viz.

Image Credit:  R. Crumb

H/T USA Today

I got my copy of The Book of Genesis Illustrated by R. Crumb in the mail and have loved reading it so far.  It's richly detailed.  It's emotive.  It's revelatory.  But I’m wondering:  Will Crumb’s newest work will be controversial as expected?  The word-for-word text of Genesis is accompanied by Crumb's comic art.  And as the cover advertises, the images leave nothing out. Adam and Eve begin the work with robust nakedness, as you might think.  Perhaps less expected are images of the sexual act laced through a great part of the narrative. Crumb draws Adam and Eve playfully tumbling, Jacob’s multiple wives and concubines, Onan’s coitus interruptus with his brother’s wife (awkward!), and Tamar’s seduction of her father-in-law, Judah, as well as many others.  Even if you have read the original text, seeing the sexual act illustrated (naked couple in missionary position) does alter your sense of Genesis.  You also get a more vivid picture of disturbing scenes such as Lot offering his daughters to be raped in lieu of his male guests, which is previewed here on the LA Times.    I believe Crumb’s illustrations utterly transform the reading; Crumbs brings to light how (deviant, troubling) sexual drives shaped  the mythological archetypes and changed the literal history of the Jewish people.  Still, I'm wondering how likely it is that Crumb will be deemed a blasphemer. Young evangelical children might not get this picture book in their stocking for Christmas, but I personally don’t anticipate an uprising.

Image Credit: R. Crumb

H/T Texas Performing Arts

At Friday night's talk and other events, Crumb  has said he expects controversy, and my assumption is that he would expect this protest from the Christian right, the Jewish community, perhaps even orthodox Catholics.   One recalls the Christian outrage at the movie The Last Temptation of Christ (1988).  Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation was an illustration of New Testament characters.  However, Scorsese was not illustrating the Bible but a  work of  fiction by Nikos Kazantzakis, where Kazantzakis deviated from the canonical Gospel narratives with a sexually tempted Christ, who considers rejecting his role in salvation.  Yet, Crumb has 'faithfully' depicted the text of Gensis.   And I think his defense that he has drawn the work literally will hold up. 

Another buffer to absorb the controversy, I think, is the literacy of the contemporary Bible reader, especially Protestant evangelical and Jewish readers. Although the sexuality of Genesis is shocking to many, devout Protestants, for example, read the older parts of the Bible more exhaustively and are familiar with the intrigues of the Genesis characters. And although they might de-emphasize the non-monogamous, at times incestuous, sexuality of Genesis, Protestants won’t find the wives of Jacob to be news.  On the other hand, as pre-Vatican II Catholic and a self-proclaimed non-religious person, Crumb was perhaps relatively less familiar with the content.  Since the sexual history is already accounted for, Crumb's emphasis won't offend the base of potential protesters. In fact, this article from USA today with interviews of Rabbi Simcha Weinstein and Jesuit priest Rev. James Martin indicates that at least some Catholic and Jewish scholars think the book is a positive step, introducing the first book of the Old Testament to a new generation of readers.  The reviews by secular readers (see Texas Performing Arts for a listing) have similarly been favorable.

Image Credit:  R. Crumb

H/T Austin-American Statesman

My guess is that if there is anything controversial, it won't be the Genesis book in isolation, but the book within the context of Crumb’s lifetime of works.  Some protesters of Crumb's promotional tour have drawn attention to his past depictions of sexual deviancy--including portrayals of rape, incest, and pedophilia. These artist pursuits make Crumb an unlikely translator and definitely imbue the biblical images of copulation with an unholy glow. My guess is that if controversy arises, it won’t be about what was drawn, but who was drawing it.  Just a note: my favorite parts of the book are the tree of knowledge, a gorgeously cross-hatched, gloriously-branching affair, and Crumb’s characteristic ‘big-foot’ depictions of the female body.

I'll write later on Crumb’s and Spiegelman’s talk Friday night on The University of Texas campus, regarding censorship, whether anything should not be drawn, and the counter-valent satire of underground comic imagery.  For now, please respond if you have heard any rumblings on the controversy front...