The religious component of this show is blatant. The ruling king, Silas, started as a soldier and rose to the top by way of powerful friends and a revelation, which in turn persuaded the people of the country, Gilboa, to follow him. Once David gets the eye of the king, these miracles begin to happen to him. The court minister revokes his blessing to Silas and instead supports David. God ceases “talking” to Silas and begins to show light on David. In other words . . . Silas is on his way out, and David is rising from being a mechanic-farmer-soldier to being a top aide to the king and country.This storyline, while incredibly fascinating to me, also relates to my thesis for my website. Science fiction authors utilize their own religious backgrounds to teach readers about religious dissonance and unity.
This story is “science fiction.” There is no futuristic technology – hell, the queen looses her Blackberry in the third episode – or anything of the sort, but rather it is an “alternate universe.” There is no map shown, but all of the countries mentioned are monarchies that were created fairly recently, out of ages-long political and social strife.
The creator of this show, Michael Green, obviously had some ulterior motive, possibly religiously-related, for writing the pilot.
What was it?
I believe that there were two reasons. The first was “just for fun.” He liked the story from the Old Testament, and imagined a modern way to incorporate the parables outlined in the Book of Samuel (Sefer Shmuel) and the Book of Chronicles (Divrei Hayyamim) (the two – or four – books concerning the life of King David (David HaMeleh)).
That is completely acceptable; many authors attempt this. C.S. Lewis used the birth, death and re-birth of Jesus as his base for the Chronicles of Narnia. Many other writers use the concept of a “chosen people” or “chosen one” to fill their books, such as Neo in The Matrix, Ender in Ender’s Game and even possibly Arthur Dent in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.
The second plausible reason for Green to write the plot for Kings with a biblical slant is that he wanted to share his own belief with others, and figured that he might as well use talents he already held (screenwriting) and a medium through which hundreds and maybe thousands of citizens would witness his work (the screen). That, too, is acceptable. Is that not the basis for The Da Vinci Code? Dan Brown was already a writer prior to his “Christianity-deciphering” best sellers (Digital Fortress, 1998 . . . Angels & Demons, 2000), so why not use every outlet he had to get his points across?No matter how controversial each of the aforementioned authors is (well, except for Douglas Adams. He's awesome.), every one of them teaches through their writings. Green demonstrates that a solid belief in God (and, indeed, every citizen of Gilboa has – or had – staunch beliefs in God and their divine-right king) has the power to unite, but then also destroy, should the “God-spoken” have a change of heart or interpret signs to be against them. Lewis writes about unity with Aslan the Lion and the Pevensie children overcoming the great evil that is the Ice Queen. Brown, on the other hand, could be said to “separate” with his books. What is his true goal when he calls out the Catholic Church for “mistakes” long forgotten?
As a side note, I find it funny that two of the authors I am discussing here have colors for their last names.
In the end, religion has this power. The power to create, the power to destroy. The power to unite, the power to separate. I believe, however, that the true meaning is in the eyes of the “beholder.”
I have yet to see “Kings” (although I am still suffering an addiction to “Merlin”, which has a religious aspect all to its own). However, I find your thesis, that science fiction authors import their religious beliefs into their works, to be fascinating. Before, when I read works such as Brian Jaques' Redwall and Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels, I paid little attention to the religious aspects (even though they feature prominently in both). Being non-religious myself, I accept other religions as they are but really pay little attention to them. That will probably soon change. Now I can't help but wonder what religious beliefs the authors held when they wrote their work. It's almost become a game to guess what religion they belonged to (although most are disappointingly Christian in some way or form).
ReplyDeleteNow, I feel rather embarrassed about my lack of religious knowledge. I'd always been afraid that the more I learned about a religion, the more it might suck me in (and I don't want to be tied to any one religious belief). Your blog has certainly opened my eyes to the surprisingly large realm of religions and religious history.
And yet, the two series I mentioned seem to fall mostly under “fantasy” instead of “science fiction”. What really separates the two in your mind? As for the idea of an “alternate universe” with technology and religion similar to our own, I recommend that you watch the Japanese Anime movie, “Ghost in the Shell 2” (I've even seen it used for a psychology paper). This movie utilizes the more Eastern belief systems while questioning what determines a person's identity (can machines have religion?).
Also, I liked how you were able to tie in a post about “Kings” to your website thesis and, eventually, to the authors you're blog is originally on (I especially like the little “Don't Panic” character who looks vaguely like Slimer). Yet, I wonder if your thesis is too broad. Of course authors are going to input a hint of their religion into their works. If an author feels strongly about a belief, it is going to translate into his work. I guess what I'm trying to ask is: are these authors putting their religious perspectives into their work on purpose in order to make a reader feel a certain way towards specific beliefs? You focus on unity and destruction, yet these too seem like broad labels. All religions have the power to both unite and destroy because all people have different opinions. What is the point of showing this unity and destruction in an alternate setting?
In conclusion, I feel your blog raises many possibly unanswerable questions and I've quite enjoyed the intellectual stimulus it has provided! Do you think you might keep updating after the semester ends?