George Carlin, Satirist, Has Died

June 23rd, 2008
By MARK DANIELS

Print Print

George Carlin, the undeniably clever comedian who, a decade into a career that was comprised of typical Borscht Belt schtick, took his comedy in a self-consciously countercultural direction, has died.

It was probably inevitable that the decade that triggered Carlin’s comedic transformation would inspire some satirizing court jesters to express the antiestablishment feelings of millions toward the war in Vietnam, the struggle for civil rights, White House lies, and the everyday hypocrisies of American life, among other things.

But Carlin, whose trademarks had been silliness and tuxedos in five-minute bits on The Ed Sullivan Show, initially seemed ill-fit for the role of a bearded, ponytailed, convention-tweaker in blue jeans.

When this new Carlin emerged in the late-1960s, it was jarring for those of us accustomed to seeing him sandwiched between such benign acts as Topo Gigio and Russian circus dancing bears.

No doubt much of what animated the comedy of Carlin in the four decades since his “conversion” is anger. Anger is often the motive power of comedy and Carlin found much about which to be angry. The Pentagon Papers demonstrated that both Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon had lied to us about Vietnam, for example. Hypocrisy was widespread among the elites in politics, corporations, and the churches.

But as it relates to the churches, Carlin, I believe, made the same mistake common to such contemporary atheists as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, confusing the hypocrisy and disinformation sometimes peddled by those who claim to speak for God, from marginally Christian parents to culture-apologists masked as theologians, for authentic faith.

Carlin, who grew up in what appears to have been a culturally Christian family, apparently got a bad dose of misinformation about the Judeo-Christian worldview and he apparently never thought to disabuse himself of the pseudo-Christianity he encountered.

He attributed some of society’s worst woes to a version of religion to which he was most intimately exposed, a superstitious junk religion rooted not in the grace of God extended to sinful human beings, the source of all hope in Biblical faith, which is the common proclamation of those in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

He claimed, for example, that all opposition to obscenity and pornography was rooted in “religious superstitions” that regarded sex and the human body as dirty and evil.

The attitudes Carlin describes are exhibited by misinformed Christians. But an examination of the Bible, the book which Christians regard as the Word of God and which in my Lutheran Christian tradition is seen as “the authoritative source and norm of its proclamation, faith, and life” will demonstrate how off the mark he was in his characterization of the Judeo-Christian view of sexuality.

The Bible has an elevated view of sex. According to Genesis, the Bible’s first book,human beings created in the image of God were made male and female, indicating that sexuality was part of what made God’s creation of humanity “very good.”

Sexual intimacy therefore, was meant to be part of every married couple’s life, from the beginning, a fact underscored by the fact that when first created, Adam and Eve, were naked and unashamed.

The joy of sexual intimacy between husband and wife is celebrated in the Song of Solomon, a book filled with subtle yet unmistakable pictures of various romantic and sexual encounters.

Sexual intimacy is protected in the Bible. The point of the Sixth Commandment–”You shall not commit adultery”–isn’t to prevent the human race from enjoying their sexuality, but to ensure that this high expression of love between a husband and wife is protected from cheapening, from “adulteration.” Martin Luther explains the commandment in The Small Catechism:

We are to fear and love God so that in matters of sex our words and conduct are pure and honorable, and husband and wife love and respect each other.

If those operating under a Judeo-Christian conception of the human body and sexuality sometimes object to gratuitous sex (and violence, for that matter) which appears in movies, video games, TV shows, and standup comedy routines like Carlin’s, it isn’t because the Bible regards the body as dirty. Quite the opposite.

The New Testament portion of the Bible says that the body is “the temple of the Lord.” And when Adam and Eve hide from God because of their nakedness, it’s not because their bodies are inherently evil, but because of an awareness created by their fall into sin, that their bodies can be used for sinful purposes, only some of them of a sexual nature.

As a Christian who regarded Carlin as a talented, if misguided, voice of our times, I regret that he never enjoyed a positive relationship with someone who truly reflected the Judeo-Christian view of sex and the human body. (I regret too, that he never took the time to find out about it for himself.)

Carlin’s experience, sadly, isn’t uncommon. We Christians allow legalists parading as Christians to hijack our faith. While they flap their jaws and invoke their crude cartoon versions of Christian faith, we keep silent. So, the Carlins of the world draw erroneous conclusions about Christian faith and the ability of all people–whatever their faith–to speak to and understand one another is hampered.

It’s just one aspect of George Carlin’s passing that saddens me today.

[A version of this piece will be crossposted at my personal blog later today.]




This entry was posted on Monday, June 23rd, 2008 at 7:51 am and is filed under As Yet Unassigned. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 4 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    very nice piece Mark. Lays it all out. HIjacked indeed. Keep speaking about it. We'll hijack it back

    dr.e
    • ^
    • v
    Excellent essay! They say that happily married couples have more sex than anyone, but how rare is it to see that kind of chemistry portrayed on T.V. or in film? It's always sex outside of marriage that is glamorized. Too bad, really.
    • ^
    • v
    And there I had thought that the hijacking had started with luminaries such as Augustine, Jerome and their contemporaries who agreed with them. From there it spread to become an overlay over most of Christianity's teachings about sex.
    • ^
    • v
    "They' get Christianity wrong, while 'we' know what the true and only interpretation of the Bible and Christianty.is.
    That's not an argument that can ever win over my logical mind. It's a preemtive grab for ownership of God.
    Everyone is reading the same text and the same words. It's ALL interpretation,

    Christianity is as Christianity does.
    If religious leaders preach an interpretation that is inclusive and seeks to benefit all humanity, then that's the Christianity I welcome into the society to which I belong. (I say the same for Islam or any other religion.)
    If it's exclusive (we're superior and, therefore, we'll decide on whom God will smile or whom God will punish), then I I'm anxious to see it leave my society.

    Carlin was not a stupid man, as is evident from his off-stage interviews. He wasn't out to destroy Christianity or any other religion. He intended to make people THINK, something not mentioned among the list of sins in the Bible.
    A religion that discourages or is offended or threatened by open-eyed observations and critical thought is not one I could ever either practise or endorse.
    .
 
close Reblog this comment
blog comments powered by Disqus



By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.