More thoughts on Aronofsky's Noah
Apr. 13th, 2014 10:11 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
seekingferretThe central conflict between Noah and Tubal-Cain can be glossed as a debate over the meaning of Tzelem Elokim, the principle that humanity was created in God's image. To start off with something that is noteworthy but ultimately unimportant, none of the sides in the argument think that Tzelem Elokim means that God has five fingers and five toes on each of two hands and two feet. Both agree that Tzelem Elokim means that humanity was given some of God's spiritual attributes. The debate is over which attributes, and how those attributes should be used in service to God.
There's been some criticism of the movie for never using the word God. God is always referred to as The Creator, something that I tentatively attributed to the movie's consistent efforts to link Noah and the destruction of the world back to Adam and the creation of the world. But another theory that makes sense to me is that Aronofsky is trying to suggest that the attribute of Tzelem Elokim is creative ability.
Both Noah and Tubal-Cain are creators. Noah of his ark, Tubal-Cain of various iron works as well as, he emphasizes several times, a whole civilization. While the actual fight between Noah and Tubal-Cain is short and conclusive, the movie spends a lot of time showing the build up to the fight. If we were analyzing the film from a storytelling point of view, we'd say that was about building suspense toward a climax, but as theology, we might say that the thing that has the most time devoted to it is probably the important part. What do we see of the build-up? Tubal-Cain working his forge, and Noah constructing his ark from wood, lovingly sealing it with pitch, paying attention to every detail of the creative process.
Tubal-Cain creates because he believes that being made in God's image means he was born to rule. He builds empires because God is the mighty one who rules worlds, and he seeks to create a microcosmic universe to rule over. He is ruthless in his quest because he seeks to create the greatest civilization he can- in that way he will fulfill the potential God endowed him with. He is also an artist- the objects themselves have value for what they are. When he hands Ham a hammer, watch the way Ham salivates over the craftsmanship. Tubal-Cain can compromise Ham because he understands Ham, understands that like himself, Ham values objects as a, well, objective measure of the outcome of our labor.
Noah builds because he needs tools to achieve outcomes. He doesn't value these tools as works of art, he only values them for the ends they allow him to achieve. And those ends are not his own, but God's. He builds in spite of the building going against his own needs and desires. Noah believes that Tzelem Elokim is much more constrained, that it connotes a creator who builds out of benevolence, not merely a builder of things. Like God, Noah sees the value of creation not in the act of saying "Let there be Light", but in "And God saw that it was good."
I think on these terms, ultimately the film comes out much closer to Tubal-Cain's position than Noah's. The end of the film forces Noah to acknowledge that in spite of Tubal-Cain's iniquity, his faith in the power of human creation was much greater than Noah's. The blueprint for the future of mankind that emerges after Noah accepts that he was wrong to try to kill Ila's daughters is Tubal-Cain's blueprint (inasmuch as it is God's blueprint, obviously). The blueprint calls for man to build a new dynastic order, for children to take their fathers' legacies and expand upon them, standing on their shoulders in (as I mentioned in my last post) progress-narrative evolution.
Weird, like I said.
There's been some criticism of the movie for never using the word God. God is always referred to as The Creator, something that I tentatively attributed to the movie's consistent efforts to link Noah and the destruction of the world back to Adam and the creation of the world. But another theory that makes sense to me is that Aronofsky is trying to suggest that the attribute of Tzelem Elokim is creative ability.
Both Noah and Tubal-Cain are creators. Noah of his ark, Tubal-Cain of various iron works as well as, he emphasizes several times, a whole civilization. While the actual fight between Noah and Tubal-Cain is short and conclusive, the movie spends a lot of time showing the build up to the fight. If we were analyzing the film from a storytelling point of view, we'd say that was about building suspense toward a climax, but as theology, we might say that the thing that has the most time devoted to it is probably the important part. What do we see of the build-up? Tubal-Cain working his forge, and Noah constructing his ark from wood, lovingly sealing it with pitch, paying attention to every detail of the creative process.
Tubal-Cain creates because he believes that being made in God's image means he was born to rule. He builds empires because God is the mighty one who rules worlds, and he seeks to create a microcosmic universe to rule over. He is ruthless in his quest because he seeks to create the greatest civilization he can- in that way he will fulfill the potential God endowed him with. He is also an artist- the objects themselves have value for what they are. When he hands Ham a hammer, watch the way Ham salivates over the craftsmanship. Tubal-Cain can compromise Ham because he understands Ham, understands that like himself, Ham values objects as a, well, objective measure of the outcome of our labor.
Noah builds because he needs tools to achieve outcomes. He doesn't value these tools as works of art, he only values them for the ends they allow him to achieve. And those ends are not his own, but God's. He builds in spite of the building going against his own needs and desires. Noah believes that Tzelem Elokim is much more constrained, that it connotes a creator who builds out of benevolence, not merely a builder of things. Like God, Noah sees the value of creation not in the act of saying "Let there be Light", but in "And God saw that it was good."
I think on these terms, ultimately the film comes out much closer to Tubal-Cain's position than Noah's. The end of the film forces Noah to acknowledge that in spite of Tubal-Cain's iniquity, his faith in the power of human creation was much greater than Noah's. The blueprint for the future of mankind that emerges after Noah accepts that he was wrong to try to kill Ila's daughters is Tubal-Cain's blueprint (inasmuch as it is God's blueprint, obviously). The blueprint calls for man to build a new dynastic order, for children to take their fathers' legacies and expand upon them, standing on their shoulders in (as I mentioned in my last post) progress-narrative evolution.
Weird, like I said.