Parable of the Monkeys
The most interesting thing I learned from the Parable of the Monkeys story was the simplicity of the situation. It seems a bit hard to me to be able to condense political and social backgrounds for the world in the past thousand years or so down to twenty pages about monkeys. Personally, I do not see how the story would have worked with any other animal than the monkey, because gerbils just do not seem like the type to be hierarchical. I always pictured them to be humble folk.
Back to the idea of the simplicity. If I had to sum up the vast changes in society since the colonization of the New World, this would definitely be on my list of witty metaphors and anecdotes to choose from. The idea of the transitional, hierarchical madness that dominated life for so long is pictured perfectly in the single, isolated status of the monkeys in their tree’s canopy. And this idea of modernity, too, is pictured with the cult of individuality and the intertwining of trees where one man (or monkey, in this case) relies on others to live. There is no longer the emphasis on producing enough to live, thus constricting the way of life. Instead, the world (or trees) is a much freer place with more opportunities for action and interaction. And even a little room for monkeys that can fly on rockets.
The story really fits in with the reading we have been doing in the larger section of class. There were the monkeys who refused to let go of their traditional beliefs, mirroring the Virginians who stayed loyal to the hierarchy and aristocracy of the crown. Change presented conflict for these traditional beliefs, so people (or monkeys) were forced to break from these traditional, and thus constraining, ties in order to live. Monkey separatists (which rolls off the tongue) mirrored, in a way, much of colonial America. There were probably fewer witch trials in Monkey City, though. I would like to make a reference to the game Monkey Island somewhere in this bit, but I just cannot seem to find a proper location. Which is probably why I just put it in the last sentence.
Another key element of the story was the isolation of the monkeys. This isolation forced them to find their own set of beliefs and, thus, their own representation of society; god. Each society of monkeys had different views, yet maintained certain core monkey values (endowed by their monkey Creator and protected in the Bill of Primate Rights) despite their isolation. This really keys in on the difference between religion not only between colonial America and motherland England, but also within the colonies themselves. The Anglican god differed greatly from the Puritan god. The Great Chimpy also happened to be a bit different from Bozo the Great (though the latter sounds more like a clown name than a monkey god name).
Overall, it just seems like a matter of adapting to modernity. Traditional values alone cannot be sustained in the modern world. Times are a’changin’ and the rigidity and firmness of the traditional world prevents it from blossoming in the modern world. This story really seems to show that in a simple, grade-school level (though the kindergarten version should have Care Bears or something).
Back to the idea of the simplicity. If I had to sum up the vast changes in society since the colonization of the New World, this would definitely be on my list of witty metaphors and anecdotes to choose from. The idea of the transitional, hierarchical madness that dominated life for so long is pictured perfectly in the single, isolated status of the monkeys in their tree’s canopy. And this idea of modernity, too, is pictured with the cult of individuality and the intertwining of trees where one man (or monkey, in this case) relies on others to live. There is no longer the emphasis on producing enough to live, thus constricting the way of life. Instead, the world (or trees) is a much freer place with more opportunities for action and interaction. And even a little room for monkeys that can fly on rockets.
The story really fits in with the reading we have been doing in the larger section of class. There were the monkeys who refused to let go of their traditional beliefs, mirroring the Virginians who stayed loyal to the hierarchy and aristocracy of the crown. Change presented conflict for these traditional beliefs, so people (or monkeys) were forced to break from these traditional, and thus constraining, ties in order to live. Monkey separatists (which rolls off the tongue) mirrored, in a way, much of colonial America. There were probably fewer witch trials in Monkey City, though. I would like to make a reference to the game Monkey Island somewhere in this bit, but I just cannot seem to find a proper location. Which is probably why I just put it in the last sentence.
Another key element of the story was the isolation of the monkeys. This isolation forced them to find their own set of beliefs and, thus, their own representation of society; god. Each society of monkeys had different views, yet maintained certain core monkey values (endowed by their monkey Creator and protected in the Bill of Primate Rights) despite their isolation. This really keys in on the difference between religion not only between colonial America and motherland England, but also within the colonies themselves. The Anglican god differed greatly from the Puritan god. The Great Chimpy also happened to be a bit different from Bozo the Great (though the latter sounds more like a clown name than a monkey god name).
Overall, it just seems like a matter of adapting to modernity. Traditional values alone cannot be sustained in the modern world. Times are a’changin’ and the rigidity and firmness of the traditional world prevents it from blossoming in the modern world. This story really seems to show that in a simple, grade-school level (though the kindergarten version should have Care Bears or something).
posted by The Sasquatch at 10/01/2006 09:26:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home