Garrison Keillor's The Prodigal Son vs. Luke's The Parable of the Prodigal Son
The classic story of the Prodigal Son is one of the best known parables in literature. A parable is often times described as a short narrative which teaches a moral; however, the plot is more realistic, than say a fable, and the characters are humans as oppose to animals or natural forces within nature. Parables are also presented in a more suggestive tone, which leaves them more open to interpretation. The play Prodigal Son told by Garrison Keillor differs greatly in terms of style compared to Lukes The Parable of the Prodigal Son told in the Catholic scriptures. Both of these parables convey the same moral, however, both are open to very different interpretation. This option for different interpretations when referring to this story truly exemplifies what a parable is meant to be. Keillor took the classic story of the Prodigal Son, told in the writings of Luke, and was able to transform it into a comedic piece of literature, in which people of the times could better relate to.
It is argued that Keillors version is disrespectful to the original parable; however, I disagree with that for many reasons. Understanding the true definition f a parable itself assists in the supporting of Keillors style and technique. The parable story the Prodigal Son told by Keillor is much more dramatic, by which he was able to establish more tone within each character. He did that by writing the parable in a script form, which was intended to be acted out for an audience. That was not the case with thte biblical story, where it was told in third person perspective. Keillors version of unveiling the moral though the characters first person dialog allowed the audienc...
... middle of paper ...
...eturns home to a warm welcome. This definition holds true to the parable that is told by both Catholic scripture and Keillors comedy. Overall I found that Keillor did an excellent job incorporating more personality to the characters in his story. This allowed for more of a connection between the audience and the parable itself. He was able to change the dynamics of the story using a more conventional method of comedy and wit in order to stay true to the moral told in the traditional scripture version of The Parable of the Prodigal Son.
Works Cited
Kennedy, X.J., and Dana Gioia. Literature; Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Ed. Longman. New York: 2002. Kennedy, X.J., and Dana Gioia.
The Parable of the Prodigal Son. Literature; Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Ed. Longman. New York: 2002. 232-233. 1361-1366. Prodigal. Microsoft Encarta College Dictionary. 1st ed. 2001.
In The Parable of the Prodigal Son, there was a father with two sons. When the younger son matured, he asked for half of his father’s wealth, and he father complied. However, he went and squandered that wealth in a foreign land. After the man had depleted all his savings in irresponsible living, a famine struck his country, and he needed to find work. The son found dirty work, feeding pigs, and lived in poverty. He grew so hungry and wept because his father’s workers had food and not him. Then he cried out that he had sinned against his father and God. He believed he should not be considered his father’s son anymore. The son went looking for his father, and when his father saw him he was filled with compassion. He accepted his son with joy and provided him clothes and food and shelter. His father had rejoiced. He believed his son had died and been reborn
In the “Prodigal”, the boy whom the speaker is addressing to yearns to accomplish his own goals by leaving his hometown behind and entering the urbanized world that is filled with endless opportunities and possibilities, including “[becoming] an artist of the provocative gesture”, “wanting the world and return carrying it”, and “[reclaiming] Main Street in a limo.” However, despite all these ambitious opportunities the boy wishes to pursue, he is ultimately unable to alter the perception of others who are the most familiar with his character. Rather, the people who are the most acquainted with the boy will perceive him with the same view as in the past. The thought of a newly changed boy that embraced a completely different identity while accomplishing several achievements, is incapable of affecting their perception of the past young boy from the county. This is illustrated when the speaker describes that even if the boy “stood in the field [he’d] disappear” and was still “aiming [his] eyes down the road” of opportunity, in the eyes of people who are most familiar with him, they will be unable to acknowledge this significantly changed individual. In complete contrast with those who are most familiar with him are others who are unfamiliar with his past. These individuals, whom the boy must have encountered while achieving his accomplishments,
Tindall, George B., and David E. Shi. America: A Narrative History. 9thth ed. Vol. 1. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, 2013. N. pag. Print.
In The Parable several characters are presented to the reader. Each one has their own behavioral characteristics which one may or my not approve of. The two characters whose behaviors I most approve of are Lee Pai and Hernando. The characters whose behaviors I do not approve of are Sven and John. There are several reasons why I approve of the behaviors of Lee Pai and Hernando and do not approve of the behaviors of Sven and John. All of these reasons I have based on my interpretation of the story, The Parable.
While these categories might be helpful for a reader to delineate between the objective or thematic point context of the parable, the author. Like Capon (2002) states that the interpreter must come to biblical interpretation with a “willingness to hear and respond appropriately” (p.24). From this perspective, Snodgrass (2008) adopts eleven rules for interpretation. These include:
...der further than what we have in front of us. We want to impose our opinion on everything. We want to relate to it in a way that can only be done through out imagination. So, due to this, when we are not given the flexibility, then the context no longer becomes entertaining. The viewers do not want to be told how to think. Given these points, if they are influenced to believe that Sister Aloysius is a cruel individual like the movie portrays, then at the end of the movie and book when Sister Aloysius says, “ I have doubts! I have such doubts!” they will take that as a confession from her, and be further lead to believe that the accusations against Father Flynn are false. I think John Patrick Shanley chooses specific diction to create a conflict that has no precise resolution,he wanted the reader get lost in story and enter into their own story manifested within.
John Patrick Shanley creates a movie as a whole I feel was more informative than the play. In the play you have 4 characters Sister Aloysius, Father Flynn, Sister James, and Mrs. Muller. While the movie introduces a few other characters, for instance the children. For me the children made a difference because they for one made me understand what kind of kids Sister James was dealing with. I really thought that being able to see the way Father Flynn interacted with all of the young boys including Donald Muller was really helpful when trying to draw your conclusion of Father Flynn versus when reading it your left to imagine for instance; what some of the kids are like. The way the book sets you up your left leaning to Father Flynn being exactly what Sister Aloysius accuses him to be. We also get to see how sister James interacts with the kids and how Sister Aloysius influences her to change the way she deals with and teaches her class.
Everyday there are gruesome and graphic murders committed in America. Unfortunately, a portion of these horrid crimes are in fact committed by none other than America’s own children. The main problem faced, is to find the line to draw between children and adults when trying them for the homicides they commit. Although they are children, they still perform the same horrible acts as many adult psychopathic killers. This leaves many to question if the minor that commits the crime is truly a child and not a cold blooded killer.
Maker, J., Brittain, J., Piraino, G., & Somtow, S. Children Who Kill. World Press Review. June 1993 v40 n6 p21-23.
Before learning about why juveniles commit homicide, who the juvenile homicide offenders are, and what causes juvenile homicide, it is crucial to understand the basic statistics of juvenile homicide in the United States. According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, in 1993 there was the largest number of juvenile homicide offenders being 14.4 per 100,000 juvenile United States citizens. Since then, the number of juvenile homicide offenders started to decline until it was the lowest in 2004 where it was 77% less than the 1993 peak (still was at 3.2 per 100,000 citizens) (Stastical Briefing Book, 2010). All of this information shows that juveniles are committing homicide but what we need to find out is how to tell who they are, what they are like, and why they do these things and then we can try to re...
It is expected that at a young age, children are taught the difference between what is right and what is wrong in all types of situations. The majority of Supreme Court Justices abolished mandatory life in prison for juveniles that commit heinous crimes, argued this with the consideration of age immaturity, impetuosity, and also negative family and home environments. These violent crimes can be defined as murder, rape, armed robbery, aggravated assault and the like depending on state law. With these monstrous acts in mind the supreme court justices argument could be proven otherwise through capability and accountability, the underdevelopment of the teenage brain and the severity of the crime. Juveniles commit heinous crimes just like adults
When a person hears the word “parable” they often automatically think of stories told by Jesus. Although Jesus did tell a lot of parables, he was not the only biblical figure to use parables. One example of an Old Testament figure telling a parable is the prophet Nathan’s parable to King David about the rich man seizing and killing the poor man’s sheep. 2 Samuel 12: 1-14. David gets very angry at the rich man and orders him killed before realizing the rich man is himself. The reasons Nathan used a parable are the same reasons Jesus used parables: discretion, to avoid defensiveness, and to stimulate deeper reflection. Parables are discreet because no one can get mad at the parable teller because even if he is talking about you, he doesn’t actually say your name, so you can remain anonymous. Parables avoid defensiveness because if you don’t think the parable is talking about you, you are more willing to listen and understand the wrongdoings in the parable, even if they are your own wrongdoings. Finally, they stimulate deeper reflection because they are stories, and while later remembering and thinking more about the enjoyable story, you can get more meaning from it. By using parables, Jesus helps us, his readers, understand his messages better.
The U.S made legal history in 1989 when the world’s first juvenile court opened in Chicago (Rank, J.) Since 1990 many states have also adopted the “get tough” approach to juvenile justice as a response to the increasingly violent crimes committed by children. Juvenile crime escalated to an all time high, and then started to decrease in 1995 when images on television, such as the Springfield, Oregon, rampage of 15-year-old Kip Kinkel who shot both of his parents and then two of his classmates. The impression of citizens in the United States was that juvenile crime is out of control. (Levinson) Now Juveniles are being prosecuted a lot more than adults in adult courts.
The Parables consist of tales that Jesus is said to have been a crowd of people following him and they explained Goods word and moral by using ordinary events. Following each Parable is an interpretation of it –made to state what the parable actually wants to explain to us.
Adam, a corporal officer, starts as man who works everyday to catch the ‘villains’ of society, but is not spending enough time with his family, especially his son. He favors his nine year old daughter over his fifteen year old son. Adam views his daughter as a sweet child, and his son as a stubborn teenager who is going through a rebellious stage. However, when his daughter is killed in an accident, his perspective of family changes. In his grief, he states that he wishes he had been a better father. His wife reminds him that he still is a father and he realizes that he still has a chance with his son, Dylan. After his Daughter’s death, he creates a resolution from scriptures that states how he will be a better father. Because of the resolution he creates, he opens up to and spends more time with his son. By th...