AP Literature - Home



Student NameMr. FreeburgerAP English Literature17 March 2017Why Do the Righteous Suffer? The Changing Face of Suffering in Literature In literature, biblical allusions to the book of Job often allow the authors to explore complex questions of the human condition, remaining relatively centered around the question, “Why do the righteous suffer?” As time and literature progress, more stories have begun to introduce answers that contradict those of the original Bible story, and this difference can often be explained by the historical context under which the work was written. The answers to the questions posed by the book of Job shift from suffering being a manifestation of God’s vast power and that this gives life its meaning, to suffering representing the absurd hostility of the world, which proves life to be meaningless. Evidence of this changing biblical allusion can be found in the works of King Lear by William Shakespeare, Moby-Dick by Herman Melville, and J.B by Archibald MacLeish.King Lear is a play in which the allusions made to the book of Job are in very true fashion to the original story, and these allusions mostly come to the same conclusions about suffering. A parallel between King Lear and the book of Job can be easily made upon analysis of Lear’s misfortunes. Wherever there is disproportionate or undeserved suffering, the questions raised by the book of Job surface in one way or another, and King Lear is no exception. Although not completely innocent as the biblical Job was (the events of the play do start from Lear’s own mistake; Lear is a man “more sinned against than sinning” (Shakespeare III.ii.60). Lear is often frustrated by his misfortune and struggles to understand it throughout the play, much as Job did in the biblical story. In the story of King Lear, “beyond worse, and even further beyond the visible worse, there is always still worse” (“King Lear”). The disproportionate and vast extent to Lear’s suffering is one of the most notable things about the play. After banishing his daughter, Cordelia, from the kingdom, his other daughters begin to betray him, he begins to go mad, his loyal friend is blinded and later murdered, and his daughter Cordelia is executed. As in the book of Job, Lear’s suffering is continued throughout the story by a series of unexpected disasters. Repeatedly, Lear is faced with “constant intensifying disaster at the moment when disaster seems to be over” (“King Lear”). One after another, as horrible things happen to Lear, they seem to increase in magnitude of absurdness, closely paralleling the biblical Job story and portraying the ever-reaching hand of God in matters of divine justice. Although Lear makes a mistake that is the source of his own suffering, his punishment is astonishingly disproportionate to the mistake that he has made.Lear’s suffering, like that of Job, is an image of suffering that is vast and all-reaching, much like the original telling of Job. In the storm scene, the emptiness of the setting and the strong image of one person alone against the elements “gives it a universal, god-like, and cosmic power of significance” (Hamlin). The purpose of Lear’s misfortune is, therefore, not only as punishment for his actions but as a display of God’s power. The focus of the storm scene is not on Lear’s mistakes but on the specifics of his suffering and how the “storm,” which can easily be interpreted to represent God, is indifferent to how he has been wronged.Lear struggles with the same questions that Job does, and with no avail, also as Job is left. If God really has no mercy, is there any meaning to life and the afterlife? Lear asks himself this question in Act III, “Is there any cause in nature that makes these hard hearts?” (Shakespeare III.vi.75-76). The cold night is used as a symbol for the apparent coldness of the world and of God in King Lear. Pondering his fate, while alone on a cold night, he exclaims “This cold night will turn us all to fools and madmen” (Shakespeare III.iv.75). The manifestation of God’s vast power as Lear’s suffering is apparent here. The main difference between the story of Job and Lear at this point is that it really provides no answer, which while examining the historical context of the setting of King Lear is easily explained.Shakespeare and his audience would have easily noticed the important similarities between Lear who has lost everything and Job; the audience therefore would have been “alive to the concern with the problem of evil and divine justice” (Hamlin). The pagan setting of King Lear gives strong insight into why such a strong and absurd punishment resulted from Lear’s actions. The removal of the Christian faith from the setting creates a strong fear of the Pagan world, one in which there is no religious faith to offer explanation and the world just seems awfully cruel. According to literary critic Hannibal Hamlin, “We are asked to imagine a world in which there is no knowledge of Christian teaching, in which there is a savage struggle for survival” (Hamlin). In effect, the allusion to Job with an absurd twist subliminally encourages Christianity to the audience.In Moby-Dick, the development of the themes from Job changes in that suffering is portrayed as more random and meaningless than in the book of Job or in King Lear. The way that Melville describes the whale indicates that it should be viewed as superior to mankind, like a God, a creature demanding respect: “There was another thought, or rather vague, nameless horror concerning him, which at times by its intensity completely overpowered the rest; and yet so mystical and well nigh ineffable was it, that I almost despair of putting it in a comprehensible form” (Melville 204). Ahab sounds a lot like the biblical Job when he expresses his feeling of the meaninglessness of life: “From storm to storm!... Born in throes, ‘tis fit that man should live in pains and die in pangs!” (Melville 369-360). The story of the blacksmith is an addition example of the unfairness of life, a mini Job story in and of itself. He was “an artisan of famed excellence” (Melville 401), but one night randomly he is robbed of everything that he owns. The randomness and meaninglessness of suffering is exemplified in both stories of Ahab and the blacksmith.Suffering in Moby-Dick is manifested into unexpected dangers and disasters that seem to come from nowhere. The white whale is a representation of God, and it represents (to Ahab) the suffering of all humankind, putting the whole chase within the context of the book of Job (“all of the subtle demonisms of life and thought, all evil, to crazy Ahab, were visibly personified and made assailable in Moby Dick” (Melville 108)). Ahab sees the injustice of undeserved suffering, that “life is full of sorrow, that misfortunes strike unfairly, and that nature is hostile – and Moby Dick becomes for him the symbol of evil and suffering in the world” (Truesdale 60). Using Moby Dick as a symbol for God, many of the scenes from “The Sphynx” can be viewed from the perspective of questioning the existence and the intentions of God. Ahab questions the whale’s head attached to the side of the ship and claims that, if it really was there the whole time, that it should have seen the arbitrary way in which suffering strikes (Truesdale). “It would have seen dead sailors, it would have seen dead lovers who jumped from a flaming ship, it would have also seen that suffering strikes as randomly as lightening.” (Truesdale 64).Nature is depicted, by itself without the presence of religion, as “hostile and shark-like” (Truesdale 68). The scene in which the sharks all take turns at taking bites out of the dead whale provokes strong imagery that “is a reflection of the evil in nature, and without religion, this evil is left to flourish” (Truesdale 69). The imagery of animals heartlessly devouring prey is used to portray the “voraciousness of humans” as well as nature (Truesdale 69). With nature’s default being chaos and evil, with devout faith in God, it is assumed that we will find meaning in life through struggle and hardship (Truesdale). The relationship between nature and God is exhibited throughout Moby-Dick, and the senselessness of nature without the presence of religion that is portrayed through Ahab’s repeated encounters with disaster help to explain Melville’s stray from the original Job story to absurdness.Melville’s incorporation of nature as the book’s manifestation of undeserved suffering can be explained through the novel’s historical context. At the time that Melville was writing Moby-Dick the United States was acquiring land and making laws to oppress and enslave the Native Americans and African Americans in the area (Bender). Here begins a connection between extreme, unwarranted suffering and the historical context of Moby-Dick. The Fugitive Slave Act was passed in 1850, and the Sioux tribe had just signed a treaty relinquishing much of their land to the USA. There is evidence that shows Melville was writing because of the influence of Nathaniel Hawthorne’s “Mosses from an Old Manse” (Bender). Melville’s connection to the activism surrounding Native American oppression puts an interesting spin on the allusion to Job in Moby-Dick, as it partially explains the shift to increasing absurdity to the Job story. The preposterous suffering that the native people were subject to for no reason at the hand of the “all-powerful” United States Government is an interesting parallel to Job.Finally, the play J.B. by Archibald MacLeish is one giant allusion to the book of Job, and is even nicknamed “J.B. – a modern Job tale” by many writers of literary criticism on it. It is a direct allusion to the biblical story. J.B., the character in the play who is supposed to represent Job, endures much suffering during the play, as the “real” Job did, increasing in severity, and raises the question of why suffering is a part of the human existence. Despite being a direct allusion to the biblical story, J.B. comes to conclusions that are fundamentally different to the original themes of Job. The continuing theme of the absurdity and meaninglessness of suffering is displayed in J.B., as well as an additional element of personal choice in suffering.J.B. is subject to repeated, undeserved suffering, and yet chooses not to let this suffering affect the outcome of his life. J.B. makes “declaration of personal independence from God,” and by doing this, begins to stray from the original story in the book of Job (McWilliams). The notion that one can choose to be affected by suffering “adds precious little to what has already been said more beautifully in the Bible” (McWilliams). The final resolution of the story is that J.B. elects to ignore the suffering around him and enjoy his life with his wife, Sarah. This portrays that the acceptance of the meaninglessness of suffering can, in effect, can set one free. The idea of defying God, ignoring suffering, and continuing with one’s life is fundamentally different from works before it, adding an aspect of personal control to the developing idea of absurd suffering. Acceptance of fate, despite its possible divine consequences in the afterlife is encouraged by J.B., as many of the events going on in his world didn’t lead themselves to easy conclusions.The hopelessness and senselessness of the world is subliminally expressed through Nickles, a cynical character who speaks bitterly, comparing the world to a ‘dung heap’ and a ‘cesspool’ (Bily). Nickles argues with Zuss, a more optimistic character about suffering in the world and mocks J. B. for thinking God cares about his suffering. Nickles presents a cynical view of the world and argues a strong case for the senselessness of the world and suffering in general. There is no justice in the world, and happiness and suffering are not deserved, but dealt randomly. During the first part of the play, a circus tent covers the acting area. This represents J.B.’s innocence, before he has seen the true wrath of God. During the last part of the play, this tent disappears. Its absence gives the effect of exposing J. B. to the indifference and meaninglessness of the world (Campbell). J. B. is a play that alludes to the book of Job in order to express that although it is possible to live a good life despite that unjust suffering persists in our world. The absurdity and randomness of the suffering depicted in J.B. is a sharp contrast from the original story in an attempt to reach and speak to the audience watching the world seemingly fall apart from their T.V. screen during WWII.J.B. was attempting to speak to Americans who were witnessing tragedies around the world from a distance, with a familiar story to help explain the apparent meaningless of the tragedies of WWII. J.B. attempts to give an answer to Job’s questions that is sufficient for the time period, that despite the horrible, absurd suffering going on around them, that good things can still happen. In the play itself, it is stated that "Millions and millions of mankind" have been "Burned, crushed, broken, mutilated” (MacLeish I.ii.12). It is also mentioned that those who died did so because they were "Sleeping the wrong night wrong city … London, Dresden, Hiroshima," a very absurd way to approach these tragedies (MacLeish I.ii.23). These three cities are where the most innocent civilians died on both sides of the war, and puts into context the absurd world view of the play. This explains the pessimistic, but not hopeless change to the Job story conclusions. J.B. is described as “Essentially the Book of Job transplanted into the twentieth century, J. B. asks how man, with dignity and hope, can love and serve a god who allows so much evil to exist in the world coming off of the tragedies of WWII” (McWilliams). In this play, MacLeish is questioning whether this concept of God, “the God of the Old Testament, the God of Vengeance” (McWilliams) belongs in a world in where “Germans murdered millions of Jews in gas chambers and Americans destroyed the Japanese at Hiroshima and Nagasaki” (McWilliams).The function of allusions to the book of Job serve an important purpose that has evolved and changed to meet the needs of the audience of the works that include them. The works of King Lear by Shakespeare, Moby-Dick by Melville, and J.B. by MacLeish, all provide evidence of this changing complex questioning of the human condition and suffering. The changes made by these works of literature to the original story of the biblical Job really parallel the changes and developments to the role of religion in society. The usefulness of allusions to Job and what conclusions these allusions reflect how much society can relate to Job and how what is going on in the world can fit into this ancient tale of suffering. As disasters seem to happen closer and closer together, society needs allusions to Job that reflect the same terrifying reality of suffering that is seemingly constant and random to provide humanity with hope that the disasters of the past, present, and future do not occur for nothing.BibliographyBender, Bert. "Moby-Dick, an American Lyrical Novel." Studies in the Novel 10.3 (Fall 1978): 346-356. Rpt. in Nineteenth-Century Literature Criticism. Ed. Russel Whitaker and Kathy D. Darrow. Vol. 181. Detroit: Gale, 2007. Literature Resource Center. Web. 20 Feb. 2017.Campbell, Shannon O. ""The Book of Job" and MacLeish's "J. B.": A Cultural Comparison."?ERIC. English Journal, 30 Nov. 1971. Web. 14 Mar. 2017.Cynthia Bily, Critical Essay on J. B., in Drama for Students, The Gale Group, 2002.Foster, Thomas C. How to Read Literature Like a Professor: A Lively and Entertaining Guide to Reading between the Lines. New York: Quill, 2003. Print.Hamlin, Hannibal. "The Patience of Lear." Shakespeare and Religion. Ed. Ken Jackson and Arthur F. Marotti. Notre Dame: U of Notre Dame P, 2011. 127-160. Rpt. in Shakespearean Criticism. Ed. Lawrence J. Trudeau. Vol. 163. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale, 2015. Literature Resource Center. Web. 20 Feb. 2017.The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan House, 1984. Print.James L. McWilliams III, “Archibald MacLeish,” in Dictionary of Literary Biography, Vol. 7: Twentieth-Century American Dramatists, Part 2: K-Z, Gale Research, 1981, pp. 58-61."King Lear." Shakespearean Criticism. Ed. Michelle Lee. Vol. 93. Detroit: Gale, 2006. Literature Resource Center. Web. 20 Feb. 2017.MacLeish, Archibald. J.B.: A Play in Verse. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2008. Print.Melville, Herman. Moby-Dick. New York: Gilberton, 1969. Print.Shakespeare, William. King Lear. New York: Signet Classic, 1998. Print.Truesdale, Barbara L., M.A. "The Problem Of Suffering: The Questions of Job in Moby-Dick, and The Sound And The Fury." Diss. The Ohio State U, 1991. Print. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download