Of
Cities and Citybred Monsters
By © E. Antons
Benjamiņš, 2017
Of
Cities
and
Citybred
Monsters
By © E. A. Benjamins,
2017
Foreword
Something
happened. Nobody quite knows what. But it happened, and the consequences of it
are wreaking devastating results to our own days. This short book attempts to
explain what it was that ‘happened’.
Unless
human beings originated on planets beyond planet Earth, which this author is
not sure about, human beings most likely originated in the warm climate of
Africa, whence they spread outward to occupy the planet.
While
we dwelt in warm climates, we walked mostly naked, or used dry grasses or salvaged
animal pelts for dress. Our dress came from the animal herds we herded for the
sake of milk and cheese, which we supplemented with roots, berries, fruit, and
mushrooms, which we had learned to pick at an earlier time. Later, during the
summer time, when we drove our herds north to the tundra, we learned to become
meat eaters, and used animal furs more extensively. Indeed, we we were “herders
and gatherers”, not “hunters and gatherers” as today’s city bred
anthropologists are trying to tell us.
As
the young men, sometimes accompanied by their girl friends drove the herds of
their homesteads to pasture in spring and returned “home” in the fall, our
“home”, initially no more than a hut in a tree, or a cave, or a dwelling made
of bamboo by the river bank, became more substantial, increased in number, and
formed a cluster, which setting was to become a village city, and later still,
a city with a temple at its center.
As
the dispersal of early humans and their animal herds gained humans experience
and ever increasing confidence in themselves, the city became of ever
increasing importance as “home”. However, to remain a “home”, the city had to be
a friendly and welcoming place. Else, the herders might not come home, but what
with their wifes and children turning into ‘camp
followers’ stay in parts unknown, become alienated, and perhaps
even enemies .of the stay-at-homes.
To
maintain themselves as ‘friendly places’, early cities could not afford to
become the impersonal piles of glass and concrete, run by direct, parliamentary,
or pseudo ‘democratic’ governments, they have become today. Thus, the early
governors of cities were sacred kings, who gave their lives to maintain the
necessarily friendly ‘morphic
field’ that resonated far and wide and enticed the herders to
come back home.
It
is this attraction of home as temple why, in the early days of history (according
to Anatoly
Fomenko*),
the name Jerusalem was generic for all cities.
*On
Jerusalem, re Anatoly Fomenko, “Hidtory: Fiction or Science”. Vol. 1.
The Sphinx as an Extraterrestrial
When I began to rewrite
the story of King Oedipus, I did not yet have the answer for the riddle of the
Sphinx. I continued to be beholden to
verbal trickery implicit in the Sphinx’s question: ‘Who stands first on four,
then two, then three legs?’ Artistic renditions showed that the Sphinx stood on
four, Prince Oedipus on two legs. Who stood on three?
School had taught me to
accept the orthodox answer “an
old man” with a cane. But this answer seemed too obvious and,
therefore, suspect. Only later did it occur to me that the problem is with the questioner,
who was not necessarily Oedipus. If so, then the
Sphinx, too, is not necessarily as portrayed by convention.
For plague ravaged Thebes
(or New York, London, Brussels, Moscow, Riga, or Beijing), the relevant question
is not the one that issues out of the mouth of the Sphinx, but that of its city-zens,
i.e.: “What plagues us, what plagues Thebes?”
Today Oedipus’s answer to
the City or citizens of Thebes is: “Your mindset;” which as anthropologists
insist also means: our environment.
Just look at the mindset
of the Monster that has ensconced itself in the Forbidden City of
Beijing or in the Trump
Tower in New York City. Tnis is not to say the present
occupants of said places (Chinese President Xi Jinping and President Donald Trump) have any idea of the
consequences of their thoughts or that they imagine
themselves in any way guilty of the consequences of their limitations. Like
King Oedipus, they and thousands of government officials like them kill without
giving the act a thought. They kill without knowing what they do, and go unrecognized for who they
are by their fellow city-zens or courts of law.
This is not to say that I
am against cities. But I am against the overbuilding of cities by citizens
(city-zens=cityjohns) who are building they know not what to know not what end.
Incidentally, the biologist
(in the link) who puts the blame for extinction of life on fossil fuels or
companies who produce them is no less guilty of being a killer than those he
blames, as he is no less a city dweller than those who use fossil fuels the
most. This is not to say that city people are knowingly killers, but to suggest
that they know not what the consequences are of what they do. For that matter, they
also know not what they think, because they live in a world that has little to
do with the real world..
In short, Sophocles play “Oedipus
the King” is, next to the Biblical story (Gen. 19) of Sodom and Gomorrah, among
the first documents that put the blame for the attempt to destroy God’s
Creation on city dwellers and city governments. One ought not to be surprised
that the first city is
built by Cain who killed his brother Abel.
When Prince Oedipus
approaches Thebes and meets the Sphinx in the wood just outside of the city
gates, he does not realize that the
Sphinx is an para-projection of what used to be the Soul of
Thebes, and that he, Oedipus, is the mirror image of the Sphinx, the misfortune
of Thebes.
No comments:
Post a Comment