Genesis - The Same Story, A New Author

Robert Crumb, through vivid images depicts the book of Genesis in a way that breathes life into the dramatic stories. Having both read Genesis from the Bible and now through Crumb, I have the ability to juxtapose both forms. The illustrations animate each of the characters and bring a visual aspect to the reader’s interpretation to the book as a whole. This enhances the overall experience.

The world’s leniency and acceptance of differing viewpoints has changed, slowly rolling in and out, lapping at people’s opinions, encouraging them to accept the changing tide and allow the pull of the sea to carry them on to new horizons. It is this world view that nothing is absolute, but instead relative based on the individual, that allows for Crumb to depict the Bible in such graphic images without bringing forth an angry mob desperate to burn him at the stake under sacrilegious pretenses. Crumb succeeded in depicting Genesis through his illustrations without irony on a whole. However, there are small details such as the women that are described as “comely” who in Crumb’s illustrations do not appear beautiful, but instead robust with abnormally strong facial features, therefore making his interpretation of them ironic. Despite this small deviation, Crumb in no way pokes fun at Genesis through his illustrations but instead allows the stories to come alive off of the page before the reader’s eyes.The stories themselves are offensive; therefore, no discomfort should be placed on Crumb who merely drew the words on the page. He did not write the story, he simply illustrated Genesis.

A Graphic Depiction

It’s understandable how R. Crumb’s graphic depiction of Genesis would have been considered “heresy” in the past. But in the past, such a depiction seemed graphic in the negative sense because the past wasn’t as accepting, or as immune as the present seems to be, to such explicit depictions like Crumb’s. Visually unveiling the intimacy of “knowing” someone, let alone “knowing” between two biblical figures, for a public audience to see…the idea alone seems taboo out of context. The gradual exposure of such previously exclusive acts in mainstream media and public knowledge is probably why we seem almost immune, or at least not as outraged, as past audiences would surely have been.

But within context—within Crumb’s goal to adapt Genesis “without irony”—the graphic novel does what its creator set out to accomplish: to leave nothing out. Despite Genesis being the first holy books of the Holy Bible, many a scandalous act occurs among the many patriarchs and matriarchs of Christianity, no matter how much the past wanted to turn its head from them. And I think Crumb’s visual attempt at elucidating these events from their archaic terminology, to scholars, Christians, and casual readers alike, achieves his goal for what it’s worth.

On that note, I don’t think Crumb’s illustrations change the stories in Genesis much, if at all. Sure, given his reputation and established style, Crumb took some liberties with how he envisioned the characters of Genesis and fleshed them out accordingly (no pun intended). Aesthetics aside, Crumb evidently tries to remain true to the original holy book; not one family lineage nor one scandalous, side-tracking occurance is omitted. And every panel undeniably bears thought and consideration towards the main storyline. The artist could have very well drawn a disjointed series of naked men and wrote “Sodom and Gomorrah” over them; but the tight structure of the story, as well as the cooperative relationship between the text and pictures, are evident of Crumb’s effort to be “without irony.”

Crummy Crumb

In my opinion, Crumb’s illustrations do change the stories in Genesis, whether he intended to or not. Just the simple fact that the illustrations exist will change a reader’s perception of the story. A person reading Genesis straight out of the Bible will naturally create different images in his or her mind than Crumb’s. By giving the reader a set image to view the story through, Crumb can either be adding or detracting from the story. One person who has read Genesis and Crumb’s version may say they preferred the original story and their own interpretation to Crumb’s, whereas maybe having the scenes illustrated made the story much more interesting and readable to another. It may simply be that the reader likes or dislikes Crumb’s art style that determines if it adds or detracts from the story. For me his art detracts from the story because it is exceptionally ugly.

                Crumb did have to take liberties with the illustrations. How do you decide how God, who most believe cannot be given an image, should be depicted? He had to take liberties depicting the characters’ appearances, emotions, and actions. By doing these things he has changed the way readers view the stories of Genesis.

                Crumb’s illustrations would’ve been considered heresy in the past, and probably still are considered that way by some. I think there are many reasons it’s more acceptable now than it was back then. The Bible itself is not taken quite as seriously, every rule stated not necessarily having to be followed. Then there are all the freedoms we have now-a-days, like freedom of speech and expression. He is legally allowed to create a work like this so it’s obviously acceptable in that way. I think it also makes the stories easier to understand and more interesting for people in modern times to have pictures.

                I believe that Crumb tried to make an unbiased translation of Genesis through his work. It seems that he didn’t try to put in any of his own beliefs or feelings into the art. I think that he found it interesting and so wanted to create a direct translation of the work. 

Genesis Illustrations

The illustrations in every book demonstrate the artist’s point of view, never really the author’s. There is always a little bit of the artist in every piece. I believe that Crumb’s illustrations do change the stories that we the readers will find in Genesis because the way he draws create a very realistic and dramatic view of Genesis. We expect God to be an old man and we the characters to have dark hair and eyes, not like the blond blue eyed Jesus that if featured in European religious art. Leading us to come up with our own judgments based on his images, but I don’t think he is changing the message that these stories are trying to present. Crumb only influences the emotions we as the readers feel towards the stories.

His illustrations only seem to add to the level of comprehension that could be achieved by the readers. He creates a very human visual by showing the graphicness of Genesis. The rape and sexual scenes, the murders, war, and the very human anger of God allows his audience to relate to the characters of Genesis, who are usually portrayed as some kind of perfect disciple of God. I don’t see any real liberties Crumb might have taken with the text nor do I see any reasons for his art to be considered heretic. I could understand why some people with the anthropomorphizing of God as it is offensive to some versions of Christianity, but the more graphic scenes are needed to prove a point that the characters of Genesis were real people who committed the same lustful and evil acts that people of our time commit.

There is a point to make that the people of the modern era have become more desensitized to some of the usually explicit visuals in magazines that if were shown on a movie would be declared for more mature audiences. The sex scene and the murder of Abel for example would probably never be as graphic on a televised version of Genesis, but in books and especially magazines it passes our eyes without a second glance because we’ve become used to nudity and death. I do not see any form of irony in his art it is straight forward and to the point, ignoring the flowery add-ins in the religious art of the past that made us only see the people of the Bible as gods, not as the confused and imperfect humans they were.

Walking on Eggshells

Crumb’s illustrations have offered a new way to look at the stories of Genesis and see them with a more analytical eye. Honestly, when I look at the pictures, I just take them for what they are: one man’s interpretation. So for me they do not add anything to the text, nor do they detract anything. My images of Genesis have not been affected by his images. I am personally not offended, but I can assure you, my Catholic schoolteachers would be.

I think that because of secular world we live in, Crumb’s drawings have become less and less obscene. After all, there are lot dirtier drawings out there. Recently, there was big controversy of Chris Ofili’s painting “The Holy Virgin Mary” which had elephant dung and bare bottoms incorporated into the painting. It would be hard for me to believe if Ofili said he created it without irony.

As artists take their creative license to interpret a religious or godly thing, they have a certain responsibility to uphold respect. I do not think that Crumb overstepped boundaries. Yes, his drawings are a little risqué, but with the Virgin Mother covered in poop going around, it’s a relatively accurate portrayal of Genesis. Our culture has become so religious insensitive in order to be sensitive to everyone about their own beliefs. We’ve basically created one giant eggshell to walk on in regards to religion.

At first I was a little skeptical about the intentions of Crumb and Genesis, but I will have to admit that I do agree with his statement about wanting to create Genesis without irony. I think that his style of drawing and his interpretation have some validity and shouldn’t be claimed has heretical. However, I do think that the book of Genesis, the first book of a religious text, holds irony within itself.

The True Story

The majority of my education consisted within the walls of a catholic school. I can remember being told the stories of Joseph being sold by his brothers, Noah and the ark, and Adam and Eve eating from the tree of good and evil. Being told these stories, I didn’t really put much attention to the other stories or to the fact that not many of the adults in my life wanted to talk about the darker stories.
In reading Crumb’s version of the book of Genesis, I was taken aback by how little I truly knew of the ancestors of my religion. It seems that the dark stories never came to the surface often enough, and I feel as if R. Crumb was able to reveal the whole story, both good and bad.

Furthermore, I can’t say whether or not Crumb’s illustrations change the stories in Genesis because, honestly, I feel as if didn’t really hear all of the stories growing up. However, it does change the way I perceive the book of Genesis entirely. It changes the good children of God and the sweet, gentle, loving God I had thought I knew from the Old Testament growing up.

I, without a doubt, feel that his illustrations provide a more truthful adaptation of the Genesis than I have ever known. I feel as if they provide a clearer picture into who the early people were and how they lived their lives, no bias included.
The only liberties I can claim that he has taken is his depictions of voluptuous women and a consistently anger God. However, if one looks at the story of the Genesis, God the majority of the time is an angry, testy being. As for the voluptuous women, I feel as if that is but a tiny detail.
Although Crumb’s work may have been viewed as heresy in the past, I believe many of us today would agree that it is not. The reasoning behind this is the ability of a society’s views to adapt and change with the times. I feel that Crumb’s depictions are not considered as vulgar and inappropriate as they were in the past because society today, honestly, is more open to the truth than in the past. I think the people of today want to know, see, and hear the darker stories because we are now more accepting of the idea that the world is not perfect and there is no such thing as a perfect human being.
Moreover, concerning the sexuality depicted in Crumb’s illustrations, I feel as if, today, sexuality is not considered the sacred thing it used to be. Furthermore, I believe that much of society does not find anything wrong with Crumb’s depictions because much of society does not deem it as worthy of respect and secrecy as it did in the past.

I believe that R. Crumb’s adaptation of the book of Genesis was in a way ironic because it contradicted most of what I was taught about the book of Genesis. Growing up, not even in high school, was I ever told of the murders, the incest, the conniving wives and mothers, and the rape that made up the majority of the book of Genesis. However, in terms of Crumb reaching his goal of treating the story of the book of Genesis with care, no humor or irony involved, I believe he reached his goal. I feel as if he depicted every line perfectly; thus, allowing many to understand the book of Genesis more easily. He took the words and literally drew them out, no additions, no vulgarity, and no disrespect towards Christianity.

After having read the Book of Genesis several times, I would have to say that this time around with R. Crumbs version which stays true to its message on the front cover of the book and leaves absolutely nothing out, I am convinced that I have a new found perspective on The Book of Genesis as a whole. I feel that the illustrations played a major part in this shift in my perspective. I would venture to say that the illustrations on each and every page of Genesis don’t change the stories in the least. If anything it helps readers, much like myself, to change old stale perspectives, and provide the opportunity to view different events from a different angle. The images presented reflect reality quite well, because they are not presented in a glorified manner and in a way that would not be believable to readers. Most notably the scenes sex is presented. Crumb’s know (and we all know) that sex in real life is not at like what is portrayed as in the movies and even in the pornography industry. These are regular men and women, with regular bodies, not men and women with chiseled abs and perfect bodies. This definitely makes it more relatable to readers.

For the most part Crumbs has generally stayed true to the original text with a few minor changes. I think that this is pretty acceptable seeing that even if he did make major changes, it would almost be the same as different theologians translating the Bible to different versions.

I think that one of the main reasons that we are able to so freely accept Crumb’s depictions is because of the changes in society. For example the way that Crumb’s depicts sexuality and women, would not have necessarily been acceptable in previous times, but with the rapid change in media and depictions of women and sexuality, we have become much more familiar with these ideas of these depictions. As I stated before, because of the relatable nature of R. Crumbs images we are more accepting of them.

I completely agree with Crumb’s claim that he illustrated Genesis without irony. You would think that it would be sarcastic and inappropriate, but the truth is that it is the exact opposite. He takes what is holy and set apart and makes it more accessible to the reader. The morals and messages behind the stories are much more universal to readers as well. I would venture to say that the reason for this is because of the realness behind Crumb’s illustrations.

Illustrations

Crumb’s illustrations do change the story a little bit by kind of poking fun at what nowadays seem ridiculous escapades in Genesis. Adding to the story, the illustrations for me, put the stories into the terms that I look at them and that is as parables and not real-happenings. Liberties that Crumb takes with the text is one of a more playful manner, while keeping the integrity of the stories intact; he does not mock or allow his own beliefs to interfere with the story’s delicacy. Crumb’s illustrations are a little risqué no matter what time period is inflicted, for it is a religious matter and these matters have always and always will be held close to the heart by many. But today it is much more acceptable than other times, it is done with taste, yet that would be of irrelevance in past times because of how society and pop-culture was on much conservative terms not too long ago. So to pinpoint what has changed in society is acceptance; acceptance of intimate images and relations shared outside of one’s home’s walls. I feel there is irony in his illustrations whether they are intentional or not. The illustrations are what make this adaptation significant and credible as a work of literature.

Genesis: Illustrated for Better or Worse?

When I think of Genesis, the first thing that comes to mind is not naked people having sex, and God yelling that He wants to smite everyone.The story of Genesis has been read by preachers and students alike for hundreds of years now, but only until somewhat recently has it been illustrated. One such version of Genesis is Robert Crumb's interpretation. Best know for his controversial work on Fritz the Cat, Crumb stated that his version of Genesis was "profoundly honest". His portrayal of people like Abraham or Rebecca is not something the average child should see.

In my opinion, the pictures themselves can either be hit or miss. Some of them actually add a lot to the understanding of the story, for example, the story of Jacob is greatly enhanced by the pictures, while others are something I would rather not understand, like the story of Lot. If a picture is worth a thousand words, then Crumb definitely has a lot to say, not all of it something I want to hear.

Crumb's pictures don't necessarily change the stories of Genesis, rather, they change my understanding of them. I never even knew the story of Lot's daughters raping him until I read it in Crumb's version. The stories themselves remain the same. I like the idea of a comic Bible, I just wish that some more prudence had been practiced in the art.

Post Options

Crumb seems to remain somewhat true to the story in his art. I find it difficult to find too many liberties taken by Crumb, even if all of the people look like they are all compacted a little too much. His drawings seem to stay close to what is said in the text, with one exception: God frequently looks angry. If God is a God of love, then why is he always angry at humans? Maybe it is the way Crumb interpreted God's harsh treatments of people. For example, many find it overly cruel that God wiped out the earth with the flood. But those humans were not repentant and even when told that a flood was on its way, they scorned Noah and went on with their lives.

Of the many drawings in this text, many show acts of promiscuity. Not too long ago, these pictures would have been deemed heretic, and most likely would not have even been printed. However, it seems that what was once taboo is now only disapproving. In its own way, our culture has shifted its view on such matters, laying such erotic scenes from bad to slightly inappropriate. What does this mean? Have we become more calloused against such things, or do we just shake our heads and turn away apathetically?

Finally there is a bigger question. Is Crumb sincere when he says that this book was made in a genuine attempt to portray the stories of Genesis, or is it simply a joke made at the Bible? The cover itself looks innocent enough, but upon closer inspection I noticed a disclaimer on it stating "adult supervision recommended for minors". I think that Crumb is sincere about his claims. The pictures are just the way that he expresses himself. They are the way he is comfortable drawing, and the Bible does not claim to be a sweet story about rainbows and happiness. In fact, it is one of the most action packed books ever written. Wars, betrayals, disasters, whole civilizations destroyed, and a never ending battle between good and evil, the Bible has all of the best plots for a movie and then some. Given all of this, it is not surprising that Crumb decided to give a new twist on Genesis.

R. CRUMB'S NEW FACADE AS A GRAPHIC ARTIST

R.Crumb is a very graphic artist, who puts certain details in his images, so that he gets a particular response out of his audience. His depiction of the words from the Book of Genesis, somewhat add and detract from the particular stories. He adds by being able to show exactly what is happening and allows the reader to put a face to the person they are reading about. The way he detracts is the distraction he causes by his vivid images. He has taken the liberty in being very open with the images and has not taken any caution with the graphics. Our culture is more open with sexuality and we do not feel awkward when seeing the incestuous acts visually. Also, we know how the times were back then so we do not feel offended when the woman are manly-esque. I would agree that he illustrated without irony. He wanted to make a name for himself other than the guy who illustrated the sexual cat, Fritz. He wanted to be taken seriously other than being reprimanded for treating the interpretation of the Bible with irony.