason, I feel free to interpret any and every character as an extension of Jody’s and Mike’s family.

Thus, Suzy can be an extension of Jody’s unconscious Oedipal feelings for his mother (with Dad dead, he can have her, provided he’s willing to carry on with the family business). If not, though, he’ll be with the Lady in Lavender that night in the cemetery, taking his chances with the bad mother instead of having the good mother transference in his dad’s office in the bank.

Indeed, because things have gone sour between Jody and Suzy (she representing the good mother), he’ll go that night to the local pub and pick up the Lady in Lavender. Mike will be following Jody, as usual. The two lovers going at it in the cemetery represents a fusion of Eros and Thanatos, the life and death drives.

Mike, of course, will be in the cemetery, too. He’ll be scared by the presence of those dwarves, making him scream for help and distract Jody from her…also saving his life without him even realizing it.

The whole point of the Oedipus complex, properly understood in its expanded sense to include the jealous wish to hog the Oedipally-desired object to oneself (be this object the mother, father,…or really anyone), is that it’s a universal narcissistic trauma expressing hate and hostility to anyone who wishes to share that object and not let one hog him or her to oneself. This is what we see when Mike is following Jody everywhere, not wanting his older brother to be free to live his own life (e.g., to be with the Lady in Lavender). Saving Jody from her knife is thus a justification of Mike’s narcissistic wish to hog his brother all to himself, and is thus a wish-fulfillment. Remember how all of Phantasm could just be Mike’s ongoing dream, all an expression of his unconscious.

The next day, Mike is downtown, and across the street he sees the Tall Man walking up to Reggie’s ice cream truck. The cold of the truck seems to affect the Tall Man negatively. Indeed, we come to understand that the antagonist, being a devil of the hottest hell, has a strong aversion to heat’s diametrical opposite.

Later, Mike is in the garage, tinkering with a car. His precocious talent at fixing cars seems to reflect a wish to know how to bring things back to life, as it were. If only he could bring people back to life, like his parents. Dwarves scare him again, and he tells still-disbelieving Jody about them.

That night, Mike will go with a knife to the mausoleum to figure out what’s going on there. As he’s hiding in a coffin, he sees a caretaker looking around. This is another middle-aged man, like the Tall Man, so as far as Mike’s unconscious is concerned, the man is yet again representative of the bad father that the boy has internalized and whom he wishes he could be rid of.

Note how in all of Mike’s fear of the Tall Man and his dwarves, the boy still ventures out to the places that are the sources of his fear. This willingness to go out there demonstrates his self-destructive nature, which in turn demonstrates the self-hate he feels from his having internalized his bad parental objects, the source of his melancholia in the Freudian sense. He hates himself because he hates them, who are now a part of him.

Still, he keeps trying to project them outward, hence he has to confront them in the forms of the caretaker and the Tall Man. The coffin he hides in is a yonic symbol, representing his forbidden Oedipal desire, which as I said above is much more than just the wish to have his mother incestuously; but in the more expanded sense, it means he wants to hog all desired objects (her, the good father, Jody, and other brother-figures–Reggie and Tommy) all to himself.

Lacan‘s Non! du père forbids Mike to hog everyone just to fulfill his personal wishes, though: Mike must enter society and share everyone with everyone else; he cannot be the symbolic phallus for the mother, which represents the wish to be the desire of the Other. This inability to be that phallus is thus a symbolic castration, which is a recurrent motif in Phantasm.

Mike struggles with the caretaker, even biting his hand…and we’ve seen how a hurt or disappearing hand is symbolic castration. Mike wants the frustration of his wishes to be projected onto others. Immediately after the biting of the hand comes the flying ball with the blade, which stabs the caretaker in the head and kills him. This flying testicle and phallic blade are both castrated and (symbolically) castrating in their mutilation of the man’s face.

Right after this struggle, Mike has to confront the Tall Man, who chases him into a room, with Mike bolting the door to keep the mortician out, his hand slipping through the crack. Mike uses his knife to slice off the Tall Man’s fingers, yet another symbolic castration and Mike’s wish-fulfillment to project the frustration of his desires onto his bad father internal object. This wish-fulfillment is a form of revenge against his father’s frustration of his desires, which led to his unconscious wish for his parents’ deaths, which in turn led to his guilt and melancholia over their actual death. Instead of human blood, the severed fingers drip yellow ichor (the blood of the Greek gods), fittingly the colour of piss and therefore it reinforces how the fingers are phallic.

Mike takes a finger, puts it in a little box [!], and takes it home to show Jody the proof that he isn’t going crazy. Later on, the finger turns into a horrible, black flying insect that attacks Mike and then Jody and visiting Reggie soon after. Its ugliness, and the revulsion that the insect causes, are the diametrical (and dialectical) opposite of the beauty of Aphrodite, who emerged nude from the foam of the sea into which the severed genitals of Uranus were thrown. Indeed, the original sky-father god was castrated by his son, Cronus, in a reversal of the fear of the castrating father of Freud’s conception (Freud, on page 469 of his Interpretation of Dreams, wrote of a variation in which it’s Zeus who overthrows and castrates Cronus in revenge for devouring all of his children.).

The insect is shoved into the kitchen sinkhole, just as the Tall Man will be trapped in a hole going down into an abandoned mine shaft. Apart from being more yonic symbols, these traps also represent attempts at repressing traumatic memories…and of course, neither of them will last long or be effective. Reggie’s seeing of the insect means he too will be involved in doing something about the Tall Man.

Jody is the next to go to the mausoleum alone, and he’s attacked by the dwarves, one of which then chases him in a hearse, it being too short for Jody to see it through the car windows. It turns out that, once Mike has arrived in Jody’s car to help and that the dwarf has been stopped, that it was a crushed, shrunken version of Tommy.

Jody and Mike come to realize that the Tall Man has been killing people in the town (including their parents), and he has been crushing the bodies down to dwarf height, reanimating them, too, in order to do his bidding. As Mike later learns through the twin metal bar portal in that room with the dwarf containers, the dwarves will be the Tall Man’s toiling slaves.

On a symbolic level, this all means that the bad father wants to infantilize Jody and Mike (i.e., to shrink them down to size), and thus make them obey their dad’s every command (e.g., continue to run their father’s banking business, and so abandon their dreams of a music career, etc., and be good slaves to capitalism) without question. Another thing to consider is how the dwarves, as symbolic children, are projections of Mike’s self-loathing. He screams in terror at them because they are him; they’re what Wilfred Bion called ‘bizarre objects,’ hallucinated projections of Mike.

As Jody tries to confront what’s going on in the mausoleum, he tries to keep Mike out of it, in a misguided attempt to protect him. The Tall Man will go after Mike in the house, anyway. Jody trying to lock Mike up in his bedroom just makes Jody into yet another bad object, frustrating Mike in his wishes to be involved with confronting the Tall Man. Mike, in his frustration as Jody is carrying him upstairs to his bedroom, struggles and screams, calling Jody a “goddamn bastard!” and fearing that Jody will abandon him forever.

Mike manages to break out of his bedroom, and the Tall Man, all fingers intact again, abducts him and puts him in a hearse to take him to the mausoleum. Mike has a pistol, though, and he shoots his way out, making the hearse crash and go up in flames. He goes in the mausoleum and finds his father’s coffin, as Jody has already done.

Just before opening the coffin, Mike says, “I’m sorry, Dad, but we had to”…do what? Wish for his and Jody’s parents’ deaths? He’s horrified to see his father’s corpse gone. A bladed ball flies at his head, but Jody intervenes and shoots it with a shotgun. Instead of being mad at Mike for disobeying and escaping his bedroom, though, Jody hugs him. Jody is thus a good object again.

They’re pleased to run into Reggie again, knowing he isn’t dead (after having assumed that he and a couple of young women were killed earlier by the dwarves). Mike is especially pleased, of course, since Reggie’s another brother-figure. They go in that room with the dwarf-containers and the portal. Mike calls the other world, the one he’s almost fallen into, another planet, but I think it’s supposed to be hell, where the Tall Man and his dwarves are all evil spirits.

Finally, with everyone outside the mausoleum again, Reggie, thinking he’s helping the Lady in Lavender, is stabbed by her, just as Tommy–another brother-figure to Mike–was. Then Jody devises his plan to lure the Tall Man into the mine shaft and trap him there.

Mike has to confront the Tall Man yet again at home, the mortician calling him “Boy!”, like a harsh, disciplinarian father. He chases Mike out to the mine shaft, where he falls in the hole, one which Jody then drops boulders from on high to trap the Tall Man in. Jody seems like a triumphant hero.

Mike wakes up in bed. It was all just a dream…wasn’t it?

As it turns out, it was Jody who died…in a car wreck, and not Reggie from a stabbing. Mike knows those rocks won’t hold the Tall Man for long (if he could survive the fire from the crashing of the hearse into the pole, surely he can get out of that trap): of course not–Jody’s trap is merely symbolic of repression in the unconscious. We know Mike has been having nightmare after nightmare ever since his parents’ deaths, and now he’s having even more of them after Jody’s death.

Has the whole film been a dream, on and off?

We see Mike and Reggie in the living room of the house, with a fireplace burning behind them. It looks almost like a romantic setting. I don’t mean to say that Reggie is being a pederastic predator, or that Mike is welcoming such predation in his unconscious; but rather that these overtones are symbolic of Mike’s deep need to have the (platonic) love of a brother-figure, a need that would be particularly intense now that he’s just lost Jody. His feelings of abandonment are overwhelming.

Since Mike has been frustrated as well as loved by his now-all-dead objects, the bad versions of them, including that of Jody now, will all be internalized by the boy. He’ll need Reggie as a good object and brother-figure. Fittingly, Reggie picks up his acoustic guitar and begins humming and strumming that song he played earlier with Jody, the one about his woman leaving him. The film is all about loss, mourning, and a feeling of abandonment.

When Mike is in his room to begin packing for the road trip he and Reggie have planned, he sees the Tall Man again, in the mirror. Seeing the bad father, instead of himself, in the specular image is a reminder to us that the boy’s demons are all inside himself, internalized, not out there somewhere and so he’d be safe from them.

Like a stern father about to spank his son, the Tall Man calls out “Boy!” again, and the dwarves’ arms crash through the mirror glass, grab Mike, and take him screaming away. The childlike dwarves, about Mike’s height, get him because, like the Tall Man, they are him.

The Tanah–The Preaching: The Remaining Spells for Preventing Sin

[The following is the thirty-first of many posts–here is the first, here is the second, here is the third, here is the fourth, here is the fifth, here is the sixth, here is the seventh, here is the eighth, here is the ninth, here is the tenth, here is the eleventh, here is the twelfth, here is the thirteenth, here is the fourteenth, here is the fifteenth, here is the sixteenth, here is the seventeenth, here is the eighteenth, here is the nineteenth, here is the twentieth, here is the twenty-first, here is the twenty-second, here is the twenty-third, here is the twenty-fourth, here is the twenty-fifth, here is the twenty-sixth, here is the twenty-seventh, here is the twenty-eighth, here is the twenty-ninth, and here is the thirtieth–about a fictitious discovery of ancient manuscripts of a religious text of narratives and magic spells. Its purpose for my readers and me is to provide a cosmology and mythography on which I am basing much, if not most, of my fiction–short stories and novels. If anyone is interested in reading this fiction, he or she can use these blog posts as references to explain the nature of the magic and universe in my fiction.]

The following are the remaining spells for preventing sin–their instructions and verses.

[Find an expansive, flat area of land. Perform a ritual with one group of people at one side, and another group of people at the other side. As the verse is chanted, the first group will march together to the other side, as if to take it from the second group of people; then the second group will do the same, marching to the first side while grabbing the arms of the people in the first group, as if to take their land and enslave them. This will all be done while repeating the following verse, louder and louder, and with more and more emotional intensity.]

What you from (others) take(,) others
>>>………………………………………..<<<

Commentary: The verse is to be read thus: “What you take from others, others take from you.” The syntax in the original language allows a smooth reading back and forth.

[Collect coins of gold, silver, and copper, and pile them in a hole in the ground; do this ritual on a windy day. Surround the pile with dirt, leaves, and kindling. As the verse is chanted, burn the leaves and kindling, then put out the fire with water, and bury the coins in the dirt. Chant the following verse repeatedly and in a growing volume and emotional intensity.]

Weleb, Crim of air, blow away my greed!
Nevil, Crim of fire, torch my greed!
Priff, Crim of water, drown my greed!
Drofurb, Crim of earth, bury my greed!

Commentary: It should go without saying that, as the wind blows on the coins, Weleb’s line is chanted repeatedly; as the leaves and kindling are burned, Nevil’s line is chanted repeatedly; as the fire is put out with the water, Priff’s line is chanted repeatedly, and as the coins are buried, Drofurb’s line is chanted repeatedly.

[Prepare a bag of coins to be ‘stolen,’ in this ritual of mock-robbery. Participants in the ritual will run around, each ‘stealing’ the bag while having it ‘stolen’ from him soon after. This running around and ‘stealing’ will continue, again and again, as the following verse is repeatedly chanted.]

When you from (others) steal(,) then others
>>>………………………………………………….<<<

Commentary: As with the verse above meant to prevent the stealing of others’ land, this verse, meant to prevent the stealing of others’ wealth or possessions, is to be read in a similar back-and-forth manner, to represent the karmic nature of the Echo Effect: “When you from others steal, others then steal from you.” Again, the syntax of the original language allows for a smoothness of reciting that cannot be properly reproduced in English.

[This ritual is to be done by one man alone. He is to stand in a flat, open field on a windy day. A circular ditch is to be dug, surrounding him. Leaves and kindling are to be left surrounding him, too. As he chants the verse over and over, he is to light the leaves and kindling on fire, then put it all out with water, then go in the ditch and crawl around in it, rolling in the dirt until his whole body is filthy.]

Weleb, if I think of myself alone, may I be alone!
Nevil, if I think of myself alone, may I be alone!
Priff, if I think of myself alone, may I be alone!
Drofurb, if I think of myself alone, may I be alone!

Commentary: Again, each act in the ritual is to correspond with the Crim repeatedly invoked, so Weleb is addressed during the blowing wind, Nevil during the burning, etc.

[Prepare a weighing scale, piles of dirt, small amounts of water, leaves and kindling, and do this ritual on a windy day. First, put unequal amounts of dirt in the two bowls of the scale so they’re uneven; then as the line addressing Drofurb is chanted, move some dirt from the heavier bowl to the lighter bowl to reverse the unevenness. As the line addressing Priff is chanted, have unequal amounts of water in the bowls, then move some water from the heavier bowl to the lighter one, again, to reverse the unevenness. Do the same with the leaves and kindling, lighting them on fire while addressing Nevil with his line. Finally, let the wind blow against the scale while chanting the line for Weleb.]

Drofurb, may my unfairness come back to me!
Priff, may my unfairness come back to me!
Nevil, may my unfairness come back to me!
Weleb, may my unfairness come back to me!

Commentary: As with the rituals meant to prevent the stealing of land or money, and to prevent selfishness, this ritual, to prevent unfairness, dramatizes how the Echo Effect punishes our sin, and so it is meant to instill in the tribe the importance of knowing never to bring bad karma on oneself.

Redacted

******************those************
************************************
****girls***************************
**********************did**********
***********************************
**********nothing******************
************************************
**************************wrong***
************************************
************************************

Analysis of ‘Aqualung’

I: Introduction

Aqualung is a 1971 album by Jethro Tull, their fourth. It was their first album to have John Evan (keyboards) as a full-time member, and their first with Jeffrey Hammond (bass–billed jokingly as “Hammond-Hammond” at the time); incidentally, the new bassist had already been referred to in a number of Jethro Tull songs: “A Song for Jeffrey,” “Jeffrey Goes to Leicester Square,” “For Michael Collins, Jeffrey, and Me,” and even “Inside” (i.e., in the line, “Old Jeffrey makes three.”). Aqualung would also be the last album with Clive Bunker on drums; when he was replaced by Barriemore Barlow, band leader Ian Anderson (vocals, flute, acoustic guitar, etc.) would be the only remaining original member of the band as of Thick as a Brick.

Aqualung was a great success for Jethro Tull, with four classic songs: the title track, “Cross-Eyed Mary,” “Hymn 43,” and “Locomotive Breath.” The band would go on to become a major radio and touring act in the 1970s. Aqualung is Jethro Tull’s best-selling album, having sold more than seven million units worldwide, being generally well-received critically, and being included on several music magazine best-of lists.

Though it’s been understood by many to be “an antichurch/pro-God concept album” (George-Warren/Romanowski/Pareles, page 495), the band has consistently denied that Aqualung was ever intended to be a concept album, and that only a few songs share common themes. I plan, however, to show that certain themes presented in the lyrics–homelessness/destitution, sin/perversity, prostitution/being of the working class/Lumpenproletariat, etc. on Side One (those down low), and religious authoritarianism and of the powerful on Side Two (those up high)–are more consistent than that.

There is indeed a dialectical relationship here between both sides of the album, fittingly subtitled Aqualung and My God. The “least of [Christ’s] brethren” would represent God far better than the Pharisee-like Church authorities scorned on Side Two. Christ came for the sick, and not the healthy, after all, hence His sitting and eating with sinners, as well as His forgiveness of Mary Magdalene, the “Cross-Eyed Mary” of His time. He never condoned her sin, nor that of the adulteress, nor of the tax collectors; with His mercy, He would have them “go, and sin no more.” (John 8:11)

Such is the real meaning to be found in Aqualung. We’ll find God in the sick and the oppressed, not in the powerful and holier-than-thou. When we look at the cover of the album and see the filthy homeless man on it, his long hair and beard may remind us of Christ’s. Consider also the text on the back cover of the album, which reverses the Creation by having Man create God, and later form Aqualung out of the dust of the ground, Man’s Adam, who in being cast out of Eden is thus made homeless.

So, in helping these least of His brethren, one is helping Christ, which thus equates Aqualung, “and a host of others likened unto his kind”, with Christ, and therefore in turn with God, an ideal created by Man. But Man cast all of the Aqualungs into the void, out of Eden, made homeless. Thus, Man became the God he created, that is, the stern Church authority figure to “rule over all the earth.”

Man isn’t seeing the Spirit that lives on within all men, and even in Aqualung–that creative, divine Spirit within all of us, a ruach-breath made sick from Man’s mistreatment of Aqualung. Man had better start looking for that Spirit, though, if he wishes to save himself and his world.

Here is a link to all of the lyrics on the album, and here is a link to the whole album.

Side One–Aqualung

II: Aqualung

The character of Aqualung was inspired by a number of photographs of homeless people on the Thames Embankment, taken by Anderson’s then-wife, Jennie, who co-wrote the lyric for the title track.

The song begins with a riff played by lead guitarist Martin Barre: D, G, A-sharp, C, C-sharp, C-natural. The shift from the perfect fifth (D) of the tonic key (G minor) to an augmented fourth (C-sharp) is significant, for this latter note is a tritone in relation to the tonic.

Finding the tritone dissonant, unsettling, and difficult to sing, the Church called the interval the diabolus in musica, or the “devil in music.” If we rename the augmented fourth with the enharmonic interval of the diminished fifth (or the flattened fifth), we thus can see in its descent from the perfect fifth a symbolic fall from ‘perfection’ to ‘devilishness,’ or to ‘sin.’ We will hear this descent from perfect fifth to tritone again in the main chord progression of “My God” (see below).

Speaking of sin, this is exactly what we find Aqualung doing on that park bench, looking lustfully at pretty little girls there, like a sex pervert. Though we naturally would never condone his pedophilia, his “watching as the frilly panties run,” matters will get more complicated. We look on him with disgust for his “bad intent,” for the “snot running down his nose,” and his “greasy fingers smearing shabby clothes”; yet we also pity him for his “broken luck.”

He’s “drying in the cold sun” because without a home, one is often cold even when the sun is out. When we go from the first verse to the second, Barre’s angry electric guitar riff changes to Anderson’s sad acoustic guitar strumming, a musical shift from the judgemental attitude towards Aqualung’s proclivities to compassion for “an old man wandering lonely.” Perhaps if we’d pitied, rather than shamed, him, he wouldn’t have stooped to the low of lusting after children.

Another thing to remember in connection with his pedophilia: many men in positions of religious authority have been guilty of the same thing, as well as having gotten away with it, thanks to that very religious authority (at least in the case of Aqualung, he’s only had impure thoughts that he, presumably, hasn’t [yet] acted on). Note what I said above in connection with this moral equivalence: there is a dialectical relationship between those in the lowly state on Side One and those in the exalted state on Side Two. These least of Christ’s brethren are equivalent to ‘Him’ (i.e., to the Church) in sin; they’re equivalent to the real Christ in piteousness, though.

With pain in his leg, Aqualung picks up cigarette butts, discarded ‘dog ends,’ since they’re all the penniless man has available to smoke. When he has to use a public washroom–a “bog”–he gets some of his piss on his feet, warming them, which ironically makes his soiling of them seem comfortable.

He’s alone, and the Salvation “Army’s up the road,” that is, not near him to give him aid and comfort. The Salvation Army has been known historically, by the way, for being rather selective with those to whom they want to be charitable. An interesting point to be made here is the reversal of the words “Salvation” and “army” in the two lines of the verse, which seems to represent a reversal, or inversion, of moral values: one isn’t charitable to whom one should be.

Anderson ends the verse with more sympathy for the “poor old sod,” then with the beginning of the third verse, the tempo and energy pick up the pace. He imagines the “agony” that Aqualung must have felt in the last, freezing cold winter, out there without any shelter.

The derelict’s “rattling last breaths/with deep-sea diver sounds” bring us to the meaning of the song’s title, which is a reference to the name of one of the first SCUBA devices. Aqualung’s heavy, laboured breathing, probably a result of pneumonia or emphysema from his smoking, exposure to air pollution, viruses, and bacteria, sounds like someone breathing in SCUBA gear.

This difficulty breathing in turn can be related to what I said above about the ruach (“breath,” “wind”) of God. This relation can symbolize the corruption and other problems of the Church, which make it difficult for the Spirit of God to flow effectively. More on this later.

The rest of the song’s lyric is repeats of the previous verses. That angry, judgemental first verse, with Barre’s electric guitar riff, ends the song, with the chord progression moving from the G minor tonality up a tritone to C-sharp major, D-sharp major, and F major. Evan finishes the song off with some piano arpeggios in that final chord.

III: Cross-Eyed Mary

The song begins with minor third tremolos on Anderson’s flute (What is a Jethro Tull song without the flute?), backed with Evan’s piano chords and Mellotron (strings tapes). The transition, from this instrumental opening to the rock riff and Anderson’s vocals, comes with a few trills on his flute.

The first two lines of the first verse are a reference to an old traditional English counting rhyme, “Tinker, Tailor,” which includes this line: “rich man, poor man, beggar-man, thief.” Anderson’s lyric, though, reverses the poor men and other Lumpenproletariat with the “rich man,” as he did previously with the Salvation Army in “Aqualung.” Again, this restates the album’s theme of a reversal of how things normally would be.

Here, however, instead of things being reversed to become bad, they’re reversed…perhaps…to become good, with the poor coming first and the rich last, as Jesus would have had them. Only in the case of this song, the poor coming before the rich is in the form of Cross-Eyed Mary, a teenage high school prostitute who offers her services to dirty old men…if they have the money.

Being a prostitute, she is a member of the Lumpenproletariat, like Aqualung, who is referred to later on in the song. These two are the ‘low-lives’ of Side One; Anderson himself referred to her as such. With the other poor wretches of the Aqualung side of the album, they’re meant to contrast sharply (and dialectically) with the highly-placed religious authorities of the My God side.

As I said above, it’s the men who have the money who pay for her services, for “she dines in Hampstead village,” a wealthy area of London, hence her clients will be moneyed businessmen. The “jack-knife barber” who “drops her off at school” is a back-alley abortionist who illegally solves her pregnancy problems.

Also as I said above, it’s older men whom she services, not “little boys.” If only Aqualung had the money for her, since he’s got her attention as he watches her lustfully “through the railings” to the schoolyard. If he can manage to scrounge up a few pounds, though, he might get lucky with her, for “she’ll do it for a song.” With the money she gets from her rich clients, she can do charitable sexual favours for poorer men, thus making her “the Robin Hood of Highgate” (one of the most expensive suburbs of London, and the site of the St. Mary Magdalene House of Charity, for the rehabilitation of “fallen women,” or prostitutes).

So where Aqualung is the Adam, having been kicked out of Eden and into homelessness, Cross-Eyed Mary is the Eve of the album, a fallen woman. These are the sinners and the lowly who are judged by those on high, the religious authorities on Side Two…yet they’re men who really aren’t any better from a moral standpoint, if one regards such men more closely.

IV: Cheap Day Return

This short song opens with Anderson playing a brief prelude on his acoustic guitar, with Evan backing him on the organ. Anderson is singing about his sick father in hospital, hoping the nurse is taking good care of him. Thus, his father is another of the wretched, deserving of pity, one of “these least of [Christ’s] brethren.” and so he’s like God.

Also, being Anderson’s father, he can be seen to represent God the Father, who is sick because of Church corruption and lost of faith in Him. The nurse would thus represent the priesthood, who are trusted to guide us in understanding God, just as Anderson hopes the nurse will do well in nursing his old man back to health.

Yet the nurse, knowing Anderson to be a rock singer, asks him for his autograph, which to him is “What a laugh.” This hero-worship of a singer is like the idolizing of a false god, symbolically implying Church corruption, which has made God so sick in the first place. Such idolatry makes religion cheap, hence the Sunday service is on a “Cheap Day.”

V: Mother Goose

The title of this song reminds me of a quote from Clarence Darrow: “I don’t believe in God because I don’t believe in Mother Goose.” Thus, the song’s title could be seen to represent the God of Church authority that is no longer believable.

The song lyric has been described as being a surreal pastiche with images of the same abstract ideas as in “Cross-Eyed Mary.” Indeed, there are schoolgirls in the song: is Mary one of them?

I suspect that, underneath the ‘surreal’ imagery, Anderson was–if only unconsciously–dealing with the loss of faith in the Church and the resulting indulgence in sin. If God is as unbelievable as the fairy tales of Mother Goose, then having “turned her loose” is a renunciation of that faith, leaving the Church authorities “screaming” at Anderson’s apostasy.

The Church and its faith can seem like a circus, or like a school, drawing the attention of “a foreign student” of Sunday school, as it were. The foreigner, knowing so little about the local faith, imagines that its ‘circus’ is full of fanciful animals–“elephants, lions, too,” like those in Noah’s Ark, when the place is really Piccadilly Circus, a not-so spectacular place, like our world, without the Biblical miracles and whatnot.

Since the Church’s teachings make it like a school, it’s fitting to hear Barre play a descant recorder and Hammond play an alto recorder, reminding us all of the instrument we as kids used to play in music class at school. Mother Goose tales tend, directly or indirectly, to teach morals (i.e., Charles Perrault‘s renderings of them), just as the Church teaches, through Christ’s parables. Anderson doesn’t want to learn all that, though, so he went “down by the bathing pond to try and catch some sun.” All those schoolgirls were there, too, and they probably didn’t know he was playing truant.

To get back to the circus-as-Church imagery, we learn of Anderson being chided by “a bearded lady” to stop “misbehaving,” or sinning. Apparently, though, a red-bearded man’s sister driving a lorry is far weirder. Could it be that the bearded lady of the Church-circus sideshow ‘freaks’ is really a man speaking for women, who are supposed to be silent in church (1 Corinthians 14:35), while a woman driving a lorry is all the more brazenly defying of traditional sex roles, since she, like Anderson, is giving up on her faith?

I suspect a sexual meaning in Anderson’s putting and having “popped ’em in their holes.” Other men seem to be doing the same, “four and twenty” of them, to be exact, like the “Four and twenty naughty boys/Baked in a pye” of the original version of the nursery rhyme, “Sing a Song of Sixpence.” (I’m sure the original rhyme meant something far less naughty than what I’m implying about the “pie,” but my concern is with Anderson’s lyric, not the original verse.) The labourers are “digging up their gold,” again, there’s an implied sexual meaning, while Anderson, as cunning and opportunistic Long John Silver, is figuring out a way to get at that treasure of girl-gold (the schoolgirls, including Cross-Eyed Mary?).

Another example of sinning is when Johnny Scarecrow stole a “jet black mac…from a snowman.” This kind of sinning, along with the lechery and truancy cited above, is what worries the Church authorities when the flock loses its faith. Such sinners might sink low, down to the depths of Aqualung, Cross-Eyed Mary, and others among the Lumpenproletariat.

VI: Wond’ring Aloud

This is an acoustic guitar ballad about a loving married couple, though there’s some implied sexual meaning…or sinning…in the lyric, too. This combination of love and sexuality in a married couple suggests the sensual love expressed in the poetry of the Song of Songs, whose male and female lovers the Church often allegorizes as the love of Christ (the bridegroom) for His Church (the bride).

That the groom and bride “are [their] own saviours,” like Christ and His Church, leads us to wonder “will the years treat [them] well,” that is, will their faith in the Church remain intact, or will they lose faith in it, and will that lack of faith lead to sinning, as we saw in “Mother Goose”?

The sinning could be in the form of unbridled passion, the kind that priests might warn newlyweds of (recall Friar Laurence‘s admonition to Romeo and Juliet to “love moderately” [II, vi, 14]). After all, “the butter runs, then she comes, spilling crumbs on the bed.” The reference to crumbs sounds a lot like crumpet in this context.

Since “it’s only the giving that makes you what you are,” we hear what sounds like a negating of the Church doctrine of salvation by grace through faith. The giving, or the act of generosity, is an example of good works, which Paul insisted could not, in and of themselves, save you (Ephesians 2: 8-9). So here again, we see an example of Aqualung‘s theme of rejecting the morality of Church authority.

VII: Up to Me

This song begins with a blues-oriented riff, at first on Anderson’s flute and acoustic guitar, in E.

The verses of this song give us a series of vignettes of the life of an ordinary, working-class man: going to the movies with a friend, leaving him in a Wimpy fast-food restaurant, getting into a drunken fight with someone (with broken glasses and beer bottles not put away), being stuck in the cold or in the rain, and what seems like a sexual encounter with a smoking (and presumably smoking hot) girl…Cross-Eyed Mary, by chance? as she’s looking up to him while having something other than a cigarette in her mouth.

As contrasted with the sins of the lower classes, we also have the excesses of the upper classes: they who have a Silver Cloud (a kind of Rolls Royce), one big enough to fit inside it the tennis club they’re members of, and the indulgence in the ephemeral fashions of the time (e.g., bell-bottoms, etc.)

One notable manipulation in the lyric is the multiple meanings given to “up to me”: “running up to me,” “that one’s up to me” (i.e., it’s my responsibility), the high social status of the rich “was up to me” (i.e., “up” in relation to my low status as a worker), and the naughty girl with yellow fingers from smoking “is looking up to me” as she smokes…something else. It’s also “up to me,” that is, an uphill battle, to scrounge up money and ask of it from others “when the copper fades away” from the pockets of “a common working man.”

And so, this is the last of the songs of the lowly: the homeless, the prostitutes, the hospitalized, the sinning apostates, the lustful lovers, and the working class. From the Aqualung Side One, we move on to the My God Side Two, and deal with those highly-placed…and see what’s wrong with them.

My God

VIII: My God

The song begins with Anderson doing an acoustic guitar solo, one very dark in mood. First, we hear octaves in A, with a few Gs thrown in, all played accelerando, before other notes come in, giving us an A minor tonality with an added ninth. Played in a fast 3/4, the solo repeats the same basic motif, but ends in an A minor chord with an added high tritone (E-flat).

After a run of single notes up the A natural minor scale, from the root up to the minor sixth (F), we go into the main riff of the song, which is the strumming of an A minor triad and an inverted B seventh chord. This involves, as I pointed out with the electric guitar riff of “Aqualung,” the perfect fifth descending to the tritone (i.e., to the major third of the B-seventh chord, a dropping from the A minor triad’s E to an E flat). And as with the album’s title track, this going down, from the perfect interval to the ‘devil’s’ interval, symbolizes a descent from grace into sin…only this time, it isn’t a lowly, homeless pervert who is falling–it’s the Church authorities who are doing so.

Jesus is in a “golden cage,” the wealth of the Catholic Church. Now, that golden cage isn’t limited to religion, for many in the Western ruling classes have used Jesus to justify their accumulation of wealth, their wars, their bigotries, their colonization, and their right-wing tendencies in general. Indeed, mankind has “made Him bend to [man’s] religion.”

Just as the lowly on the Aqualung side of the album aren’t only sinners, but are also the working class (proletariat) and those destitute and outside of society (the Lumpenproletariat), so are those on high on the My God side of the album not just the Church authorities, but the rich bourgeoisie as well.

If all one can see in God is the God of the religious and political establishment, then He is no real God at all–“He is the God of nothing.” In the next two lines of the second verse, Anderson seems to be hinting at his pantheistic leanings when he says that “the God of everything” is “inside you and me.” What’s more, if the God of nothing is He of the establishment and those in power, then the God of everything is He of the people, the working poor and the global proletariat, those least of Christ’s brethren, those equated with Him.

We should “lean upon Him gently,” that is, have Christ as a figure of comfort, love, and aid to the wretched, and not as a figure to judge others with. We shouldn’t “call on Him to save us,” that is, use Him as a crutch to limp our way to heaven and to help us save face when our sins disgrace us publicly. Salvation is supposed to be about real moral betterment, not about social status and being with ‘the right group’ or social circle.

“The bloody Church of England” would have been used as the religious justification for British imperial conquest and the “white man’s burden.” Going to “the vicarage for tea” reminds me of the line in “Aqualung” about the Salvation Army “and a cup of tea.” Instead of prioritizing the poor, the Church all too often prioritizes social gatherings; it’s all about that being in the right group, an exclusive social circle, and keeping the Aqualungs out.

Next, Barre does a blues-inflected guitar solo, then Anderson comes in with his trademark breathy flute-playing, similarly full of blues licks. After that, instead of the flute being backed by the band, we hear the “odd voices” of Hammond, sounding like a church choir…only the music doesn’t have the usual peace-inducing effect it’s supposed to have; it sounds rather eerie, suggesting how disturbingly corrupt the Church has typically been.

To get back to the lyric, we’re reminded of how the second Commandment condemns the use of images for God, or any god, for that matter; yet Christians have images of Christ all the time, including the crucifixes they wear–Jesuolatry is even acknowledged in the New Testament itself (Colossians 1:15). Does God actually get a kick out of this excessive emphasis on His Son?

Will “confessing to the endless sin,” which one all the same will continually fall into, actually lead to salvation? One will be “praying to next Thursday,” or before Good Friday (or even before the Muslim day of congregation), “to all the gods that you can count,” because far too many people out there think that only saying, “Lord! Lord!” is sufficient, as opposed to actually doing the good deeds that God wants us to do (Matthew 7:21).

The song ends with some soft flute playing…that is, not with a bang, but a whimper.

IX: Hymn 43

This song, in D, continues the criticisms of Church corruption, with its hoarding of wealth and violence to secure its ends. God on high looks down on Christ (or on His Church, anyway), as we the lowly looked up on Side One. We ask Jesus to save us from our sin instead of correcting ourselves.

Examples of that violence have been the genocide of the Native Americans to make the US into a ‘Christian nation.’ Then, Western movies in Hollywood portrayed the white man as the hero and vilified or denigrated the aboriginals.

Again, we ask Christ for forgiveness while we, “the gory glory seekers…use His name in death.” As was complained about in “My God,” we find hypocritical believers praying for forgiveness, then committing the same sins, the worst ones (killing), over and over again.

A heavy riff is heard a number of times on Barre’s guitar: these notes–D, D, D-C-A, F, G–then his pick scratches on damped strings, four groups of three scratches each, with Bunker pounding the same rhythm on the drums to emphasize it all.

Jesus is said to have been sighted in places from those as mundane as a city to those as legendary as the Mountains of the Moon, yet the bloody violence of the Church throughout history makes us doubt such miracles of His as the rolling of His stone to leave Joseph of Arimathea‘s tomb, to indicate His resurrection.

So, why is the song named “Hymn 43”? It’s an arbitrary title Anderson used to reflect how the song is just one of many ‘hymns’ or critiques of Church corruption and hypocrisy. Normally, hymns are given specific names, dealing with particular issues in a meaningful way, whereas the generic, random number of 43 shows that the issues critiqued here are generalized ones, widespread and having occurred throughout the history of the Church.

X: Slipstream

The song begins in a cheerful E major, with Anderson singing and playing his acoustic guitar. If you pay close attention to the song lyric, though, things are not all that cheerful.

“The lush separation [that] enfolds you” is your alienation, as one of the common people, not only from each other, but also from the luxurious life of the ruling class, who would separate you from themselves “and the products of wealth.” You go “on the bow wave” of the slipstream (a pun on a stream that you slip on–then “you paddle right out of the mess”–and an actual slipstream), one of the “spiritless, undying” rich, who have no souls, yet never seem to disappear from the world.

You give “God’s waiter your last dime,” leaving you penniless “as he hands you the bill”: in this we see how the Church, far from doing what it’s supposed to do–to help the poor–instead has a way of propping up the bourgeoisie (We need churches to do more than just react to homelessness, for example…we need them to help prevent it.). “You spin in the slipstream,” like so many whom the religious and political establishment have ruined and left behind, and all alone you have to solve your own problems, unaided.

Anderson’s singing and strumming are accompanied by an arrangement for strings by David Palmer (who would become a member of Jethro Tull in 1976). His arrangement is similarly cheerful…until the end, when it changes to creepy-sounding, dissonant glissandi, as one might hear in a horror movie. The effect is to tell us that the ‘cheerful, free life’ promised by capitalism and the Church is an illusion, and when we finally wake up from the dream, we find waking reality to be a nightmare.

XI: Locomotive Breath

The song begins with some bluesy/jazzy piano playing by Evan, soon to be accompanied with Barre’s bluesy guitar licks. Then the song proper begins.

The rhythm, with more electric guitar scratching, is meant to imitate the chugging sound of a train. As for the lyric, Anderson had grown worried about overpopulation, hence, our world is a “runaway grain” because “of population growth and capitalism,” as Anderson himself explained. Is the train going to crash because of overpopulation, capitalism, and the using-up of our Earth’s limited resources? In the years since he wrote this song, in which so much more population growth has undoubtedly happened, Anderson has grown much more worried.

The steam power “of the locomotive breath” can be linked thematically with Aqualung’s laboured breathing, partly a result of air pollution, coming partly from trains. As with Aqualung’s difficulty breathing, the smoky “breath” of the runaway train can represent the diseased breath of the ruach–God’s spirit–in today’s troubled world.

Indeed, there’s an almost apocalyptic quality to a song about a runaway train that “won’t slow down,” one in danger of crashing because of not only overcrowding, capitalism, and the using-up of Earth’s natural resources, but also Cold War fears of a nuclear Armageddon–a fear from back then as well as of now. The train can thus be seen to represent our imperiled planet.

“The all-time loser” would have to be Satan, since with the dying of Christ on the Cross, the Devil has lost the battle for our souls. Still, as “the god of this world” (2 Corinthians 4:4), Satan has control of the train, and he’s running it “headlong to his death,” endangering us all, too. I suspect that “Old Charlie” who “stole the handle” is also Anderson referring to the Devil, since the name can be associated with a demon, and such an interpretation is consistent with the rest of the song.

In other posts, such as this one (scroll down to VIII: Conclusion), I’ve used the metaphor of a runaway train racing to a cliff, to represent how neoliberal capitalism is driving us all to the abyss; it’s rather similar to what Anderson is singing about. I wrote of Marxist-Leninists as being the ones actually jumping off the train in time to save themselves from the inevitable crash. In “Locomotive Breath,” Anderson sings of “children jumping off at the stations, one by one.” These kids are sensible enough not to have any more kids (perhaps like millennials today?), while the Devil is “crawling down the corridor, on his hands and knees”: the Devil is like the conservatives, liberals, and moderate leftists of my analogy–they’re either staying on the train, or they’re not moving fast enough to get off in time.

Meanwhile, the Devil’s “woman and his best friend [are] in bed and having fun.” The horned cuckold doesn’t care that his woman is getting pregnant with another man’s child…because he doesn’t care about rampant population growth. After a flute solo by Anderson, we hear the final verse.

Satan “catches angels as they fall,” just as he caused the fall of the rebel angels, as well as his own fall, in his failed war with God and the good angels (Revelation 12:7-9). Thus, as he’s the all-time loser, God is the “all-time winner,” who’s “got [Satan] by the balls.”

An amusing side note ought to be made here. Since this song would be a single played on the radio, many were uncomfortable with tender ears hearing the word “balls,” so in one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship ever, the word “fun”–from the second verse, where the melody is the same–was spliced in the place of “balls,” rendering the new line as “got him by the fun,” and giving us a new, amusing euphemism for that part of the male anatomy.

Anyway, the “all-time winner” seems more accurately to be the Church rather than God, since the Devil finds Gideon‘s Bible (presumably in the hotel room where his woman and his best friend are in bed and having…balls?), and on page one it says “be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth” (Genesis 1:28), implying that the corrupt Church is also at least partially responsible for the population boom problem. After all, “God, he stole the handle” now, rather than the Devil holding it.

XII: Wind-Up

As the last song of the album, “Wind-Up” sums up what Anderson has been saying the whole time. There’s a huge difference between blindly following the dogmas of the Church and having a genuinely spiritual relationship with God, the Divine, or whatever you would call the Ground of All Being.

With Anderson singing about having been “packed…off to school” as a kid, we’re reminded of the references to school in “Cross-Eyed Mary” and “Mother Goose.” The point is that conforming to the ways of the Church is like going to school: not merely learning the three Rs, but also being made to conform to a way of living, “how not to play the game,” or not to sin. In the other two songs, we have examples of people who played the game sinfully…Mary, and Anderson the truant/apostate.

As a child, Anderson was “groomed…for success,” and he had “their God tucked underneath [his] arm,” that is, the Bible, or the family’s idolatry of the Good Book as linked with a bourgeois wish that he grow up to make a lot of money; recall the Church’s “money games” from “Hymn 43” in this connection. “Their half-assed smiles” indicate the hypocrisy of a self-righteous, ‘loving’ bourgeois Christian family “and the book of rules.”

In prayer to God, Anderson got the reply that God is “not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays,” that is, you don’t have to wind up in church to know Him, and you don’t have to get wound up over Him there, shouting “Holy, Holy!” and “Hosannah!” Anderson doesn’t care if the Church excommunicates him for playing truant from Sunday school; as in “Mother Goose,” he didn’t want to be inside on a sunny Sunday–he instead wanted “to try and catch some sun,” not catch the Son.

Instead of conforming to Church dogma, Anderson would “rather look around [him], compose a better song, ’cause that’s the honest measure of [his] worth.” As he sang in “Wond’ring Aloud, “it’s only the giving that makes you what you are.” We’re justified to God based on the good we do, not on the faith we conform to, a conformity based more on a fear of what will happen to us after we die than on sincere piety.

XIII: Conclusion

Though the members of Jethro Tull have denied that Aqualung is a concept album, I’d say that it is unconsciously a concept album…and I’m a strong believer in the power and meaningfulness of the unconscious mind.

In any case, the issues raised on the album–homelessness, lechery over underaged girls (including those involved willy-nilly in sex work), people needing proper health care, the working poor, questioning Church authority (and the despair that often accompanies it), and apocalyptic fear from overpopulation, ecocide, and nuclear war–are more relevant than ever.

In a world where the ruling class, including evangelical Christians, rationalize an ongoing genocide, we can see how what is not being done for these least of Christ’s brethren, the Aqualungs of the world, is something that should make us all say, “My God, ‘people, what have you done?'”

The Tanah–The Preaching: Four Spells for Preventing Sin

[The following is the thirtieth of many posts–here is the first, here is the second, here is the third, here is the fourth, here is the fifth, here is the sixth, here is the seventh, here is the eighth, here is the ninth, here is the tenth, here is the eleventh, here is the twelfth, here is the thirteenth, here is the fourteenth, here is the fifteenth, here is the sixteenth, here is the seventeenth, here is the eighteenth, here is the nineteenth, here is the twentieth, here is the twenty-first, here is the twenty-second, here is the twenty-third, here is the twenty-fourth, here is the twenty-fifth, here is the twenty-sixth, here is the twenty-seventh, here is the twenty-eighth, and here is the twenty-ninth–about a fictitious discovery of ancient manuscripts of a religious text of narratives and magic spells. Its purpose for my readers and me is to provide a cosmology and mythography on which I am basing much, if not most, of my fiction–short stories and novels. If anyone is interested in reading this fiction, he or she can use these blog posts as references to explain the nature of the magic and universe in my fiction.]

Four Spells: their instructions and verses

[Light a fire, surrounded by rocks, on a windy day. If it is winter at the time of preparing this spell, have snow or blocks of ice to put out the fire; otherwise, use water to do so. Chant the following verse over and over, louder and louder, with increasing…then decreasing…emotion, to the four Crims of air, fire, earth, and water/rocks.]

Lust,
the
son
who grew out of fire,
must
shrink
back.

Commentary: Ai (pronounced like “eye”) is the son of Nevil, the Crim of fire. Ai is the demon of lust, who tempts us to practice fornication. Ai also drives people to act aggressively and to intervene unwelcomely in others’ affairs. This spell is meant to drive him away.

[Take two sticks of long but brittle wood and strike them together repeatedly until one breaks. Then break the other in two. Chant the following repeatedly as the sticks are struck together.]

He
who
will
is thus to hurt himself and be
[by]
other
men

Commentary: The cross shape of the verse represents the two sticks being struck together. It is recited thus: “He who will hurt other men is thus to hurt himself and be hurt by other men.” The breaking of the sticks, by sympathetic magic, is meant to represent cruelty killing cruelty and being killed by it, an enactment of the Echo Effect.

[Make a life-sized effigy of a man. Tie a rope around its waist with one end, and around the waist of a living man with the other. Pull the effigy far enough the opposite way of the man so he is pulled with the effigy. After doing this for some time, let go of the effigy and let the man pull it back to the starting place. Then burn it, douse it with water, and bury it. Do all of this while repeatedly chanting the following lines to the Crims.]

What you pull one way

will pull you the other way.

Nevil, Priff, and Drofurb: stop the pulling!

Commentary: This ritual is meant to prevent the controlling of people.

[Have two men in the tribe dramatize a fight with wooden swords on a windy day. After a while of clashing swords, one man pretends to stab the other; then the fallen one reaches up to stab his killer. Both men lie on the ground, pretending to be dead. Then the swords are to be burned, doused with water, and buried. This is all done while chanting the following, over and over, to the four Crims.]

The
man cuts, stabs, and kills
who

is
cut, stabbed, and killed. to
be

Commentary: These verses are to be read thus: “The man who cuts, stabs, and kills is to be cut, stabbed, and killed.” It’s a plea to the Crims to ensure the karmic retribution of the Echo Effect on all of those who would wage war.