13 December 2007

Differing Perspectives on the Same Event

Memory: it’s the second casualty of aging. (The first is our knees.)

How we remember an event in the past depends upon many things: our age at the time, the impact the event had on our psyche, our desire to relive the event, how often in the future we choose to recall it, and most importantly, what is our goal for retelling the story. When there are numerous witnesses to a single event, chances are great each eyewitness account will offer differing details delivered with varied emotions. Individual perspectives truly are “individual,” and so is the way in which each person tells a story for effect.

You can see a wonderful example of how a single world-altering event is recounted by four different eyewitnesses by looking at the story of the nativity in Scripture.

In the book of Matthew, the story about the birth of Jesus doesn’t even share details of birth. Matthew focuses instead on the “shame” Joseph felt when he learned his wife was expecting a baby without his participation and how the angel intervened on her behalf. Then, Matthew skips right past the birth to journey of the Magi and their encounter with King Herrod, which put Jesus in early harm’s way.

The evangelist Mark doesn’t seem too interested in the nativity either. His opening chapter starts with John the Baptist preparing the way for Jesus, then skips right into Jesus’s baptism. If the crafting of religious tradition had been left to Matthew and Mark, none of us would have miniature crèches in our homes.

Luke, who most people attribute some propensity toward medicine, offers the most detailed nativity story, including side stories from Mary’s family, the “no room at the inn” metaphor, along with visits from the shepherds and the appearance of the Christmas star. If Luke hadn’t been a doctor or an evangelist, he would have made an excellent screenwriter.

By contrast, the book of John (my personal favorite) doesn’t bring us any news of Jesus birth or his childhood. John’s focus is literary and symbolic; John could be a poet. If you don’t believe me, read his opening lines:


In the beginning was the Word
And the Word was with God
And the Word was God.

If the Word is God as John says, I’m grateful to call myself a writer!

No comments: