Elephant's Journey by Jose Saramago ~ November Bookclub Online

[JoanP]

The Book Club Online is  the oldest  book club on the Internet, begun in 1996, open to everyone.  We offer cordial discussions of one book a month,  24/7 and  enjoy the company of readers from all over the world.  everyone is welcome to join in.

The Elephant's Journey
by Jose Saramago

"History attests that in 1551, an elephant made the journey from Lisbon to Vienna, escorted first by officers of King João III of Portugal, then by officers of the Archduke Maximilian of Austria. Solomon the elephant and his mahout had already made a long sea voyage from Goa and spent a couple of years standing about in a pen in Lisbon, before setting off for Valladolid as a present from the king to the archduke, who travelled with him to Italy by ship and across the Alps to Vienna. In the novel, Solomon and his mahout Subhro (whom the archduke renames, with true Habsburg infelicity, Fritz) proceed through various landscapes at an unhurried pace, attended by various functionaries and military men, and meeting along the way with villagers and townsfolk who variously interpret the sudden enigma of an elephant entering their lives. And that's the story. It is extremely funny. Old Saramago writes with a masterfully light hand, and the humour is tender, a mockery so tempered by patience and pity that the sting is gone though the wit remains vital."  - Ursula K Le Guin

Discussion Schedule:  
Nov. 1 ~ 7  pages 1-46
    Nov. 8 ~ 14  pgs. 47-100
           Nov. 15 - 21  pgs. 101- 154    

 

*****

Some Topics for Consideration
Nov. 15 - 21  pgs. 101-154
(ending with line:  "Suleiman received in return a generous sprinkling of holy water that even reached the mahout on top, while the watching crowd, as one, fell to their knees....")

1.  What is the actual political climate between the Austrians and the Portuguese at this time? Why do the Portuguese consider the Austrians "enemies," even before they meet at the castelo rodrigo?   Wasn't this supposed to be a "friendly" mission?  

2. Saramago asks if we've noticed the author's "disdainful  ironic tone" whenever Austria and its people are mentioned. Have you? How did you understand his position?

3.  Do you see the mahout as the elephant's "alter ego"  or as one of those "star-crossed lovers?"  Does Suleiman seem to appreciate his new bejeweled saddlecloth, as Subhro does his warm, new overcoat?  Why has the archduke ordered the elephant's mahout be treated with respect by his men?

4.  How has Solomon changed the Portuguese commander's attitude towards Subhro?  Wouldn't you think it would be the other way around?  What prompted those "brotherly" goodbyes between the captain and Subhro?  Between  the captain and  Solomon?

5.  How does the archduke come to regard Suleiman on the journey to Austria?   How does  the archduchess feel about the elephant? Why?

6. "Archdukes, kings, and emperors, nothing more than mahouts or elephants."  How does Fritz reach this conclusion? Do you think it expresses Saramago's opinion?

7.  If elephants could talk, Suleiman would admit he misses his former state of "dolce niente" in Portugal.  Does Fritz miss Portugal too?  Or India?   Do you think Saramago have any particular group of people in mind when he speaks of those in poverty being forced into emigration?

8.  What if Suleiman refuses to kneel,  as the emissary from the basilica has requested?  Why does the emissary assure Fritz that a "failed miracle" is impossible?    

Contact:  Joan P

[JoanP]

"The trouble is, he's so much subtler and cleverer than I am that I feel I'm missing a lot." PatH

I've felt the same way, Pat - since the very beginning, except now I'm watching him (Saramago) more closely, tracking down those little references in this tale told through the lens of his Portuguese eyes.  Portuguese history plays an important part in his writing, don't you think?

"Saramago, who with parables sustained by imagination, compassion and irony continually enables us to apprehend an elusory reality"  Nobel Prize Committee, 1998

Jude, those observations provide very helpful information - thank you!  I immediately latched on to the idea of a parable, though the Nobel Prize committee wrote this in 1998, referring to Saramago's earlier works.  Do you see Elephant's Journey as a parable?

"A parable is a succinct story, in prose or verse, which illustrates one or more instructive principles, or lessons, or (sometimes) a normative principle. It differs from a fable in that fables use animals, plants, inanimate objects, and forces of nature as characters, while parables generally feature human characters. It is a type of analogy"

Can we consider the story as a parable today?  If so, what is Saramago's lesson he is illustrating?

I was touched by the story of the story of the  cow who withstood the attack of the wolves to protect her calf - but not surprised.   Why was this story relevant here?    

[JudeS]

I was saddened by the story of the cow because what it reminded me of was soldiers , returning from war, who have learned to fight and kill. They have such a hard time readjusting to civilian life.

The last sentence in the paragraph on page 89: "she was killed, slaughtered, not by the wolves,....but by the very men who had saved her.......incapable of understanding that a previously docile, biddable  creature, having learned how to fight, could never stop fighting."

What I think he is saying is that men who have become warriors are understood only by others who have experienced fighting for their lives. Aggression is able to take over your life once you, and your children, have been in mortal danger. You forget that their are other ways to live your life and solve problems.

If your enemy (the wolves) don't kill you yout former friends wil,l by lack of understanding of the changes the battles have wrought in you.
I'm not sure I agree with the author one hundred percent but there are certainly elements of truth in this allegory.

[BarbStAubrey]

Well finally started on this week's reading assignment and could get no further than the chapter that started on page 47 to page 70. What a Chapter!!!! OH how perfect - he nailed so many truths and ironies, and the humor - there where times here alone in this house and I am erupting in laughter. Mark Twain, yes,  but for me he does a quieter Kurt Vonnegut - I could even see a site com and a couple of Saturday Night Live using the church as the theme which would never happen. An absolute riot.

The old tug of war within the church was made loud and clear between the Authoritarian, political, administrative, governing and legal system versus the moral, theological, prayerful faith in God. Then, how some folks get tied up in thinking the legalities of a religion are the path to moral purity. Reminds me of all the newscasters this week describing the character lineup in the shame at Penn State where the distinction was drawn between the legal and moral behavior.

The Villagers leading the group to the priest reminded me of as a kid it was usually one of the 'ladies' from either the Rosary Society or the Alter Society who laundered the alter linens and dressed the alter for Mass - not a job that required a lot of theological knowledge and yet, because of having a closer attachment to the care of the garments and alter cloths there was a sense of esteem that, for some, had to be projected. This was often accomplished by the taking on of how well the rules were obeyed and what is right behavior and best of all when it could prompt a question and discussion with one of the priests - oh heaven on earth - better than a chocolate bar.

And then the priest - God bless - hahaha - I am sure he is usually a man with the patience of Job, except to be woken up in the middle of the night with this nonsense that he cannot embark on a year's classes in religious training to folks that some can read and others depend on their daughters to read. Then to realize it takes just one of these self-righteous nincompoops to start the ball rolling toward the Inquisition sending someone to pick him up.

Reminds me of how some idiot will make a joke about terrorists at an airport check-in that lands him handcuffed in detention rather than on his scheduled flight. I never can tell who the bigger idiot is but for sure, the one with the power wins and in 1551 that would be the authority of the representative of the Pontificate

I love it the fog and mist like Potato soup - you cannot get more peasant like basic than potato soup - it is easy to consider today or even in the 1700s when more than half the people could read that having the Bible available for all to interpret would have legs but at this time in history I can see the dilemma. Plus the Catholic Church was never big on the Bible - also, each interpreting the Bible would fly in the face of the dogmatic theosophy of this system.

During the early church there would be someone in the village or surrounding area who made a difference and was revered so that after their death folks wanted to emulate the virtues of this person - thus we have saints - a whole bevy of saints - It was this attitude toward local customs and the special revered gods and people that missionaries quickly incorporated into the story of the Trinity with one God.

We see this in many European ethnic churches of America where the name of the church is often the name of a saint revered from the early history from where the founding parishioners emigrated. This was the successful tool used by St. Francis Xavier when he went to China and Japan as one of the founding clergy of St. Ignatius Loyola's Jesuits.  

I know little about Hinduism but that much I had read that where Catholics have a large bevy of saints the Hindus have a large bevy of Gods, each a specialty to various happenings and various virtues. Evidently, the story of Ganesh has several versions according to where in India you lived and heard the story. I do not know but the various positions of the legs, hands and arms in Buddhism would each be a symbol of a virtue – I notice various photos of Ganesh show different poses so I wonder if the poses are symbols that followers understand.

Anyhow back to the story – brilliant - the lost castaway is nameless – everyman – as we walk through the thick puree of life waking from our spiritual death by the blast of something – three blasts from Solomon that is only heard by the castaway – brilliant – we are called to a set of values, beliefs and ceremony that three would be the number symbolic of creative power, growth, the first number that the word ‘all’ can be attached, Body, Soul, Spirit – three wishes, Buddhist the three Precious Jewels, the Trinity, Three charities, graces, sirens, in the Qabalism male, female and uniting intelligence, Taoists the Triad Heaven-Man-Earth and reading I learned that in Hinduism the Trimurti, creation, destruction, preservation.

Some of the language in this chapter reminds me of a pilgrimage, Chaucer’s pilgrimage which would have been popular in the sixteenth century and so I wonder if the Commanding Officer is on an adventure that is reminiscent of some of the adventures in his book and also his views are broadened by his experience as he embarks on a pilgrimage of sorts to Spain to deliver the elephant.

Then to top it off he has a witch be the savior to the injured priest - a witch - would you believe - an  anathema to the church of the worst kind - probably some dear sweet woman who has a knowledge of herbs and their healing - oh what we have done to each other... however, from Saramago the perfect irony.

[PatH]

The story of the castaway in the mist is a good example of my struggles understanding Saramago.  It’s a wonderful sequence—dreamlike, surreal, beautifully described.  He sits in fear until the trumpeting of the elephant shows him the way to safety.  When he finds the others, no one seems to have looked for him, and when he talks to Subhro, it seems that Solomon didn’t actually trumpet.  The men who might corroborate vanish, and then the castaway himself turns transparent, shrinks like a soap bubble, and vanishes, plof.

Barb suggests he’s Everyman, looking for salvation, and that fits.  But why does every evidence of his experience vanish?  Is it because our salvation is individual and unknowable to others?  And why does the castaway himself disappear?

Or am I just grossly overinterpreting everything?

[PatH]

Then there's that disturbing forward reference to WWI:

"...its as if the mist, and this is a much more troubling idea, were of a kind that can corrode the skin, the skin of people, horses, even elephants, yes, even that vast, tiger-proof elephant, not all mists are the same, of course, one day, someone will cry Gas, and woe betide anyone not wearing a tight-fitting mask."

Barb, as our poetry guru, I bet you know the poem this reminds me of--warning for the squeamish: it's got some gross details.

Dulce et Decorum est

Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs,
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep.  Many had lost their boots,
But limped on, blood-shod.  All went lame, all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of gas-shells dropping softly behind.

Gas!  GAS!  Quick, boys! --  An ecstasy of fumbling
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time,
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime. --
Dim through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.

In all my dreams before my helpless sight
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.

If in some smothering dreams, you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin,
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs
Bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues, --
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie:  Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.

Wilfred Owen

[PatH]

Owen himself did, in fact die pro patria, a week before the Armistice, in a gallant action that earned him the Military Cross.

[BarbStAubrey]

Pat yes, there is a group of WWI poets - I am trying to remember what I was reading last week and the only way to describe it was the author - Oh I know Cormac McCarthy - not reading, I was describing for a friend All the Pretty Horses which includes some brutal scenes of torture and deprivation...

The best way I could describe it is that some authors write of the dark side of humanity as if beautiful - letting us know not to turn from the horrors that must be expressed - but more - it sounds perverse however, I do not know how to better describe it - there is an exquisiteness even delicacy to describing pain, fear and horror which is why I think Cormac McCarthy entitled his story All the Pretty Horses. There is very little that could be described as "Pretty" in his story - powerful, courageous, adventurous,  brutal on and on but not much that is "Pretty." Even John Grady Cole's love experience takes what seems like his last drop of emotional blood.

All that pulling at our heart is similar to the words of so many of the WWI poets who write of horror, pain, palatable fear -

The fog scene The Elephant's Journey could have so many meanings for us - it is not nailed down so that I can see how we each, based on our own life's experiences, could make meaningful symbols out of the experience Saramago includes in the chapter.

Carrying further with Cormac McCarthy - two of quotes from him are among my very favorites and they both are exemplified in this story and our reaction to the story.

Men say they only learn this but he said that no creature can learn that which his heart has no shape to hold.

And the other...

When one has nothing left make ceremonies out of the air and breathe upon them.

That is another vision I have of the mist and fog scene - as if Saramago is helping us make ceremony out of the air so we can breathe upon them.

[BarbStAubrey]

Two quickies - just in case you were not aware - the Catholic Church only sees that Humans have a soul and to the gnashing and tears of many a 2nd and 3rd grader when they learn animals do not have a soul and will not go to heaven - and so we have created like Santa the idea of a doggie heaven - no matter bird or dragon or anything in between, other than humans, according to the church do not get all the ceremony of blessings.

Also, the cult to the Blessed Mother started in the middle ages so the addition of the Virgin to the Trinity is giving a nod to history as well as, the Rosary which RC myth says it was given to St. Domenic during a visitation by the Blessed Virgin at the turn of the thirteenth century as an answer to a heresy movement active in the South of France. Historians are now at it trying to find the link between the practice of saying the Rosary and the Islamic Tasbih - which I believe has 99 beads.

[JoanP]

OH my...goodness!  So many meaty posts -  It seems we are going in so many directions, but not really.  It will take at least another day to sort this out before moving on down the rocky road with the poor lumbering elephant!  

Are we coming to understand the man who produced this story a little better, I wonder?  Before I even attempt to absorb and comment on the recent posts,
I'd like to share this comment by the author himself, which I found yesterday while researching his biography and connection to WWI ...to any war for that matter.

"In one sense it could even be said that, letter-by-letter, word-by-word, page-by-page, book after book, I have been successively implanting in the man I was the characters I created. I believe that without them I wouldn't be the person I am today; without them maybe my life wouldn't have succeeded in becoming more than an inexact sketch, a promise that like so many others remained only a promise, the existence of someone who maybe might have been but in the end could not manage to be." (from Nobel Lecture, 1998) http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/saramago.htm

While reading this, I found myself thinking about which character from Elephant's Journey the author implanted in the man he was becoming.  Then I thought - this was his very last book...

Back soon, need to read and absorb your posts!

[JoanP]

  Perhaps Subhro's  character best expresses Saramago's view - his "law of life' - "First triumph and then oblivion."   Plof!  

Clearly Saramago expresses cynicism for the Catholic church.  I can't figure out how if he feels the same about the Hindu beliefs.  Maybe the answer can be found in Subhro's character.  What does he feel about Hindu beliefs of an afterlife? Plof?

PatH - I'm beginning to think that we will never be able to fully plumb Saramago's mind, his intent, but I really believe that we are getting closer as we talk together about the passages that cause us to stop and think. Jude brings us the despair of those who give all and in the end, their bravery, forgotten.  Like that poor cow's.  Plof!

Barb looks at the soldier, lost in the mist - as "Everyman looking for salvation."  He is confident a search party is looking for him.  He prays he will be found - and the trumpeting elephant is the proof he needs that his prayers are answered.
  PatH asks "why does every evidence of his experience vanish?"   And why does the castaway himself disappear? Plof?  Pat, can this be Saramago's belief - that there is no God who listens to prayer?  That any sign we grasp is really only out of desparation.  We are alone, we will be alone - we will all disappear into oblivion?  Doesn't this sound just too dark?  
I'd like to consider your question - "Is it because our salvation is individual and unknowable to others?" Is this what Saramago is saying?  Does this describe Subhro's philosophy of life?

[JudeS]

Talk of WW1 always makes me sad. Anyone who thinks they know all about this particular war should order the movie (non-fiction) "Gallipoli" from Netflix. It is an eploration of both the British and the Turkish men, their families, their suffering  and the results. It was an eye-opener for me.

Though this is the shortest, most humorous of Saramagos works he has succeede in embedding some of the same ideas as in his other books.
He said in some article that he doesn't write about politics or religion just about the people that live those causes or that religion.

Pat:
The WW1 poets have influenced my thinking since I was in 7th grade and had to learn by heart "In Flander's FIelds".
And I  eventually went to see Flander's Fields during the season that the Poppies grow and it looked like a never ending sea of crosses and blood.

How did we get so serious and sad when we are reading a humorous book? I will now try to relate more to the humor, if I can.
 

[JoanP]

Jude, he lightens up when meeting with the archduke - at least it seems that way to me.  Though never does his cynicism towards Christianity lessen, he does use humor to express his views.  I'm interested in Subhro.   I'm thinking  that he might be Saramago's alter-ego - if not Solomon's...  Read on!

[JoanK]

" Historians are now at it trying to find the link between the practice of saying the Rosary and the Islamic Tasbih - which I believe has 99 beads.  "

Hindus also have a set of beads. I have one somewhere, given to me by a Hindu friend, but I forget how many beads it has.

Yes, the story of the castaway reinforces the other mentions of the elephant as god. Previously, we laughed at that -- now we don't know what to think. I think "our author wants us not to know what to think. Or is he laughing at us? At himself?

haven't quite finished new reading. What is the last sentance?

What do we think of Subho now that he's called "Fritz"?

[BarbStAubrey]

ah so the Hindus also use beads - of course curiosity takes over -  looked it up and here is a photo of beads along with an explanation - evidently they use 108 beads divided into groups of 9 Hindu Prayer Beads

I am trying to figure out the symbol he is trying to clue us into for the number 12 - yes, Jude - poor cow - but that story has me thinking it is an attempt at an allegory to further his concept of religion.

The 12s I find were not at odds with each other - at first I thought maybe 12 Doctors of the RC church or 12 Fathers who were all using logic and philosophy to explain a deeper understanding or to sway how the church developed - at times at odds with each other's point of view - however, there were far more than 12 Doctors or Fathers.

The 12 Tribes does not make sense since the tribes were not pulling against each other or taunting a central premise - the same with the 12 apostles and the 12 days of Christmas just does not fit at all.

Since the cow is sacred to the Hindu I looked it up and there are for the Hindu 12 gates to the Heavenly City , loaves to the Temple which represent the months of the year and 12 fruits of the Tree of Life. Again, nothing that I can see that would show taunting of the divine.

Since the cow also for the Hindu represents fertility, plenty, the earth and we see how two nations compete risking altercation over the transporting of a gift maybe there were 12 Nations/Empires during the sixteenth century encircling like wolves after the earth's riches - this was a time of discovery...

[JoanP]

Fritz!  JoanK, I'm still trying to think of the mahout as "Fritz"! It doesn't fit, does it?  Did you notice that there are many named "Fritz"  in his new land?  He will be like all of them now, indistinguishable.  When you come right down to it, I can't accept that he was baptized "Subhro" either - not a saint's name, during this time when saints were regarded so highly.  Do you think that Subhro was the name his mother gave him - whatever name the baptizer gave him has been long forgotten.  At any rate, I'm going to have to continue to call him "subhro."Nov. 15 - 20  pgs. 101-154[/b]
(ending with line:  "Suleiman received in return a generous sprinkling of holy water that even reached the mahout on top, while the watching crowd, as one, fell to their knees....")

Oh, I forgot you are reading the book on your kindle.  How is that going?  Are you getting used to it?  Here's the schedule for the coming week -
Nov. 15 - 20  pgs. 101-154[/b]
(ending with line:  "Suleiman received in return a generous sprinkling of holy water that even reached the mahout on top, while the watching crowd, as one, fell to their knees....")

[JoanP]

Barbara, I just knew that any mention of color - or number, would send you scurrying to find the meaning behind them.  I found this article on prayer beads, both Hindu and Catholic.  It might help...

Catholic Rosaries
Christian use of beads for reciting prayers began in medieval European monasteries and came into more widespread use as a way to assist the often illiterate worshippers in keeping track of their prayers. Although they were commonplace by the late Middle Ages, prayer beads were not officially accepted by the Catholic church until Pope Leo X gave the rosary approbation in 1520.

The term rosary is derived from the Latin word rosarium, or rose garden, and refers both to the religious exercise of reciting prayers and to the string of prayer beads used to assist in this practice. In Catholicism, the rose is a symbol of perfection; thus the rosary expresses the idea of a permanent garden of prayer. It is used to count the prayers recited in honor of the Virgin Mary while one meditates on scenes of the life of Christ and his mother. This exercise is traditionally repeated three times a day. The "typical" rosary contains 59 beads—six large and 53 small. They are arranged into five decades of 10 small beads and one large bead each plus a pendant of one large and three small beads that terminates in a cross.


Hindu and Buddhist Mala
, one of the oldest living religions, is the major religion of the Indian subcontinent. The two main branches of modern Hinduism—Shaivism and Vishnuism—. Shaivists, who are devotees of the god Siva, carry strings of 32 to 108 rudraksha beads made from the seeds of a tree unique to the island of Java in Indonesia. These rough seeds represent the difficult and rigid life required of the worshippers of Siva. Each seed is segmented into five sections, which represent the five faces and personalities of Siva. Vishnu mala consist of carved wooden beads from the sacred basil shrub, or tulsi, and are usually found in strands of 108.

Buddhist mala also typically consist of strands of 108 beads, reflecting the religion's historical connection to Hinduism. In Buddhism, the 108 beads represent the impurities or lies that one must overcome in order to reach Nirvana. Most monks wear 108 beads for use in counteracting their 108 impurities, whereas lay people tend to wear only 30 or 40 beads. The difference in the number of beads used is a result of the spiritual differences in what different people must overcome or how far they have come on the path to enlightenment. Buddhist prayer beads have traditionally been made from the wood or seeds of the sacred Bodhi tree. As Buddhism spread throughout China, Korea, Japan, and Tibet, it was influenced by the various cultures of those areas and a number of new materials such as bone, amber, and semi-precious stones began to be used for prayer beads
http://anthromuseum.missouri.edu/minigalleries/prayerbeads/intro.shtml

[JudeS]

Prayer Beads are used by Catholics,by Muslims (Not Wahabees) Hindus, Sikhs,and Bahai Faiths.
In Arabic prayer beads are known as "misbaha" or "subha".((Relation to Subhro?).
They are mainly used to count prayers, or to help you remember how many times you must use the word God in your prayers. Each religion seems to have a different number of beads and different stories connected to the beads.

In the years i lived in Israel and traveled by bus there were only elderly male Arabs who sat with the prayer beads and moved their lips as if in prayer. I never saw a young or even middle aged person carrying beads on their belts or in their hands.

The Wahabbi sect believes that one should use the right hand and not the prayer beads to count prayers so those Muslims don't use prayer beads.

If you go to the site "Prayer beads" the number of places selling the beads far outnumbers the sites that explain them.

[BarbStAubrey]

I chuckle - perfect JoanP - more of the incongruity in keeping the flow of power in a straight line - for awhile I thought the Elephant was a symbol for the Church in Rome - large, lumbering, can move swifter than expected however, typical is slow, s-l-o-w - that Pope Leo only gives his approbation 300 years after is such a perfect example   - here is a great photo of what most of us grew up with who attended a school taught by Dominicans -
http://www.hail-mary-rosaries.com/images/HistoryStDominic.jpg

Wow 108 impurities - sounds like a lot for someone who is already trying to walk a holy path through life - I wonder what is on the list of impurities

Jude, you have actually seen Muslims praying - what a treat - Do you know anything about their service - There is so little made public - I finally broke down the other day and ordered a book about how Islam affected Europe - which will probably account for the politics but not the practice of the religion itself.

Finally I think I found an answer to why the northern part of Europe broke away from Rome during the Reformation where as most of Southern Europe stayed. Seems these monasteries have something to do with it.

When a monastery was built in nations like Spain, Portugal, France and the various nation states in what is now Italy, the Kings financed the building, had sumptuous housing arrangements built into the monastery and spent time living at the monasteries - where as, in the north the monasteries where built by wealthy patrons who were either being grateful for something or as a penance. Therefore, the life within the monastery in the north was not dependent on the hierarchy running the nation.

Jude have you read any of David Liss' Books - I am remembering the Coffee Trader where he gives a rich explanation of Jewish life in the Netherlands about a 100 years after the Elephant's Journey Seems there are flair ups between members of so many religions as one groups interpretation does not jive with the other and Liss, a historian goes into some detail as to how the Jews were accepted in the Netherlands but lived separate. What was new to me the stringent treatment in the Jewish community between the older inhabitant successful Portuguese and Spanish Jews and those who came from the Balkans and other places east of the Danube.

Then it took the US invading Iraq to learn more about the 1000-year-old interior war among the Muslims between Shiite and Sunni and further the conservative nature of the Wahabbi/Wasabi -

The Buddhists - wow, like Christians - there are more groups and sects and according to some friends the various groups disagree violently at times with each other - of the main groups are Theravada Buddhism, Zen Buddhism, Pure Land Buddhism, Yogacara Buddhism and Vajrayana Buddhism. With so many differences within religious groups it makes me question the concept of peace on earth.

I must say I was a bit disappointed with Saramago's choice of issues that he alludes to during the discussion over the factuality of the cow story as the rational for questioning the Bible. The examples he uses are so old they were around back when I was a kid as to why to doubt the Bible. At this time in history with so many relevant factors that shed a questioning light on the choice of included texts in addition, the research extended to what was going on in history when the various Bibles were written that would have affected what and how the hearsay was written makes his concepts too elemental. Even just the awareness we have of some Bible stories added in the margins by monks when they copied a text could have legs.

As someone said, we may have white sugar, brown sugar, confectionery sugar, rock sugar, cane syrup etc. but we all know the taste of sweetness and so the basics are available to us for whatever view of God we want –

As to it all going puff - that may be Saramago's opinion - memory seems to stay and we have now a concept that within our DNA there is memory – therefore, an individual’s search for their God my go puff but I see the search going on for thousands of years.

I will give it that man has a need that religion met to help with whatever affected mankind that could not be explained - but there is something more that has been called the soul - another Rebel for most Popes till recently was Meister Eckhart, who does a great job of explaining the rational for the soul. I guess, like being an American - it is constant work with disagreements and knowing some of our leaders disappoint in both their private and public life and so, where I do not pack up and leave I have the same work and struggle with my faith and have chosen not to pack up and leave.

There are many who find the behavior and workings of religious groups intolerable and seem to put most of their faith in science or simply in what they believe to be the basic goodness in man - to me that is simply another form of religion and if someone cannot be comfortable in their choice without putting down other choices - hmmm. But then the Curia is sure doing its best to knock down Vatican II when the RC Church moved towards more tolerant views if not yet, embracing views.

[JoanP]

Good morning....first cup of coffee, not yet alert enough to think through your recent posts - but did a quick search and came up with that list of "impurities" - not sins, but "impurities" - Looks as if I need to get out my  prayer beads after reading this list -  

ostentatiousness -  grudge  - gambling -  ingratitude

 -  ambition -  dominance -  faithlessness

manipulation -  stinginess -  pessimism -  hostility

abuse -  debasement  - sexual lust - sarcasm

humiliation - jealousy -  gluttony -  unruliness

hurt - cruelty  - unkindness  - obstinacy

envy - indifference - negativity - furtiveness
 
sadism - enviousness  -derision  -falseness

high-handedness  -know-it-all  -rage - aggression

rapacity  -effrontery - disrespectfulness - hard-heartedness

eagerness for power - lying  -insidiousness  -self-denial

inattentiveness - contempt - wrath - haughtiness

greed for money -seducement - vindictiveness - insatiability

voluptuousness - excessiveness - censoriousness - dissatisfaction
 
egoism  -ignorance - hatred - greed

impudence - imposture - cursing - imperiousness

lecherousness - callousness - malignancy - torment

intolerance - blasphemy - shamelessness - irresponsibility

obsession - prejudice - arrogance - violent temper
 
garrulity - dogmatism - presumption - intransigence

oppression - prodigality - lack of comprehension  -obstinacy
 
pride - conceitedness - delusion - quarrelsomeness

self-hatred - violence - vanity - hypocrisy
 
stubbornness - baseness - pretence - mercilessness

disrespect - ridicule - masochism - tyranny

capriciousness - deceit - anger - discord

calculation - unyielding - desire for fame - deception
http://www.virtuescience.com/defilements.html

[JoanP]

It occurred to me that Saramago was familiar with these "impurities"  as they recur in his characters, don't you think?  (not sure about "dipsomania"...what is that?)  Something else occurs - Subhro seems to be free of most, if not all of these impurities...Interested to hear if you agree with that?

[JudeS]

JoanP
Dipsomania is an accute desire for alcohol.
In the "old days" alcoholics were called "dipsies".

[BarbStAubrey]

Wow - quite a list!

My sister happened to send this - a bit of delight that seems appropriate

http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/2785199/973432777/name/Pool_party.wmv

[JoanP]

Barbara - they are adorable baby elephants.  Maybe two years of age?  The same as Solomon was when he made the trip with Subhro to Portugal?

What I'm finding interesting about Saramago's fiction is the fact that he uses real characters, along with the fictional, who must have been part of the history, but never recognized untilo Saramago breathes his fictional breath into them.  The elephant's mahout for example.

I'm trying to understand the relationship between the Portuguese and the Austrians.  They are acting like enemies.  Are they?  This is supposed to be a friendly gift-giving transaction.

I've almost given up trying to understand the relationship between the Portugues king Joao III and the Archduke Masimilian of Austria - though I know it is important to the story that Saramago is telling.  A quick search only made the relationship murkier -

John III (or João III, was the fifteenth King of Portugal and the Algarves. He was the son of King Manuel I and Maria of Aragon who was the third daughter of King Ferdinand II of Aragon and Queen Isabella I of Castile.She was born at Cordoba on 29 June 1482, the third surviving daughter of Isabella I of Castile and Ferdinand II of Aragon (the Catholic monarchs).


Born in Wiener Neustadt, Maximilian was the fourth son of the emperor Maximilian II and Maria of Spain.- She was the daughter of Emperor Charles V and twice served as regent of Spain.

From 1593 to 1595 Maximilian as served regent for his young cousin, Ferdinand, Archduke of Inner Austria. In 1595 he succeeded their uncle Ferdinand II, Archduke of Further Austria in his territories, including Tirol, where he proved to be a solid proponent of the Counter-Reformation. He also worked to depose Melchior Khlesl, and to ensure that Archduke Ferdinand of Inner Austria, his former charge, succeeded as Holy Roman Emperor.

  Do we have a historian in the room?  Does this make sense to anyone here?  I guess I'd like to knw how JoaoIII and the Archduke are related.  Am I to understand that Maximilian had at first exhibited protestant sympathies, but then later became a proponent of the Counter-Reformation?  

ps  "Dipsies"  -thanks Jude!  We aren't seeing too many of them along the road to Vallalodid...

[BarbStAubrey]

Joan do not have time now but I am almost sure the line of reltionship is because of his wife - she is the daughter of Phillip and Joanna (The Mad) making her uncle Charles V, who was an older brother of Joanna.

As Charles was the first person to rule Castile-León and Aragon simultaneously in his own right, he became the first King of Spain (Charles co-reigned with his mother Joanna, which was however a technicality given her mental instability).

In 1519, Charles succeeded his paternal grandfather Maximilian as Holy Roman Emperor and Archduke of Austria. From that point forward, Charles's realm, which has been described as "the empire on which the sun never sets", spanned nearly four million square kilometers across Europe, the Far East, and the Americas

[JoanP]

Thanks, Barbara - so do I have it now? - Portuguese king, Joao III marries Catherine, sister to the Holy roman Emperor Charles V, who is the uncle of the Archduke Maximilian's wife, Maria of Spain - niece of Charles the V.  Our archduke is destined to become the emperor himself, right?

So I can see the tight family connections - between the Austrian Hapsburgs and the Spanish...
and then the connection between Joao's wife and her family.  But who was Joao III? 

I'm trying to get to the reason why the Portuguese are so quick to regard the Austrians as enemies.  Also, am wondering about Saramago's portrayal of the Austrians as the "bad guys."

[JoanP]

While CathyB's question sits in the back of my mind - Saramago's purpose in writing this story - I am still very much aware of Jude's observation that we are somehow failing to consider Saramago's humor as we follow the elephant to Austria.  Can we concentrate on the humorous elements for a while today?  After all, this is how Saramago is retelling his tale of the historic journey from Portugal to Austria?

[BarbStAubrey]

Joan quickie - meeting folks in a half hour - you would think I was ducking out on humor  I am thinking the scene was not knowing if they would be an enemy force or not which would be in keeping with that time in history where everyone was looked upon as a potential enemy - and then the normal competition between forces that we no longer see but I remember back during WWII there was even competition between members of our armed forces - the Air Force was not separate yet but those who flew were considered top dog and then the battle between army and navy which continues to this day on the football field - and so the idea that there would be competition between nations as to who marched better and whose uniform was more flashy and who had the most horses and and and = gotta run or I'll be late.

[JoanP]

That was a very comical confrontation at the gates of the castle - between the Austrian and Portuguese officers, Barb!  The slightest rays of sunlight on the glistening shields of the Austrian cuirassiers gave them the edge.  Saramago's humor seems to depend on  innuendo - on what is not said, but implied -  I don't think his readers ever feared there would be actual bloodshed over which soldiers would accompany the elephant to Vallalodid.  It was fun watching them go through the dance, which finally led to "victory."  

"Faced by the dilemma of having to choose between Enemy in sight, which any civilian could understand and a very unmartial Our visitors are arriving, the uniform they were wearing made the decision for them, and thy expressed themselves using the appropriate vocabulary."

It's a humorous incident, yes - but as you said, the underlying message is still there - these were uncertain times - politically and regarding religion too.  The Archduke seems to hold the power advantage - he's in line to become the Holy Roman Emperor yet he's showing Lutheran sympathies... Who knows what will happen when he returns to Austria?  No wonder the Portuguese are wary.

What interests me is Saramago's attitude, his cynicism regarding the Catholic church, though couched in humor - which seems to get stronger as we move along in the story - and yet his negative portrayal of the Austrians.  He's even asked us the readers, if we've noticed this!

[JoanP]

The name changes - bothers Subhro, doesn't phase Solomon.  What do you think of "Fritz" and "Suleiman"?  Why would the archduke choose these names?  Have you decided what YOU will refer to them for the rest of the journey?

[JoanK]

Are you getting tired of Saramago constantly making fun and belittling everyone? So am I. He realizes this in one passage in which he (almost) apologizes.

Page 139.

"We hereby recognize that the somewhat disdainful, ironic tone that has slipped into these pages whenever we have had cause to speak of austria and its people was not only aggressive, but patently unfair.  Not that this was our intention, but you know how it is with writing, one word often brings along another in its train simply because they sound good together, even if this means sacrificing respect for levity and ethics for esthetics, if such solemn concepts are not out of place in a discourse such as this, and often to no one's advantage either.  It is in this and other ways, almost without our realizing it, that we make so many enemies in life."

Here he (almost) exhibits the saving grace of those who make fun of everything -- the ability to make fun of himself as well. Does he carry it off? What do you think? Why or why not?

[BarbStAubrey]

Not sure he makes in fun of himself but he does give pause and yes, Joan a great quote that shows his reason for his sarcastic views -

I was trying to figure out the church thing and started to look at the relationship Portugal has with the church - interesting the US and Portugal now each have the same relationship with Rome -

Seems Reagan admired Pope John Paul II, who was Pope during most of Vatican II [started by John XXIII] and so, Reagan arranged for a more senior level diplomatic relationship - Apostolic [Papal] Nuncio [like an Ambassador]- rather than just a Apostolic Delegate - In some countries the Papal Nuncio is ranked higher among the country's diplomatic corps than their Secretary of State.

In the 1990s Portugal lessoned its ties with Rome - Where Portugal still has an Apostolic Nuncio, unlike the past, the Cardinal or Bishop holding that position is not a part of the Curia - [which is like our Congress, Supreme Court, and the President's Cabinet all rolled into one] The Papal Nuncio in nearby France still holds that position and power within the church and here they had the French Revolution.  

I have read how in Europe, Catholics attending Mass is only 12% of the population as compared to, surprise to me, 40 something % here in the states. Since Vatican II there are many well known theologians who have been removed from their teaching position, and some have been removed from their positions as they give voice to the discontent in many sectors of the Church - this long before the Sex scandal that has rocked everyone.

I do not pick up that Saramago is voicing his discontent with the church over the Sex Scandal - it almost sounds like he has a problem with church and state being so tied together but then it also sounds like he sees no value in ceremony rather he wants perfection on the part of those who perform and participate in ceremony regardless King, Arch-Duke, soldiers or the church. He is sarcastic and sees the irony in all authority.

As to writing aggressively about another nation - everytime I have ever visited Europe or had guests here they seem to have hot issues with particular European Nations, often based in some happening that took place during Medieval Europe - from Roland to Charlemagne or the Saracens or some French this or that versus Scotland's Catholic James or or or... the arguments seem much more visceral than feelings expressed here on issues in our past history. And so, to me he sounds like he is writing with a glass or more of wine putting on paper a scene using a few more words than would be typical at a gathering of drinking friends.  

[BarbStAubrey]

I saw the movie 'The Way' on Thursday - something i noticed - walking long distances with a group there is a need to fill boring hours, where as walking long distances on your own the walk is more meditative. Some go inside themselves and others see a metaphor in everything that happens and in everything they see. Where as a group is chatting and doing nonsense activities - which brought Chaucer's pilgrimage alive and now this pilgrimage of sorts with an elephant.

In our story Subhro, or Fritz, travels separate from the group, either riding above everyone on the elephant or taking care of the elephant - I wonder if that is the advantage that officers have creating their authority - they ride alone on a horse where as some of the soldiers are on foot. Those that also ride form a columned rank that does not include the lead or main officer. I would think it was easier to have conversation while walking than riding abreast - part of your mind has to be on the horse minding where it walks where as, a foot soldier the body takes over like a self propelled machine leaving the mind to wonder or verbalize its thoughts.

Come to think of it Saramago goes into spasms of sarcasm describing how they organize themselves during the days march or walk - I wonder if it is anything with order where a degree of importance is placed on folks and is displayed in the order they are to go forward - because it is that organized order of sins, church hierarchy and practices that is the butt of his sarcasm as any display of establishing hierarchy by the monarchs and their representatives.

[JoanP]

JoanK, I can't really say I'm getting tired of Saramago belittling everyone, though I will admit I'm feeling a bit on the defensive at times.   Perhaps because I grew up with the Benedictines.
When you get right down to it, I can see where he's coming from.  To become a saint, there must be evidence of at least one miracle as a result of the deceased candidate for sainthood's intercession. Modern day saints' intercession is usually in the form of a cure from a terminal illness. In this period, the miracles were more spectacular - they could fly!   St. Anthony of Padua is a good example.  Unbelievable the number of lost articles he has returned to me...

Saramago's near-apology which you  bring to our attention - is half-hearted. He seems to be saying, I really don't mean to be critical of anyone's beliefs, but...  He does this with such a light hand, and yet he is making a point.  The question is - what is it?  I'm thinking it is more than a beef with the Church in Portugal...but what is it?

Another thing that occurs to me - I wonder what you learned about Ferdinand and isabella in school, beyond the fact that they sponsored Columbus' trip to the new world? [Columbus was first buried at Vallalodid...later his remains were moved elsewhere.] But did you also learn about the Inquisition - that Ferdinand and Isabella established the Inquisition in Spain - and Portugal as well?  Who knew?

[JoanP]

Barbara, do you think that's it?  Saramago, as a  socialist...and an atheist, resents his country's close relationship with the Church today?  I was interested in your observation that hot issues among Europeans you've met are based on something that took place in Medieval Europe? During the Inquisition?  The Reformation? I can see that.
- Saramago is most sarcastic when depicting the self-importance of those connected to the Church.  And the hierarchy - the order of importance.

Let's consider the convoy, at first the Archduke decided that the Elephant [God?] would lead them, but he soon rejected his own plan...and moved himself to the front, followed by Suleiman and Fritz. Realizing that his grumbling army would not be happy, he orders that they  treat the mahout with the same respect that they have already attached to the elephant.    

If I learned anything from delving into the Archduke Maximilian's history, trying to establish his relationship to the Portuguese king and queen, it was about his attempts and  his success in establishing harmony between the Catholicism of his youth and Luther's reforms in Austria.  I wonder about Saramago's upbringing, his childhood.  Did he start out a Christian - a Catholic in Portuguese Spain?

[BarbStAubrey]

Joan I do not know if we will ever be able to figure out what is the burr under Saramago's saddle - I do know I have a friend who after some years I can only take visiting if there are others in the group because she has this knee jerk reaction to anyone in a position of authority especially those in the Catholic Church.

She felt compelled to become a Catholic when her children were young. Her husband was not a demanding Catholic - he just was a practicing Catholic however, his family was one of these judgmental demanding families that let her know she did not measure up and unfortunately, her experience with the priests was not helpful at all. Her experience was not to learn what, and why but only how and obey.

With all that I realized after some years that no matter how much fact finding and explanation of the various Theologies active within the Church she preferred to hang on to her anger with the Church and in some instances hang onto her learned interpretation of events or dogma after the research showed a different story.

There is among the therapeutic community the concept that your view of God has much to do with your relationship with your parents especially your father - I am beginning to believe that is the basis of my friend’s anger but I am not a Therapist nor do I need to solve the problem

For me if anyone has a question or a concept other than the one I was taught - first thing I am researching in both books and among several Theologians who I know - often, each has another slant that shines another light on the question at hand. Anyhow, for 3 years because of this friend sharing her outrage and views on church history I was researching like a mad woman and learned more about the church than I need to know but overall it is good...

Because, I too had to come to terms with the fact that the Church is not just about guiding our love and faith in God and our fellow man but it is a powerful organization - a dogmatic organization - however, within this organization is the writings and philosophy of some greats that I can choose to wrap around myself and simply stay out of the way of the official church - Much like I have chosen a political viewpoint when it comes to our Government and even then the group may have a different conclusion for governess.  

I do remember feeling put out that the church was more about governing than a comfort and teacher to the laity - until I realized I wanted a church that had what I consider my best interests at heart and just as I do not think our Government has my best interests at heart but rather the leaders success of  their own career is first, so too does a church with leadership have the duty to carve out a place among governing nations and to lead their followers by strengthening the church organization. Some how I think that is the missing link with Saramago - I think he wants a church that meets his best interests and anything else is un-worthy -

History writers also are political and like the news today the more controversy and blame that can be heaped on to get attention and satisfy the appetite of readers to place blame rather than, do the work it takes to learn what an issue is really all about - understand why things happen and who benefits and whose power is at stake and and and -

It would be interesting to have the numbers and learn what nations have taken to this book - Personal experience has its limitations to use as a measuring scale but that is all I have and my take on this is that the French I know never take a cliché as the basis and will use thoughtful conversation over and over and over to sort it out. Where as the Germans seem to be far more liberal, have always felt superior to Rome and simply go their merry way regardless of Rome. Their participation and the aftermath of Vatican II is a perfect example. Now does this mean all this gnawing and gnashing by Saramago is typical of the Portuguese or even the Spanish - I do not know -

We have a friend who comes back every year for 3 months but lives in Portugal and speaks fluently over a dozen languages making his money by translating, mostly church books into English. He was a priest and when the changes expected upon the conclusion of Vatican II did not happen and some of the commissions were disregarded by John Paul, he was part of that mass exodus of clergy that happened late 60s through the 70s. All to say, living in Portugal even his bitterness does not include a total attitude of disregard nor does he see satire in the Church's every move. He sees politics at play and his personal faith includes having just completed the very pilgrimage through Spain that was depicted in the recent movie The Way .

I am thinking out loud here but to me it only adds up that we each handle our bitterness differently and there is no fixing someone who has a reason to hang on to what they cannot forgive - I get that Saramago cannot forgive this church for being a political force and he is doubting the value of religious ceremony as having any value especially in the face of his view of God. Who knows, he may hold a John Belushi attitude toward traditional ceremony coupled with a Steven Hawkins belief that Science shows no God - but even Hawkins does not account for the cause of the big bang with energy the outcome - for some of us that energy is God - good as any since no one has ever seen God.

Anyhow 20,000 words to say I do not think we will figure out what is behind or under this authors attitude - which I do think is more than being pushed along by the very act of writing - the book is putting us in touch with a time in history that as you say we learn just a rudiment about in school. I've enjoyed reading well done sarcasm - but it gets old and seems immature with what appears to be a narrow target - easy to see he has no clue about the Chaos Theory - where his target is narrow his exposure to those targets seem just as narrow.

[JudeS]

Here is some mor information on Saramago.
Saramago was born in 1922 into a family of landless peasants in the small village of Azinhorga Portugal (about 100 Miles NE of Lisbon). In 1924 the family moved to Lisbon and his Father became a policeman. Jose spent his summers with his Grandparents in the village of his birth. He remembers when his Grandfather was taken to Hospital after a stroke. He embraced each of his fruit trees and bid them farewell. the author says "If that doesn't move you for the rest of your life you have no feelings."

Saramagos parents had no money to send him to a grammar (regular High School) so he went to a Technical school and became a car mechanic.  However the school had some language classes which he took and learned German very well. On graduating he worked as a mechanic for two years but soon got a job as a reporter and as a translator.

Saramago wrote 30 books in his lifetime (Novels, Poetry and Children's books) and won the PEN award and the Foreign Journalist award. With the award of the Nobel Prize for Literature it was noted , among other things, "his modern skepticism about oficial truths'.

On Saramago's death 20,000 people , from all over Portugal, came to his funeral. Notably absent was the Right wing President of Portugal.

[JoanP]

"There is among the therapeutic community the concept that your view of God has much to do with your relationship with your parents especially your father - I am beginning to believe that is the basis of my friend’s anger but I am not a Therapist nor do I need to solve the problem."  Barbara

A fascinating idea.  I'm wondering how you reacted to what Barbara wrote yesterday, Jude?  From what you found on Saramago's childhood, his father was a poor peasant, unable to send him the boy to high school.   I'm guessing that his family were baptized Catholics.  The boy seemed happier with his grandparents - which indicates to me that his relationship with his parents, his father, was not the best.

You also found that while at the vocational school, he studied languages - "learned German very well."  He would have been about 16 at the time - about 1938. "On graduating he worked as a mechanic for two years but soon got a job as a reporter and as a translator."  This would be quite a learning experience for this "peasant boy"  - a reporter in Portugal during the war years.

I came across this New York Times article, written about Saramago in 2007.

"It’s not much of a stretch to say that Saramago has since regarded his literary fame chiefly as a means of spreading his political convictions. A member since 1969 of Portugal’s notoriously hard-line Communist Party, Saramago spends much of his time at international forums, where he tends to deliver rather dull, pedantic speeches denouncing the European Union or the International Monetary Fund. Five years ago, however, he managed to create a worldwide scandal when, on a tour of the West Bank, he compared the situation in the Palestinian territories with “Auschwitz.”

To the literary critic Harold Bloom, the comparison with Auschwitz was “an unforgivable failure of imagination and humanity” on the part of a novelist he considers “second only to Philip Roth” among living writers. “Saramago’s novels are endlessly inventive, endlessly good-natured, endlessly skillful,” Bloom told me, “but it baffles me why the man can’t grow up politically. In 2007, to be a Portuguese Stalinist means you’re simply not living in the real world.” NY Times, 2007

[JoanP]

"History writers also are political" Barbara

Do you regard this book as an historical reflection on the political situation in the 17th century?  Do you see a resemblance between the political climate of the 21st century in Portugal and the period in which Solomon made the trek to Vienna?

From Barbara's former priest-friend,  living in Portugal -  "his bitterness does not include a total attitude of disregard nor does he see satire in the Church's every move. He sees politics at play.

Are we getting closer to an understanding of Saramago's cynicism regarding the Catholic church - the hierarchy of the Catholic church in Portugal?  

How do you explain his attitude towards the Austrians?

[JoanP]

But we need to get back to our story, Solomon/Suleiman is moving slowly on the path to Austria...though swiftly to a conclusion.

Harold Bloom referred to Saramago's novels are "endlessly inventive, endlessly good-natured, endlessly skillful."  
Do you get the feeling that the elephant's future in Austria is not promising?  As much as I'd like to believe this is a charming tale of the relationship between an elephant and his mahout, it appears that both of them are about to leave the friendly Portuguese convoy for the unknown north.  Wasn't that a touching goodbye between the captain and Subhro - even Solomon got into the mood? - as if he knew what was going on...  The captain and the mahoot have become friends - because of Solomon we are told.  I hadn't noticed this growing friendship - had you?  Perhaps the responsibility of shepherding the elephant on the walk, defying the army and delivering him into the archduke's hands, had led to the friendship.

As we walk into the concluding chapters of the tale, who do you see as the narrator?  Who is telling the tale?  What is the mahout's role here?