Sep 21 2009
“Apocalypse is a means to understand the world and ones place in it.”
It was a little difficult for me to find the overarching theme in Rosen’s Introduction so I will simply address some points that stood out for me. The first is a quote near the beginning of this section, which sums up quite succinctly what purpose has the Apocalypse through out human history. Many different authors have spoken about the slant and the social influences of apocalyptic theory but she addressed it quite nicely in the beginning.
“Apocalypse is a means to understand the world and ones place in it.”
This quite frankly speaks for itself and does not need any further explanation. It is an attempt to answer the age-old question of “why am I here?” The apocalypse offers a hope that at least there is an end for all of us. The end essentially is the great equalizer of humanity. The oppressed find hope in the promise that they will one day vanquish their oppressors. Another reoccurring theme is that all things in the universe move form disorder to order. This concept is found beyond the boundaries of literature and social theory. Perhaps, we as natural beings are accustomed to all things coming to an end; it only makes sense that time or the world we live in is also bound by such confines. And lastly, her observation on New Jerusalem in a secular context was quite interesting. A new vision as opposed to a perfect world headed by a perfect being makes a lot of sense. I simply believe that I never stopped to consider that. However, in secular contexts the new vision, which originally seems promising and innovative, is horribly flawed. For example Huxley’s Brave New World and Lowry’s The Giver is a new and “improved” world but appears to the readers (or me at least) as oppressive and inhibitory. Just my thoughts…
Jahneille, I want you to consider further the implications of Rosen’s quote that “Apocalypse is a means to understand the world and one’s place in it.” You say that it “speaks for itself,” but she doesn’t think so because her emphasis is on the variations in the ways that people understand their place–sometimes dangerously as righteous and divinely appointed slayers of their perceived enemies. Watchman shows how that works with Adrian’s plot and we can see from history how often wholesale slaughter has been justified through an apocalyptic understanding of one’s place (the Crusades, the Nazi Third Reich). So much depends on how a group interprets their place.