DCML digest, Vol 1 #162 - 10 msgs

bhc@primenet.com bhc at primenet.com
Thu Jun 1 00:02:20 CEST 2000


Kristian wrote:

>At the risk of displaying to to the world my in no way impressive
>knowledge of the Bible (I _could_ go home and check first, but then I'd
>have to wait until tomorrow to post this), I think Noah actually DID take
>more than one pair from some of the species, didn't he? If that's true,
>and nothing further is mentioned, then we still don't know for sure
>whether whatever-it-is-that-Donald-and-Daisy-are (WIITDADA) = ducks ;)

The Biblical tale of Noah is, according to many scholars, a parallel 
telling of a single tale, its threads taken from at least two 
distinct sources (with certain passages suggesting a third). In one 
of the two readily distinguishable threads the animals are permitted 
a single pair of each type aboard the ark, whether clean or unclean, 
while in the other the clean animals and all birds are allowed seven 
pairs per type on the ark, and the unclean animals but a single pair 
per type. The single-pair-per-type numbering is reiterated twice, 
which might partly explain why it is the better known and most often 
used in popular entertainment. However, the seven-pair-clean and 
one-pair-unclean numbering is possibly the more valid from an 
ecclesiastical standpoint, as it best serves the requirements of the 
ritual sacrifices conducted by Noah after the waters receded. In any 
event, both threads permit four pairs of humans aboard the ark, 
though reproductively speaking one pair, Noah and his wife, are a bit 
past it.

An interesting irony of the Old Testament concepts of "clean" and 
"unclean" animals is that the prescribed fate of many "clean" animals 
is to be sacrificed and to be eaten, while all "unclean" animals are 
spared this. Humans also can become "clean" or "unclean" according to 
certain natural cycles, types of physical contact, and rituals, 
though in neither state are they to be sacrificed and eaten.

Anyway, if the Donald-type creatures seen boarding the ark in 
Fantasia 2000 are human-equivalent, then not only are they not be 
fixed in a "clean" or "unclean" state, but they don't belong in the 
animal queue in the first place. If they are not human-equivalent 
then they are birds, more specifically ritually clean waterfowl, and 
Noah will sacrifice a number of them when the Deluge is over.

That first notion creates difficult contradictions, while the second 
notion doesn't even bear thinking about. Come down to it, it's hardly 
the sort of baggage the gag in Fantasia 2000 deserves. What Disney 
version of any Old Testament story is going to include animal 
sacrifices anyway?
-- 
Gary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I think we're missing a check or balance somewhere." - Wally
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gladstone on the Web: http://www.brucehamilton.com




More information about the DCML mailing list