Procrastination, procrastination

I really don't want to write that Andorra speech.

A couple weeks ago in my new Introduction to Fine Arts class - I switched to the 10 AM class instead of the 8 AM class, so as to preserve both my sanity and my life - the professor, who is obviously a feminist, started in with Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code. This novel has something to do with the philosophy of art, how? Oh yes, we can look at The Last Supper on the PowerPoint screen for about an hour while she rants on and on and on. What I found amusing was that the professor had seized on a mystery story as a basis for her latest theory. Of course, she "backed it up" with the Gnostic gospels ... "real documents!" blah blah blah.

Imagine this: Suppose that this morning, Rush Limbaugh writes a long, viscous screed about how all Democrats, all of them secret Communists, are conspiring to destroy 21st century America. His point of view would be dismissed; when historians write about our era, his version of events would not be included. Because it simply isn't true. They're not all that bad ;)

But, let's say two thousand years pass, and some far-right extremist makes an amazing archeological discovery: Limbaugh's essay, a copy of which has survived the millennia! Then some loonies would no doubt run around claiming: "Look! This document is from that very era, and this is what it says really happened! The version in the history books was written by a bunch of people trying to conceal the truth! All Dems are commies, all Dems are commies!"

Ridiculous, eh? But that is what people try to do with the Gnostic gospels. That is how they get the "Mary Magdalene was married to Jesus!" B.S. I have even met some "Christians" who believe this stuff, which is amusing (or shall I say, disturbing) since Gnosticism is a heresy condemned in the second century - and thus rejected by all Christians, Catholics and Protestants alike. (Let me know if anyone wants to see some web links about it!)

Why do otherwise intelligent people swallow this load? Because it "fits" with the agenda. While philosophically it's almost a logical certainty to give the benefit of the doubt to the idea that the original compilers of the Bible knew what was true and what was outlandish, anti-Establishment, feminist partisans will still insist on a vast, elaborate, centuries-spanning patriarchal conspiracy to silence the feminine voice.

Argh.

Of course, you could take the point of view (which many of them do) that history is a fabrication of those in power; the feminine voice was silenced, as it has been throughout history, because the powerful men wanted it that way. There is no "true" history, there is only the version we have been fed by history's winners. Of course, if this is the case, it sort of destroys the argument for going on living. If history is a farce, then man becomes a ridiculous creature, even to himself. And there is really no point to studying art history, is there? Or history in general? Or studying or doing anything, actually, since the "truth" of whatever we do will simply be distorted to fit the agenda of the powerful.

Obviously, I consider this perspective to be Insane, with a capital I. Although I sure would like an excuse not to do that Andorra speech ... ;)