The Olympic Rorschach Test
One of the most anticipated components of the Olympic Games is the Opening Ceremony. Every year the Olympics is scheduled, the host city spends an enormous sum of money and effort to present their iteration of the Olympics in the best way that reflects their country's history, customs, and rituals. This year's Olympics in Paris was no different but was there something else?
Unless you have been tuned out of the world for the last week, you may have been exposed to the criticism of the Olympics for the opening ceremony fitted with a circus of acrobats, pyrotechnics, elaborate water fountains, and intense imagery of French culture. As the Opening Ceremony unfolded, social media exploded as the interpretation of the ceremony spanned from the greatest Opening Ceremony ever to the most demonic Satanic ceremony ever perpetuated on the world.
The mainstream media quickly took their ideological positions, regurgitated, and vomited the most profitable views back to the already enlightened and enraged consumers. Sadly, there has not been much intellectual attention paid to the Opening Ceremony or the reason for the worldly response. Hopefully we can open that discussion here in a neutral and level headed analysis. It is there we can try to understand why it is that we are consumed by the meta narratives surrounding the Opening Ceremony. We can also learn to be more accommodating and tolerant to people that have differing beliefs while working to prevent offending them. Free speech is a double edge sword. It is one that can be used to create tyranny or defeat it.
First let me be fully transparent that I was not immune to the reaction while watching the Ceremony. I too have opinions and there was an immediate reaction after seeing many of the scenes unfold on the television. Some of that was due to the exceptional production of the torch travelling through Paris in the hands of mysterious figure seeming to represent a warrior from the French Revolutionary period. Its impression was immediate since I have been doing extensive research for my next novel which is a sequel to my previous novel – "Sugar". Other opinions of mine were surrounded in disappointment by the part of the Ceremony of what appeared to be of a Bacchanalia festival expressed in an unnecessarily sexually provocative way which was not appropriate for prime time television.
Something that I did enjoy was the process of trying to understand the artistic interpretation of what the producers of the ceremony were trying to communicate to the viewer. First and foremost, good art communicates clearly a stream of emotions that branch and flower out from the intentions of the artist. This flowering was clear with the mission of revolutionary torchbearer stitched throughout the Ceremony. The mysterious character jumped from rooftop to roof top, through the crypts underneath Paris, and through museums and halls across the city.
There was much symbolism, or what one may allegorically say flowering, to be interpreted here. Someone steeped in French Revolutionary history might interpret the mysterious character as writer Jean-Paul Marat who wrote propaganda during the French Revolution often hiding in the sewers evading anti-revolutionaries. The torch could represent the light of truth or the burning flame of incendiary lies carried by someone wishing to start the glorious violent revolution of late eightieth century France.
Someone that enjoys theatre might see the torch bearer as the masked character from Phantom of the Opera written by Andrew Lloyd Webber where the beautiful soprano Christine Daaé becomes obsessed with a mysterious dweller of the subterranean labyrinth under the Paris Opera House. The torch could represent the chandelier that crashed down in the Opera House after the Phantom's heart is broken by Christine. Its flame could represent love and heartbreak.
Someone who plays video games might see the torch bearer as the character from Assassin's creed. The character is caught in the struggle between the Order of Assassins who fight for peace and free will and the Knight's Templar who fight for order and control. This would be a very beautiful homage to the longest standing myth known to man which is the fight between order and chaos. It was apparent on social media that all of this seemed to feed the masses watching with a chorus of mystery and interest.
Unfortunately, there was also the controversy that spread virally through social media after what some have called the "Last Supper" portion of the ceremony. As mentioned before, good art communicates clearly a stream of emotions that branch and flower out from the intentions of the artist. Note that art can be offensive and achieve this goal. I am sure that the band Black Sabbath offended many and most likely they intended to but they are credited as one of the biggest pioneers in rock and heavy metal music.
With that said, we are faced with the questions of whether the art is appropriate. This is really where lines have been drawn between the honest critiques being expressed about the Opening Ceremony. The line has seemingly been drawn between the people with a Secular Humanist world view and those with a Christian world view. As mentioned above with the mysterious torch bearer character, the interpretations of the art being displayed can be numerous. Both of these world views have their sacraments with those of the Secular Humanist world view subscribing to an ever-evolving progressive morality and the Christians with a more conservative one.
It is important to mention sacraments here because it is the best way to describe what members of the two large groups believe and subscribe to and where their allegiances are. Note that the word "sacrament" is really something of the Judeo-Christian ethos but it applies since the origins of western culture are predominately Christian so it speaks to the broader explanation here. If you are uncomfortable with the word sacrament, you can think of the term oath of allegiance. The sacrament or oath of allegiance is a way of professing orientation to the world and living by the world view. Very often these oaths of allegiance can be offensive to members of another group and it would be prudent to ask whether expressing these views are hurtful or helpful.
Much of the Secular Humanist and Christian world views are reconcilable. They both subscribe to agency of individuals or human beings which is the beginning of serious philosophical discussions. This idea undergirds Western Civilization. Another similar view is that humans are naturalistic and use science to understand. Christians for the most part do not reject this but see it secondary to faith in the super-natural. Both believe that morality is the way for humans to better their lives. This is where the branches of the tree begin to separate between progressive and conservative ideals.
What is moral? Here is a controversial but honest question. Should we have transgender models walking a runway on the stage of the Olympic Opening Ceremony? Some subscribing to the Christian world view may say that homosexuality is not moral and expressing it publicly on prime-time television is not appropriate for children. Some subscribing to the Secular Humanist world view may say that it is an act of inclusivity and progressively introduces and desensitizes the public to alternative social practices. This would be a moral situation to which the Secular Humanists and Christians clash. It is a difference in morality. Thomas Jolly, the artistic director of the Ceremony, expressed that his intention was to be inclusive to all people. If a Christian would have produced the Opening Ceremony, there might have been a true "Last Supper" scene which surely would have offended someone. So, are either of these appropriate and truly inclusive?
The better discussion is actually addressing the Ceremony on theme and intent. This is where I have tried to place my judgement on whether it is a good effort by Jolly or not. Did the art expressed here communicate effectively and flower an array of emotions? Sure did! If fact it was epic in that respect. Was it appropriate? It was maybe appropriate for those subscribing to non-Christian values. So, the art potentially alienated a significant portion of the two billion Christians around the world. How is that inclusive? Or is inclusivity only a sacrament of the non-Christians. Does this seem appropriate? Was it necessary? These are the proper questions no matter what camp you may find yourself in. Let's mention some of the more notable parts of the theme.
One portion of the Ceremony showed Marie Antoinette holding her head singing the popular song from the French Revolution called "Ah ! ça ira" The lyrics are as follows:
"Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira
Le peuple en ce jour sans cesse répète,
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira
Malgré les mutins tout réussira !"
Which is translated to:
"Ah ! It'll be fine, It'll be fine, It'll be fine
The people on this day repeat over and over,
Ah ! It'll be fine, It'll be fine, It'll be fine
In spite of the mutineers everything shall succeed."
It was then followed by the explosive performance of French Heavy Metal band "Gojira". They were the first Heavy Metal band to play the Olympics. They played at the Conciergerie as the back drop which was one of the locations of the September Massacres in 1792. During this massacre, between 1600 and 1700 people were slaughtered including up to 17% of the victims being priests. Included in the numbers also were women and children as well. Many of the bodies were found mutilated and placed on pikes for all to see.
In the Conciergerie windows was what appeared to be priests wearing the colors of the Catholic Cardinal. Was that what was intended or only left for poor interpretation? During the song with huge explosions blasting fire into the sky, red confetti blew out from the building as a symbolic expression of bloody violence. While this is part of the theatrics is historical in nature and formed as a part the fabric of French society, is this something to be celebrated? I am huge fan of Metal music and do like Gojira but was this the most tasteful display of unity and inclusion by the board and artists directing the Ceremony? I guess only for the Metal fan not concerned with the symbolism portrayed here or maybe one that revels in the killing of priests, women, and children. Okay maybe this comment of the reveling would be a little hyperbolic but I just saw a drag queen with what appeared to be a testicle exposed on prime time television during the Olympic Opening Ceremony.
Yes, I know. What a buzzkill right? I get it. Without that context, the performance in front of the Conciergerie was epic. But ask yourself, with the context does this send the wrong message? I mean words and actions have meaning. Should we dumb ourselves down and numb our opinions for the sake of bread and circuses. Ironically , the lack of nutrition and most of all bread was the reasons for the start of the French and Russian Revolutions. Was the artist ignorant of this historical context and just happened to pick a building central to the beginning of the part of the French Revolution called the "Reign of Terror"? It would seem that there were many points of the French Revolution that could be used to illustrate French history for revering Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. At best, this could be considered as an ignorant social miscalculation or at worst it was a brooding extension of the middle finger to Christianity.
It may seem to be a harsh interpretation but the French Revolution's primary theme was the overthrow of the oppressive First Estate which was the Clergy or better known as the Catholic Church. The French Revolution was a point in the Age of Enlightenment where secularism broke through the social structures suppressing non-Christian belief systems. Some would say it was the bloody birth of Secular Humanism as a religious belief system. And it was and is a religious belief system. Robespierre even converted the Notre Dame Cathedral into a "Temple of Reason" for place to worship by members of the "Cult of Reason". As silly as this may sound, even Robespierre understood human beings have a thirst for the super-natural.
Another component of the Opening Ceremony was the infamous "Last Supper" scene. The scene opens with a scene representing a type of Bacchanalia festival, potentially represented in Titian's "Feast of the Gods", where performers enacted a type of Satyr Play. Satyr Plays were a type of Greek drama, representing a "Joking Tragedy", where the performers offered comedic relief to life's vices. You'd be a liar if you said you didn't laugh at any point during the Dionysian scene so kudos to Jolly. Instead of a festival scene with the cast of gender challenging characters in a natural environment as representations of this festival throughout history show, the performers were at a table eerily similar to that of the "Last Supper" painted by Leonardo da Vinci. The context to this is similar to the previous Gojira act in the Ceremony where the artist seems to be was ignorant to how this "Feast of the Gods" is portrayed by Titian. This misinterpretation, accidently or intentionally, could easily be misinterpreted as simply a middle finger to Christians. Either way we could ask ourselves is this act in the Ceremony truly necessary or tasteful?
An interesting note of history here is that the Olympics were most likely canceled by the Roman Emperor Theodosius I as an extension to his decree to eliminate pagan cults and practices. Or when his successor Theodosius II ordered the destruction of all Greek Temples. To either of these, there is deep irony since the Olympics Opening Ceremony has seemed to return to its pagan roots. Furthermore, the Olympics were revived in the modern era first during the French Revolution with L'Olympiade de la République. This brings us full circle back to Paris hosting the Olympics for the third time since it was formally established by the IOC in 1896.
So, what is the "something else" mentioned in the opening paragraph since we are illustrating the path of coming full circle? The Olympics are one of many moments in current history where we are forced to discuss our world views. If you don't think you are being forced, you have an opinion about all of this derived from some part of the Secular Humanist or Christian world view. Everyone seems to get offended nowadays whether it is a guy wearing a red "MAGA" hat or an Orange Dodge Charger from the "Dukes of Hazard" with the Confederate Flag on top of it. Some get offended by Palestinian, Cuban flags, or Gay Pride flags. Where is all of this coming from? Why are we all so damn offended.
This is the generational growing pains or you may even call it labor pains of the birth of our future. You might call it the "Fourth Turning" as illustrated by Strauss–Howe in their books Generations (1991) and The Fourth Turning (1997). The societal questions are what ideas and ideals should we model society after. Offenses experienced by many is nothing new in course of history. It has been occurring since the San-Culottes rushed the Bastille at the beginning of the French Revolution. They were offended. It has been occurring since the 1917 when the Bolsheviks overthrew the Duma's provisional government at the beginning of the Russian Revolution. They were offended. It has been occurring since the Cultural Revolution in 1964 when Mario Savio gave his speech on the campus of University of Berkley where he said, "And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus -- and you've got to make it stop!". He along with whole generation were offended.
The Olympics Opening Ceremony was just a test like many other incendiary events in history. It is similar to a psychological test called a Rorschach Test. I'd like to think I came up with that on my own but it was mentioned by Evolutionary Biologist Bret Weinstein on his X feed. As usually, it was brilliant analysis from Bret. Britannica defines a Rorschach test as a "projective method of psychological testing in which a person is asked to describe what he or she sees in 10 inkblots, of which some are black or gray and others have patches of color." The Secular Humanists are seeing one image from the Ceremony (ink blot) and the Christians are seeing another. The acceptance or offense is derived by these symbols and what the relative meanings of these scenes are representing while looking through the interpretive glasses of their world view.
It would be easy to say that we should all just not be offended but then we would be asked to try and exist in a nihilistic world without meaning. That is arguably more destructive than the world that the brilliantly prescient Friedrich Nietzsche predicted that we are currently living in right now. It would be a world without aims and most importantly aims that point upward. It would be a world where people would be subjected to their own hedonistic whims where civil society would simply collapse under its nihilistic, narcissistic, psychopathic hell. The question we all should as is whether all of this misalignment of worldviews is leading us there.
In closing, I would say that we are in a place where we need to honestly reconcile the differences we have as the Greeks did through democracy and work hard to avoid the inevitable blood bath like the one carved into history beginning in 1792. Are the targets to which our institutions aim going to explode in blood and fire like that of the Gojira portion of the Olympic Celebration? Can we aim to stand united in peaceful competition on the battlefield of ideas synonymous to the great Olympiad athletic competitions between the nations all around the world?
Can those with Secular Humanist world views and those with religious world views, not just Christian, live in harmony or are we too lazy to find continuity between the natural and the super-natural. The answer is that we can. It will be a hard mountain to climb in finding. Common ground, finding the commonalities in our broad overarching world views, and re-engineering or reinventing our institutions. It will be an introspective process where we will all have to be honest with ourselves for the sake true inclusivity and ultimately peace. It will require us to learn from history the real outcomes of bloody revolutions similar to Russia's lost century at the hands of the idealist utopians of the Bolsheviks. As the French figured out after the rule of monarchs and Napoleon, humans do not progress by forcing with the fist of government dragging members of government to the guillotine. Progress isn't found by the middle finger. The true way to progress is through the open hand. The hand works best will all of its fingers extended. This is something those of a secular world view and Christian world view can unite on.