Skip to main content

Listen to me Shamash!

Drew A. Hyland has a point when he argues in 1973 against philosophy as a Hegelian view of history. And he is also right to mark out the importance of the Epic of Gilgamesh. From my perspective of the 21st century I always thought the story was silly. A comic-like story of a sexually ambivilant superhero. What was that thing he had going with Enkidu? All that wrestling in the dust. Enkidu Shams and Gilgamesh Rumi.


But Gilgamesh wasn't Superman, he wasn't, as Tarantino suggested in Kill Bill II, a snide critique on the weakness of men or Chabon's Kavalier and Clay fantasizing about saving all our grandparents from the ovens of Treblinka and Aushwitz. Gilgamesh headed straight for the ovens of Ishtar. The figure of Gilgamesh is worthy of being the first human figure in myth. greater. Gilgamesh would fight for humanity's dignity and place in what Pythagoras was to call the kosmos. Gilgamesh, as quoted by Hyland says:


"Shamash, listen to me, listen to me Shamash, listen to what I have to say. Here in the city people die oppressed in their hearts, people perish with despair in their hearts. I have looked at what happens at the crematorium and in the cemetries. I have seen the bodies roll into the flames, and that is going be my fate too. Indeed, I know this is true, because even the cleverest and strongest amongst us won't find any heavan or live for ever, and even the greatest of us aren't able to encompass the Earth and command it to obey at will. So, that's why I want to walk through the valley of this country of death: because I have not yet done what I should have. I haven't yet made my mark. I will go to that country."


The story of Gilgamesh is heartrending, not comical. Later on the story was mirrored in the Eleusinian Mysteries in an interesting sex role reversal with Demeter trying to rescue Persephone. Up until Gilgamesh people had no claim to controlling their destinies, they were sacrificed to cruel gods and they died anyway. But Gilgamesh was a story that bravely claimed our right to aspire to controlling our destiny as people and even conquer death. Claim the right of deserving humans, our boys and girls, to challenge the cruelty of nature and the gods. We are more than dust returning to dust, than breaking toys.


Gilgamesh helps us to turn and make a stand and challange what needs to be challnged. In his time there was little hope the dream of this challenge could ever be met. Now, seven or eight thousand years later, the dreams of millenia of people, to be more than the playthings of fate is achievable.


You know the mystical symbolists are wrong. The image of the breaking of the Tower of Babylon is not a symbol of the destruction of illusion, of Maya. It is a symbol of the breaking of the hope, a symbol of the destruction of hope that the story of Gilgamesh offered.

The symbol of the Tower was a symbol instituted by sacrificers of people, nihilists. The priests determined to crush the aspirations of humanity in witch hunts and religious narratives. Floods and the end of times to put us in our place. Or so said the preists. Power flows from harnessing the river of the lost, the helpless and the hopeless. Power flows from the despair of human victims into cruel hands: The hands of social Darwinians, the bullies of the market, mechanisms that keep people passive, the media helping to create a self-censoring self-regulating social mediocrity.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Aerogramme from Lisa and Richard

To: Mr & Mrs J. Hall, Box 49 Eikenhof (TVL) Johannesburg Afrique du Sud. 28.3.76 Dear John and Nola, Today a week ago we were still in New Delhi with Eve and Tony and the boys and the whole thing looks like a dream. We arrived on the 28.2 in New Delhi and were happy to see the whole family fit and in good health. The boys have grown very much, Phil is just about the size of Tony and the twins are above average. We stayed untill the 22nd March, as our visa ran out and we did not want to go through all the ceremony of asking for an extension. It also got hotter and I don't know how I would have supported the heat. The extra week would also have passed, so we decided not to go to all the trouble with the authorities and leave on the 22nd. I cannot tell you how happy we have been to see such a lovely family, so happy and united. It is rare to experience sucha thing and we have both all the reasons to be proud of them (when I say goth I mean you and us ). There is su...

Guardian books blog fringe: Norman Mailer

FLASHING THE GUARDIAN -- A BOOKS BLOGGERS' REBELLION :  The unheroic censor with a death wish Part 1: In which Norman Mailer stars in an experiment in search engine optimisation By ACCIACCATURE 3 February 2009 When Norman Mailer died in 2007, informed opinion – in the blogosphere, people who had read at least two of his books – was split. The army of readers who saw him as one of the most despicable misogynists writing fiction in the 20th century was perfectly matched by warriors on the other side, who raged that the label wasn’t just unwarranted but tantamount to heinous calumny. Before commenters returned to bitching-as-usual, tempers were lost on literary sites all over the net in debating temperatures high enough to bring to mind tiles burning off space shuttles re-entering Earth’s atmosphere. After I'd agreed to a spontaneous suggestion by our good friend Sean Murray -- a pioneer and stalwart of the comments section of The Guardian’s books blog – that we re-...

Guardian: Kate Harding's reactionary censorious blog on CiF

It should go without saying... ....that we condemn the scummy prat who called Liskula Cohen : "a psychotic, lying, whoring ... skank" But I disagree with Kate Harding , (in my view a pseudo blogger), posting her blog in the Guardian attacking bloggers. It's a case of set a thief to catch a thief. The mainstream media is irritated by bloggers because they steal its thunder and so they comission people like Kate Harding , people with nothing to say for themselves, apparently, other than that they are feminists, to attack bloggers. I'm black. So I can legitimately attack "angry white old men". I'm a feminist, so I have carte blanche to call all anonymous bloggers "prats." Because yes, that is her erudite response to bloggers. No I don't say that the blogging medium can't be used to attack progressives in whatever context. Of course it can. But to applaud the censorship of a blogger by a billion dollar corporate like Google, and moreov...