I have nearly
finished a new novel, Brethren. I am now thinking
about possible illustrations for this novel. As usual, I am collaborating with
Dan Hallett to create a few samples for publishers, who can then decide if this
is something they would like to see more of. The picture above is the first
such sample. The rest of this post is a simplified account of the creation of
this illustration, including: some general notes I wrote for Dan to introduce
the novel; a short extract from chapter 15; and a script for this particular
illustration.
General Notes for Dan
Brethren is set
in evangelical Protestant church (the Brethren are a particularly austere
non-conformist group). So my original idea was that its depiction of angels and
demons would be rigorously Protestant, and use only Biblical sources. This is
important because most of our ideas about demons, and some of those about
angels, actually come from the New Testament Apocrypha (i.e. works judged
unreliable by the early church) or the similar Old Testament Pseudepigrapha.
But Robert’s theories about angels are taken solely from the canonical books of
the Bible, which leads him to rather different conclusions to those of
Christian traditions informed by these other sources.
However,
Brethren is
also a horror story: that is, a story in the Gothic tradition, in which the
protagonist is haunted by repressed secrets. And one of the ideas behind the
Gothic as it emerged in eighteenth-century novels is that England is similarly
haunted by its medieval past: that is, by its Catholic past. The ruined
monasteries and abbeys and castles that were the settings for Gothic fiction
were ruined because of the destruction caused by Henry VIII’s reformation.
So
my protagonist tries to construct an austere Protestant system of belief, but
he’s haunted by Catholic ideas, which seep into his visions and experiences:
e.g. transubstantiation (the idea that the bread and wine somehow become the
actual body of Christ during communion), and the Harrowing of Hell (the idea,
derived from the so-called Gospel of Nicodemus, that Christ preached to the
imprisoned spirits in hell between his death and resurrection). I also draw on
late-medieval Catholic sources like morality plays, in which the soul of
Everyman was besieged by demons and angels; and medieval characters like Joan
of Arc (who was visited by saints and angels).
So
I want the images to have a late-medieval, Catholic feel, with a visual style
from the 15th and early 16th centuries (i.e. just before the Reformation), but
(if and when they include human figures) these will be dressed in 1980s clothes
(I have some photos I can supply for reference, but they’re not necessary for
this particular illustration). I was thinking of an engraving style, but
really, if we’re talking 15th century, woodcut is more appropriate (and will
probably be easier to do).
The
sample illustration is based on the idea of the scapegoat from Leviticus in the
Old Testament, which is discussed in chapter 15 of the novel. The relevant
extract is appended below. Robert, the main protagonist, is the only one who
can see or hear the ‘girl’, a.k.a. the demon Azazel. His friend Tracey’s there
for moral support, as is Jenny, who’s an R.E. teacher with a background in
theology. Mark’s an autodidact lay preacher. He’s the one actually performing
the exorcism.
Novel Extract
‘My name is
Azazel,’ the girl says.
Robert
copies her. ‘Az-a-zel.’
‘What
does that mean?’ Mark says. ‘Who are you?’
‘Ask
Jenny,’ the girl says. ‘She knows.’
‘Jenny
knows what it means.’
‘Me?
I’m not …’ Everyone looks at her. ‘Fine. It’s from Leviticus. The ritual for
the Day of Atonement. It might not even be a name.’
‘It’s
my name,’ the girl says.
‘We
don’t have theological discussions with demons,’ Mark says. ‘They’ve got
nothing to teach us about God.’
Jenny
pulls her bag out from under the chair, and gets her Bible out. She places it
on her lap. ‘Maybe it’s something Robert needs to tell us.’
Mark
says, ‘Well, there’s no harm in reading from God’s Word. But I’m not having a
demon explain it to me.’
‘Take
your time,’ the girl says. ‘Talk it over.’
‘On
the Day of Atonement,’ Jenny says, ‘the High Priest stood before the Ark, in
the presence of God. But first he had to make a special sacrifice.’
‘Nothing
to do with demons,’ Mark says.
‘So
he took two goats, and he cast lots between them.’
‘That’s
you and Tracey,’ the girl says to Robert.
‘One
goat for God; the other … for Azazel.’
‘It
doesn’t say that.’ Mark gives in and goes to get his Bible from the top of the
dresser on the other side of the room. He gives the bed a wide berth.
‘You
won’t find it in the NIV,’ Jenny says. ‘Or the King James. Or the Living Bible.
They all translate it. But they’re guessing, because no-one knows what it
means.’
‘I
do,’ the girl says.
Jenny
says, ‘In Hebrew, it’s something like “taken away”; “removed”.’
‘Exorcised,’
the girl says.
‘In
the Greek version of the Old Testament, it’s “a thing that keeps illness away”.
Like a charm.’
‘Except
not like a charm at all,’ Mark says. ‘Because that would be the occult.’
‘In
the Latin Bible, it’s caper emissarius. Messenger goat. Scout, spy.’
‘Angel,’
Robert says.
Jenny
flicks through her Bible to Leviticus. ‘In English, it’s usually scapegoat, but
Tyndale invented that word in 1530 for his translation, and everyone else
copied him. Except the RSV.’ She reads, ‘The
goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord
to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to
Azazel.
‘So
the High Priest sacrifices one goat; sprinkles its blood in the Holy of Holies.
Then he puts his hands on the head of the other, and confesses the sins of the
people.’ She reads again. ‘The goat shall
bear all their iniquities upon him to a solitary land. To Azazel. Which
could just be a place in the desert. Or a demon who lives there.’
‘Both,’
the girl says.
‘Jesus,’
Mark says. ‘He’s the scapegoat.’
‘But
they don’t kill the scapegoat,’ Tracey says. She hooks her feet around the
front legs of her chair and looks down again.
‘Right,’
Jenny says. ‘Literally, “the goat who escapes”. Because it doesn’t matter what
happens to it, after they send it away.’
‘One
for God,’ the girl says, ‘one for me. But the one for God dies; and the one for
me lives.’
Robert
doesn’t believe her. ‘Maybe Azazel kills the scapegoat.’
‘Jesus
is the scapegoat,’ Mark says. ‘And He wasn’t sacrificed to a demon.’
Jenny
closes her Bible, but keeps her finger inside it to mark her place. ‘Why
Azazel, Robert?’ she says, as if he chose the name. ‘Did you hear it in a
sermon?’
Robert
makes his hands into fists. ‘No.’
‘In
the desert, outside the camp.’ Jenny taps her Bible against her knee. ‘The
Greek word for hell is Gehenna. Name of
a place outside Jerusalem where people sacrificed their children.’
‘Maybe
Abraham went there to kill Isaac,’ the girl says, drawing patterns on the quilt
with her finger.
‘In
Jesus’ day, it was abandoned, cursed. A rubbish dump.’
‘So
Azazel is hell?’ Robert says, thinking of Jesus in the wilderness, tempted by
Satan. Maybe that was Gehenna too.
‘I
don’t know.’
‘If
Azazel eats the goat, does that mean it’s eating sin?’
‘What
else would a demon eat?’ Mark says.
Jenny
says, ‘In medieval paintings, the entrance to hell is a mouth. So when Jesus
dies, it tries to eat Him. But He’s too pure; it can’t digest Him. So it spits
Him out.’
‘Does
Azazel spit the scapegoat out?’ Robert asks.
The
girl burps.
‘We
don’t need to know this,’ Mark says. ‘It’s not relevant.’
Jenny
says, ‘Christ bears the sins of the world, but He’s still pure. He takes the
penalty, but not the guilt.’
The
girl burps again, and says, ‘His flavour doesn’t change. He still tastes the
same.’
‘For
the scapegoat, it’s more like the other way round. It takes the guilt, but not
the penalty.’
‘You
take the penalty; Tracey takes the guilt,’ the girl says to Robert. ‘Or the
other way round. It’s up to you.’
‘I
don’t want it to be up to me.’
‘Robert,’
Mark says, ‘stop talking to it.’
‘But
it is up to you,’ the girl says. ‘So who do you want to be? The goat for God;
or the goat for Azazel?’
Script for Dan
A really boring
illustration of these ideas would be a picture of two goats: maybe one black,
and one white. So I thought, what if it’s not two goats? What if it’s half a
goat? This ties in to another famous Biblical story about King Solomon, who
decided to cut a baby in half to find out which of two women was the mother:
she was the one willing to give the baby away rather than see it harmed. In the
context of the novel, depicting the goat cut in half could suggest that choice
is painful, disruptive, and reveals secrets (the inside of the goat). It always
involves violence and the renunciation of possibilities (by choosing one thing,
by definition you exclude another).
I
started off by thinking of
Damien Hirst’s Mother
and Child, but if you look at the cross-sectioned cow in that, its
interior just seems a mess. It’s difficult to make out the shapes of internal
organs, etc. So we want a goat cut in half, but rendered somewhat
non-realistically, more like the ‘self-dissecting man’ from the anatomy
treatises of Vesalius, who displays all his internal organs, etc. In fact, the
high priest often had to separate individual organs as part of the different
Old Testament sacrificial rites.
So:
a cross-sectioned black goat, with a (probably simplified and stylised) set of
visible internal organs.
The
idea that the scapegoat is Christ also made me think of the image of the Agnus
Dei, the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world, which is shown with a halo,
carrying a flag with a Saint George’s Cross. So our goat will similarly have a
halo and flag. It’s both the Lamb of God and the scapegoat. But a goat
(particularly a black goat) is normally a Satanic symbol, so it’s also both
Christ and the devil.
The
Hirst cows look very odd with only two legs, and similarly I suspect it will be
difficult to render a convincing two-legged goat. This is something you’ll have
to figure out. I guess the Hirst one is neither sitting nor standing, but
suspended, and that’s probably the impression we want too.
Brethren
also has several allusions to the Minotaur and the labyrinth, which represent
the devil and hell in medieval allegory, with Theseus as Christ, penetrating
the labyrinth to kill the devil. So one final layer is to have a red maze in
the background behind the goat. This maze begins / comes out / is analogous
with the spaces between the goat’s various internal organs, i.e. the organs sit
on a red background inside the goat, where they block out most of that
background, reducing the visible part of the background to a series of lines,
whose shapes resemble those of a maze / labyrinth. A drop / line of blood
trickles out of the goat and down onto the background of the page, where it
begins another, similar path through a larger maze / labyrinth. (N. B. For
reference, there’s a labyrinth filled by an advancing rivulet of blood in the
first Hellboy
film.)
The
blood coming out of the goat is therefore a trickling red thread like the
thread Ariadne gives to Theseus in the minotaur's labyrinth. So there's a sense
in which we should be able to see the blood flow as reversible: we should be
able to follow its thread from the outside inwards, as well as from the centre
out.
Mazes
/ labyrinths are common elements in the floor decorations of medieval
cathedrals, where they represent the idea of pilgrimage. Here’s the one from
Chartres:
http://www.luc.edu/medieval/labyrinths/chartres.shtml
In this context, it's Jerusalem at the centre of the labyrinth, not the devil.
This alternative, positive meaning ties in with the goat / lamb doubling /
superimposition.