The Book of Eli: For your Knowledge (Interesting)

I was exploring a blog (click here to see it) and in the comments I found this, and was not only super happy that someone decided to do the research I wanted to do, but really excited to see what it had to say, so enjoy!

• “Name “Eli” = Translates in literal definition the actual word, “God.” Therefore, the movie’s title literally is : The Book of God
• Story of God’s promise of Restoration = Ultimate message; God will protect His Word and restore new covenants with his people which consistently happened time after time as man is so flawed and egotistical and ultimately filled with sin; God intervenes through events and people that are brought into our lives to minister us if we listen – key point: if we listen.
• Eli = Which was his name as stated on his Bible copy; probably a reference to Paul or Saul of Tarsus – a Christian missionary who authored several books in the Bible; a masterful and proud teacher who received his call (or experienced a ‘conversion’) to follow Jesus as Messiah and take the gospel to the Gentiles; the blind messenger led by God to show he indeed literally “walks by faith and not by sight” which he wasn’t truly blind as Carnegie is shown at the end who was actually blind to the Word
• Marvin Gaye song = I can think of younger days/When living for my life/Was everything a man could want to do/I could never see tomorrow/But I was never told about the sorrow/And how can you mend a broken heart?/How can you stop the rain from falling down?/How can you stop the sun from shining?/What makes the world go round? – Eli was blind which the song references (foreshadows this revelation at the end of the movie), as well as, referring to the creator via questions
• Cats = Were believed to be agents of the devil, and to possess magical powers. Egyptian and Asian households worshiped as animal as being godlike; most likely why we see Eli’s first action in the movie slaughtering a cat since we see he could have easily eaten rodents and birds for survival
• Carnegie = Most probably indicative of the evil of man who uses temptation to achieve his goals which is not unlike being led by the Devil; we are introduced to him as he is reading about Mussolini wearing a cross buried beneath gold medallions; representation of the ego of man who uses for personal gain which is not unlike a industrial/capitalistic/Marxist misuse of power by man to have control over other men by eliminating God’s gift of Free Will; a theory that seeks the eliminating the idea of private property in order to gain control of the economic “means of production” by stealing it; at the end people who once “were too scared to say his name” were now fighting against him
• Claudia = Name first used in the New Testament – derived from Latin meaning “lame, crippled”; a very rare Christian name; I believe when Carnegie pushed the Bible to her it was opened within the New Testament possibly even at a point of the discussion of the Devil; Carnegie was crippling man who himself ended up crippled
• Solara = Possibly to mirror Mary of Magdalene who was described as sinful woman and also identified as a repentant prostitute (Carnegie as her “pimp”) to which Jesus healed her/delivered her from evil spirits; she received truth directly from God and became a follower of God which again mirrors Solara seen walking the path of God at the end of the movie
• Martha = Name from Aramaic meaning “lady, mistress”; she was the one to invite them in and offer them human flesh; cannibalism separates these people from their humanity
• Religion = Stated to have been the reason people believed the war began in which all the Bibles were destroyed with purpose by burning.
• Man = The basis of Original Sin; the ultimate determination of warfare not religion – as God gave us Free Will, we choose to meander off the path He lays for us time and time again; think of parenting: we know what can and eventually will happen even with the rules set out
• The Bible/Christianity = Constantly under attack and through history and ultimately had to be protected as people sought to destroy it (i.e. the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Qumran cave) – many times the Logos (or word) of God was taught verbally and re-written (the parchment, which was written on animal skin, sheep skin to be exact, and like all paper, it falls apart) a practice still done today in Jerusalem; the Bible went through many revisions and additions – new scrolls/books added over time Alcatraz = Genesis, the beginning; the island protected them from the cannibals in order to start the teachings from the old world, to teach the uneducated, to bring to light the beauty that existed and provided by the Lord; Eli and Solara were shown a structure that was “more than a museum” and that the “spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters” which is why God led Eli there
• Printing Press = Changed the world in spreading the word of God; invented in the 15th Century, it was significantly cheaper than a handwritten Bible that could take a single monk 20 years to transcribe; the King James version was the first bible translation to be mass produced/published first edition in the 17th Century; ultimately the most printed book in the world
• Cannibalism = barbarism; a sin from the 10 Commandments: thou shall not murder; Pagans, through a number of stories, involve cannibalism (i.e. Greek Mythology); historically, this act challenges what is or is not acceptable human behavior and is equated with evil and savagery; one could make a point that in the Christian tradition, cannibalism is believed to be undertaken in the form of communion and the Eucharist, however, this is used with bread and wine and not human flesh
• Water = Baptism is the means of entry, and the defilement of human sin is removed as the initiate enters into communion with Christ’s act of salvation; Carnegie had control over many watering holes which show the control over Free Will – Paul had converted from Judaism to Christianity through baptism
• Earth = The representation of barren salvation – “the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep”; once West you see that God has started restoration visually as the land shows new growth by green pastures; rich and full of color in contrast to the sepia tones that were used before they reached the West
• Alcatraz Library = Held many books: “Saints on the Seas”, “A History of the Jews”, “The Torah”, “The Tanakh”, “The Holy Quran”, “Hymns of Praise, Numbers One and Two Combined”…I couldn’t make out others, however, I am positive that they would be history on these cultures and regardless Judaism, Catholicism and Muslim were the first religions of humanity that formed from the Word of God.”

The Book of Eli: Religion is Power

This brief blog post is simply to express one of this greatest idea’s this movie discuses, the idea that “religion is power”. We understand Eli to be a profit with a mission, perhaps even a biblical judge. Eli is appointed by his God to take the bible somewhere safe. In a conversation with Solara he explains how he arrived at this understanding,

“Eli: The war tore a hole in the sky, the sun came down, burnt everything, everyone, I wandered, I didn’t really know what I should do or where I was going. I was just moving from place to place, trying to stay alive. Then one day I heard this voice. I don’t know how to explain it, it’s like it was coming from inside me. But I could hear it clear as day. Clear as I can hear you talking to me now. It told me to carry the book west, it told me that a path would be laid out before me, that I’d be led to a place where the book would be safe it told me I’d be protected, against anyone or anything that tried to stand in my way. If only I would have faith. That was thirty years ago and I’ve been walking ever since.”

We understand that Eli has read the bible almost every day, and has proven to be more than capable of reciting scripture; using it to open or close his defensive attacks. He also says grace before eating and reciting quotes for Solara and lastly, recites the entire bible at the end of the movie. Solara, who has never been exposed to religion of any sort, is curious and always asking questions:

Solara: You know, you say you’ve been walking for thirty years, right?
Eli: Right?
Solara: Have you ever thought that maybe you were lost?
Eli: Nope.
Solara: Well, how do you know that you’re walking in the right direction?
Eli: I walk by faith, not by sight.
Solara: [sighs] What does that mean?
Eli: It means that you know something even if you don’t know something.
Solara: That doesn’t make any sense.
Eli: It doesn’t have to make sense. It’s faith. It’s the flower of light in the field of darkness that’s giving me the strength to carry on. You understand?

Through the course of this movie we find Solara to become more and more enlightened by his God and inspired; this is evident when she says Grace with her mother before breakfast. Furthermore, at the end of the film she goes back to her home to “change it” as Eli initially instructed her too, it could be said that Solara has become an angel.

However not only has The Book of Eli  showed us the power of religion in a positive was, as a means of the preservation of humanity and an inspiration of hope. It also shows how religion can be used as a weapon, as a form of mind control. Carnegie, has had road warriors out searching and killing to bring back books in the hopes he will one day find the bible. When Carnegie first suspects Eli has the bible after the bar fight, where he then tries to lour him into staying by flattering him with warm food, a cozy bed, and a female (Solara).  However he escapes in the morning only to be caught on the streets.

It is without a doubt an interesting idea that the film has presented, that religion is perfect tool, or weapon when people are in poor conditions and in need of a crutch. When Carnegie has his mean go after Eli he re-states,

Carnegie: IT’S NOT A FUCKIN’ BOOK! IT’S A WEAPON. A weapon aimed right at the hearts and minds of the weak and the desperate. It will give us control of them. If we want to rule more than one small, fuckin’ town, we have to have it. People will come from all over, they’ll do exactly what I tell ’em if the words are from the book. It’s happened before and it’ll happen again. All we need is that book.

Carnegie becomes enraged by Eli’s “protection” something he so desires for himself. However, because Carnegie sees the Bible as a weapon (as we just saw), one which he could use to control the lost, the hungry and the desperate masses, he is never given the chance to do so being instead prevented by some force of God.

This is all used to show how how religion can be used for good or evil. I have come to understand, Christianity has two completely different gods, one in the Old Testament and one in the new. One is angry, vengeful, jealous, murderous, selective, etc. The other is portrayed kind, loving, selfless and all these other things. Which makes me see Eli and Carneigie as the two Gods.  This is why Eli knows that Carnegie should not hold possession of the bible, and why he understands that he has found the right place at the end of the film, it is a haven for humanity.

Work Cited:

• The Book of Eli. Dir. The Huges Brothers. Perf. Denzen Washington, Mila Kunis, gary Oldman. Warner Home Video, 2010. DVD.
• The Book of Eli (2010) IMDb.

The Road and The Book of Eli: “The good guys”

The Road and The Book of Eli  have similar plot lines, both representing a post apocalyptic society devoid of humanity, with a main character(s) representing the spark of humanity, or “the breath of god”. In regards to The Road, The people they meet have mostly become scavengers and cannibals; humanity has degenerated into bestiality, and existence, “a grotesque survival of the fittest. Human beings are killed, gutted and eaten.” However, the father and his son are exceptions; they are presented to us as “the good guys” throughout the novel (Softing 710). In the Book of Eli Denzel Washingington plays what can only be called a badass warrior (or badass profit perhaps) who has been contacted by God, to take a copy of The New King James Bible West until he finds somewhere where it belongs, and can be safe. At the end of this film, Eli manages to arrive at his destination, a place of refuge from humanities achievements with preserved works of art, novels and other books.

With all of this being said, the question still remains, are they the “good guys” (referring now to both the Father and son and Eli). In today’s society killing out of self-defense is complicated by the law (and for good reason) however, in the post-apocalyptic word there is no law, just life and death and survival. With that being said, our father son duo, kill out of survival and self-defence, but is it that simple? The boy repeatedly asks his father whether they are still “the good guys”, which makes the novel probe into these ethical questions: what does it mean to be good? Can you kill and still be good? Does the end justify the means, or is the deed morally autonomous? (Softing 710).  The boy keeps asking, wanting and needing to be assured that they are still “the good guys” even though they do inhuman things. The father is always assuring the son, that this is the case, that they are still good, which the text reassures us by suggesting that “they do not eat people and they do not kill, except in self-defence” (Softing 710). In The Book of Eli, Eli kills out of self-defence, but mainly out of defense of the bible, in some instances one might argue he over steps this right, invading on aggressive killing. However, he feels like he has been chosen by his God to protect the last surviving bible on earth. Therefore, the movie begs similar questions.

Let us take a moment to look at the present day justification of self-defense. According to David Mapel’s article, “Moral Liability to Defensive Killing and Symmetrical Self-defense”, “Justified self-defense requires that a victim inflict only necessary and proportionate harm. As the necessity requirements suggest, self-defense is concerned with protecting human life and limb, not with punishment (198). Furthermore, this article also argues that self-defense is justified only if an attacker first violates the rights of others, making him lose his rights against attack. (207)

Focusing first on The Road, we can see that the boy has messianic qualities, he is constantly only able to see the good in people. Furthermore, the duo refuses to eat human flesh in order to remain pure, choosing starvation instead (128-129), this purity seems to aid their improbable survival against  the various situations in which they are prey. It is the existence of, “band roving cannibals and warriors that implies that this world rewards brute survival skills more (Kearney, 173-174). Take for example the scene in which the father has to shoot the cannibal who puts their lives in jeopardy, if we think back to when the father said, “I was appointed by God. I will kill anyone who touches you” (77) we know that the father is constantly on defense. If you consider that this cannibal was in fact an emanate threat, he had a weapon, and had every intention of kidnapping them for food, then regardless of whether or not he acted first, it could be justified that in such a situation, the father had to kill this man in order to save their own lives; and for the survival of humanity. Throughout this novel, the father only threatens to kill if it is a matter of self-defence and their own impending death, even with this, the boy still attempts to stop him always trying to see the good in people first. It could be argued that their actions are morally autonomous, as there are no laws to govern by, however killing and acting in what could be argued as unethical ways, are justified in any situation where their death is put into jeopardy, thereby justifying their actions.

In The Book of Eli however, regardless of whether or not his machete skills make him “badass” and provide action for the film, his actions when analyzed morally are sometimes unjust. Eli has been chosen by his god to protect the last surviving Bible on earth, which he takes as free reign to go about killing people, who stand in his way. With that being said, he doesn’t help the travelers being attacked by the biker gang even when he sees the innocent women who’s about to get raped (yes I know he’s blind but he’s very much aware) as he says to himself “stay on the path its not your concern, stay on the path it’s not your concern”. He is arbitrarily selective about the people he decides to save. Furthermore, he is an aggressive killer, though he does attempt to avoid conflict through his calm tones, attempting at first to resolve conflict non-violently, when he does have to act out of self-defense, there is something almost too enjoyable about the fast-effortless killing, this is especially obvious when Solara has to tell him to “please stop.”

 

However it can also be argued that as the movie progressed we saw Eli realize that he himself had lost humanity focusing so much on his mission that he failed to realize he was being selective. This seems to change when he saved Solara from the cannibals. When he met Solara and their relationship developed, he realized he could protect her and complete his mission; that protecting others and remaining humane, was just as important as delivering the book itself.

Solara: I didn’t think you’d ever give up the book, I thought it was too important to you
Eli: It was, I was carrying and reading it everyday, got so caught up in protecting it, I forgot to live by what I’d learnt from it
Solara: And what’s that?
Eli: To do more for others than you do for yourself

After this, we see how he changes from aggressive self-defense, to simply self-defense, which shows a justification of his killings and a return to humanity, in post-apocalyptic society.

Therefore, the post-apocalyptic world does not suggest that killing is now humane; it simply suggests that due to a dramatic change in society, brute survival skills are at times a necessary method of self-defense. Just like all things change over time, the justification of moral self-defense must also be altered for a post-apocalyptic world.

 This is a short mash-up of scenes which do a pretty good job of telling the story, however, watch the film!

Work Cited:

• Kearney, Kevin. “Cormac McCarthy’s The Road and the Frontier of the Human.”Literature Interpretation Theory 23.2 (2012): 160-178. Print.
• Mapel, David R. “Moral Liability to Defensive Killing and Symmetrical Self-Defense.” Journal of Political Philosophy 18.2 (2010): 198-217. Print.
• McCarthy, Cormac. The Road. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006. Print.
• Softing, Inger- Anne. “BEtween Dystopia and Utopia: The Post- Apocalyptic Discourse of Cormac McCarthy’s The Road.” English Studies 94.6 (2013): 704-713. Print.
• The Book of Eli. Dir. The Huges Brothers. Perf. Denzen Washington, Mila Kunis, Gary Oldman. Warner Home Video, 2010. DVD.

 

The Road: Frontier of the Human

The Road is a dystopia, it is, the story of a father and son traveling through a post-apocalyptic world, destroyed by the unknown. In a dystopia, humanity is often threatened, and Cormac McCarthy spares no details to prove that here. In this novel, human beings are up against something much larger than themselves, nothing with which the science or technology we have come to rely on can remedy; instead, it is something that in a moment was capable of causing a total degeneration of humanity (Softing 708).  In an Interview McCarthy said, “Good literature deals with issues of life and death and literature that does not deal with these huge issues, seem strange” (Softing 705). There is no doubt, that life and death are the central theme in this novel as well, The Road gestures towards the idea of a “world without us” it is both the idea of a re-birth, and of eventual extinction, thus resulting in its obfuscation. The Road depicts cities populated by rocks and bones after a collapse so destructive the future of life itself is almost completely wiped. Critic Kevin Kearney writes, “I argue that the ‘‘real’’ cause of the apocalypse exists as a hole in the text that parallels a potential hole in human existence: the complete absence of human futurity and the absence of life itself” (161). Focusing mainly on the idea of human futurity, or simply the future of humanity we can see how The Road is filled with anxieties regarding the regeneration of human kind and specifically humanity itself. On a similar note, Inger-Ann Softing writes, “the dead land is like a nihilist agent seeking to destroy human kind” (708). It can be said the post-apocalyptic challenges are far greater than the first settlers who pushed the frontier westwards, as these characters are now human frontiers pushing humanity. The duo spends this novel attempting to retain and continue ideals and ethics which appear to be no more than fading memories. Thus, leading to one of the novels major themes- memory, “the names of things slowly following those things into oblivion. Colors. The names of birds. Things to eat. Finally the names of things one believed to be true” (93). At one point, the boy questions his father by saying, “you forget some things don’t you?” to which he replies, “yes. You forget what you want to remember and you remember what you want to forget” (12). By beginning the novel with this statement, McCarthy is suggesting that to forget, is to lose humanity, that when that happens humanity is also a thing of the past and then it would be as if the past never was (Softing, 708). When we combine these ideas, we see how The Road is about the idea of human futurity being subject to the characters ability to retain memories and thereby continue, and promote, humanity. This is done through the act of, “carrying the fire” (which I believe to be first introduced to us on page 83). The need to resist annihilating and to pass on life is presented through the “fire”, a mysterious entity which exists within the man and his son. This “fire” can has been viewed in multiple ways, it can signify the spark of civilization, the promise of regeneration, or the life breath of god (Kearney 162). Despite the fall of the world surrounding them and the death to seemingly every living creature, this “fire” is kept safe within the boy, akin to his soul. It is the guarantee of the fire, as repeated throughout the novel (pages 83,129,216, 278 and 283), that weaves this novels story; a tale of promise in a world marked by destruction and death, with nearly no hope of passing the fire. However, his father’s dying words remain, “it’s inside you. It was always there. I can see it” (279). Throughout this novel, the father has carried a gun containing two bullets, suggestive of the act of killing both he and his son should the need ever arise, furthermore he plagues the novel with questions of whether or not he would be capable of killing his son if he was put in such a position, “Could you crush that beloved skull with a rock? Is there such a being within you of which you know nothing?” (120). By changing the ending from a murder-suicide to a generally peaceful death, and a hopeful remark, we actually are able to see what could be considered a “happy ending”. Had the father used his bullet on his son, it would have been consistent with being symbolic for the end of humanity (Softing 7012). However, by not killing him, the boy is able to frontier the future. In the novel, he does so when introduced to the man in the yellow ski jacket (yellow… fire… coincidence? I think not!) who has followed them in an attempt to bring them to their shelter, when the boy asks this man, “are you carrying the fire” (283) and the man responds with yes I am, the boy has essentially been successful in developing a collective group of “good guys”. In the film, by focusing on the boy’s awe at the site of a bug, we see a suggestion of futurity and hope, at the possibility of other life forms, the boys futurity and the hope of a rise of humanity as well. (Kearney 172). This is a clip from the end of the film, I was hoping to find one which showed the bug, however this will have to do. Pardon the totally inappropriate music transition and if you are looking for a laugh take a peek at the comments.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NUlkdtQY_I

Work Cited

• Kearney, Kevin. “Cormac McCarthy’s The Road and the Frontier of the Human.”Literature Interpretation Theory 23.2 (2012): 160-178. Print.
• McCarthy, Cormac. The Road. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006. Print.
• Softing, Inger- Anne. “Between Dystopia and Utopia: The Post- Apocalyptic Discourse of Cormac McCarthy’s The Road.” English Studies 94.6 (2013): 704-713. Print.