Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
Penguin Classics (1998), Paperback, 256 pages
Description
When a mortician appears on television to declare that death is infinitely preferable to life, he sparks a religious movement that quickly leaves Christianity and most of Islam in the dust. Gore Vidal's deft and daring blend of satire and prophecy, first published in 1954, eerily anticipates the excesses of Jim Jones, David Koresh, and the Heaven's Gate suicide cult.
User reviews
LibraryThing member Ganeshaka
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to read a Gore Vidal novel." My apologies to Santayana. (And, "No, Dear, it was Santana who sang "Black Magic Woman").
But - truth in jest - tired, tiresome, Tiresias though he may, at times, be, Vidal has made a respected career of instructing the
I confess I haven't read Burr, Lincoln, 1876, Empire, etc. My affections for Vidal stem from past memories of his jousts with Buckley and Mailer on Susskind and Cavett, and a recent delight in his interviews on more modern media such as the Henry Rollins Show and the webjournal TruthDig. So chancing upon a copy of Messiah, at a recent book sale, I thought it time to give a novel by the master a spin.
Messiah, written in 1954, is Vidal's vehicle for dramatizing a history of Christianity. Although the fictitious messiah of the title is contemporary to the 1950's and uses the techniques of televangelism to spread his message, the focus of the story is not his fate but his church's via an updated and speculative imagining - roman a clef - of the formative years of Christianity. Just as the historical Jesus is lost in the mists of time, so the messiah of the novel, John Cave, a man of charisma, a compelling speaker, is a man of few written words and an ambiguous message (Live, and don't fear death). Upon his assassination, his meaning (Cavesword) is up for grabs, and an ambitious P.R. firm, a close female disciple, and an institutional following fight for and take over his flock, to ultimately consolidate, codify, and mutate his teaching. They are unscrupulous as theocrats, and thus, wildly successful. The Cavites end by controlling even the United States government. The narrator of the tale, also once a disciple, is written out of the church's history because his understanding of Cave's message, a true one, conflicts with the popular dogma. He narrates the tale as an elderly exile, hiding, ironically, in a Moslem country, where the dogma of the Cavites hasn't yet penetrated. The story's parallels to the apostle Paul, the cult of Mary, the role of Constantine, the editing of the "gospel" by the early church fathers, and the persecution of heretics are thinly disguised.
The novel, though clever, is a "fail" because Vidal comprehends the deceits of a "Christianity" rather than sensing its truth. Consider, for a moment, The Grand Inquisitor chapter of the Brothers Karamazov - which casts a similarly skeptical look back at Christianity. What if it had it been written not by Dostoyevsky, but by Ivan Karamazov, its narrator? Despite, and maybe because of, his knowledge of the depths of the human psyche, Dostoyevsky struggled to a vision of society which included the redemptive role of the church. And so, he gave a crucial touch to the chapter, Christ's silent enigmatic deparing kiss to the Inquisitor. That single kiss - somehow !? -redeems all the Church's iniquities. Had Ivan Karamazov rewritten the chapter, I rather imagine it would have turned into story, like Messiah. A story brilliant in its understanding of the historic cruelties and paradoxs of a religion but without a convincing explanation, a convert's understanding, of its staying power. A story without the kiss.
Then too, the novel fails as a novel, because it is a vehicle for ideas rather than the organic arc of interaction of genuine personalities. There's a whiff of John Galt in John Cave. The Ayn Randian appropriation of characters to sell a message. But, enough of that. Mixing Gore Vidal and Ayn Rand together in a sentence is likely to result in an explosion, a toxic salt, and water.
In closing, be sure not to miss tomcatMurr's scholarly, balanced, and, sigh, in most ways, superior assessment of Messiah. The book, despite its flaws, is clearly worth reading.
But - truth in jest - tired, tiresome, Tiresias though he may, at times, be, Vidal has made a respected career of instructing the
Show More
American people, regarding history, on the ignobility, and danger, of blissful ignorance and blind optimism. Just as Son House and Mississippi John Hurt were rediscovered at Newport because the tumultuous 60's were ripe for a widespread appreciation of the blues, so the Bush II presidency brought Vidal back into vogue, as a prophet emeritus and "tsk-tsk"-master general.I confess I haven't read Burr, Lincoln, 1876, Empire, etc. My affections for Vidal stem from past memories of his jousts with Buckley and Mailer on Susskind and Cavett, and a recent delight in his interviews on more modern media such as the Henry Rollins Show and the webjournal TruthDig. So chancing upon a copy of Messiah, at a recent book sale, I thought it time to give a novel by the master a spin.
Messiah, written in 1954, is Vidal's vehicle for dramatizing a history of Christianity. Although the fictitious messiah of the title is contemporary to the 1950's and uses the techniques of televangelism to spread his message, the focus of the story is not his fate but his church's via an updated and speculative imagining - roman a clef - of the formative years of Christianity. Just as the historical Jesus is lost in the mists of time, so the messiah of the novel, John Cave, a man of charisma, a compelling speaker, is a man of few written words and an ambiguous message (Live, and don't fear death). Upon his assassination, his meaning (Cavesword) is up for grabs, and an ambitious P.R. firm, a close female disciple, and an institutional following fight for and take over his flock, to ultimately consolidate, codify, and mutate his teaching. They are unscrupulous as theocrats, and thus, wildly successful. The Cavites end by controlling even the United States government. The narrator of the tale, also once a disciple, is written out of the church's history because his understanding of Cave's message, a true one, conflicts with the popular dogma. He narrates the tale as an elderly exile, hiding, ironically, in a Moslem country, where the dogma of the Cavites hasn't yet penetrated. The story's parallels to the apostle Paul, the cult of Mary, the role of Constantine, the editing of the "gospel" by the early church fathers, and the persecution of heretics are thinly disguised.
The novel, though clever, is a "fail" because Vidal comprehends the deceits of a "Christianity" rather than sensing its truth. Consider, for a moment, The Grand Inquisitor chapter of the Brothers Karamazov - which casts a similarly skeptical look back at Christianity. What if it had it been written not by Dostoyevsky, but by Ivan Karamazov, its narrator? Despite, and maybe because of, his knowledge of the depths of the human psyche, Dostoyevsky struggled to a vision of society which included the redemptive role of the church. And so, he gave a crucial touch to the chapter, Christ's silent enigmatic deparing kiss to the Inquisitor. That single kiss - somehow !? -redeems all the Church's iniquities. Had Ivan Karamazov rewritten the chapter, I rather imagine it would have turned into story, like Messiah. A story brilliant in its understanding of the historic cruelties and paradoxs of a religion but without a convincing explanation, a convert's understanding, of its staying power. A story without the kiss.
Then too, the novel fails as a novel, because it is a vehicle for ideas rather than the organic arc of interaction of genuine personalities. There's a whiff of John Galt in John Cave. The Ayn Randian appropriation of characters to sell a message. But, enough of that. Mixing Gore Vidal and Ayn Rand together in a sentence is likely to result in an explosion, a toxic salt, and water.
In closing, be sure not to miss tomcatMurr's scholarly, balanced, and, sigh, in most ways, superior assessment of Messiah. The book, despite its flaws, is clearly worth reading.
Show Less
LibraryThing member SeriousGrace
John Cave, as a professional embalmer, is intimate with death. While working on a client he has an epiphany of sorts. Suddenly he has deemed the act of dying a good thing. Cave is so taken with this revelation that he must share his idea with as many people as possible and without warning a new
Show More
religion is born. His followers call it "Cave's Word" or Cavesword. It's strongest message is death is to be welcomed. As Cavesword spreads Cave establishes a following so large he needs a team to promote and protect him. Closest to him is Iris Mortimer, Paul Himmell, Clarissa Lessing, and Eugene Luther. Each individual has a different purpose for being part of Cave's inner circle. It's Eugene Luther who narrates the story of John Cave. With the help of Cave's inner circle he developes and promotes a product to go with his message. Cavesway is a drug taken to make death even easier to initiate. As the world's suicide rate rises, thanks to Cavesway, Luther's perception of Cave and the cult-like message starts to distort and crumble. Messiah is prophetic and mesmerizing. Show Less
LibraryThing member dbsovereign
Vidal's foray into prophetic satire. He once again takes aim at cults and the hell to which they lead their followers.
LibraryThing member DinadansFriend
Gore Vidal, having a firm grounding in American politics, tells the USA how their particular version of Christianity will be replaced by Cavism, an extremely sad death cult. To me it seemed Vidal was quite sure that christianity was just not suitable for the USA. Sad, and chilling, especially in
Show More
2019. Show Less
LibraryThing member AZBob1951
Even though Gore Vidal was trying to show how silly Christianity is, he hugely missed the point
Language
Original publication date
1954
1965 (rev.)
Physical description
256 p.; 7.72 inches
ISBN
0141180390 / 9780141180397