mantis says:
1 quoted line
Speaking of authorial context, if this story was written by Michael Moorcock my interpretation of it would be relatively cut and dry--I have read enough Moorcock work that is a variation on this theme, so that I wouldn't give it a second thought. Elric and Arioch, that sort of thing: we might call it "Elric's Revenge." When Moorcock takes a swipe at Big Religion it is often targeted at Roman Catholicism, but sometimes all of Christianity. The name of the god seems rather close to a swipe at the Jews, which seems uncharacteristic of Moorcock, so I'd transfer this to the early Christian church (and we're back to Catholic bashing). (I can't think of a case where Moorcock writes positively about any religion.)
I tend to think of "Behold the Man" as being less anti-religious than a lot of Moorcock that seems less directly critical of religion. Certainly not positive, per se, but more nuanced than a first reading indicates.
In general, the author is alive and kicking until the day people cease to
use information about what the author has written/said/claimed to desire/etc. in the past to help them shape their conception of anything he writes/says afterwards. Since we automatically do this with other people, and unless we all become Latros are probably going to keep doing so, I suspect the author will be in good shape for many years to come. Certainly the "author" of publishing/etc. is a "new" thing, and different with the changing media of the ages (insert random mandatory Marshall McLuhan observation) but the creating force behind a text/story is a very old concept--it's not as if post-Gutenberg thinkers made up Homer.
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:32
Alex David Groce (agroce+ at cs.cmu.edu)
Ph.D. Student, Carnegie Mellon University - Computer Science Department 8112 Wean Hall (412)-268-3066 http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~agroce