Justin Reed notes Christian churches, EVEN the Southern Baptist Convention, have rejected the idea that there is, or was, some "curse of Canaan" that was Blackness or similar.
Progress, right? But, the core of his piece is that the post-Flood story is still being misinterpreted, as though Noah's curse was correct, and the only incorrect thing has been the identification of what that curse was.
In other words, just maybe, Noah was nothing more than a grumpy old sot with a hangover. This is better than some other alleys Reed wanders down as side warrens. Yes, people like women were marginalized in antiquity; the idea that we should read their point of view into ancient stories is often overblown.
It also ignores a more straightforward reading. This is Yahweh the nationalist god for the descendants of certain children of Shem. The "divine curse" is not slavery, but an invasion and takeover of their land. You know, Yahweh the proto-Zionist. Because Noah has three sons, Japheth is along for the ride. Surprised that Anglo-Israelite types haven't done more with this.
That said, frankly, and via poetry, I've long wondered if this was a Yahwist version of something like a castration myth like that of Cronos against Ouranos. Fitting that into the above, Ham has a failed castration attempt and is punished for it, as is son Canaan.
No comments:
Post a Comment