Volume 7 | 2018-2019
Peripateo
the Swarthmore College Journal of Christian Discourse
Also in this issue:
What Do We Do If We Meet Aliens? by Daniel Swanson
Animism in Animation by Adam Schauer
Vocation and the Student by James Sutton
Jest up to a Point: Seeking Constructive Irony by Tobias Philip
A Letter from the Editor Dear Reader, Many of us may consider entertainment the stuff of passive consumption. After a long day reclining and unwinding with netflix presents itself as an irresistible temptation. Nevertheless, even as we consume with utter resignation to the medium, it effects new thoughts in us - thoughts that this issue of Peripateo seeks to treat. For example, although aliens occupy the mind of many an astronomy major, who among us would really give them sustained consideration were it not for the many iterations of sci-fi television and films that handle the subject? For the Christian, this consideration may appear as the question: should aliens be baptized? Daniel Swanson gives this very question due thought and, in doing so, shows how very integral to life itself (human and otherwise) the Christian worldview is, such that even extraterrestrial civilization may have a place in its system. Less serious than the astronomical ponderings of science fiction seem to be the childrens’ films of disney and pixar. Adam Schauer, however, thinks otherwise and finds within these seemingly puerile pleasures a distinctly biblical message. In fact, animated films prove to be a treasure trove of Christian allegory, depicting through a rich symbolic language a world marred by original sin and reaching out towards love and redemption. My own piece looks to a concept embedded in nearly all contemporary entertainment, which is popularly identified as postmodern irony. I seek to juxtapose this phenomenon with the very different understanding of irony proliferated by Socrates and consummated in the gospels. On a very different note, James Sutton explores the idea of a vocation in contrast to our often deficient usage of the term and considers what a true calling might look like. Finally, Daniel gives us a peculiar contribution to the long tradition of versifying the Bible by concentrating salvation history within fifteen delightful limericks. I hope that he has taken us full circle from discussing themes in contemporary entertainment to creating a contribution thereto. I commend to you a rather unusual issue of Peripateo from this last Fall, but one that, no less than any other, displays how pervasive the message of the incarnation truly is. Indeed, from high mysticism to “lowbrow� entertainment, Christ resonates in every register. Tobias Philip Editor-in-Chief
i | Letter from the Editor
IN THIS ISSUE What Do We Do If We Meet Aliens? by Daniel Swanson
2
Jest up to a Point: Seeking Constructive Irony by Tobias Philip
6
Animism in Animation by Adam Schauer
10
Vocation and the Student by James Sutton
14
In Just a Few Words by Daniel Swanson
19
Essays & Ar ticles
Reflections
Peripateo
the Swarthmore College Journal of Christian Discourse
Editorial Staff
Tobias Philip '20 Irene Tang '19 Juhyae Kim '19 Adam Schauer '20 Rebecca Sanders '20 James Sutton '21 Daniel Swanson '21
Editor-in-Chief Design Manager Editor, Design Editor Editor Editor Editor, Design
Piece Contributors Ar t & Poetry
Tobias Philip '20 Adam Schauer '20 James Sutton '20 Daniel Swanson '21
Photo Contributors
Cover: Rebecca Griest '16 16-17: Sam Gutierrez '16 2-5, 14: Claire Yang '17 21: Timothy Greco '19 i-1, 10-11 Irene Tang '19 18-19: Ju Hyung Kim 6-7: Public Domain
Who We Are
Peripateo seeks to reconcile faith and academia by engaging religious issues through an intellectual
lens. Coming from a variety of Christian traditions, we seek to represent a diversity of perspectives. We
believe that the message of Jesus Christ has power-
ful implications for our daily lives and the world at large. Our goal is to fuse creativity and intellectualism in this journal to invite readers into a thought-
ful discourse: what role does God play in our lives? What are the ways that a Christian perspective both
complements and complicates an academic one?
Read our previous issues at https://issuu.com/swarthmoreperipateo
Swarthmore Peripateo | 1
What Do We Do if We Meet Aliens? by Daniel Swanson
"So," one might reasonably ask, on step three, which is to discuss religion. of souls. Human souls have the capacity
"what do we do if we meet aliens?" If you're asking about what we will actually do, then I have no idea (though if the non-Trek SciFi I'm familiar with is any indication, it will probably be disastrous). However, on the matter of what we should do I present the following plan of action. The first step would be to throw a bunch of linguists at them and replicate the first half of Arrival (I don't recommend the second half, but, if atemporal perspectives are available and you really like barely averted global war, then go for it). Once we can speak the same language, step two would be offering a trade of board games and spaceship blueprints (those who can travel the stars hardly lack access to natural resources). If we are the ones providing board games, I would recommend Tak and Go since both are simple, interesting, and easily divorced from their original cultural context. Beyond this point the plan gets rather complicated (and, even before this, there are complexities that I'm ignoring) so I'm going to spend the rest of this article
2 | What do we do if we meet aliens?
Since time, space, your attention, and my knowledge are all limited, the actions and implications discussed below are limited to those that are significant to Christianity, and not even necessarily all of Christianity. Doubtless some religions would be fundamentally contradicted and others radically transformed, some would claim to have been validated and others would be unaffected, while dozens more would spring into existence - but all these are outside my present concern.
The first thing to ask would be whether or not they are spiritual creatures like we are. The first thing to ask would be whether or not they are spiritual creatures like we are. A traditional understanding of the soul is that it is what distinguishes a living being from a corpse. There are various types
for rational and abstract thought and can survive the death of the body, whereas the souls of animals and plants do not have that capacity and probably don't survive death. If the aliens that we meet fall into the latter category, then they would seem not to be "in the image of God" as we are, and so there wouldn't really be anything more to discuss with them in terms of religion. In the case that the aliens we meet are robots, the definition of the soul given above works out to either a stream of electrons or nothing at all. Either way, I don't think they can really be said to be alive, and if they aren't alive then they aren't really people in the relevant sense and we again don't have much to discuss (though we probably should treat them as we would if they were people, to avoid encouraging immoral tendencies in ourselves, if for no other reason). However, it is quite possible that the beings who created them were people, and we could potentially learn useful things by asking about those creators. Of course, simply asking "Do you have
souls?" is not likely to be particularly effective. The idea of a "soul" is probably going to be tricky to convey accurately, and until we know their language very well it might well come across as something like "Are you alive?" or "Are you possessed?", neither of which is what we want. Thus, we should probably prefer an indirect approach.
Of course, simply asking "Do you have souls?" is not likely to be particularly effective. In my experience, all rational beings seek truth, and it seems reasonable to hypothesize that this is a feature of rationality in general, rather than of humans in particular. In addition to what is known from divine revelation, various human philosophers have constructed arguments from first principles demonstrating the existence and immortality of the soul. Thus, if aliens have rational souls and seek truth, I would expect that many of them would believe this
to be the case, even in the absence of divine revelation. Now, just as is the case with humans, where many are not convinced by the arguments for souls or the revelation, the existence of some aliens who don't believe in immortal souls would not invalidate the conclusion that they have them. In summary, if they commonly believe that they will survive death in some sense, then they probably will. Once we know that we're dealing with rational beings, there are two possible states they could be in. They could either be in right relationship with God, as Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden and as the angels are now, or they could be fallen, separated from God as we and demons are now. Only when we reach this point do our questions really have theological significance since, I would argue, the discovery of non-personal life elsewhere in the universe would have no more impact on theology than the discovery of a new species of mosquito in the Amazon. Given what we know about God, I would expect any aliens we meet to have
some revelation from him. And even if they don't, it is still possible to know a great deal about God from his creation, so I would put complete lack of knowledge of God in the same category as having fallen from relationship with God. In any other case, their knowledge of God might well be different from our own, not in the sense of contradicting our knowledge, but rather in the sense of highlighting aspects of God that are less prominent in the revelation that we have received. Studying their knowledge of God is the best way I can think of to resolve the question of whether or not they are fallen. If they are unanimous in their beliefs about God and those beliefs do not contradict what we know with certainty, that would be reasonably solid evidence that they know God and that their minds are not clouded by sin. If their beliefs contradict each other, that does not necessarily prove that they are fallen, but it seems extremely difficult to have ongoing communion with God and yet have significantly divergent opinions about Him. If their beliefs conflict with
Swarthmore Peripateo | 3
ours but in some relatively small way, we should make every effort not to create yet another division over mere word choice.1 However, any beliefs that are completely irreconcilable with each other or previously revealed truth are likely false and also good evidence that their minds are clouded by sin, in which case they are indeed fallen. If they aren't fallen, then we would learn that there are parts of the universe that weren't damaged by our fall. This might have interesting implications for our understanding of the fall of humanity, since that is generally understood to have affected the whole universe. If the effects of one race's fall only extend to their own planet, then perhaps studying the aliens' world could give us insight into what the Garden of Eden was like. On the other hand, if they fell through the breaking of a commandment, then we might be able to reach the same conclusions about the effects of our fall, but we wouldn't gain that same insight into what an unfallen world looks like. But there is another possibility: they could have fallen as a direct consequence of our fall. If this were the case it would seem that humanity is extremely important in the grand design of the universe.
4 | What do we do if we meet aliens?
Furthermore, the relationship between tionally it is understood that the primary our fall and theirs could be one of indirect reason angels cannot be saved is because causation, in which case it could go either they cannot repent, rather than that God way. We might learn that somehow their doesn't want to save them. actions changed the events at the beginFor humans, information is perceived ning of Genesis and that if, they had acted by the senses, is understood by the inteldifferently somehow, Satan would not have lect, and is acted upon by the will.2 Angels, appeared to tempt Eve or someone would on the other hand, do not have bodies and have made a different choice. That could be thus do not have senses like we do, since taken as showour sense are tied to ing the aliens' our physical organs. As significance in result, they do not If the aliens have fallen from aobtain the grand design, knowledge over grace, can they be saved, and, though I would time but rather simply be inclined to have whatever knowlif so, how? view it more as edge God has given evidence of how them and innately undeeply interconderstand whatever that nected all things are. knowledge implies.3 Since their knowledge The final question - not because there is constant, and that knowledge is what the are no more questions after it but because will acts on, their wills are also constant, the layers of speculation become unman- and thus at the moment of their creation ageable - is if the aliens have fallen from they choose to turn either towards God or grace, can they be saved, and, if so, how? away from Him and that choice is permaAccording to Christianity, humans can be nent.4 saved through faith in Jesus, but fallen anSince we are discussing biological and gels cannot be saved. From that it might thus corporeal aliens, they would be capable seem like the answer could go either way, of changing their minds and thus I would but that doesn't seem likely to me. Tradi- expect there to be some way for them to be
saved based on Paul's statement that God the method of their salvation, it will prob"desires all people to be saved and to come ably be a surprise to us. to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy On the other hand, if it turns out that 2:4 ESV). We can't absolutely rule out the God has not told them how to be saved possibility that salvation is not available to then the answer is probably that they are them, but, if that were so, I have no idea saved in the same way that we are. If we how we would know it without divine reve- run into problems like the aliens being the lation. So the answer to the first part of the Wicked Witch of the West and baptism question is a probable "yes", but that still will literally kill them, then perhaps they're leaves the second part: How are they saved? actually waiting for some other species to In our study of their religions, we might show up and share salvation with them. (It discover one that has should be noted actually received revthat, if it is not esMy intuition is that God elation from God. If sential to the nawe found one and it would either create a single ture of baptism that described a way for it be done with wathem to be saved, means of salvation that is the ter or if salvation is then we would have same for all species or He primarily brought our answer. This way would give ech species their about by internal might be any numbelief rather than own path. ber of things. Persacramental achaps something like tion, then this sort observing the Law of of issue will not the Old Testament or the temple sacrificial arise.) It would, however, strike me as odd system would be sufficient for them. Per- if they were waiting for someone else. My haps Jesus also became incarnate on their intuition is that God would either create a planet (or the Holy Spirit, for that matter). single means of salvation that is the same But then again, as Aslan says, "things never for all species or He would give each spehappen the same way twice"5 so whatever cies their own path. The comparison that
comes to mind is that it's as if God's chosen people, rather than being specifically Israel had been Israel and China, but no one else. On the other hand, if this did turn out to be how God has set things up, then we would have yet more evidence that God's ways are not my ways and I would have a new mystery to be curious about. In any event, upon meeting aliens I would recommend asking the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth and ensure that we answer these questions correctly and properly apply the answers. Incidentally, the fourth step of the larger plan is to ask what sort of music they like.
r
Endnotes 1. Not all splits within Christianity are simply over words and not all splits over words are without significance, but there are a frustratingly large number of divisions that are now nothing more than quibbling over the preferred wording of technicalities. 2. Aquinas ST 1 Q84 A6. 3. Aquinas ST 1 Q58 A3. 4. Aquinas ST 1 Q64 A2. 5. C.S. Lewis, Prince Caspian.
Swarthmore Peripateo | 5
It seems as though, with each
passing era, a new layer of identity is stripped from the vestments of our personhood and burned in the fire of socialscientific scrutiny. Be it religion, cultural group, or gender, each is reduced to the ashes of phenomenological incommensurability and the individual is robbed of what once robed her in meaning. What results is not the empowerment of the individual over prescriptive categories of identity but rather her inability to relate concordantly to her fellow individuals and the world around her. When ontological categories dissolve into arbitrariness, particular experience alone becomes determinative. Just as experience becomes more particular, it becomes less communicable (language itself is the abstraction and universalization of a particular, so as to make the thought of one person comprehensible to another). When phenomenology, the raw experience of a person, is alone operative in shaping that individual, then person A cannot relate to person B any more than A and B share the same experience. The individual can only achieve meaning in such circumstances by self-assertion in opposition to others, resulting in the incessant and irresolvable positing of difference. This is the violence at the foundation
of post-modernity. Contemporary irony becomes essential to our self-determination, rather than methodological. Whereas ironic distance could once resolve in a new understanding of one’s relationship to the world, it now serves only to renew itself in an “infinite jest.”1
When ontological categories dissolve into arbitrariness, particular experience alone becomes determinative.
The ontological violence that pervades the contemporary West is the alienation of the individual from her world and fellow man. This alienation maintains itself through the rejection of meaning. David Foster Wallace effectively characterizes the popular manifestation of such an attitude in his essay on television and U.S. fiction. The ironically negative relationship towards the world rejects any attempt to pin objective meaning onto self-expression as banal or outmoded.2 Within the framework of ontological violence, the world must exist
6 | Jest up to a Point: Seeking a Constructive Irony
essentially in discord rather than peace, and so the individual’s relationship to any other subjective entity must be negative. As a result, the positing of truth that transcends a single subjectivity is fiercely rebutted, even derided. Appearance and being are one and the same, because to be otherwise would imply a truth deeper than experience. This is the absolute coincidence of phenomenon and being that underlies our world. Irony in its ancient formulation serves well to contrast its present usage. Socrates developed this irony, employing it to reverse the orientation of truth from the exterior world to the interior person. His irony, I argue, found its consummation in the person of Christ, who rejects the ontology of violence and creates an absolutely positive relation of the individual to the world. Socrates did not only introduce irony on a world historical scale, but devoted his entire existence thereto. The kernel of his character can be summarized in his realization “that whatever I do not know, I do not even suppose I know.”3 This fact, reasons Socrates, is what makes him the wisest of all men. The fact that his wisdom consists in a negative orientation towards all other wisdom describes his irony. A more detailed description of Socratic irony as it manifested itself throughout the Platonic dialogues
Jest up to a Point: Seeking a Constructive Irony by Tobias Philip
is a task far surpassing the scope of my own reference to the illustrious figure, so I will summarize the insightful remarks that Kierkegaard, the well noted Christian ironist, has to say on the subject. Kierkegaard contrasts irony as a way of being with its rhetorical usage, where “there frequently appears a figure of speech with the name of irony and the characteristic of saying the opposite of what is meant.”4 In this sense, one might call ironic what is simply sarcastic, but in the purely ironic “the phenomenon is not the essence but the opposite of the essence. When I am speaking, the thought, the meaning, is the essence, and the word is the phenomenon.”5 So irony, in the sense which consumed the life of Socrates, was the active resistance to transparency and denial of experience per se in favor of a secondary, often hidden truth. Irony appears throughout the gospels in the form of apparently absurd analogies that, by virtue of their risible images, make stark the reversal of the seemingly natural order, which Christ brings about. Most famously, Christ preaches, “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.”6 On the one hand, it seems as though Christ thus closes heaven to the
rich. However likely this may be in prac- such an absurd denial of the state of things tice, it would be incompatible with Christ’s that it elicits laughter rather than faith. It teaching elsewhere. Christ also preaches may be remembered, that there was not as that one must make oneself as a child in of yet in the life of Christ any report of the order to enter the kingdom of heaven.7 If a dead having been raised, not Lazarus and grown man can make himself like a child, certainly not Christ himself. Christ’s statethen perhaps a camel too can pass through ment, therefore, seems to assume that the dead, who remain the eye of a needle. dead, are somehow Nonetheless, such still raised, just as an image offends the the blind, insofar intellect. If it gave no as they are blind, offense, then neither would those who Christ’s statement, therefore, may still see, and the deaf, remaintake no offense be seems to assume that the 8 ing deaf, may hear. blessed. More mean- dead, who remain dead, are The last phrase especially, “πτωχοὶ ingful, however, is somehow still raised εὐαγελίζονται,” the sort of irony in which may be better which Christ’s words translated, “beggars strongly contradict have good news observable phenombrought to them,” ena. When John the Baptist sends two of his disciples to inquire seems to confirm this sense, since πτωχοὶ as to whether Christ is the one whose com- are not said to have remitted their poverty, ing John preached, Christ answers them yet, being beggars, they hear good news. “The blind see, the lame walk, the lepers Throughout the gospels, Christ often asks are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise “Having eyes, see you not? and having ears, again, the poor have the gospel preached to hear you not?”.10 If someone has eyes, then them.”9 This response would seem a mere it is well assumed that they see, and likereport of miracles attributed to Christ be- wise with ears and hearing. It is certainly forehand, except that each experience seems not the sensual sort of seeing and hearing
Swarthmore Peripateo | 7
to which Christ refers, but one which those in possession of the physical senses may still lack. It is a sort of seeing and hearing that stands in dissonance with the observable phenomenon that Christ tells John’s disciples to report. What, then, is Christ’s relation to phenomenon? Indeed he does not deny outward action, saying that it is by external actions that the quality of a person may be judged, since “A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit.”11 At the same time, however, Christ gives good reason through his own speech for distrusting the apparent meaning of external signs. He is described as speaking obscurely, “without parable he did not speak unto them; but apart, he explained all things to his disciples.”12 κατ᾽ἰδίαν, meaning “apart,” may be literally translated “according to his own,” or personally, and is the same word used to describe “his own disciples,” ἰδίοις μαθηταίς. This personalness is opposed to the publicity of lucid expression. The necessity of parables follows thus: Christ’s meaning, like his Godhead, is veiled from the exterior senses. As the phenomenon of speech serves the ironist as antithesis to the essence of his intention, so do the parables provide a sacred distance between Christ’s words and his meaning. Indeed, it was apparent to his disciples that Christ preached In repudiating the world, obscurely. They urged Christ repudiates materiality, him, “there is no man doth any thing in the apparently manifest, and, that secret, and he himself like the ironist, phenomenon seeketh to be known itself. openly. If thou do these things, manifest thyself to the world.”13 Christ responds that the world hates him since he gives testimony of its evil after which his disciples departed to observe a festival, “But after his brethren were gone up, then he also went up to the feast, not openly, but, as it were, in secret.”14 Following the very challenge to manifest himself (φανέρωσον σεαυτὸν)
8 | Just up to a Point: Seeking Constructive Irony
and the reproach for working in secret (ἐν κρυπτῷ), Christ departs for the feast not manifestly (οὐ φανερῶς), but as in secret (ἐν κρυπτῷ). His active repudiation of publicity devalues externality, just as his teaching favors interiority. He preaches, “There is nothing from without a man that entering into him, can defile him. But the things which come from a man, those are they that defile a man.”15 Very much in the spirit of the writer of Ecclesiastes16 Christ also asks, “what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul?”17 This is the very world (κόσμος) to which Christ’s disciples ask him to manifest himself. In repudiating the world, Christ repudiates materiality, the apparently manifest, and, like the ironist, phenomenon itself. Returning to the classical view of irony, Kierkegaard claims: [Irony] has the returning-into-itself that characterizes personality...but in this movement, irony comes back empty-handed. It’s relation to the world is not one in which the relation is an element in the content of personality; its relation to the world is a continuous non-relation to the world, a relation in which, the moment the relation is to begin, it pulls back with a skeptical reserve...thus one sees that there is an absolute dissimilarity between Socrates and Christ, because the immediate fullness of deity resided in Christ, and his relation to the world was so absolutely real a relation that the Church is conscious of itself as members of his body.18 I believe Kierkegaard’s understanding discounts the negative aspect of Christ’s relationship to the world. Insofar as Christ is truly man as well as God, his relation to the world must be as real as ours. Nonetheless, a real relation to the world is not a real relationship to apparent phenomenon. Socrates did not deny that there was reality, but he did devote his life to probing it with incessant inquiry, until all that remained real was rational thought. Christ followed the Socratic path by giving the highest
truth to interiority, but followed further. Like Socrates, the Gospel of John gives precedence to the principle of rationality, the λόγος.19 This principle, however, came to bridge the infinite gap between rational thought and experience, that manifests in Socratic aporia, when “ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο [the word became flesh].”20 Whereas Socrates’ existence was defined by his “non-relation to the world,” that ever returned to his particular personality, Christ’s retreat into personal interiority is made universally real by his assumption of humanity in its fullness. For Socrates personality could not extend beyond his very self, but Christ identifies himself as existence itself (ἔγω εἰμί).21 The world has its greatest reality from the fact that God dwelt therein, and so, in relation to the world renewed in the embodied λόγος, all else is untruth. Finally, what good does it serve to compare Socrates with Christ? For this answer, I will quote Johann Georg Hamann, a seminal figure of the German enlightenment, brilliant ironist, and devout Christian: “Socrates seduced his fellow citizens from the labyrinths of their learned sophists to a truth that lies in hiding, to a secret wisdom and from the pleasure-altars of their prayerful and politically savvy priests to the service of an unknown God...whoever shall not suffer Socrates to be counted among the prophets must be asked: Who is the father of the prophets? And is our God not called and shown to be a God of the gentiles?” 22 Truly then, Socrates and Christ serve similar roles insofar as they lead their disciples to the hidden God. Nor is it incompatible with the Christian religion that it was the same God who inspired Socrates and spoke through prophetic revelation. Socrates and Christ, then, offer stark counterexamples to the shallow satire that passes for irony today. While Socratic irony deconstructs phenomenon and leaves thought as the only truth, contemporary irony deconstructs reason and exalts phenomenon as the only truth. The existence of Socrates served to annul the Sophistry
of fifth century Athens. Christ, on the other hand, annulling the exteriority of first century Palestine, established the validity of the God within, such that everyone might through his universal personhood participate in the hidden Godhead. r
Endnotes: 1. To borrow the words of David Foster Wallace. 2. David Foster Wallace, “E Unibus Pluram: Television and U.S. Fiction,” in Review of Contemporary Fiction, (1993), 184. 3. (Apology, 21.d)Thomas G. West, Plato’s Apology of Socrates: An Interpretation, with a New Translation. Copyright by Cornell University, published by Cornell University Press. 4. Søren Kierkegaard, The Concept of Irony with Continual Reference to Socrates, in Kierkegaard’s Writings, II, Edited and Translated by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong, (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1989), 247. 5. Ibid. 6. Mat. 19:24. All translations are Douay Rheims, except when it is noted that an alternative translation is presented, which is my own. 7. Mat. 18:2-3. 8. Mat. 15:6 9. Mat. 11:5. 10. Mark 8:18, but compare also Mat 11:15, and Mat 13:15. 11. Mat. 7:18. 12. Mark 4:34. 13. John 7:4. 14. John 7:10. 15. Mark 7:15. 16. See Ecc. 1:2. 17. Mat. 16:26. 18. Kierkegaard, 220-221. 19. “ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος” ( John 1:1). 20. John 1:14. 21. John 9:8. 22. Johann Georg Hamann, Hamann Magus des Norden. Hauptschriften, edited by Otto Mann, (Leipzig: In der Dietrich’schen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1937), 79-80. [Translation is mine].
Swarthmore Peripateo | 9
Animism by Adam Schauer
our relationship with the world... or at least explains why I cry every time I watch the movie Up. In my study of children’s films, I hope to expose some of the less obvious tropes and difficult ethical or philosophical questions that these movies instigate. Unfortunately, I will inevitably leave you As emotionally riveting and visually stunning with more questions than answers - that’s just the magic of Disney. So, what if toys did have feelings and purpose? The already as animated films can be, many of them hide an unfortunately derivative preface: what if [insert a non-human object here] had unfortunate implication of this very question is that humans are feelings? Redundant as they may be, each query provokes perti- still the center of the toy universe. The toys do have their own aunent issues about humanity’s ultimate purpose, exposing limita- tonomy and emotions but live to please Andy. This idea seems to tions in our perspective. What if our childhood toys had their own imply the blasphemous idea that human live as borderline deities. lives separate from our presence? What are the ethics surround- Sid, the villain of Toy Story 1, discredits that notion. We are thus immediately faced with our imperfections ing the souls of said toys? (Toy Story and lack of ultimate importance, much 1, 2, and 3) What if bugs had their like the plotline of Bolt, where a “superown fears and social anxieties just like hero” dog learns that his powers are actuus? Would that make swatting a fly What if [insert a non-human ally mere Hollywood stunts and he comes equivalent to murder? (A Bug’s Life, to terms with the daunting reality that he The Bee Movie) What if cars had object here] had feelings? is, in fact, neither particularly special, nor their own purpose? Does that purpose the center of the universe. reflect our bias towards human-cenIn a more poetic, redemptive interpretric philosophies limited by our shaltation of Toy Story, the community of toys low experience in the world? (Cars 1, 2, and 3) What if our very feelings had their own feelings! (Inside mimics that of a utopian body of like-minded religious fanatics, Out) The study of these pertinent hypotheticals through the lens living in community to glorify and please their directly inaccessible of such seemingly secular films offers a deeper understanding of higher power. The toys initially fall out of favor with Andy (as he “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 18:3-4
10 | Animism in Animation
in Animation
grows older through no fault of the toys, but for the sake of the However, what caused Marlin’s and Nemo’s flawed personalities, analogy, we will overlook this), and constantly seek to reclaim relationship, and the eventual odyssey to reconcile father with son? his attention. Their plight is doomed by the inevitable growth of Marlin and Nemo certainly cared for one another, which did lead to Andy, much like how humans strive to reattain a right relation- some tension as Marlin understandably feared for Nemo’s safety. The ship with each other despite their innate disposition to evil. initial cause for these issues, though, came from the broken world So the toys, like us, have a purpose, around them. If not for the but Toy Story does little to explain the Or instead, it is simply not our place to evil of the barracuda, their lives original fall from Andy’s graces - other would have looked very differthan his aging. For that, we will turn question the motives of God and bemoan ent and they would not have to another famous Pixar film, Findneed for such animosity the presence of evil, but simply accept it the ing Nemo. In this odyssey, Marlin the or their greater purpose in the clownfish attempts to reconcile with as a given of life and make the most of film: reuniting. Perhaps then, his only son, after he is kidnapped. the innate evil in the world creour time here. However, Marlin’s backstory and the ates our purpose here as we too reason for his desperate love for Nemo attempt to reconcile with our offers a potential interpretation of humanity’s inherent flaws. heavenly Father, who lives in a world without the evil of barracudas. Marlin and his beloved wife lived happily and tended to a large Or instead, it is simply not our place to question the motives of hatch of eggs, soon to become their children. Clownfish are God and bemoan the presence of evil, but simply accept it as a given known to congregate in sea anemones as one of the few creatures of life and make the most of our time here. This mentality is captured that can survive its poison, meaning that the familial bond of the in the aforementioned verse from Matthew, demanding from Chrisclownfish would have have been undoubtedly strong. One day, a tians the freedom (and perhaps naivety) of children. The movie Up barracuda attacked the eggs and Marlin’s wife, Pearl, was eaten in would argue that “adventure is out there” and you can only fully emthe ensuing battle. Devastated, Marlin found only one surviving brace that adventure with an acceptance of our temporal limitations egg and nurtured it as a testament to his wife’s memory. That egg on earth. In the movie Carl Fredricksen’s wife dies (after a riveting became Nemo. montage of their happy life) and leaves Carl to live out his days as
Swarthmore Peripateo | 11
a sour, aged widower in a world that continues to develop and move on without him. However, Carl finds purpose in fulfilling his promise to his late wife of taking his house on an adventure, and manages to do quite a lot of good in the process. The movie even ends with Carl taking on a paternal role for his adolescent companion, Russell. The good Carl does in the world comes as a result of his ability to reopen his heart and accept the brokenness in the world around him. So love freely and die, the argument goes. But life is simply not that easy. The brokenness and evil of the world tax our will and “the evil deeds of the wicked ensnare him” (Proverbs 5:22). Then, within this dystopian, doomed, evil world, in the words of the Beatles, “love is all you need.” Although cliche and oversimplified, the hero Wall-E epitomizes this mentality in his barren and toilsome existence. Wall-E cleans up after humans, who have decimated earth and live a life of gross gluttony aboard a spaceship. Wall-E lives relatively happily, until he meets another robot named Eva. Wall-E soon becomes smitten and focuses all of his attention on convincing the emotionless Eva to reciprocate. This becomes Wall-E’s new purpose. Then, is ours also to love fully but prudently in this evil world? To enjoy the luxury of raw emotions and passion in our time here for the betterment of ourselves and a choice few around us? To the contrary, many philosophers argue that granting ultimate purpose is inadequate justification for evil to persist in the world. A truly benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient creator, they argue, would have defeated evil’s wrath for good. So, for another interpretation of human purpose, we turn to the clearly obvious source of all divine teachings: the Bible. Just kidding, we’re going back to Pixar. The movie Coco seems to invite the idea that there is life after death as the living human Miguel accidentally wanders into the realm of the dead. In For another interpretation of this universe, the memories of the dead live human purpose, we turn to the on in a harmonious world, displaying the best of their lives. Every dead person clearly obvious source of all very lives on with their life’s passion. It teaches divine teachings: the Bible. Just Miguel the importance of remembering the kidding, we’re going back to Pixar. past, but more importantly, the full embrace of life in its temporal limitation. Miguel surmounts his worldly family’s disapproval for his new dead family’s approval - a clear indication that we should seek the approval and desired lifestyle of our heavenly father. And what about evil ones? Should we not seek to understand our collective broken humanity - its underlying emotions, its logic,
12 | Animism in Animation
its inevitability? Is our given purpose empathy for those around us who struggle with the same evil as well? That is the premise for Monsters, Inc., a tale about the very real anxieties of our monsters. These monsters grapple with their purpose to scare children for capitalistic gain and instead turn to a more fulfilling path after addressing their own fears and caring for a small human child. As the monsters understand their ethics, they can more easily become the objects of empathy from humans, just as the monsters change their purpose after losing their similar fear of the humans. In this way evil is something that should be combated with understanding and empathy, despite its inevitable existence in the world. In every case After diving deep into the underlying motivations of Walt Disney and his entertainment short, but still empire, it is clear that the philosophical im- find holy glory in plications of even children’s movies are fundamental and profound to our way of life. This is especially true considering that all of creation was made to reflect at least some of heaven’s glory and contains the creator’s “fingerprint”, design, thoughts, however you want to interpret it. Sure, in every case creation falls short, but still many people find holy glory in worldly things. It follows that if all of creation has the potential to display some nugget of philosophical virtue, and Disney is (hopefully) of holy creation–albeit through humans–then Disney must include some wisdom too. However, the most shocking part of this research is that throughout the sagas of Disney, old and new alike, the resounding philosophical arguments are consistently Christian in some way (ignoring, of course, the old movies’ all too obvious racism). The community of Toy Story very closely aligns with the very call from 1st John 1:7 that says “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.” This very verse also backs the separation from God that we face, as depicted in Toy Story and Finding Nemo as well. By living in the way that Up’s conclusion suggests, adventuring for the benefit of others in the same struggle around us, we then walk in the light and can truly be reunited with God in the afterlife, at least somewhat provoked by Coco. We then epitomize God’s call for praise to him (vertical) through the promotion of each other (horizontal). And that creates a cross. Yay for overdrawn symbolism! And what if our feelings had feelings (see Inside Out)? Well, that would just leave our existence controlled entirely by aware entities outside of our own domain and utterly meaningless as a result. Is Disney really meant for children?!? r
creation falls many people worldly things.
Swarthmore Peripateo | 13
Vocation and the Student by James Sutton
While many Americans conceive of the average
student at an elite university as a wild-eyed leftist, the nation’s best and brightest actually seem to prefer stocks and bonds over socialism. Graduates of such esteemed universities like Harvard, Penn, and Princeton have gone to work in consulting or finance at such high rates (34, 36, and an eye-popping 60 percent, respectively). Color this writer skeptical, but the idea that graduates of elite colleges are drawn en masse to money and business management because of their deep personal call towards Wall Street seems unlikely. It has much more to do with the difference between career and vocation, and the way the former has taken ahold of our worldview. The word vocation comes from the Latin noun vocatio, meaning a call or summons. The word might sound strange to us; a little oldfashioned or awkward. Certainly no one uses it in casual conversation: “So, what kind of vocation do you want to pursue?” seems
14 | Vocation and the Student
like an off-kilter version of the usual questions adults ask college students about their “career.” Career, however, is a word we are comfortable with. Our high schools host “career days,” colleges send us glossy pamphlets desperately trying to convince us that they and only they will help us on to the most successful career, and once on campus, we have the Office of Career Services. The meaning behind the word is clear as well: almost always something well-compensated, prestigious, or both. Jobs that are neither aren’t mentioned, or seen as a fairly quaint aspiration that young people will outgrow. Of course, the modern university has been failing to help students in discerning their vocations for a long time. One of the clearest and most incisive indictments of careerism (though he never uses that specific term), was made by W.H. Auden in a speech, “Vocation and Society” to undergraduates at Swarthmore.
He only taught here for three years (1942-1945) and had a educational system, we have lost an understanding or even awareness somewhat ambivalent attitude about the college and the town. of the word vocation. From the beginning, American education is shaped towards the His poem about Swarthmore, “A Healthy Spot,” opens with the bland statement “They’re nice”—a fairly damning indictment. identification of “skills” which then have to be carefully cultivated. However, he remained connected to the college in one way or The impulse starts in kindergarten with advanced reading groups another for several decades, lecturing, giving interviews, and and the like, but is fully brought to light in high school; look to the even donating some of his manuscripts to McCabe. But in his barrage of STEM classes and programs designed to put advanced address, delivered in 1943 he outlined exactly what vocation is students in touch with employers. This leads to an educational system less oriented towards creating scholars or citizens, and more and how students might seek it. In the opening of the speech Auden uses the example of the to creating workers. Again, the language of educational policy betwo protagonists from The Magic Flute to outline three types of trays these motives. Words like “achievements,” “jobs,” “careers,” and living: “lowbrow,” “middlebrow,” and “highbrow.” The charac- “future” abound. Even worse are the “find your passion, change the ter Papageno is lowbrow. When asked if he is willing to fight world” type of pitches often heard on college campuses, which use and risk his life for wisdom and love he renounces both, saying the language of vocation to hide a worldview fundamentally based he does not desire wisdom and that he would rather keep his on loosely defined achievement and “success.” A university claiming life than have a “sweetheart.” His friend Tamino is the heroic that it will make you a “young leader of tomorrow” or that it will help highbrow, eagerly putting himself in danger for his love Pamina. you become a world-historical figure is A) selling you a bill of goods The interesting thing, Auden notes, is that both characters are and B) marketing ambition more than true passion. These ideas were blessed by the gods and find spouses. Tamino’s case is clear-cut. already rearing their heads in Auden’s time. Progressive educational He has a “Passion” for Pamina and is willing to suffer for her. As reformers, objecting to the stifling and didactic methods used in traAuden says, “He must look for her, whether he find her or not, ditional education, advocated for an educational system that emphawhether he succeed in marrying her or not. He has a vocation.” 1 sized personal expression. Auden said their objections were mainly This is the classic highbrow life. But Papageno, too, has his pas- correct but that their solutions were unsound: “If the traditionalists sion and his willingness to suffer. It is “the passion of remaining have caused the child to stumble by putting up a barbed wire fence, immediately alive, even if that means remaining a bachelor,” and then the progressives have equally sinned against him by greasing the the willingness to suffer in a “negative” way, by giving up wisdom floor.”4 After all, if a system simply makes it easier for someone to and love. The lowbrow, then, with his fear of death and suffering cultivate skills, then they will lose out on the struggle which is part of is conditioned by “objects outside himself...conscious of nothing the joy of learning. A child (or college student) may be a gifted mathbeyond the immediate moment, there is no distinction between ematician, and therefore constantly nudged by teachers and parents object and subject.” 2 It is childlike, but dictated by some neces- to jump through higher and higher hoops on the way to a good career in engineering. But his skill at math does not necessarily have sity and harmonious with nature, at least as Auden puts it. But if both kinds of lives are somewhat acceptable to the anything to do with his vocation. He may fall in love with Biology, gods, what kind of life is unacceptable? According to Auden it or Poetry, or Film Studies—though God help him in the latter case. is the middlebrow life, “to exist without passion and without a But the “greased floor” of careerist, middlebrow education will simply willingness to suffer.” The middlebrow, when asked whether he cause him to slide right by his vocation. This is why Auden calls Vois willing to suffer to find love and wisdom, says he is but thinks cational Guidance (Career Services to us) a “contradiction in terms.” to himself “I’m smart and modern...I’ll take the trials by cor- “The only reasons” he says, “that another can give me why I should adopt this career rather than another are respondence, or buy a bottle of aspithat I should be more successful or that it rin at the drug store and feel nothing. As an educational culture, we have pays better, but such matters are precisely After all, what are college professors and scientists for?”3 Leaving aside lost an understanding or even what I must not think about.” 5 is not merely a gauzy sense of that aspirin seems to have packed a awareness of the word vocation. “doVocation what you love,” and this point is where considerably bigger punch in the forAuden is at his most helpful. He uses psyties, we start to see how “middlebrowchological terms to define vocation, calling ism” can poison our academic culture. Because ultimately, the middlebrow wants to succeed, will work it a state of “subjective requiredness.” It is subjective because it is hard to succeed, but does not really understand what success is. about only possibility; “never the how, only the why” and required They would rather have a 4.0 GPA than challenging courses, or a because it the seeker is in it for the duration, success or failure be prestigious internship instead of one that they love. They take an damned. Auden compares it to marriage vows, saying “No one can instrumentalist approach to the whole process of college and the hope to have a vocation, in fact, if he makes a private reservation that, rest of life; everything must be ordered towards “achievement.” should circumstances alter, he will get divorced.” Vocation, then, is But it would be a mistake to pretend that middlebrows are “other no guarantee of success or gratification. One follows their vocation people.” Everyone is at least in part a middlebrow because we because it allows them live at their most human: full of passion and are shaped by a culture that is fundamentally middlebrow. And longing for something higher. But in what ways is this relevant to Christians, especially Christhat cultural shift has quite a lot to do with the fact that in our
Swarthmore Peripateo | 15
tian students? Auden, second only to T. S. Eliot among Christian poets in the 20th century, certainly saw the pursuit of vocation as grounded in Christianity. He says “It would be dishonest of me to conceal my conviction that the notion of subjective requiredness presupposes a belief that man is born in sin but may be saved through the grace of God.”6 The whole concept of vocation, that humans face the choice between middlebrow and highbrow life, rests on the Christian belief that humans are both born of dust and contain the divine image. The middlebrow never transcends the dust, focusing on the demands of the world. He merely wants to make his life as pleasant and pain-free as possible by altering the world around him. But the highbrow who has a vocation is constantly striving toward an unattainable, higher, ideal, an experience with obvious echoes in the Christian life. The Protestantized vocation that Auden identifies is an echo of God’s grace, as the act of struggle and passion will, when properly channeled, help the striver hear an even higher call. In the modern university, the views of students seem to be trending towards the middlebrow. When asked in 1970 what the purpose of education was, 70 percent of students answered said it was most important in “developing a meaningful philosophy of life.” In less than two decades, the majority response became “to make more money.”7 Maybe students now are more prudent, but who ever said Christians should be prudent? Alan Jacobs, in his illuminating book about Auden and his literary peers in World War II (The Year of Our Lord 1943), says a society that encouraged subjective requiredness would serve as the ultimate refutation of Fascism. If individuals could discern vocation and passions for themselves and flourish, the totalitarian view of objective requiredness The modern and technocratic imposed by the state would crumble. The education so many college statist ideologies of the 20th century are behind us, but a more developed students encounter fails to (mostly) and more secular United States seems to expose them to passion. impose its own objective demands. To refer back to the beginning of this essay, the droves of students leaving the Ivies for essentially the same jobs on Wall Street cannot all, in the deepest parts of their hearts, feel bound to be bankers. More plausibly, the modern and technocratic education so many college students encounter fails to expose them to passion, so the culture they are formed in imposes its own objective demands. The meritocratic culture that modern universities both create and live off—the complicated ecosystem of SAT tutors, college counselors, application essays, college rankings, Goldman internships, and “summer fellowships”—forms students towards “achievement” as an end in and of itself. When every incentive given to students, starting from an early age, is in the form of supposedly objective measures such as admissions processes, GPA, and the fairly well defined hierarchy of schools and after-graduation jobs, the only thing they know to pursue is achievement. Which is, in their defense, a less risky and complicated path to follow. Landing an $120,000 a year job at Deutsche Bank after graduation is a very clear signal that you’ve made it, and ascending the corporate ladder is a clear next step. Lest it be said that I am only writing
16 | Vocation and the Student
about bankers, who are honestly easy targets, this same analysis is easily applicable to all professions: law, government, and academia all have similarly clear markers of status and hierarchy. This is the middlebrow life Auden warns against. Concerned with only “the immediate being and the actual,” the middlebrow will only ask questions of “the How, never the Why.” 8 Questions of technique crowd out all other considerations. A poem Auden wrote during his years at Swarthmore, “Under Which Lyre,” illustrates a war on campuses between humanist highbrows (“sons of Hermes”) and technocrat middlebrows (“sons of Apollo”). Under Apollonian control “Truth is replaced by Useful Knowledge/He pays particular/Attention to Commercial Thought/ Public Relations, Hygiene, Sport/ in his curricula.”9 Thankfully, there is enough fight left in the liberal arts to stop these particular courses from encroaching on campus. Not enough, however, to stop the steep decline in humanities majors and the rise of more technical majors like computer science and economics. To demonstrate where this technical, careerist mindset will lead, Auden references Kay in Hans Christian Andersen's “The Snow Queen,” into whose eye a shard of glass from a cursed mirror falls and who then So what should Christian students do? only sees things as they Their first step should be to remember are, not how they could that Christians do, in fact, have an be. Faults and mistakes are magnified; roses are only objective ideal to pursue that isn’t rotten or dying. professional success. So what should Christian students do? Their first step should be to remember that Christians do, in fact, have an objective ideal to pursue that isn’t professional success. It is the example of Christ; the Christian life is a vocational pursuit of this fundamentally unattainable goal. But to focus more narrowly on the educational stage of our lives, it is also to remember that living a life without passion, to be afraid of risk and suffering and to desire no more than comfortableness, leads to spiritual decay. Auden grasped this point fully in his (aptly named) poem, “Like a Vocation:” But politeness and freedom are never enough, not for a life.10 R Endnotes: 1. Auden, W.H. "Vocation and Society." Lecture, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore PA, 1943. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 6. Ibid. 7. Schmidt, Benjamin. “The Humanities are in Crisis,” The Atlantic. 8. “Vocation and Society” 9. Auden, W.H. “Under Which Lyre (A Reactionary Tract for the Times).” Harvard Phi Beta Kappa Poem, 1946. 10. Auden, W. H. Collected Shorter Poems: 1927-1957. New York: Random House, 1964.
Swarthmore Peripateo | 17
18 | In Just a Few Words
In Just a Few Words by Daniel Swanson
There once was a God named Jehovah Who, before He created Moldova Said "Let there be light!" And split day from night As was spoken of old in the Torah
In the fullness of time He did come He became one of us, dwelt among In the wreck of our world A flag He unfurled Of the Kingdom beyond that he hailed from
In just a few words the whole Earth Was shaped, formed, and filled - given birth From dust He made Man As part of a plan To fill the whole world with His mirth
But the prince of this world did rebell And all of the forces of Hell Were very incensed And all fought against This Jesus Immanuel
Then God said to them "I will rest You two carry on, make Good Best" But all was not well For an angel then fell From Grace and put Man to the test
All rulers against him they turned Who old animosities spurned Betrayal was bought And Jesus was caught God can die is what we then learned
'Tisn't love if you cannot undo And God spoke again, for he knew "Ok here's the deal So love can be real I'll make something for me but not you"
But as He hung upon that tree He fought against the Enemy Those sin enslavèd From death He savèd For His defeat was victory!
The angel came then as a snake And sought Eve a sinner to make "Did God really say That on this very day You will die if the fruit you now take?"
And He did not in death abide He rose again, now glorified His new church to build That’s now being filled With those who are to be His bride
Alas they believed all his lies And found there are two ways one dies One's body may fail But that horror pales When out of God's friendship one flies
He sent us all out ‘cross the earth To offer mankind second birth And now we all follow Our king every morrow To reestablish heav’n's mirth
But still as we ran from His face, He refused to relinquish His Grace He came up with a plan To save every man And after our souls did give chase
And when completed is His plan When time has reached its proper span Him we will see And great it will be: The wedding feast of God and Man
From the peoples of Earth He chose Abram And gave to his children a good land Within Canaan to live So as through them to give Grace to every last Bob, Sue, and Sam
Swarthmore Peripateo | 19
PERIPATEO CONTRIBUTORS AND STAFF Tim Greco ’19
Juhyae Kim '19
Tim is an engineering major from Lexington, Massachusetts. He takes pictures.
Juhyae is from St. Louis, Missouri and is a Linguistics major and Educational Studies minor. She enjoys taking Buzzfeed quizzes to find out what dog breed she would be.
Irene Tang '19
Tobias Philip '20
Irene is from Southern California. To date, she has changed her major three and a half times. Irene enjoys the great outdoors and dreams of shepparding lonely animals into loving homes.
He’s sometimes Socratic On rare days Sophistic Mostly unproblematic If a tad too Thomistic
Adam Schauer '20 Adam is an Engineering and Economics double major from THE nation's capital. When he's not reading about baseball, he's probably listening to baseball, and when he's not listening to baseball, he's probably watching baseball, and when he's not watching baseball, he's playing baseball.
Rebecca Sanders '21 Rebecca is from Phoenix, Arizona, the land of cacti and rattlesnakes. She is a Greek and Latin major and loves dogs.
James Sutton '21
Daniel Swanson '21
James is from San Francisco, California, a state he thinks about longingly whenever it’s snowing in Swar thmore. He hopes to major in History, loves all racquet spor ts, and is unapologetically a Warriors fan.
Daniel is from Minnesota and plans to major in Math and Linguistics. He probably has more neckties than you.
20 | Peripateo Contributors and Staff
Selah.
Pause. Breathe. Think of that.
סֶלָה
