Archive | Horror RSS for this section

True Blood Series Finale, “Thank You,” You’re Welcome

Game of Thrones better hurry up because True Blood is over! 

True Blood

I know, Eric and Sookie, we’re upset too.

In our last True Blood article, we talked about hope and the purpose of belief in something, even if that something is not organized religion. I know I will probably not make too many friends by saying this, but there were parts of the True Blood series finale that I actually liked… a lot.

I mean, let’s face it, endings are hard to write, even harder to write so that everyone is happy. Endings to a seven season series on vampires, fairies, werewolves, demons, witches, shifters, and all other manner of mythical being – yet harder still. The truth is that no one really wants to leave Bon Temps, so having any ending is not going to give you the warm fuzzies. Stick with me here and I will explain why I found the ending to be, theologically at least, acceptable.

 It only makes sense that when we talk about theology in an overt way in True Blood that the Reverend Daniels almost always has something to do with it. He is a “man of God” afterall. This time, however, it’s not Sam, but Sookie, that seeks his advice. See Sookie has a huge choice to make and it’s a choice that echoes to days past – “to be or not to be?”[1] The origin of that question harkens to days past to another writer who constantly challenged his characters in their decisions. Sookie’s predicament, not unlike Hamlet’s, revolves around acceptance of an unfair life versus becoming… well nothing. While Sookie is not looking to kill herself, she is contemplating getting rid of an essential piece of herself. Should Sookie aid in Bill’s death and ultimately render herself powerless – a normal human being?

I am not going to tackle the “to kill” or “not to kill” ethical dilemma here, which would be made even more complex by dealing with an already dead vampire. Rather, I want to talk about Sookie Stackhouse, who she is, what she is, and her decision about what to become.

Sookie lived few decades of her reality not knowing, in name, that she was fae. She knew she was gifted, as did everyone around her, and knew that that made her different. While she didn’t have a word to put to her gift Sookie had a center – a piece of self, recognized by herself, that she held at her core. Maybe it was her soul, maybe it was just her essence, the being of Sookie Stackhouse. In fact we all have that piece, the evidence that makes us recognizable to ourselves as ourselves. Sometime through abuse, trauma, and tragedy, that piece can get damaged, but it is always there – still – at the heart of the self. Sookie, in her decision, risked losing that vital core. On the other hand, she loved Bill and sometimes sacrifice is also vital when helping and caring for those you love. She contemplated sacrificing herself for his demise. Sookie sought out the Reverend Daniel in order to get some advice on the subject.

 

Sookie: Do you believe that God made us all as He meant us to be, or… do you think that some of us are just… mistakes?

 

Rev. D: I heard about all you’ve done for this town, and believe it or not, Sookie, most folks are saying we wouldn’t be here Sookie and Dwithout you. How can you think for one second that you’re a mistake?

 

Sookie: But what if I just want to lead a normal life? What if I’m tired of being what I am? Am I sinning against God if I decide not to be?

 

Rev. D: Now hold– hold on a second. Are you saying that you can un-fairy yourself? Oh, that’s another story, then, because, yes– yes, I believe we are all as God made us, but I also believe He doesn’t have to lead our lives and He doesn’t have to walk in our shoes. What I’m getting at is God wouldn’t have given us these amazing brains we’ve got if He didn’t expect that, at some point, we were gonna start using ’em to make our own decisions, to exercise our free will.

 

Similarly, in a flashback to Gran, Gran told Sookie in reference to having a “normal” life and family,

 

“Stop it! I don’t want to hear you talking like that. You can have any kind of life you want. You can persevere. Anything you want, Sookie, you are entitled to it. There are no limits on you if you don’t put them on yourself.”

 

In the end, Sookie couldn’t do it. Giving up her light, her essence, was too much, she had to be herself.

Aside from the conversation with Reverend Daniels, there is a theme running throughout the series from Lafayette to Steve Newlin that God makes, God creates, as God sees fit. In other words, God doesn’t make mistakes. On the surface that could be a problem, would that indicate thatPregnant Sookie we should never seek to change any part of ourselves, physical or otherwise? Well, no. Many theologians have written on the gifts that God gave to humans to be able to come to know and love themselves and others. It is reasonable – reason being one of those gifts – for someone to feel that their essence is one way or the other. Sookie felt that she was a fairy, she also felt that she wanted a family and what she deemed a “normal” life. I don’t feel that Sookie was defined by her choice, her pregnancy, or her family life. I don’t feel that the writers threw everything away for the standard American family in this instance or that, when she wants to be, Sookie is any less of a badass fairy than she was before. I do feel the need to acknowledge Sookie’s choice and the affirmation of what she wants, even if she is only a character, as that choice is essential to being human and to affirming the self that God created. I would be equally supportive is she had chosen to become a lesbian and live in a hippie commune with Ginger, but that was not her choice – at least not as it was presented to the audience.

The importance of this episode can be summed up in three steps.

  1. God created us – no mistakes, no deficiencies.
  2. God also gave us free will to screw up when we choose or to be true to ourselves, or any combination.
  3. No one has the right to decide anyone else’s core, being, self, or interior light.

 

That’s the beauty of our life with God – always loved, always free, always true.

 

Peace out Bon Temps.

[1] Shakespeare, Hamlet

True Blood S.7 Ep.3 – Who Wants to Place a Bet on the Pale Rider?

photo-4

Makes sense that a blog on theology + POP culture would frequently turn to the subject of faith. For those in theology, who are used to dealing with specifics and minutia, “faith” is a sobering, yet broad, term. It doesn’t describe in entirety a belief system, a method, or the interpretation of sacred doctrine. Faith, rather, is understood from the standpoint of the being, in this case a human and shape-shifter, who seeks a God, gods, and something to believe in. I plan to discuss more on this in later articles, but some theologians and scientists, sometimes even working together, are trying to bridge the gap between philosophy/theology and science. But we’ll get to that later, for this article, let’s focus on the unknown, the unknowable, and the unseen – the problematic (to some!) concept of faith.

True Blood this past Sunday, true to form, had some surprising twists. **SPOILERS AHEAD! – LIKE RIGHT NOW…** Alcide dies, Mrs. Fortenberry dies (oh darn…), and Sarah Newlin’s new love guru dies. Tara only recently died and everyone, including our beloved dog-shifting Sam Merlotte, is still reeling from finding the town of St. Alice decimated. Even the supernats, who are in the thick of it like Sam, are having trouble coming to terms with the chaotic chain of events that have unfolded.

 

Sam: “You take the simplest most everyday thing you do. These people, these people just sat down for a frozen pizza dinner. What if that was the last thing you were ever gonna do? Because life is supposed to add up to something, not some half eaten slice of pizza. They got my fiancé, Reverend, my fiancé and my child. My life was just starting to head up to something.”

Rev.: “You’re gonna get ‘em back, you’re gonna meet that baby of yours, but you got to have faith.” Rev Dan and Sam

Sam: “Reverend, they had Jesuses everywhere. They had Jesuses on the walls, they had Jesuses on the mail, and every single bedroom – they had faith. What good did it do them?”

Rev.: “What good would not having it done them?”

Sam: “I don’t know, at least they wouldn’t have been blind to the fact that the devil’s coming.”

 

Sam, in his time of need, does what any self-respecting southerner in Bon Temps would do and turns to his Reverend. During their heart-to-heart, Sam explains to the Reverend Daniels that all the faith in the world did not stop death, or the devil in Sam’s words, from ravaging the people of St. Alice in their, seemingly, normal frozen pizza eating existence. So what does faith buy anyone but empty hope?

Rev. Daniels did a fairly fine job of answering Sam’s doubting Thomas pleas, but I’d like a crack at it all the same. The Rev. Daniels said, “What good would not having it done them?” That line made me think back to Pascal’s Wager. Pascal’s Wager is actually a small part of a much larger, and much more complicated work than is given credit, Pensées. Pascal wanted to work on coming up with a rational proof of God’s existence, or at least the reason that people should believe there is a God. For those interested in the intricate version, go here http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/. In short, very very short terms, the wager works like this, it is better to bet, probability-wise, on the existence of God and to have faith in that, than to bet against God’s existence. It is more beneficial to the person to believe in God. Pascal outlines those reasons; again dealing with probability, but also that if you believe in God, and there is a gain (happiness) then you will win it all. If you believe in God and lose, you lose nothing because without God’s existence, there is no happiness unbegotten to be lost – you just live in normal existence, but you live in hope. That is a gross oversimplification, but it will do for these purposes. Sam and Rev. Daniels are standing on opposite paths, but both heading towards the same horizon, death. Sam is not buying into this wager. He sees death around him, coming for people without prejudice or reserve. He sees “Jesuses” everywhere and yet these people still suffered awful deaths. Not only can Sam not see an after-life offered, but also he is consumed by the fear of the present – a place where frozen pizza is symbolic of a pathetic last meal.

Rev. Daniels, on the other hand, tells Sam,

“Now looky here, this ain’t the kinda thing I’d say in front of the congregation, but since it’s just you and me right now – death is a dark and blinding mother-fucker whether you see it coming or you don’t. But a life spent in anticipation of it coming, Sam, well that’s not a life worth living.”

Rev. Daniels’ perception is to wager on what he sees as the most productive, to live in hope and happiness. After all, like Pascal, what does he have to lose? Even if there is no after-life, since it is improbable (though we do have several episodes to go…who knows…) is it better to live without any faith in something or to believe that each moment holds a piece of time that is meaningful in itself, despite a march towards death?

Everyone has their own answer. Scholars of Pascal argue greatly about the specifics of the wager, can it even be used and applied adequately in a general way? I think the point that the Reverend is trying to make, however, is that we can spend each day taking for granted the little moments in search of the big picture, but we would be lying to ourselves if we denied that life is lived in those infinitesimally small bits of time. We love not only on a large scale, but also moment to moment. Whether you believe in God, to a certain degree, may even be irrelevant. The real question of the wager is whether or not you are going to let fear, despair, and blindness rob you of life. If you do, the “devil” has most certainly won, for now you have lost the good stuff that life is made of.[1]

 

By: Erica Saccucci

 

 

 

[1] Just for reference, the author (me!) does not believe in a physical devil. No incantations of Satan, Mammon, Beelzebub, Perdition, Lucifer, or Old Scratch have been done to complete this article.

Marie Laveau and the Devil: Misrepresentation of Vodou and Women’s Religious Leadership in American Horror Story: Coven

photo

The third season (Coven) of American Horror Story (AHS) was by far the most popular installment to date of the television series.   A record number of 4.2 million viewers tuned in for the season finale to find out who would reign supreme in this epic of witches from Salem and voodoo queens, all set in magical New Orleans.[1] Due to the increased popularity of the most recent season of AHS, it seems appropriate to address some racial and religious injustices perpetrated by the program – common Hollywood prejudices whose firm grip upon the popular imagination has apparently not relaxed in the twenty-first century.

Many published works on Vodou include a preface that says something like, “Vodou is not devil worship, black magic, cannibalism, etc.” This is a necessary introduction, as Vodou is a religious tradition that has long been glamorized and vilified by scandalized white voyeurism and fear of black power. Hollywood did not originate the diabolic spectacle versions of Vodou, but has been a vehicle for its wide dispersion. The ubiquitous image of the zombie of Walking Dead or any comparable works have their roots in the sensationalist creation of “voodoo” by white writers.

The grim fascination of Vodou for white audiences began in the eighteenth century with the legendary Vodou roots of the Haitian Revolution, in which men and women of color rose up against a sadistically cruel slave economy in the French colony of St. Domingue and, ultimately, won independence. The victory of the Haitian republicans horrified white slaveholders in the newly-independent United States and caused political turmoil on both sides of the Atlantic. Suspicion of the savage “slave religion” of Vodou has followed it ever since, and in the twentieth century became fertile ground for the spectacular entertainment of Hollywood.

So with that, what has all this to do with AHS: Coven?

Coven introduces the viewer to the fictional New Orleans boarding school, Miss Robichaux’s Academy, a school for young witches. The school was founded by the persecuted witches of Salem, who fled New England for New Orleans, and is now a safe haven and place of instruction for modern witches. There is a tense peace in the City of New Orleans between the predominantly white witches of the academy and Marie Laveau, the centuries-old voodoo queen and her devotees, who are women of color.

The focus of the season is, by far, the Salem-heritage witches of Miss Robichaux’s; however, Marie Laveau and her fellow Vodou sévités, based at a hair salon, stand as antagonists to the witches. As such, the development of Marie Laveau’s character is less comprehensive than the other characters; however, near the end of the season a window into Marie’s past is opened that directly touches on the themes of race and religion.

It is revealed that the source of Marie’s powers and her extraordinarily long life is a deal she made with Papa Legba, one of the principal lwa of the Vodou pantheon. Here is the first problem with the depiction of Vodou in AHS, it is never portrayed as a religion, but as a black magical tradition. Papa Legba shows up to explain how Marie received her powers. Legba is iconographically a muddle of other lwa, principally the familiar figure of Baron Samedi (always depicted as negative and scary by Hollywood). Naratively, Legba functions more like the figure of the Christian devil. He is the lord of Hell and comes to collect those bound for the afterlife; his deal with Marie is to exchange power and immortality for her soul. Another stipulation of this deal is that she must provide him with the soul of an innocent child each year. Here the depiction of Legba goes beyond any kind of blending of lwa characteristics and stumbles headlong into the lurid sensationalism of white commentators on Vodou since, at least, the nineteenth century.

Papa Legba, in Vodou practice, is the keeper of the crossroads. It is he who holds the keys to gate between the world of the lwa and the world of human beings. As such, Legba is served and petitioned at any Vodou service, so that the ceremony may take place at all. As such, the iconography of St. Peter with the keys of heaven and hell is often used to represent Legba. Alternately, he is depicted as a man with a cane, broad-brimmed hat, smoking a pipe, and attended by a dog. Thus, both iconographically and characteristically, AHS made a mess of the figure of this important lwa. Making him a cocaine-snorting baby-eater is the offensive icing on the cake, so to speak. Not only does this distort Vodou in rather unimaginative ways, it treats Marie Laveau in a misogynistic and, again, racially problematic light.

Laveau, the real Marie Laveau, can in many ways not be separated from the legends that have grown up around her (such is the also the case with Delphine Lalaurie, who figures into the AHS narrative). What can be said definitively about Marie Laveau is that she was a spiritual practitioner in the city of New Orleans, who had some measure of public recognition for her work. She is, perhaps, one of the most popularly well-known women religious leaders in a city that has known many, from the Ursuline sisters that helped settle and build the young colony to a long line of women’s leadership in the Spiritual Churches of the city. Women, both Vodou, Christian, and beyond have been arbiters of the divine and leaders of the community in New Orleans. AHS demonizes Marie Laveau and her religious tradition just as male religious leaders have discounted the leadership of women for centuries. The narrative spends more time working through the character of the notorious racist and slave-torturer, Mme. Delphine Lalaurie, and renders Laveau and Queenie as rather flat versions of the “good” and “bad negro.”

If the writers of AHS were going to write a fanciful revision of the Salem Witch Trials — themselves an historical instance of religious hysteria and violence of against  women—why then are the same racist and misogynistic tropes trotted out for the “voodoo” women of New Orleans?

Granted,the concept of “horror” is written into the very title of this television series; however, it doesn’t seem that the kind of atrocities the writers ended up depicting, either blatantly or subtly, were what they had in mind for this season about scary witches.

 

[1] http://www.vulture.com/2014/01/ratings-american-horror-story-coven-finale.html — accessed 3.2.14

 

By: Seth Alexander

 

%d bloggers like this: