Day 42: As The World Turns

Well I'm getting near the end of my allotted days of this Lenten time writing project, and I didn't even get a chance to spend time talking about another two sub-groups of delay of recognition stories. Scaramouche is a novel in which characters who interact throughout the story have no clue that in the end they will turn out to be family members. I don't want to spoil the ending, but think of Luke and Darth Vader. There are many favorite stories that I have which include an apocalyptic moment when two main characters find out they are siblings, or parent and child, or twins who were separated at birth, or some other family tie which totally rocks their world at the moment of recognition. But I'm short on entries and have to move on to the final days and tie it all together for Easter.

The other sub-set of stories has to do with a disguise being removed from someone who has been passing as a member of the opposite gender. As You Like It is a Shakespeare play that comes to mind, and many Shakespeare comedies have women who are disguised as men and who help an story that seems certainly to be a tragedy to end up as a comedy. I mention some of my favorites cross-dressing stories in a blog entry from a few years ago so read that if you want more of my thoughts about that sub-group of stories.

A few nights ago I watched a movie from the 1980's starring Barbra Streisand as the title character: Yentl. I just happened to pick this one out at the library without knowing anything about it, and it is amazing to me that it is the perfect story to encounter during this season of reflecting upon stories which include a delay of recognition.

The first scene of the movie opens in the marketplace of an Eastern European Jewish village, and a travelling book-peddler is advertising his wares with these lines, said over and over:
"Storybooks for women, sacred books for men!
Picture books for women, sacred books for men!
Novels for women, sacred books for men!
Novels, very romantic, for women, sacred books for men!"

These lines say everything about the mess that many religious communities have made of the division between the genders and the arbitrary division of cultural objects into "sacred" and "secular." The unfortunate attitude that coined the term "chick-flick" goes way back before Sleepless in Seattle! In many unhealthy religious systems, there are two kinds of writings: sacred and secular. There are two kinds of knowledge: sacred and silly. There are two kinds of literature: sacred and storybooks. There are two kinds of audience: men and women. The men may learn and interpret and teach the lofty sacred writings, while the less intellectually challenging storybooks are for women and children. This town's observant Jewish community considers women who study Talmud to be demons. They put the women in the balcony during worship, and would severely punish any women who broke the following law: "No woman shall wear that which pertaineth to a man." Well as you can guess, Yentl is a woman who is interested in studying Talmud, so interested that she takes the risk of disguising herself as a young man and getting enrolled into a yeshiva for education as a rabbi. And that is only the beginning of her risky and scandalous escapades, since she lives in a place and time when it is impossible to be herself while wearing woman's clothes, because of the way women have been marginalized as domestic servants who need to know little to nothing about the sacred writings and are told to stick to reading what men would not stoop to enjoy: romantic storybooks. It is amazing that no one recognizes her as a woman, not even the other women in the story! How could they all be so blind and miss all the clues about her true identity!

A week or two ago, I heard an On The Media interview on NPR with a man named Darryl Pickney who became a big-time fan of the soap opera As The World Turns. He wrote an article about his experience in the February 2010 issue of Harper's and Bob Garfield, the interviewer, was having a hard time accepting that a male adult with significant intellect was openly talking about such a "weakness." There was a point in the interview when Darryl gently rebuked Bob for assuming universal disdain for the soap opera genre (here's a link set up if you want to hear or read the interview). This interview is worth listening to, because it reminds us how easily we can disdain story genres which depend on outlandish events: surprise pregnancies, characters we thought were dead which come back, hyped up weddings, secret love affairs, sexually-charged romantic encounters which are edited into 30-second clips and dragged out for a whole week to ensure that fans will tune in tomorrow. It is generally assumed that only uneducated housewives could get sucked into such fluff, those women who are oblivious to the fact that a soap opera storyline exists primarily to generate greater advertising revenue from companies who manufacture household cleaning products.

I closely followed a soap for a couple years in junior high: Days of Our Lives. Steve and Kayla, Jack and Jennifer, Bo and Hope and Billy were the couples and triangles that I recall. It was hard to keep up because we didn't have a tv, but I would call my aunt on summertime weekdays and ask her if she had any laundry folding or ironing for me in exchange for an hour's access to Days. An occasional episode, along with reading the soap update in the newspaper, and I could generally keep up with the long drawn out storylines for a few years. By the time I was in college I had lost interest, but several of my dorm friends gathered around the television for the Days hour each day as Roman Brady turned out to be John Black (was it the other way around?), or Marlena was possessed by a demon, or evil Stefano turned out to be kind and other unlikely revelations of plot and character.

How much respect do you have for a soap opera with all of its fantastical plot twists? Is it the furthest thing from sacred writing that one could get? Is it a grown-up form of a child's fairy-tale, worthwhile only for silly women? Your answers to those questions may affect your encounters with the Bible, which is filled with stories of astonishing pregnancy news, supernatural encounters, characters who are killed off then somehow come back alive into the story, ranting and raving of jealous husbands, wedding hype, affairs, betrayals, murders, adulteries, misunderstandings, feuds . . . drama, drama and more drama among lovers, family members and friends.

Day 41: Children, Animals, Fools 3

There are an abundance of talking animals in this children's series, but I mainly want to mention one of my favorite storybook characters of all time, found in the Chronicles of Narnia. Her name is Lucy and she is a very little girl, the youngest in a family of four children. She responds with a believing, courageous, and gracious attitude when she is granted access to a peculiar and magical land before any of her other siblings.

I first met Lucy in C.S. Lewis's The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe when I was five or six, and I still vividly remember the introduction. I was in our fireplace family room in our house on Elm Street and I was sitting on the arm of the chair while my father read this book aloud to me on several different evenings. It was magical, and I was hooked when we got to chapters with such titles . . ."Deep Magic from the Dawn of Time", then "Deeper Magic from Before the Dawn of Time" . . . . this story is one of the foundations of my fascination for literature, fantasy, fairy tale, and it influenced the choice of my all-time favorite recreational activity: entering into the creative world of an author who skillfully tells a story that is so satisfying that it must be true.

Lucy is in a challenging situation a couple times, first in the above book and they another Chronicles of Narnia book called Prince Caspian. In The L, W, and the W, she accidently discovers the entrance to a nearby but faraway world called Narnia while she is playing hide and seek, and when she tries to tell her older brothers and sisters about it they do not believe her, and rebuke her for being up to her silly imaginative games of pretend like little kids always are. Eventually they find out she was telling the truth and they apologize and she is very gracious to forgive them.

In Prince Caspian, a similar discovery happens, but it is more heartbreaking to her because her siblings should have learned to trust her perspective by now. They have been suddenly summoned back into Narnia by a call for help, and they are trying to make their way across the land to find the Prince who needs their help. They are having trouble navigating the terrain to find a safe and direct route to their destination, when all of the sudden, Lucy sees Narnia's lion-king, Aslan, in the distance, beckoning them to come back upstream, the opposite direction they are currently hiking. She is so excited and announces what she sees to the others, but for some reason, they are not given the eyes to see Aslan, and they do not believe her and they are annoyed that she seems to be up to her childish fantasies again during a situation that requires serious focus and discipline. They take a vote on whether to validate what Lucy sees, or continue their path downstream. The majority do not believe Lucy, and the chapter called "What Lucy Saw" ends with these words, a chapter ending which has always tugged at my heartstrings: "Down," said Peter after a long pause. "I know Lucy may be right after all, but I can't help it. We must do one or the other." So they set off to their right along the edge, downstream. And Lucy came last of the party, crying bitterly.

Lucy is granted recognition of their help and their leader, but she can't make the others see it. Later, when she finds Aslan in the middle of the night and speaks with him about how awful that was, she understands that he expected her to follow him anyway, even if it was by her lonely little self. She is told to wake up the travel party and insist again that she can see Aslan and that he wants her to follow him on the correct path. If they don't believe her this time, she'll just go without them. She wakes everyone up and tells them the plan, and her group grumblingly agrees to trust her since their downstream path yesterday turned out to be a dead end after all. In general they complain about why it is only she that can see Aslan. But as time goes on, Aslan's figure becomes recognizable to each member of the group one at a time and eventually they all can see him quite clearly. They apologize again to Lucy for hesitating to follow the littlest one among them, and she graciously forgives them once again.

There are so many stories of children who describe or experience reality in a way that is startling or impossible or unlikely or fantastical, and we older rational people might quickly discount their perspective as make-believe or silliness. What does it mean to let a little child lead us, and would we ever dare admit that they often receive the gift to recognize what is hidden from even the most educated and the most powerful among us?

Day 40: Children, Animals, Fools 2

After I noticed how much I loved a Constable Dogberry role in a story of recognition, I started looking at other popular mystery stories to see if similar characters popped up. To date I have discovered: Inspector Clouseau of the Pink Panther movies starring Peter Sellers, Maxwell Smart of the Get Smart tv show starring Don Adams, and Inspector Gadget the cartoon. Each of them have a boss or assistant who is perturbed by the clumsiness and complete cluelessness of each. Yet it seems to be their very cluelessness which causes them stumble into every situation with a perfectly unpredictable approach, and every time they accidentally expose the criminal, find the stolen papers, or discover the kidnapped professor. These are stories that point to a world where fools are the best candidates for uncovering a crafty plot, even if they stumbled upon the answers out of sheer clumsiness.

In the typical Scooby-Doo, Where Are You original cartoon episode, the gang of mystery solving kids will search for clues by dividing up into two groups, the serious and smart ones: Fred, Velma and Daphne, and the fearful, hungry ones: Shaggy and Scooby-Doo. Shaggy and Scooby are considered by the others as a slight nuisance to the serious detective work, because they always get distracted by the sight or smell of food, but it usually turns out to be that their hunt for food leads them to the secret hideaway or one of the most important clues in cracking the case. Scooby-Doo and Shaggy regularly get tripped up in the trap as they try to help execute Fred's elaborate trap schemes, they always run away in fear from their own shadow, and they are ever the hams who generate most of the the laughs, but while we are laughing at them, we love them for being a crucial link to the success of the Mystery Inc. gang

Scooby-Doo, Where Are You also consistently uses an "unmasking" as the final identification of the episode's rascal or villian. Someone whom they had probably already talked to on the crime scene is disguised under that mask and portraying himself as a supernatural monster. The mask is pulled off, the terror is reduced and the answers all make sense. I don't think this show has ever been considered part of "apocalyptic" genre of writing, but whenever I see the unveiling and unmasking at the end of each episode, I want to clap at how cleverly this scary-funny show reassures children that the most terrifying monsters of human imagination will someday all be unmasked as pesky but ultimately powerless con-artists who may be experts with holography and creepy howls but that is about it.

Those are all the examples I have space to mention of the unrecognized smart fools, and here is my only example I will mention of an unrecognized visionary animal:

The famous talking ass in the story of Balaam in Numbers 22, who was able to recognize the hazardous object in the road which Balaam could not, and saved Balaam's life. But before Balaam recognized the value of his ass, he treated it as a nuisance who deserved several whippings for disobedience and stupidness and stubbornness.

Tomorrow I will talk about my favorite unrecognized recognizer, the young child.

Day 39: Children, Animals, Fools

Another sub-set of my favorite delayed recognition stories include an unrecognized recognizer. As the story gets to the place of conflict or mystery, the main characters who are the adults and smart people get right to work on solving the problem or identifying the answers. They are annoyed by some less important characters who seem to be underfoot, in their way, distracting their focus, and generally being a nuisance. They are seen as too little to understand, or too stupid to be helpful, and not having a perspective that anyone could take seriously.

Yet as the story unfolds, it turns out to be the ridiculed, scorned, pushed aside ones that get to unlock the secret, find the truth, or save the day. So the main characters recognize finally that the person they formerly belittled is worthy of their respect, attention and gratitude. They begin to look at that child, animal or fool with new admiration and recognize that their own assumptions about the pre-requisite qualities of a valuable detective or visionary or leader were off-base.

My first example is from that Shakespeare play which I have mentioned several times already, Much Ado About Nothing. The main hero of the whole story is a minor character whose only lines are full of mis-used words, mispronounciations and general sloppiness of dialogue. He is a person whom people don't have time to listen to, and if they do, it is with impatience, or to make fun of his gaffes. He is Constable Dogberry, and while the main characters are going about all their dramatic love affairs, and weddings, and rejections at the altar, and challenges to duels, and pretended deaths, he is quietly attending to his post as rural Constable, and available to solve the very mystery that is throwing all the main characters into a tizzy. He and his assistants apprehend the man who pretended to be Hero's secret lover in the bedroom window, and they conduct their questioning session with utmost seriousness, even while we all laugh at their inability to use any courtroom procedure terms correctly.

Finally one of the important household members impatiently takes a minute to listen to what Dogberry has discovered, and the whole household finally recognizes that this silly constable who they mocked and barely tolerated as a neighbor all their lives is the neighbor who has saved the day, uncovered the mystery, and resolved the household's most serious catastrophe.

Michael Keaton plays Constable Dogberry in the film I have mentioned before, and he does a good job of illustrating how any of us would easily fail to recognize the value of such a constable. Grubby looks, bad breath, inability to speak a sentence that makes sense, a lack of social dignity. He is the comic relief, but he is also the one who keeps this comedy from ending as a tragedy. Laugh at him, laugh with him, he can handle it, but do not forget that in some stories the fools recognize what the wise have overlooked.

Day 38: A moment of recognition to remember

I was eleven or twelve, and it was New Year's Day. All the relatives were over, and there were two tv's in the house! One was the tv in the family room we would rent every year from the Rent-A-Center for a few weeks during Christmas vacation. The other one was a tv my uncle brought for the day and hooked up so he and his brothers could watch some football.

This was one of my favorite memories of a holiday, because after the big noontime meal, around 2 or 3, somebody in the family room turned on the non-sports tv and announced that there was a Cary Grant film festival that day . . .three movies back to back starring Cary Grant. Many of us family members did not leave that room until the room was dark and the third movie had ended. Arsenic and Old Lace, To Catch a Thief, and An Affair to Remember. And the final one was a movie to remember. The movie has some slow parts, but it is a great one because of the serious misunderstanding that keeps the two lovers unnecessarily apart for so long. And the concluding scene has one of my all-time favorite climactic moments of recognition, when the two are making polite small talk in her apartment, and both are refusing to say what they really feel out of pride and unwillingness to be vulnerable or show neediness at the risk of getting hurt and rejected, and then Nicky realizes the truth, mid-sentence, and stumbles through his words and strides from room to room as he understands it all now, that she didn't ditch him that day when they had promised to meet at the Empire State Building. That movie and that particular dramatic moment of recognition were such a magical experience to me that first time I saw it. I'll always remember the thrill I had to watch the characters in a story flip around in about 12 seconds from a place of heartbreak and stoic resignation and alienation to full understanding and explanation and reunion and joy.

Day 37: A time to plant

Clark and Marty were one of the first romantic couples I met in my bookworm years. This was my early middle school years and Janette Oke was a best-selling Christian romance author, maybe one of the first in that genre and all the older girls and the moms were reading her books. It was also one of the first books I read where people in the book constantly talked to God and prayers were written out in the dialogue and narrative and the main characters said evangelistic Christian things all the time. As I have said before, a good story does not need to have God-talk to be a gospel oriented story, and many "Christian" romances I have since read seem more like mediocre writing that is peppered with God talk so that it can sell in the religious market. But Janette Oke's Love Comes Softly is special to me, and I am sentimental about books I found magical in my grade school years. Some of those books I have read again as an adult and been distracted by certain themes or philosophical assumptions that I now would object to, but out of love and respect for that 5th grade bookworm Jessica, I choose not to be too harsh.

Marty is a pioneer woman who was heading west in a wagon train when her husband was killed. She was a relative newlywed and is expecting her first baby and now is quite alone in a strange land. The town where they buried her husband has a widower who has a young toddler he is struggling to care for, so she agrees to a marriage of convenience and the widower Clark vows to keep his physical distance and give her a private bedroom in exchange for her housekeeping and childcare help. And so most of this novel proceeds with Marty grieving her losses and being a clumsy housewife and using the slang of an unchurched greenhorn. And I guess most of the plot includes devout Christian Clark teaching her by example how to be a God-fearing pioneer. But I was more interested in the romance than the born-again believer part back then, and have to admit I still would be today.

They keep a polite distance all through the fall and winter and figure out how to work together as household partners and struggle through their own loneliness on their own. Until spring planting season comes. The "sexy" chapter that I read over and over, which is very tame indeed, but still so sexy, is the day when they are both planting in the garden and Marty is a lot less depressed and alienated from this community, and she is making progress through her grief and post-partum stages, and this is a day she is feeling a lot more spunky. The season of seed planting is a sexy time for farmers, I'm sure, and the sunny warm weather is helping Marty feel more happy and optimistic about her future. She plays a little prank on Clark and pours some seeds down his back and runs off. He chases her down and there is a tackle and a little wrestling in the dirt and the rest is history. I'm a sucker, I know, but I think this is one of the sexiest encounters between two people who have all of the sudden realized that they have been in love for a while. Clark plants some more seeds that night in their new shared bedroom and before long Marty is blooming with a pregnant belly.

Day 36: Why are my cheeks so warm?

I love the moment when blind lovers come to that point in time when they recognize they are feeling something much more than apathy or disdain for the other. I often race ahead in anticipation till I reach this point in the story and sometimes lose interest in the story after that point. There's something about that revelatory moment that is so much more thrilling than what comes before or after, even though that moment can't exist without having a place within the before and after.

In the story of Maria and Georg, the moment happens during their dance just outside the ballroom on the patio. The nun Maria is showing the von Trapp children one of the Austrian folk dances, and Captain von Trapp steps in to be her partner. There have been several heated arguments between these two about their differences of philosophy and execution in caring for children. But have already started to acknowledge a common delight in Austrian music and dance, and so this all comes to this moment in their dancing steps when they make their first physical contact, and lock eyes for a moment and all of the sudden there is something very intense going on. Maria runs off, probably because she had some very un-nunly feelings of arousal in a body that is soon to be dedicated as off-limits to any human lover. Georg's lady friend and fiance is the one who sees more than Maria or Georg are willing to admit, and she unsuccessfully tries to scare Maria off the premises, then eventually leaves the premises herself, knowing she is unable to distract Georg from his fiesty governess. There is another moment when Maria becomes aware that Georg has broken off his other engagement, but I don't think it carries the same dramatic pull as the earlier recognition during the dancing scene. And the rest of the movie would have very little to keep us hooked if it didn't switch to the suspenseful scenes of the family's crafty escape from Austria

Day 35: When did you first fall in love with. . .

Brown Sugar, 2002 starring Taye Diggs and Sanaa Lathan

This is a movie I stumbled upon while surfing cable tv several years ago.

Dre and Sidney are not the fighting kind of blind lovers, they are best friends who met as children and share a common love for hip-hop music. Sidney is talking to someone about the day she fell in love with hip-hop and it turns out it was the same day she met Dre. They both try to remain "friends only, nothing more" and pursue unsuccessful love relationships with other people. Everybody except for them are able to guess that this story will not end until they acknowledge that they are more than friends.

Here is a review that covers more details than I remember: Brown Sugar

Day 34: The long and winding road

Gilbert and Anne. They could have been great friends and gradeschool sweethearts right away if it hadn't been for the unfortunate teasing nickname Gilbert used on Anne: "Carrots!" Anne absolutely hated having red hair and often imagined that it was turning a rich auburn but Gilbert reminded her that orange was the dominate hue and she vowed she would never forgive him for that injury.

I perfectly remember the spot in my school library where I was standing by the window and card catalog looking for a new book to read. My 4th grade teacher pulled Anne of Green Gables off the shelf and said it was a book she really enjoyed as a child. I had a great time over the next few months reading all the books in the Anne series, and then moving on to the Emily of New Moon trilogy.

The Anne of Green Gables series moves through its first several volumes before these two finally reconcile their past hurts and arguments, rivalries and silent treatments and take the first difficult steps of attempting to speak to one another again. Many friends and family members tell Anne outright that she is being silly to go on with her grudge for so many years, but she has some great fear to letting herself feel affection for Gilbert. Years go by, and it seems they will never reconcile, but then it finally happens. They have taken a very long and winding road to their first openly affectionate encounter, but that makes for a satisfying love story.

The original L.M. Montgomery novels are the best way to enjoy this story, but our family has many many good memories of watching a slightly revised take of the Anne chronicles as dramatized in the Anne of Green Gables mini-series and its sequel, Anne of Avonlea: 1985, 1987 made for TV starring Megan Follows as Anne and Megan Dewhurst as Marilla.

Day 33: Definitely not Love at First Sight

My next set of stories are those love stories which include this delightful plotline: everybody except the actual couple can recognize that they are in love!

They say that love is blind, which is usually said to mean that when you are madly in love with someone, you are blind to their flaws.

Well another way that love is blind, as shown in many satisfying romantic comedy stories, is that the two people who are in love have no idea about that condition. They are definitely aroused in the presence of the other, but they express this with angry arguments, sharp retorts and insults and dirty looks, stomping off in a huff and all other such forms of passionate relational intercourse (all except sex)! They are often couples who are very self-confident about how they view themselves, the world and this other person who is a burr in their side at the moment. They appear slightly ridiculous to the ones around them who see that love is in the air, who also see that it is a matter of time before the sharp-tongued self-assurance of those two arguing love-birds will give way to a stammering shyness and a new sense of perplexity about their own deepest feelings.

My favorite couple who spend most of the story in this state are the Much Ado About Nothing couple called Beatrice and Benedick. Hero and Claudio, the other main couple in this play, supposedly fell in love at first sight, but had some difficulties with misunderstanding and jumping to conclusions later. Beatrice and Benedick have known each other for a long time and have a habit of constantly swapping insults. Their best friends see the relationship for what it really is and decide to help things along by "accidently" having fake conversations in the hearing of each B. about how much the other B. is swooning with love and just can't get up the courage to confess it. The dynamics between Beatrice and Benedick are wonderfully played by Kenneth Branaugh and Emma Thompson in the movie version of this great comedy. It is possible that all the verbal sparring and hiding behind witty retorts may have come out of a former history of being a couple and failing at it and feeling too vulnerable to try again. There is a ShakespeaRetold version of this story set in the present day at a British newsroom studio and Damian Lewis plays Benedick. This is also a fun way to enjoy the story.

When Benedick and Beatrice finally get to the point where they can acknowledge their love for each other, they still are able to keep up the banter and the witty conversation and the swift replies, though it is now more in a delightful kind of interaction than to wound the other with jesting insults. You can just tell they are going to have a good time continuing on in this relationship. Benedick had vowed over and over to his friend Don Pedro in the beginning of the play that he would always remain a contented bachelor. His tune has much changed by the closing lines of the play as he encourages Don Pedro to find himself a wife, and does not seem to be ashamed for such a drastic change of perspective. Then he insists that it is time for everyone to start dancing and no other activity (not solemn ceremony at church, nor retributive punishment upon the villain) should put a delay on the celebrative dancing. It is time to celebrate, now that Hero's innocence has been vindicated and the authenticity of Benedick's love has been tested and proved. "Strike up, pipers!" are the final words of the play as the main characters dance off the stage.

Day 32: The Three B's

I just realized yesterday that I am going to have more than forty entries, because unlike last year I am writing a post for each day of the week instead of skipping the Lent Sundays. That is kind of nice because the more I write, the more things I think of to write about on this topic.

Today I am going to mention my three B's. Not Bach Brahms and Beethoven. They are my preacher B's, who, before I ever heard of them, had already opened up doors that I used to think were a product of my own romantic wishful thinking. I have never met nor been in the pews of any of these three preachers, but they all took the time to write and publish their perspectives on the gospel and I have benefited greatly and found much comfort and encouragement in their outlook.

Frederick Buechner is the first B. I was introduced to some of his novels and autobiographical pieces in college, and in my college Shakespeare class, my professor recommended we read his book called: Telling the Truth, the Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy and Fairy Tale. It is a really short book, only 4 chapters, so I have read it over a dozen times and it has heavily influenced my perspective of gospel as cosmic story. This book rocked my world when I read it and first grasped that the gospel is not a set of doctrinal standards to get just right so much as it is the most exciting, dramatic and satisfying story to ever be told.

Jan Bonda is the second B. He was a pastor in the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands. A family uncle gave me a book by him in 2006, and he made mention of some Bible stories to defend his thesis, stories that I had been wrestling with also, it was very exciting to enjoy the companionship of reading his thoughts in his book, The One Purpose of God.

In 2007 I purchased and read my first book by Karl Barth, the final draft of his commentary on Romans. I had heard a little about Barth in a theology class in college and in 2007 when I was looking up some concepts in my Christian theology textbook, his name came up in one of the sections and his particular outlook on that topic seemed interesting to me. The Letter of Romans used to be my scary and intimidating Bible book, so I would read it many times to try to really understand it. And when I did, it became my favorite and most encouraging Bible book. Reading Barth's commentary also made me feel so much comfort to know that some of the ideas I was wrestling with were not craziness, because here was a talented theologian who was working through and reconciling some biblical themes in a way that I was hoping someone would do!

So I just want to give a shout out to these three people and the positive impact they have had on my life. And a thanks to the translators who brought the Dutch and the German texts into English. Each of these preachers has helped me to finally be able to get to a point where I am able celebrate the Gospel as really good news, and to feel better that I am not on my own in my personal inquiries and wrestlings and efforts to reorient cognitions on particular topics.

Day 31: Re-cognition

Today a brief talk about the word: recognition.

Cognition is a word that describes our how our thoughts, memories, assumptions, paradigms, and sensory organs work together to help us know reality.

Cognitive therapy is a way of looking closely at all those factors and how they produce an emotional reaction and a response of action to what we perceive as reality in a particular moment.

Here's an example. If a receptionist is short and unfriendly to me at a library or a school or a business, my cognitive process usually goes this way: She doesn't like me, I did something wrong, I am bothering her. So I get sad and feel ashamed. Sometimes I get sulky and cry or leave before I do what I came to do. That shows I need some significant skills to learn re-cognition of a situation to which most emotionally healthy people can see reality as: that receptionist is having a bad day or she doesn't feel happy today and it has very little to do at all with me.

I also find it helpful to think of an optical illusion when I think about the concept of recognition. Most of us have an initial cognition of an optical illusion, like the classic one that sees a vase or a candlestick made from to squiggly vertical lines. And then someone says to us: do you see the two faces looking at each other? Re-cognition. The lines don't change, but the cognition is regrouped and the sensory messages are re-processed in the brain. Then we look at it for a while and toggle back and forth to see the first reality and the second reality, and we feel a magic that both realities can be seen in the same drawing.

Recognizing a person is sort of like that. We see a face, but the identity is not hitting our brain. It is someone we knew before, or someone we are supposed to know, but while we are seeing every detail in the face, something else that we are seeing or thinking or assuming or interpreting is blocking the recognition. It is a weird feeling to go from seeing to recognition, because it seems weird that nothing about what we are seeing has changed, but something else less obvious comes in to play that gives us the ability to recognize. Sometimes it is the memory recall of a past event or the sound of the other person's voice, or sometimes they have to go all the way and say their name and remind us in detail who they are and why we know them.

I have talked before about the two ways that recognition can be delayed. One is that the person who sees but does not recognize is operating with assumptions and paradigms of cognition that keep recognition from taking place. In The Prince and the Pauper, no one recognized the prince when he was in pauper's clothes, because everyone knew for a fact that a prince would never wear raggedy clothes.

THe other way is usually because the unrecognized person wants to remain unrecognized for a time, so he or she is in disguise or veil or cloak until she/he is ready to be recognized. No one recognized the Prince because he had altered his appearance and placed himself in an unlikely social setting.

Sometime the two ways are both happening at the same time. Usually they are, I guess, and time is moving both blindness and disguise along to that climax scene when the blinders are lifted and disguises are removed, and that weird disorienting and reorienting apocalyptic experience of recognition takes hold upon an individual or crowd.

Day 30: Two Thrones

The other pair of characters important to the story of Esther is the married couple. I interpret this story first of all as a story about the prophecy--"every valley shall be exalted and every mountain and hill made low." Haman and Mordecai's see-saw. But I also see a plot that involves conflict and resolution in the arena of authentic love and honor between men and women.

The story opens with a king who does not have a healthy relationship with his queen. There is a strong indication, based on the party conversation, that in this kingdom, women are seen as lesser subjects than the men, as sex objects to be shown off and used for male ego and pleasure, and kept low on the totem pole when it comes to power and influence. Depending on whether or not we think that is a good thing, we may also condemn Vashti as an unsubmissive wife, or cheer for her bravery in refusing to be treated as a pretty toy in the presence of a roomful of drunken men.
There also seems to be a need for a significant number of eunuchs at court, those that have been surgically castrated into a kind of neutral between-gender, who are treated as a buffer population to work in the chasm between the penis-people rulers and the vagina-people harem.

Vashti is sent away from court as an object lesson to the rest of the kingdom's women, and we sense that there is no real chance that the king will move to a new kind of relationship with any woman in his new harem collection.

The social mess and the major alienation of the king from everyone else is made very clear when it turns out to be even impotent eunuch bodyguards who are willing to plot an assassination attempt upon the king. Who can he trust if he can't trust even his eunuch bodyguards?

The Greek Esther and the film Esther that I saw both spent a little more time developing the progress of the relationship between Esther and her king. I don't think they are out of line for doing so, because there is something special about how Esther uses her wits and her timing and her beauty and her courage to use her own personal and kin-group crisis to draw the king into a different perspective about how he could relate to his wife.

Esther's major dilemma by the middle of the story is that she is in a prime place to appeal to the king on behalf of her people, but the king's law is that he gets to call the shots on when his wife visits with him, whether day or night. She is considered one of his subjects, and so it is a risk to her life to rebel against his rules and come before him uninvited. The Greek Esther has a spot where something huge changes in the relationship during this crisis. This is just after the more dramatic scene of entrance in Greek Esther, she faints with fear at her boldness in approaching him uninvited. Know what, I just have to quote it all here:

Then, majestically adorned, after invoking the aid of the all-seeing God and Savior, she took two maids with her; on one she leaned gently for support, while the other followed, carrying her train. She was radiant with perfect beauty, and she looked happy as if beloved, but her heart was frozen with fear. When she had gone through all the doors, she stood before the king. He was seated on his royal throne, clothed in the full array of his majesty, all covered with gold and precious stones. He was most terrifying. Lifting his face, flushed with splendor, he looked at her in fierce anger. The queen faltered, and turned pale and faint and collapsed on the head of the maid who went in front of her. Then God changed ths spirit of the king to gentleness, and in alarm he sprang from his throne and took her in his arms until she came to herself. He comforted her with soothing words, and said to her, "What is it, Esther? I am your husband. Take courage; you shall not die, for our law applies only to our subjects. Come near.

It goes on, but the turning point in their relationship is that he recognizes their relationship as husband and wife, as co-rulers, no longer as ruler and subject. She has taken the courageous risk to push the relationship to that level, and he responded. Now she can reveal her true identity and vulnerability as a doomed Jew to him and count on his protection and advocacy. The film demonstrates this beautifully by closing the story with a picture of two thrones, and Esther and the king ruling the land as a true partnership. What a relief it must have been to a man who never before knew who to trust and respect as a help-meet and right hand person, who was paranoid and immature as a result of having no intimacy with a person who was his royal equal and who had the courage to take a personal risk to show him the truth about a foolish and blind decision that he had made to trust Haman!

In the wording of the second edict (Greek Esther writes them all out) that is put out to take the teeth out of the first edict, the king refers to Esther as "the blameless partner of our kingdom." What a change in his perspective from when the story opened!

This is definitely a beautiful love story, and I hear it announcing two things that make me glad: 1. an invitation for the fake-smile-fear-frozen-heart Queen-Church to boldly approach the King-Judge's throne for a more direct and honest kind of intimacy. 2. a hopeful model for a life-giving way that men and women can relate to one another with equal dignity as co-leaders in various institutions (church, household, workplace.)

My final comments about this story have to do with the differences between the Jewish original story and the Greek supplemented story of Esther. The first makes no mention of God, and the second is full of what you could call God-talk. The first seems content to imply that fate and casting of the lots and luck of timing were the elements that just happened to work out for the ultimate good of the Jews, and the other makes clear over and over and over and over that God was working behind the scenes and in the hearts of each character. I would like to say that either way of telling the story is valid. If the Greek Jews added the God-references to make the story more "religious," I don't think that has to be done to a good story. Sometimes you can just be content that a story, which may appear to be completely secular, making no mention of its Author and Finisher, is still a story that honors the Author and Finisher, One who often prefers the modest place of a hidden uncredited presence. There is no need to separate stories into two categories: secular or religious. Every story, if it is crafted with an internal integrity of plot and character, is a story that reveals the truth about humans, their condition and their nature, where they have come from and where they are going, and helps every listener recognize more about the identity of the One who made them and loves them and never will give up on untangling them from the impossible knots of human conflict.

Day 29: See-Saw continued

One pair of characters important to the story of Esther is the pair of men called Mordecai and Haman. I picture them on opposite sides of a see-saw of Fortune. Somehow we all know, and they know, and even Haman's wife intuitively knows that if one man is on the rise it must mean that the other will be lowered from his heights.

The movie I saw and the Greek Esther both set up Haman at the very beginning of the story as someone who is determined to take advantage of the king, by playing on his fears about knowing who to trust in his court. This is a king who has many advisors and officials and seems to lack confidence in his own judgment, but he also is not sure which advisors to really trust. The plot of assasination which Mordecai uncovered makes him feel worse, and Haman is right there to set himself up as a trustworthy help-meet to the king. And the king promotes Haman to be his right-hand partner.

When Haman sees Mordecai as some sort of threat to his own ambition (is he hoping to go higher than 2nd place in the empire?) he plays on the king's paranoia about resistance to the king's authority to get the go-ahead to make up his own edict to take out Mordecai and eradicate his people. All of us wish that the king would wake up and recognize Haman as his true threat, but instead he gives Haman his own ring and the power to issue the irrevocable verdict of destruction upon every Jewish person in the kingdom.

So the beautiful queen who has wisely stayed a closeted Jew must now move forward very carefully into full recognition. I used to think that Esther's seeming procrastination on communicating her problem was due to her fear, but now I think it had more to do with Esther's ability to use timing to her best interest. Inviting the king AND Haman to a special banquet two days in a row is the extra little bit of higher raising that Haman needs to put him at his most precarious point. Her timing and delay with exposing her own identity and Haman's plot gives the chance for Haman's ego to get blown up a little more and so that he starts unraveling at the sight of Mordecai refusing to bow.

The first sign of Haman's downfall is a very funny scene. The king can't sleep, and his idea of something that will put him right to sleep is having someone read his own kingdom chronicles aloud. That's funny. Mordecai's name and heroism happen to come to the king's attention at the very same moment that Haman has started to build a gallows for Mordecai. And Haman makes a special trip to the palace with the gallows in mind just at the moment the king is looking for advice on how to give a special thank-you honor to Mordecai. Haman's shock and surprise at who gets the special treats he thinks up, that's funny. Esther's first banquet contributed to Haman's extra arrogance and maybe even to the king's inability to fall right to sleep. She intuitively knew at the first banquet that the time was not yet ripe for recognition. After Haman has to parade Mordecai around using honors he was hoping to receive for his own self, Haman goes home on the edge of a tantrum, and his wife recognizes first that the see-saw is starting to change positions. She tells him: "Beware, Haman, it looks like your downfall is starting." At that point in the conversation he is picked up by his special limousine to go to the second banquet of Esther. Where he is exposed and undone and raised up on the gallows he had built for his enemy.

There is an important plot detail that comes up several times in this story. The king can make any decree he wants. He made the first decree of divorce while drunk and embarrassed by Vashti and someone had to remind him of that decree when he started to miss her. He can hand off his ring to a trusted right-hand person and let them make a decree in his name. But there is a law in the land above even the king's power when it comes to those edicts and decrees. Once issued and published, they can't be revoked. The king can't change his mind about an edict and say, whoops I take it back. Supposedly that would influence a wise ruler to think very carefully before issuing any edict, but this king is not so wise. Once the irrevocable edict is put out . . . "Kill every Jew on this particular day" even the king can't cancel it or make it obsolete. As far as this kingdom works, there is no hope for the Jews at all, they might as well consider themselves dead. But this is a fairy-tale type of story and irrevocable decrees of destruction don't always get the last word in a fairy tale. The Greek Esther has the wording of the first and second edicts. Each create a law to be followed on the random days chosen by Haman through a casting of the lots. The second edict can not and does not revoke or cancel the first, but it very craftily and creatively takes the hopelessness out of the first. The second edict turns the favor and the power and the advocacy of the king and his kingdom to the side of those who were doomed by the first edict. Anyone who was planning to kill a Jew that day will still be authorized to do so, but is urged to think twice before doing so because 1. The greatest enemy of the Jews just lost his life and position, 2. my new right-hand man is a Jew, 3. Jews will be given authority and arms to defend themselves, and 4. I, the king recognize the treachery of the one I formerly entrusted authority to and take partial responsibility for allowing such an unfair edict to be published 5. my kingdom resources will now be used to help the Jews defend themselves on that first edict's day of doom.

What an amazing transformation that came out of the second great Purim edict. That randomly selected day was transformed from a day of sorrow and destruction to a day of feasting and gladness and relief from enemies. The holiday of Purim ensures that the Jews will never forget this amazing story in their people's history, which also holds many tragedies of genocide and infanticide, pogroms and Holocaust.

Irrevocable decrees seem like something a person or a group could really count on, put all their stock in, place all their chips upon, but this story shows that even such a rock-solid decree can lose its clout and become obsolete even while it exists into perpetuity. The most permanent, unchangeable decree of any kingdom might suddenly be eclipsed by a new development or a new recognition in the affairs of state, though it takes great craft and creativity to figure out a way. The Story of Esther is prophetic about this, so that no one will be taken by surprise some day if something unexpected happens regarding a kingdom's day of doom, one that we are sure must certainly take place because we have read the irrevocable decree published and posted throughout the land by its ruler and his designated authorities. So that no one is caught off guard when a sudden shift in favor and power turns the doomed ones into the protected ones, and escorts the Accusers into the traps they built for others.

Day 28: See-Saw

I have one more transformation story. This one is about an orphan girl in a foreign nation who was recognized (after a year of intensive spa treatments and training in courtly etiquette) as the highest ranking beauty of a powerful and wide-reaching kingdom. And that is only one way to summarize the incredible story of Esther the Queen. This is another prophetic event of Jewish history, like Joseph and his brothers, which to me seems packed full of clues about the way that Kingdom Come and its authentic royalty will emerge into full view of everyone, lowering and raising the proud and the humble, stepping forward in vulnerability and boldness to advocate for the doomed, and capturing Accusers in the traps they had eagerly built for others. I am more intrigued by Esther than ever as I have reflected upon the plot details more intently in the past couple of weeks.

This is a tangent but not really, because it comes as part of my reflections upon the Story of Esther. . .
Was anyone else not allowed to use the word "lucky" as a kid? Lady Luck and the Goddess Fortune are not easily invoked by those folks who are certain that all events, details and outcomes are controlled by the fatherly hand of Providence. I was taught that saying something was "lucky" or "fortunate" or "coincidental" was to participate in a view of reality that seemed to identify certain events as chance or happenstance. Card and dice games, gambling, horoscopes, playing the lottery, drawing straws, casting lots, buying raffle tickets, betting on horse races or athletic matches, filling out a form to win the grocery-store spree, might be seen as a placing of one's hopes in Lady Luck or Madame Fortune and various groups of people have named some such activities as sinful vices or, at the least, a careless use of time and money.

According to mythical and medieval tradition, Goddess Fortune has this wheel, not the flat one on Pat Sajak's show, but an upright one more like on The Price is Right. Or picture a Ferris wheel. I must have seen a drawing of it once with different people tied to it. When the wheel of Fortune is turned, the people who were at the top go down to the bottom and the people who were on the bottom go to the top. Or you could picture a see-saw, where both sides of the plank just can't be up.

Now it seems to me that people who sing "Luck, Be A Lady Tonight", or unfortunate people who are longing for a reversal of Fortune's wheel are not any more believers in randomness than someone who invokes Providence. They are just picturing a different person, but in every case a powerful figure who is pulling strings or turning wheels behind the scenes of visible reality. Even "fate" is a reference to the mythical three Fates, ladies who end your life by taking their scissors to your particular yarn of existence. The difference would be not whether someone had a role in guiding your destiny, but whether it was arbitrary and blind with no personal concern for a human "puppet" or whether the guiding action was purposeful and concerned and relationally involved with a person's destiny.

Back to Esther . . .

The Book of Esther is another one of my favorite delay of recognition stories. I am loving it more than ever as I am discovering many things I never knew or noticed about this story before. First of all, there is a Jewish book of Esther (which is recognized as canonical to Protestants and Jews) and a Greek book of Esther which would be in the Bible of non-Protestant Christians. Every Bible I have read includes the original Jewish book, but my NRSV study Bible also includes, as part of the Apocryphal writings, the expanded Greek Esther which is generally the same as the Jewish Esther with about 5 or 6 extra chunks added to the original story during a later part of Jewish history. One thing that is interesting to me is that the Jewish Esther has no reference to God, and seems to be a generally secular story. But the Greek Esther is much more overtly pious, adding prayers of Esther and Mordecai to God, prophetic dreams and interpretations of a religious tone, an emotional tone and religious description of the scene of Esther's uninvited entry to the king's throne room, and also word-for-word descriptions of the two major Purim day edicts written on behalf of the king by first Haman and then Mordecai.

I also saw an excellent film version of the story of Esther in the last few weeks which made me think more about the story. (Released in 2000 by Lions Gate starring Louise Lombard and F. Murray Abraham.)

Now a few fascinating things about this story, just to get warmed up:
The Jewish religious holiday called "Purim", which is a two-day costumed festival and celebration of the story of Esther saving her people from genocide, gets its name from the word for casting lots. So isn't it kind of like the holiday is called "Roll of the Dice?"

The Hebrew girl Haddasah chose a "stage name" so she could keep her Jewish identity hidden from the court when she was cast as one of the Harem Follies and eventually became the queen. The name she chose, Esther, means hidden, or concealed from recognition. I was so excited when I found this article, which shows me even more how Esther's story is connected to my theme: Delay of Recognition. Rabbi Levy tells us that the Hebrew name for the scroll of Esther is Megillat Esther which means in English: revealing the hidden.

I have lots and lots to cast, I mean say :), about Esther but I need to stop for today, more tomorrow!

Day 27: Who are you married to?

This movie is a fun one because it transforms a frumpy married couple with major communication and honesty issues into a well-tuned partnership of action and adventure. It humorously combines the romantic comedy genre with the action genre and I can tolerate the hokey action scenes since the hokey romantic scenes are fairy-tale material.

I haven't seen it in ages but it is fun to watch the wife undergo her "makeover". She starts out the movie with ill-fitting clothes and seems to live a very uneventful life. But by the time she is in a hotel hallway, shaking in her heels and ripping a few modesty seams out of her dress and putting on the bright red lipstick, we figure out that her life is taking a different direction. Her husband has never had the pleasure of seeing this more adventurous side of his wife. A fairy tale again, as I am thinking that bed-poster pole-dancing takes some serious practice and time to pull off successfully.
Arnold Schwarzeneggar and Jamie Lee Curtis in True Lies.

My favorite scene is the very end when they are spy and dancing partners at a ball. It just looks like they are finally really having fun together and ready to enjoy a relationship based on true recognition and appreciation of each other's special qualities.

I'm sure I could have a lot more to say if I had the time to watch it again. Oh well.

Day 26: Kiss Me

I saw this one when it was in the theater and won't forget it because I had a panic attack when it started. I had this sudden overwhelming fear that I would be punished someday for watching yet another movie in open rebellion to my upbringing. Not as many people in my generation have been indoctrinated by religious authorities who condemn drama and movie theater attendance as wicked and worldly, but most people I know could go back in their family tree a generation or two or three and find some religious ban on drama and theater. Although the earliest forms of dramatic theater in Western European Christian culture were tropes and mystery cycles that re-enacted the big biblical stories of Creation, Flood, Nativity, Passion and Easter, somewhere along the line some blind religious authorities decided that a room with a stage built for the most incarnational form of story-telling must be the antithesis of a sanctuary with a pulpit and a communion table.

Although I had generally been a girl who was eager to comply with religious expectations of good behavior, I started sneaking into those carnal places when I was a teenager. It took about about ten years before I was fully comfortable in my chair, before I embraced my current outlook that many a stage has become a sanctuary because of the story that is told and the truth that is recognized thanks to the art of the players. I am finally able to wholeheartedly enjoy being part of the audience, and have the highest respect for the people who participate with their various talents to work the magic of such amazing story-telling. Last summer when I saw the musical Spring Awakening live in Chicago, I wept during the "Song of Purple Summer" because the Spirit of Word Made Flesh is moving in mysterious ways in the theater.

I have in the past year or so been thrilled with imaginings that Jesus is going to make his second return as a King of the comic stage and no one will be more incredulous and shocked and disoriented about that fact than the religious folks with our careful and anxious and somber and solemn concepts of decorum and holiness. Can you picture it? Laughter holding both his sides--on his rightful throne! Now that would be apocalypse.

"Haste thee nymph, and bring with thee
Jest and youthful Jollity,
Quips and Cranks, and wanton Wiles,
Nods, and Becks, and Wreathed Smiles,
Such as hang on Hebe's cheek,
And love to live in dimple sleek;
Sport that wrincled Care derides,
And Laughter holding both his sides.
Com, and trip it as ye go
On the light fantastick toe,
And in thy right hand lead with thee,
The Mountain Nymph, sweet Liberty;
And if I give thee honour due,
Mirth, admit me of they crue
To live with her, and live with thee,
In unreproved pleasures free . ." (from "L'Allegro" by John Milton)

But back to the movie where I had my panic attack. She's All That was written for teenagers in 1999 and I was well into my 20's by then, but I still enjoyed this one. When post-makeover Laney comes down her staircase in slow motion to meet her date, this is the jawdropping staircase entrance kind of reveal that I am talking about that makes for a great scene in any tale of transformation.

This plot is actually loosely based on the same play, Pygmalion, which inspired My Fair Lady. The boys have a bet on, and Laney is chosen by Zack's friend as the awkward object of challenge. Can Zack make good on his boast that someone as popular and talented and charismatic as himself could transform any old girl into prom queen material? Well like Henry Higgins, Zack treats Laney as an object of his ego for most of the story. And eventually sees this scorned girl rise to beauty and recognition. And comes to recognize and regret his mistreatment of her. There is a little of the Pretty Woman storyline when Zack's friend tries to make the moves on Laney and take advantage of her vulnerable position as a new-to-the-scene beauty. But it all works out, Zack repents of being a jerk and gets another chance to win the girl, and Laney gets full recognition and respect as a person, and the snobs of the community get their own taste of ridicule and rejection.

And the final kiss with background music swelling and melting all our romantic bones to mush, then to credits . . .I'll never get too old for this!

Day 25: Two brothers and a Swan

I know about two versions of this popular film, one starring Audrey Hepburn and the other starring Julia Ormond. It has been way too long since I have seen Sabrina, so I don't remember details, but I feel like I remember two parties at the great house . .one with adolescent Sabrina up in the tree watching and wishing, and the other with all-grown-up Sabrina in attendance as the beauty of the ball.

She's just the daughter of the estate's chauffeur, but a few years in Paris works wonders on an awkward girl. When she returns home, everyone takes a second look at the girl no one ever noticed. The special twist on this tale is that the estate has two sons, Linus and David. She always had a crush on dashing David, but he never noticed her till she returned from France and now he is engaged. No-nonsense big brother Linus wants to make sure Sabrina doesn't interfere with David's wedding/family business merger plans, so he whisks Sabrina away and pretends he is in love with her to distract her from David.

A complicated mess, but recognition happens eventually.

Day 24: Coming out of the Corner

I first saw this "ugly duckling" story in seventh grade at a friend's house overnight. We watched it at about 3 in the morning with the volume as low as possible and turned it off everytime we thought we heard a noise upstairs, because we expected to get in trouble if getting caught watching such a racy movie as "Dirty Dancing."

Baby is not as gorgeous or as popular as her older sister and her daddy wants her to stay the innocent and wholesome little princess in the family. But Baby is ready to grow up. It takes a few dance lessons at the vacation camp, but eventually her family and the whole crowd of vacationers gets to see and appreciate her "coming out" moment as a sexy woman who can really cut up the rug with her lover. There are a few other delay of recognition sub-plots going on that make this movie even more delightful, such as the dad finally recognizing his misjudgment about who got Penny in trouble, and the purse thieves turning out to be the last people that anyone would suspect. And a general recognition by all of us that the boundaries separating the rich vacationers and the hired staff may be about who has the money and the power, but not about who has the class.

All these movies I haven't seen in such a long time, just talking about them makes me want to enjoy them again. There just isn't enough time in the day!

Day 23: More Double Takes

Pretty Woman starring Richard Gere and Julia Roberts

Another story that has little interest in the realities of being a woman of the street. But it is one of my favorites, from the hotel manager who shows kindness to Vivian, to the snotty shop-keepers who eventually regret they didn't. She does have a grand entrance with a gorgeous dress, but he is the only one in the hotel ballroom, playing the piano. Yes, the piano scene.

He treats her for most of the story as rental equipment for evading his loneliness. But he comes around and starts seeing her as a person whose dignity is worth defending (my favorite scene is when he punches his friend in outrage for treating her like a whore.) Eventually he recognizes her as the person with whom he has had his first meaningful relationship, and Vivian ends up getting to be Cinderella for more than a week.

Day 22: Double Take

My next grouping of favorite stories are variations on the "ugly duckling" story. Each story is mainly about a woman who is valuable and beautiful, but not recognized as such early on in the story, especially by the one who will fall in love with her by the end. They are all fairy tales, with the unrealistic premise that a few speech lessons or a stunning formal gown would be all it takes to bring a rough-around-the-edges woman to her full potential. But there is something irrestistible about these stories, as you can tell by the popularity of reality "makeover" shows on TV. The moment of the big reveal, someone looking fabulous, and all the family members or formerly uninterested men doing a double take, with jaws dropped in wonder. There is often a staircase scene to add extra drama to the grand entrance.

The musical My Fair Lady is a classic example of this story. A street vendor girl with no understanding of high class vowels or polite manners is taken in by a professor of linguistics. He sees her as a challenging experiment in language and pronunciation and usage, and I think his success with her is motivated by a bet with his friend. He is impatient and rude with her and forgets often to treat her with human kindness. But of course, at the night of the big ball, she has been transformed, and the professor sees her for the first as a desirable woman and realizes, almost too late, that he has fallen in love with her. "Almost" is the key word of course.

Day 21: That Sneaky Duke

A few days ago I mentioned Measure for Measure as my current favorite Shakespeare comedy. The veil tricks played by the ladies make it fun, but what makes this comedy so completely wonderful is that it is mainly a story about 'royalty in disguise.' The story opens with the Duke of Vienna deciding to step down from his throne and go away from his land for a while. He puts Angelo in charge, admitting that he himself has been a bit lax about enforcing the laws of the land, but everyone knows that Angelo is a stickler for rules and morality, and highly regarded for abstaining from all vices, so will be a good influence on the town and help them to all get more serious about observing the legal code while the Duke is away.

So off he goes. And he comes right back, in disguise. We as an audience get to find out right away that he cloaks himself as a church friar, keeps himself hooded and mingles right in with the main action of the city, mostly to test if Angelo can keep himself in line just as well as he did before, now that he has all the power.

Well Angelo, of course, finds out firsthand what happens to most people when they experience a sudden election into power and favor and the "high" of invincibility that comes with it.

The Duke is nearby for most of the action of the play, under his friar cloak. He speaks with Claudio and Isabella, giving them advice about how to deal with the calamity that Angelo has placed upon them. He has interesting conversations with people who don't know they are talking to the Duke, and who say more than they would ever dare say to the Duke. He craftily works behind the scenes to orchestrate a public outdoor gathering like a courtroom scene where all of the main characters mistreated by Angelo will come forward with their story and plead a case against Angelo. Isabella and Mariana are discussing the mystery of why this friar is helping them and why he has asked them to practice some duplicity of their own when they denounce Angelo: they decide to trust that for some good reason his full purpose is veiled for now, and that his strange strategy for pursuing justice is to be seen as a remedy that starts out with a bitter taste but has a sweet result.

It looks as though it will be too late to fix the situation, because word is out that Claudio is already executed, but anyway the Duke sends word to Angelo that he is returning to the city and wants to be met at the city gates with trumpets to announce his return to Vienna and to Vienna's throne.

He and Angelo sit down at the city gates where the public has gathered, and Angelo is a bit nervous because the Duke had invited anyone who had an issue with Angelo's execution of justice to come make their case at this time. So Isabella comes forward with her story of how Angelo has wronged her and Claudio. The Duke pretends to be shocked that upright Angelo could be accused of such a thing and turns suspicion back on Isabella. And then more witnesses come forward and the story gets more complicated, so the Duke says this complex situation is not for him to deal with. He tells Angelo to sit as judge instead of defendant to these plaintiffs. When it seems that all the witnesses against Angelo are not credible, the Duke acts to be tired of the whole situation and tells Angelo to wrap it up and punish these false accusers, and he leaves the area. And comes back. He comes back quietly among the crowd in his old disguise as the friar, where he gets to be called up as a witness in the complicated affair.

The Duke disguised as friar demands to give his testimony to the real Duke and is rebuked by the leaders "We are "the Duke" right now, so speak." He starts calling out Angelo as a villain and the Duke as unjust, and Vienna as a hotbed of corruption and a mockery of justice. The leaders are getting ready to haul him off for disrespectful behavior and slander to the state, and then he unveils himself as the Duke in front of the whole crowd.

Apocalypse. The sudden power shift rocks their world.

Angelo jumps up in respect and shock, then jumps on the ground at the Duke's feet to whine out his confession. Isabella and Mariana get proper attention to their stories of mistreatment. Claudio comes out from the dungeon, not dead after all! Angelo eventually receives the unwanted mercy of remaining alive and free to be Mariana's husband (he'd rather get death than mercy, like anyone who can't handle the way mercy messes with the fair distribution of punishments). Claudio gets reunited with his wife and child, and even Isabella gets the opportunity to reconsider her intentions to remain celibate for life.

The Ambrose Video production that I have viewed a few times says this on the sleeve of Measure for Measure: "The trickiest sort of play . . .a comedy with tragic relief." Just when you hear people weeping because the Duke will return too late to save Claudio, or groaning that Vienna has reached moral disarray beyond correction, or complaining that innocent women must accept the unjustice of being dishonored by men and punished by those same men, just when the mess seems unfixable, everyone finds out that the Duke has been right here the whole time, paying detailed attention to his original purpose all along, and bringing the city to a better-than-they-could-imagine resolution of affairs, and a full recognition of the true character of its citizens and authorities. The Duke has been right next to everyone the whole time, letting his "absence" be a catalyst for crisis, and waiting for the perfectly ripe time to throw off his cloak.

This comedy is satisfying in so many specific places, and you have to dig into the words of this text, not just a summary of the plot to see how it over and over vindicates the wisdom of a ruler who hides his complete purpose from full view, and who patiently allows his unique ruling style (lending his keys of authority to hypocrites and rascals, remaining "in absentia" for a miserably long duration, and mingling among his people as a commoner) to be perceived as unjust or ill-timed or neglectful or irresponsible by those who necessarily are kept from seeing the whole picture until that day of full recognition by all. I think this story also serves as the most satisfying response I have yet seen to that puzzle of a question that many a theodicy has tried to solve: Where is our good God who holds authority, and why is he allowing such terrible things to keep happening in his world?

I love this story!

Day 20: Vine-Dresser Bride and Shepherd-King

When I did that internet search for rulers in disguise a few years ago, besides that King Abdullah news story, I also got an introduction to a comic-book hero called The King. That kept me interested for several hours, and I hope to go to the special library someday which keeps a collection of original comic books with this hero. The most interesting link that came up though, was an article by a bible school professor that was an interpretive re-telling of the story behind Song of Songs, also called Song of Solomon.

Now this book of the Bible has always been a mystery to me. It usually makes me think of my grade school days when the occasional student in my 4th/5th grade room would read a selection from it for lunchtime devotions and get many titters from the listeners. Then the teacher would give a lecture to us all about respect, proper preparation, and inappropriate Bible passages to use for lunchtime devotions and that student would have to redo devotions the next day as a consequence. The book is tricky to read because it is like reading a conversation transcript, with all dialogue and no narrative, no idea who is saying what, or what the action or setting is. Some translators are helpful by studing grammatical clues in the original languages of this book and adding character notations for who says what. But in general, it seems to be sort of a mysterious book, with many interpretations, and many different ways of understanding what is happening between the lines (besides lots of heavy petting) and what is the larger meaning of the story and how it fits in with the rest of the Bible.

Well when I came across the professor's article, I had a little leap of excitement at the possibilities that his interpretation opened up. You can read it yourself if you are interested (unfortunately the site has been revised and some of the article is now missing), but I will loosely summarize it here and maybe embellish it a bit to satisfy my own romantic imagination:

A wedding banquet is taking place in the King's Palace, and there are some poets or musicians or actors entertaining the newlywed couple and the banquet guests by retelling highlights (songs, poems, skits?) of the interesting love and courtship story of the King and his new bride:

King Solomon had some vineyards in the country of Baal-Hamon that are cared for by tenants, and he decides soon after becoming king to check out the vineyards and see how that area is doing. He disguises himself as a shepherd, so that he can go about unnoticed and avoid the hassles of traveling via motorcade. He meets a young girl who is sort of bullied around by her big brothers and has to do most of the work on the vineyard that the family is sharecropping. The two become lovers, and Solomon sneaks back to the area a few times, sometimes at night, always in disguise. Then they become engaged to get married. The shepherd tells the girl he has some business to take care of but once he has everything ready he'll be back to make her his bride.

Well a long time passes and the girl is starting to wonder whether her shepherd will ever return to marry her. She knows she is ready to come out into the open as a woman who has secured a lifetime lover but her own people don't seem to listen to her. Her family still treats her like a little kid and she doesn't have the time or the enthusiasm to take care of her looks. Maybe her neighbors are annoyed because she rebuffs their sons and refuses to be courted by anyone, or they are trying to persuade her that she is in fantasy-land when she talks about some out-of-town shepherd whom she is saving herself for.

One day, her neighbors are all excited to see that there is a huge royal procession coming down the way . . the king is out and about in the land! The girl is not that interested because she just misses her lover so much, but then the motorcade stops at her door. It is her shepherd, but now she recognizes that her lover is also the King! The townspeople and the family are amazed and turn to recognize the ordinary vinedresser with wide-eyed astonishment (our little sister? our sunburnt fieldhand neighbor? she is chosen to be the beloved queen?) The king throws a feast to celebrate their love in her town, and then she is taken to the big city and palace to get ready for the big wedding banquet.

Now if that is not a Cinderella type of story I don't know what is. Of course there are many credentialed people out there who have much more time and access to study the history and the geography and the cultural context and the original language clues and everything else that goes into a respectable interpretive reading of this particular piece of biblical literature, but this is the plot I will be picturing for the time being.

It seems to tell a story that encourages the hope of the oft-persecuted children of Israel who wait and wait and wait for the Messiah and are wondering if he will ever show himself to them. It also can be interpreted to encourage the hope of the oft-ridiculed followers of Christ who are waiting for the return of Jesus of Nazareth, God made flesh who was killed but came back to life.

At the least it is a plot for a very satisfying love story!

There is a much repeated chorus throughout the text: Be careful not to wake up love until the time is ripe! It seems that timing is crucial when we are talking about the consummation and public recognition of an long-enduring love affair.

There is also an exchange between the lovers in Chapter 8, about the power of love:

Set me as a seal on your heart,
as a seal on your arm.
For love is as strong as death;
ardent love is as unrelenting as Sheol.

Love's flames are fiery flames
the fiercest of all.
Mighty waters cannot extinguish love;
rivers cannot sweep it away.

I think if this story were acted out, the background music swelling right at this passionate exchange of dialogue should be: The Eternal Flame by the Bangles. A song I could not get enough of in eighth grade.
Here's the words:

Close your eyes, give me your hand, darling
Do you feel my heart beating, do you understand?
Do you feel the same, am I only dreaming?
Is this burning an eternal flame?

I believe it's meant to be, darling
I watched when you were sleeping, you belong with me
Do you feel the same, am I only dreaming
Or is this burning an eternal flame?

Say my name, sun shines through the rain
My whole life so lonely, and then you come and ease the pain
I don't want to lose this feeling

Day 19: The King Returns

There are many tellings and translations and variations when it comes to The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood. But pretty much everyone is familiar with this outlaw who was notorious for robbing from the rich to give to the poor, in a land where the true king was gone and the deputy rulers were using their civil and religious authority for their own advantage rather than to serve the people.

Robin Hood is known for hiding out in the woods with his band of followers, impossible to find, unless he chooses to be "found" on his own terms and his own turf where he can keep the upper hand on the encounter. He loves to kidnap and host wealthy travelers to a great banquet, letting them go only when they have a full belly and an empty purse. Occasionally he'll take a risk to come into town to win an archery contest or rescue a friend, but it is usually in disguise. He is an enemy of the state, but we are rooting for him because the state is run by a corrupt network of self-interested rascals.

My favorite tale in the collection is when King Richard, who has been out of the country for a very long time, first battling, then a prisoner, returns to his land to try to figure out where the domestic loyalties lie. Some of the local authorities are supporting Richard's brother John's attempts to usurp the throne. He hears mixed stories about this outlaw in Sherwood Forest and takes wise advice to cloak himself as a monk and be "found" by the Band of Yeoman. Robin hosts a fine banquet for his guest without knowing the guest is his king. It is very satisfying when the King can be assured for himself that very few of his subjects are more loyal than this outlaw. He uncloaks himself and Robin bows before him.

It is wonderful to meet a king who is not below resorting to a trick of disguise. Someone who is truly interested in discovering the truth, and is willing to create a potentially awkward situation in which people have their guard down and say what they really think. We squirm with anticipation when a King gets to sit next to flattering pretenders who expose their own duplicity right to the King without realizing who's presence they are in. It is thrilling when that King gets a chance to test and see the authentic loyalty of those who have been falsely accused of betrayal.

Day 18: Prince on the Streets

My first introduction to this story was a modern film adaptation called P.J and the President's Son. When I was a kid, I spent many Saturday mornings at the library, and once in a while they would show a film adaptation of a literary classic in the library basement. P.J. and the President's Son is based on the story by Mark Twain called The Prince and the Pauper. This one has a unique twist because the prince can live on the streets for a long time with no one missing him, because he has changed clothes with a real pauper named Tom Canty who looks just like him. The prince comes to learn first hand what is really going on in London outside of the royal palace, and when he returns just in time for coronation day to get crowned himself, he is determined to increase mercy and justice for citizens who had not been receiving humane treatment by those entrusted with civil and religious authority.

This novel has a great comic chapter, Chapter 32, Coronation Day, which describes a public throng undergoing the brain-befuddling experience of apocalypse. When the pauper comes to Westminster Abbey on coronation day, the true prince interrupts the ceremony and announces that he is the true prince, even though he is all dirty and dressed in rags. The chapter helps us imagine what it would be like to have a wrench thrown into a once-in-a-lifetime event in which everyone is confident about who's who on stage:

These sentence fragments trace the crowd's and the royal attendants' collective emotion and response to the surprise that unfolded at the coronation gathering:
multitude in the galleries alive with interest,
a waiting pause; then, at a signal, a triumphant peal of music burst forth,
the entire multitude rose, and the ceremony of the Recognition ensued.
a noble anthem swept the Abbey with its rich waves of sound;
impressive solemnity
deep hush
startling apparition intruded upon the scene
a sort of panic of astonishment swept the assemblage
stared in a bewildered way at one another and at the chief figures in this scene,
wondered whether they were awake and in their senses, or asleep and dreaming.
a paralysis fell upon the house; no one moved, no one spoke; indeed no one knew how to act or what to say, in so strange and surprising an emergency.
all minds were struggling to right themselves.
the tangled minds still floundered helplessly
the sternness vanished away, and gave place to an expression of wondering surprise.
perplexity
perilous to the State and to us all, to entertain so fateful a riddle as this; it could divide the nation and undermine the throne.
troublesome and perilous business
all the company wondered at this speech
now began a movement of the gorgeous particles of that offical group . . . . a movement which little by little, in the present case, dissolved the glittering crowd that stood about Tom Canty and clustered it together in the neighborhood of the new-comer.
the whole assemblage was on its feet, now, and well nigh out of its mind with uneasiness, apprehension, and consuming excitement
a deafening buzz of frantic conversation
for five minutes the air quaked with shouts and the crash of musical instruments, and was white with a storm of waving handkerchiefs;
the avalanche of laughter
cannon thundered the news to the city, and all London seemed to rock with applause.

Avalanches, quakes, a crowd struck mute, the world turning upside down. People falling on their faces, not in horror, but because they are laughing so hard at the final surprise punchline, delivered with absolutely perfect timing: "Speak up, good lad, and fear nothing," said the king. "How used you the Great Seal of England?" Tom stammered a moment, in a pathetic confusion, then got it out--"To crack nuts with!"

Day 17: The Cloak

There is another sub-set of stories that give me the tingles because they share an element similar to the veil. This time it is not generally a covering of the face, but it is a covering of the crown. Royalty under cloak. A few years ago I was searching the web for stories of royalty under a cloak beyond the ones that I knew and my search came up with a real news story!

Read it here.

I don't know about you, but it makes me want to find out more about this present day king and what kind of an impact he is now having as he rules his country and interacts with the other nations of his region.

Many royal figures suffer from the inability to truly know what their advisors or subjects are feeling and thinking because advisors tend to flatter in the hopes of keeping their position of influence, and subjects will either be star-struck or awe-struck and not have the presence of mind or the courage to express their own attitudes or opinions honestly either. Some rulers become paranoid, not knowing who they can really put their trust in, so they imagine everyone a potential traitor or usurper. Some royalty enjoy the insulated world they can experience when they never have to confront reality about their own faults or immaturity, or the problems in their realm. And some royalty decide to go undercover once in a while to get the real scoop on the state of the Kingdom.


My sophomore highschool English class with Mr. Cole read a book of Greek and Roman myths together, and upon finishing the book we were all assigned a group project to pick one of the stories and act it out. Our group chose the story of Baucis and Philemon. They are a poor elderly couple who turn out to be the only people in a region to open their doors to some weary travelers. The weary travelers are Zeus and Hermes, two gods in disguise. Baucis and Philemon knew that it is always wise to show hospitality to unidentified travelers, they may be rulers or gods. They were rewarded for their hospitality.

Genesis 18 tells a similar hospitality story, Abraham and Sarah welcoming three strangers who turn out to be divine guests. Acts 14 introduces us to a group of townspeople who know the Baucis and Philemon story quite well, and eagerly anticipated the day that a pair a visiting strangers might reveal themselves to be divine.

Day 16: My last veil story for now

Measure for Measure, William Shakespeare.

(My library has the BBC Ambrose Video which is like watching a play that is filmed, rather than watching a film, but it still a great experience.)

I have been going to the Shakespeare theatre on Navy Pier as a season subscriber for 10 years, and though I was taught in my childhood religious instruction that drama was an off-limits story-telling method for a Christian (I can now say the opposite--that it is the greatest story-telling method on earth), and though I did my best back then to enjoy Shakespeare just by reading him, I now say that it is impossible to really make sense of everything unless you see it all acted out. The language is complex, lots of English vocabulary meanings have changed over time, and what is more, there are so many double meanings to things that you need the face and body language of a good actor to catch more of the meaning. I personally need about five viewings and going back to my Bevington Complete Works book and reading all the footnotes and viewing it again while I read along. See the plays, watch the films! Don't miss out on these totally awesome stories!

So Measure for Measure. Studied it in college and I didn't get that thrilled about it. So from my first introduction as a kid to the popular Shakespeare stories (comic-style abridged versions), Merchant of Venice was my first favorite, then it was As You Like It.
When Much Ado About Nothing came out on film in 1993, that became my new favorite. And then in the mid 2000s I saw Measure for Measure at Navy Pier and it is now my top of the list of favorite Shakespeare plays.
And of course, lots of delayed recognition. I have to come back to this one later too I guess, now that I'm trying to group the stories a bit into sub-topics.

You'll just have to go watch it if you want a summary, because there are a lot of parts to it. But I'm talking about veils.

Angelo, like Jacob and Judah and Claudio in my other favorite veil stories, needs to recognize a few things about life and needs to have his hypocrisy exposed publicly. The wise people in his life (well, yes, ultimately the wise author) decide that exposure and recognition will best happen through a trick of the veil.

A temporarily-placed-in-charge government official named Angelo wants to whip his lawless town into shape, and has sentenced a man to death for public example and crime deterrent. The man's sister, Isabella, comes to him to beg for mercy for her brother. He agrees to pardon the brother Claudio on one condition, if she sneak to his house some night and have sex with him. Never mind that Angelo is already engaged to another lady that he has sort of dumped, or that he is executing Claudio for the offense of getting his own fiance pregnant before they were technically married, or that Isabella is a nun and has made vows of celibacy.

Angelo feels pretty bad about realizing that he is giving in to tempation, but not bad enough to change his mind. He welcomes a veiled woman to his room at night, and the next day decides not to pardon Claudio after all. But he should have looked more closely and lifted the veil. It was not the nun, it was Mariana, the fiance he had dumped. There is a lot more to the story of course and I'll be coming back to this one, but the veil trick was a big part of bringing this story to a resolution called comedy. Mariana reminds us why it is worth spending a little time and effort to bring hypocrites (those blind to their own reliance on pretense) through the crisis of apocalypse that happens when masks and veils are donned and lifted: "They say best men are molded out of faults, and, for the most, become much more the better for being a little bad." Hypocrites love the right and hate the wrong, they have that going for them, they just don't see that they are in the wrong as much as everyone they are pointing fingers at. Once they recognize reality, they can finally experience what it is to beg for and receive mercy.

Day 15: Another veil bed trick

Much Ado About Nothing, William Shakespeare

(the 1993 film adaptation starring Kenneth Branagh, Emma Thompson and a bunch of other great actors is my favorite way to enjoy this play.)

Well I could spend many days just talking about this delightful comedy which has delay of recognition running through it about 8 different ways. But I am trying to stick to the veil tricks, so I will go back to the other parts on a different day.

Claudio is a love-at-first-sight kind of guy, and he loved the beautiful young Hero as soon as he laid eyes upon her and before he even had a conversation with her. . .. "in mine eye she is the sweetest lady that ever I looked on." His friend Benedick teases him for his quick decision to make her his wife.

The night before their wedding, Claudio looks up to Hero's bedroom window and "sees" her entertaining a lover, and so he makes another quick decision based on first sight and publicly denounces her as a "rotten orange" at the wedding ceremony.

It turns out that the two lovers in the bedroom were a trick set up by rascal Don John, to deceive Claudio's eyes, and it takes the rest of the play for everyone to find out who was really making love in Hero's bedroom. The woman's face was veiled from full recognition by the dark night and her hair, but the it was enough for Claudio that the man was moaning Hero's name, and it was Hero's bedroom, and yes the lady had Hero's clothing on.

After the groom and the bride's dad knock her down and kick her around with disgust at the altar, Hero is announced to be dead of a broken heart and the public stripping of her honor. Really though, she is hidden by the friar in a safe place until her innocence can be proven, and when it is, Claudio recognizes how mistaken he has been with his hasty judgments of "She's an angel . . . .no she's a slut." He recognizes that he has been the cause of Hero's death and asks her father what he could do to make up for his mistakes. He agrees to marry Hero's cousin, and she shows up at the wedding with a thick veil. Obviously, he can't completely stop relying on appearances, because he does ask if he could see the girl's face before he makes the vows, but Hero's dad refuses that request. Claudio agrees to marry first and see what he gets later, as an attempt to put "first sight" in the back seat a bit more.

And if you haven't guessed by now, once Claudio vows to marry her no matter what she looks like . . . the lady is unveiled and Hero is before him. Everyone thought she was dead so you can imagine the surprise on the faces of the groom and the groomsmen. "Another Hero!" "Hero that is dead!"

Claudio and Hero were young immature lovers who were mostly in love with an ideal of being in love, so the two veil tricks were a necessary part of their story. By the end of the comedy, it seems that they both are learning to recognize each other as real humans rather than just the object needed to wear the tux or the gown for "my dream wedding."

Day 14: Veil Again

This was one of the Bible stories I never knew of till I was a young adult, because in my elementary Bible and catechism classes, the violent stories were told with all the blood and gore (i.e. Jael pounding a tent stake through the head of a sleeping soldier), but the sex-laced Bible stories were adapted to a G-rating or skipped altogether. And by the time we were old enough to know the facts of life, the religious formation classes had moved on from the Bible stories to the epistles and systematic summaries of doctrine. This story is obviously hard to tell in any form without talking about sex and semen and prostitution. But is a favorite of mine because it depends on a delay of recognition and ends with a very satisfying resolution of conflict.

Tamar and Judah, Genesis 38

Tamar is widowed before she bears any son, which is an extremely hopeless state for her to be in. Her father-in-law, Judah, honors a law of justice to women by letting Tamar try conceiving a firstborn son to continue her dead husband's line, through semen donation from her dead husband's brother. That brother is not willing to have a baby that he won't be the acknowledged father of, so he practices the pull-out method of birth control. Then he dies, so Tamar looks to be quite the Black Widow, and dad-in-law is not so sure he wants her anywhere near his only surviving son. She is sent back to her family, used goods and childless and better off dead.

I wonder if Tamar had heard the story of Grandma Leah's veil trick! Anyway she also dons a veil and puts herself out there on the road with the intent of turning a trick on her father-in-law. He does not recognize her, assumes she's a prostitute, and has sex with her and gets her pregnant. She also shows a mastery of timing as she carefully delays any recognition till pregnancy is certain. She ensures that she can prove paternity one the day when he finds out his widowed daughter-in-law is pregnant and yells "Burn that slut" with an impressive show of righteous outrage. Even in those days Jerry and Maurie would have had plenty of baby-daddy dramas to bring on their shows!

Because this story is placed as an interlude in Joseph's story, it seems that it is regarded as an necessary sub-plot for later developments in the drama of Joseph and his jealous brothers. It seems that Judah recognizes something about his hypocrisy when he is forced to publicly acknowledge the truth about Tamar's illegitimate pregnancy. He reaches a new level of maturity that he did not have during the drama of Joseph's captivity, for he takes responsibility for his actions at last, announces that Tamar came by her children quite honestly, even though she was veiled. He cares for Tamar properly after that, and he is now ready to be the first brother willing to personally offer himself up for punishment in the place of his little brother Benjamin at court in Egypt.

But that sibling rivalry is still in the bloodline. Tamar's twin sons act out a rivalrous childbirth scene that remind us of Jacob and Esau who were wrestling for elder son status already in utero. Zereh punches his hand out first and gets tagged as firstborn by the midwife, but then that hand is yanked back in (poor Tamar!) It is Perez who crowns and breaks out first. I'm sure the brothers argued all their lives about who was technically the oldest and the favorite. Maybe they died without ever knowing for sure, but we get to see that it was Perez who was chosen as a link in the royal ancestral line that will lead to King David and eventually to Jesus of Nazareth.