It was great when it all began - And it still is

Back in the very early 70’s, an out of work actor called Rick, decided to write a bit of a play, just to keep his hand in whilst he was resting you understand.  It was a bit of a mish-mash of Sci-Fi, B-Movie horror and simplistic ‘Blues-Box’ Rock ‘n’ Roll – And it was alright really, you’ve probably heard a couple of the songs… You might have drunkenly ‘Timewarped’ at your Auntie Vera’s wake. Or repeated the words ‘Dammit, Janet’ over and over because you’re not really sure what the rest of the words actually are (Apart from some hypothetical river being deep that is – And how willing you are to prove that you’ve swam it. Maybe you’ve planned a future, because it’s ours – I don’t really know.)

But by now, you’ve probably guessed that I’m talking about Richard O’Brien’s Internationally-acclaimed Rocky Horror Show – The original version of which, one no-one’s ever seen (Unless you were one of the people who spent real cash money going to the dismal ‘Experimental Space’ above a dodgy theatre in Sloane Square in the summer of 1973.)

But you’ve probably heard the Original Soundtrack Album – Produced by everyone’s favourite (alleged) celebrity Peadophile, Radio 1 DJ (Obvs) and record producer Jonathan King. Who oddly, was also one of the original backers of the stage-play, so you’ve got him to thank – In part at least, for its popularity.

Here’s a juicy tangent… A cute girlie once made me a cassette-tape copy of the OST, She went as far as decorating the Memorex C120 with drawings and quotes from the album sleeve and I thought I was, what we used to call back then, “Well-in” with her, but this happened not two short months before she was discovered, in flagrante-delicto with the local (married) blacksmith/jeweler – I swear, unrequited lust and blacksmiths… Ah tells thee, I used to live in your actual 18^th. Century, Henry Fielding novel. Feel free to insert your own ‘Hot Anvil/Hammer & Tongs’ joke anywhere around here that you see fit.

It only took a couple of years for 20^th Century Fox to pick it up and turn it into a film, “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” (Which every single human being and a good proportion of the world’s more patient farm animals has seen on multiple occasions.) – It contained a mixture of both the London and Broadway cast and it was quite popular, making $140 Million from its $1.4 budget.

Now, I’m not going to go into the plot of the play/film, because that would be redundant… You’ve seen it, you’ve probably sung the songs and you’ve had impure thoughts about Tim Curry. So, Aliens, Transvestites, Bikers, Rain, Floor-show etc. – You get the gist. Bizarrely (popular word when you’re talking about Rocky Horror), the film became more popular with audiences (more than critics) than the stage-show and it wasn’t long before people started dressing up as characters and interacting with the action on screen… There’s a whole list of prescribed actions, props and talk-backs that you can throw/shout out should the muse take you – There’s a guide here provided by Timewarp, the UK Rocky Horror Fan Club. This transferred (Bizarrely – See, told you it was popular word) back to the stage-play, which is pretty much always touring somewhere on this planet’s face – But with a slightly different set of rules.

If I can only ever give you one piece of advice – Apart from the time I explained what to do in case of a bear attack and how to change the timing belt on a 1974 Triumph Herald - It would be… If you’re going to get ‘involved’ take the time to learn the actions and get them right. Students have adopted Rocky Horror as their own; as a way to show how messianically bloody great they are, which in the words of my good friend Nathan, makes my piss fizz. But they will laugh at you when you get things wrong. Being laughed at by a 200lb Rugby-playing 19 year old who’s experimenting with sodomy whilst wearing his sister’s underwear and makeup is not something anyone really wants, well, not unless they’re paying extra for it.

Then, if we fast-forward to… Well… About a week ago (If you are reading this in early November 2016, which is when I’m writing it) the remake was released on FOX (Bizarrely)…

When you get right down to it, it was a pretty faithful recreation with an entirely new cast (With one deeply sanguine notable exception) but ‘brought up to date’ visually. It was pretty much universally despised by anyone who had seen, participated in or even heard of the original. Which, in my opinion, is doing everyone involved a massive dis-service.  I can understand people not liking it – Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, I even agreed with people who hated the Phantom Menace when they first saw it. But this film has to get some kind of award for the number of people who were monumentally butthurt without actually seeing it. I’ve seen it called filth (and not in a good way) – I’ve seen it blamed for the reappearance of actual medical conditions – I’ve seen it accused of shitting all over the memory of the original… All by people who haven’t gone to the lengths required to actually watch it.

Let me take you through a few of the things that are different, to relieve the tension (see what I did there?):

1. The general ‘feel’ – It was made for a new audience, it wasn’t aimed at us old, opinionated people who idolized the original
2. Frank ‘n’ Furter is played by a WOMAN! – It might temper your fury somewhat if I said that the very talented young lady in question, Laverne Cox, used to be a guy – So, a real Trans-sexual playing an Alien from the planet Trans-sexual (Can you smell the irony people?) She does a brilliant job – Getting a lot of Tim Curry’s mannerisms cock-on (if you’ll pardon the expression) a lot of the time
3. The guy who played Dorian Grey in Penny Dreadful does a great Richard O’Brien impression as Riff-Raff
4. Magenta is BLACK! ZOMFG!!!1!!!1eleven – Played by Christina Milian (Whom I understand is a noted Popstrel, popular with the younger generation)
5. Trixie the usherette is played by Ivy Levan – Who is, as I believe the young say nowadays, hot AF. and is not in the film anywhere near as much as she should be
6. IT SHOWS (some of the) THE AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION – So, there’s a clue there for newbies who want to go and see the show
7. You don’t see any female nipples during the floor-show at the end, which is a pity, but I’m sure you’ll survive.
8. It features 100% less overt cannibalism than the original
9. There’s no Christopher Biggins – which is a crying shame
10. Tim Curry plays the Criminologist… This is the only part of the film that I, personally felt uncomfortable watching – Mr. Curry had a major stroke in 2012 and is still suffering some of the effects, one of which is being confined to a wheelchair, combined with a stilted voice, made all the more heart-wrenching when you remember its strength in the original.

I’ve counted some of the major differences out for you, so there’ll be no big surprises to upset you and stop you seeing it. 

Look, just watch it, suspend your disbelief that anything could ever be better the original – It doesn’t try to – It’s a cover-version, an alternative – Well made by some very talented people who’ve done their best to capture the soul of the original and drag it kicking it’s tranny-shoes into the 21^st. Century.

Watch it, then say you don’t like it… Or watch it, and say you do – But just watch it - I've watched it and it did me no harm.. See!

One of these people is me!

Oh yes, whilst I remember, Frank ‘n’ Furter’s Castle/Spaceship in the 1975 film was Oakley Court in Windsor UK – Which had provided scenery for many of the original Hammer Horror films of the entire 70’s so that was a bit of a cyclic reference.

But it says here...

So, Religious Texts, what do we think about those?

There are a lot of them about, probably more of them than there are actual religions.  And most of them purport to be the word of whatever god, God or Goddess favoured by that actual religion, whether directly dictated or 'translated' by a selection of scholars and prophets.

I'm going to put the next bit in big letters, so there's no confusion as to what follows.

IN MY OPINION ALL RELIGIOUS TEXTS ARE THE WORK OF MEN - NOT A SUPREME BEING.

You could argue that the people who wrote these things were directed by a god, you might be right, I don't pretend to know, but my opinion is up there, in the big letters.

But they exist... The books that is.  We're stuck with them now, so what do we do with them?  Well, as I understand it they were provided initially as a set of stories to teach things like morals and laws, rules for handling certain situations, and ways that you could prove that you were a follower of that particular religion.  In Christianity (I chose this one because it's the one I know slightly more about, but I'm reliably informed that the others are pretty much the same.) You've got your commandments and suchlike and your abominations, things you should do, things you shouldn't do. Fish you can eat, neighbour's asses that you can't covet.

And then there's the contradictions, a detailed book, written by a committee, is bound to have a few contradictions - Even if it was dictated directly by a deity - the entire history of space-time is a lot to remember, even for the omnipotent.

Although you'd think that they'd manage to get his Corporeal Son's last words right at least..

MAT 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

OK, you're right, I'm being petty - It was probably an emotional time.

And there's the whole 'Who told David to start the census in Israel?' question - There's some confusion, but the two 'suspects' couldn't be more different:

II SAMUEL 24: And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

I CHRONICLES 21: And SATAN stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

No... I got nothing on this one - You'll have to make your own minds up.

Maybe, just maybe, it's a mistranslation.  I mean, the texts that form the Christian Bible were written in a mixture of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek with a smattering of Chaldean thrown in to make things interesting, over a period of a thousand years or so. The the bits that were in hebrew got translated into Greek so that the Jews could read them (Most 'modern' Jews didn't speak a lot of Hebrew at the time - from about 100AD onwards) Over the next thousand years it got translated into Gothic (Germanic) Olde Englishe and Latin and didn't get a Modern English translation until the sixteenth century.

Is it any wonder that a lot of it doesn't really make sense, you can imagine scribes translating from a Gothic version, into Latin, for the English market, hitting a word that the previous translator didn't really get right, scratching his head with the end of his goose-quill and saying something like 'Whateth I thinketh he meaneth thereth is-eth...' and having a wild stab at it.  No guarantee that he gets it right either of course.

There are a lot of parts that various people (usually those people who are directly effected by them) claim to be mistranslations.  A popular one is 'Abomination' as I've used above, this was originally translated from the Hebrew words 'Sheketz' and 'toevah' which is a bit difficult to explain really... It kind of means 'Things that THEY (pointing to Johnny Foreigner) do, but WE don't think are right.'  Many things are described a toevah through an awful lot of the Bible, including Child sacrifice, Idolatry (Very big on idolatry being toevah they are), fortune telling, haughtiness (Really, if you feel like doing a bit of reading, try tho Book of Ezekiel, it's a laugh riot - there are flying saucers and everything), eating with Shepherds (which brings up a whole bunch of questions on its own), women wearing trousers, remarriage and... Wait for it... Sodomy - A man lying with a man, as he would with a woman.

Which brings me to the trigger for today's Blog.  My good friend Nathan, shared a piece on Facebook about the Dr Laura letter - Which for those who haven't read it, is included below.

As a note, this is a real letter, written to a real person, but not by James Kauffman, He has a web-page about it and everything.

-oOo-

On her radio show, Dr. Laura said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Schlesinger, written by a US man, and posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as quite informative:

It also shows that once you've read The Book of Ezekiel, take the Book of Leviticus out for a spin - But have a dry pair of trousers ready to change into afterwards if you have a weak bladder.


Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.


Your adoring fan,


James M. Kauffman,

Ed.D. Professor Emeritus,

Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

-oOo-

Note: To the Religionites who may or may not be reading this, I don't mean to offend, I mean to entertain.  I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't make me the subject of a... Erm... Whatever the Christian version of a Jihad is... Possibly a crusade I suppose, or perhaps inviting me to a bake-sale and then not letting me eat anything with Jam or Cream in it.

Only a bit of fun - Yeah? So no stoning to death for me please, if at all possible.