I would argue that Apalehorse has a point, is the Tree of Life a physical tree? Or is it Wisdom? You can all the Knowledge of the World (Good and Evil) and still loose your soul...a paraphrase of a verse in Proverbs & a Letter from Paul.
If the Tree of Life is Wisdom, then that is the starting point for Indy.
My idea of what the IV plot line could be using the Tree of Life idea:
Indiana Jones is called to the beside of his very old, but dying, father. Henry, Sr. tells him of his first "love affair", it was not with the Grail as Indy had believed, but with finding the Garden of Eden, the birthplace of mankind. Indy, who believes this all to be the ramblings of a dying man, brushes the idea aside. At Henry's funeral, Indy meets up with Marion and Willie who have heard about Indy's loss. Later on that evening, Marion asks Indy to keep an eye on a daughter of a close friend of hers, since Marion is busy on an expedition. Indy reluctantly agrees and promises that he will watch the girl. After falling asleep on the couch, Indy awakes in the middle of the night only to find a burglar inside. Indy knocks him out cold, but when he pulls the mask off he finds out the he is a she, the girl he is supposed to be watching. Indy then finds out that she was hired by an unknown person to get several of Henry's journals and find anything related to the Garden. Indy now knows that something is up, so after a quick stop to Marcus' son Indy and the girl travel to Greece where the research suggests that Atlantis may be the Garden of Eden...or at least the first place to start.
Okay so this is just the kick off, but I think that you see where I am going with this. The girl is Indy's daughter, Indy is not searching for a physical tree, and Indy hooks up with some old friends for help. Will Indy and Co. survive? Will they find the Garden before the Soviets? Will there be another movie? Only time will tell, tune in next week...errr...I mean stay tuned!
Well, I'm new here and this is a great way to get to know everyone-by coming on and disagreeing with everyone. Personally I don't want to see the Garden of Eden in the film. Mainly for my own religious beliefs-yes I believe that the garden is real place, but the location shifted from where in has been commonly placed (at least on this thread). I know that the script deals with something to do with Adam & Eve, but who said it had to do with the Garden? Perhaps it could do with an artifact from after they were kick out. Maybe the secret as to how Adam's generations could live so long. (just an idea) If they show the Garden that's fine, I'll survive. I just hope it's not centered around it.
I think a FAN misunderstood me, and if so I want to make every effort for a mutual discussion... email@example.com
with that in mind...
Thank you Aaron for seeing a broader aspect of this thread: how ultimately can the Tree of Life be represented. You touched on some cinematic and dramatic elements that may be too obvious to all of us celluloid raveners, but does such simplicity mean a movie is bad?
It is my belief that Indy wouldn't actively pursue the garden, just as he never thought of pursuing the Ark, Sankara, or Grail. In every cinematic instance, he was thrust into action. With respect to his age, he would never actually go after anything that wasn't FACT, without some impending impetus. Lorn had the right idea with Indy being cpompelled by a student or rival, when it comes to Eden.
The only other way he would pursue such an endeavor personally, is if he felt the pains of mortality, and not having any legacy of his own, would seek to rectify himself with Marion, and gain an eternal goal.
"They want you to go after it!"
"Oh Marcus... and the museum gets the Ark when we're done, right?"
I object to the reluctant hero idea, at least for Raiders. While I agree that in Temple of Doom and Last Crusade the items were secondary to Indy's true goal, in Raiders it was specifically the Ark of the Covenant Indy was after. It was an item that bridged a gap between mythology and reality and I believe this was why Indy was fueled to get it, although he did not believe it had any power to it.
The idea that the new movie would have to be written with a super goal, making the garden itself secondary, isn't necessary. Although the reluctant hero is a key theme with adventurers, Indy sort of plays the role of "protector of ancient artifacts" and dons that guise when religious artifacts are threatened by evil-doers.
Basing the idea on Raiders, the only motivator Indy would need is that the (Germans?) Russians would be one step ahead in locating the true resting place of the Garden of Eden. Indy would be compelled to beat them, I'm sure.
However, since the story takes place in the fifties, I'm sure some cold war activity will play a key role in Indy's motivations. So, what if a top Russian scientist plans to defect to the States with plans for a new bomb. He gets pursued and/or shot down and a radio S.O.S. is picked up by American intelligence. The scientist claims he found Eden. Indy is hired by the government and the race is on to find the missing russian defector who just may have discovered the Garden of Eden.
[Edited by thegreatimposter on 06-17-2003 at 01:55 pm]
Been awhile since I've been in here, but apalehorse told me there were a few interesting developments in the thread, so I decided to jump in.
First of all, I'm glad to see that the debate is still raging. Nothing is more fun than a great debate!
Secondly, I think I'd better clarify my position on a couple of issues.
I *don't* necessarily see Indy as reluctantly going after Eden. The idea of chasing after a student or following somebody elses dream was somebody elses idea (I don't recall who.)
That's not to say that I expect Indy to go chasing after Eden. As apalehorse stated, Indy searches for Fact, not truth.
Other great points have been made:
"This is what we got into archeaology for in the first place" is a quote that stands out in my head.
I think having Indy go after Eden for the immortality angle is a bit too cliched. As I've stated before, Indy to me always questions what has happened to him before. "Naah...things COULDN'T have happened the way I remember them."
In the course of each movie, he decides to take a leap of faith, and believe in the mystical nature of whatever artifact that he finds. This is where Indys truth comes from.
But the one thing that Indy is consistent about is his Fortune and Glory. (Last Crusade is a bit of an exception to this rule, but we all know Indy was really seeking his Father, right?)
apalehorse was absolutely right to point out that in the case of the Sankara Stones and the Holy Grail, that Indy ended up searching for the artifacts almost as a byproduct of the situation that he's in.
In those situations, he's initially reluctant to go after the artifacts, but grows more and more excited as the chase goes on. Before long, he's an enthusiastic participant in the search.
I dont' think Indy will believe in the mystical powers of the Tree of Life, or even that it necessarily exists.
Here's how I see things playing out:
Remember, this movie takes place in the 50's. Archaeological methods will have changed quite a bit in the last 20 years. While Indys adventurous/graverobbing ways may've gotten the job done in the past, the museum would probably be much less willing to turn a blind eye to Indys methods.
International Agreements for the treatments of antiquities will probably be taken MUCH more seriously.
While Indy has brought back relics for the museums, he always brings back small pieces - never the historical pieces that he seeks. I figure that by the 50's, he'll probably be a director of his department at the college, and one of the senior fellows at the museum. He'll probably have taken over Marcus' position after his death.
However, he probably hasn't returned with any significant finds in some time. He's well respected, but also perhaps a bit of a joke at this point in time. His methods no longer apply, and he may be something of an embarassment to the museum at this point. How funny would it be to have Indy lecturing his students about taking unncessary risks? Remember "X Never, ever marks the spot?"
I figure that at this point in his life, what Indy wants is not so much fortune...but he would want a little glory to be attached to his name. Something that will let him be rememberd as something more than "That professor at the college, who tells the great stories." He wants to be somebody who BRINGS A SIGNIFICANT ARTIFACT HOME.
This is where I think the plaque at Babylon comes in. The plaque itself is a real artifact, that supposedly talks of the Garden and Tree located in Iraq.
This alone is a very interesting artifact...and finding such an artifact could spur Indy into trying to locate the place referenced.
He's not after mysticism...he's after artifacts and knowledge of the Cradle of Civilization, in the hopes of having a legacy that will live after him, and give him a kind of immortality. Of course, if he finds the Tree of Life itself, he could gain the literal kind.
Maybe that is what sends Indy off in search of the Garden. Perhaps, the Soviets aren't after the Tree, but instead it is an attempt by them to have the world's most powerful (whatever) and they think they can find it there. The Tree would be just the "side trip", so to speak.
I am not sure that the movements in archaeology will play much part in Indy IV as somehow i doubt that Indy will change his nature it could be good just to show how much of a dinsoaur Indy will be by the 50's but anyway the new archeaological practices tended only to apply to the west at this time i believe it was not until the rise of nationalist states in the rest of the world that the protection of artifacts (or at least not selling them to the west) came into operation.
It seems that we are now in a very interesting dilemma. The reality is that Indy is a true archeologist. "That belongs in a museum" is his mantra and it lies very close to his heart. But we know that Indy will sacrifice his love for humanity (Marion, the children, his dad). I do not see him deviating from his character in this respect. I still am not convinced that he wanted to find the grail. I also think that his character will not be one to adventure all across the globe. I think bob is right in the respect that we may see Indy at a dig sight in some unknown country, directing his students or some workers on the art of digging, and possibly making less then respectable trades for items found at the sight with a government that doesn't want him there, but knows he can find impossible artifacts. The idea that Indy is a reluctant hero has been tossed around in other threads, and I think the same will be true of him in IV.
The problem is in the tangible artifact, worthy of the search by whomever. Since I think we can all agree that Eden may not be a primary goal of Indy, how then could the aforementioned artifacts pose as a problem for our reluctant hero?
Is it possible, as lorn suggests, that he would be at a dig trying to find a common thread toward Eden? Could the idea of a cold war play into this theroy? Is it possible that the TREE is a seconday object, a metaphor of life that is gained through the wisdom of failure? Could the soviets be looking for the FLAMING SWORD because it has the power to guard Eden from all sides? Until we can define the artifact concretely, (and all of it's consequences, positive and negative) all of the speculation is this thread is just that. I mean even if this concept isn't used it would be nice to think we all had a part in a story that could be put into print at some time...
What I should've said was Could not the Tower of Babylon have housed an ancient weapon? And could the use of that weapon have been the cause of the destruction of the Tower itself?
And once the plaque is found detailing the location of the supposed location of Eden, and scripture speaks of a flaming sword, could the people who located the plaque not conclude that The Machine housed in the Tower of Babylon might've had a twin weapon located at the Garden of Eden?
The dig at the location of the tower could make for some very interesting archaelogy.
While this plotline would be very similar to Indiana Jones and the Infernal Machine (a possible strike AGAINST the idea), it does lead to a lot of interesting story possibilities.
It gives you the archaeology that you're looking for...the possible opponents for Indy (if you buy into the communists searching for an ancient weapon), and could explain how Indy would make for the Garden of Eden without actually seeking the Tree of Life.
I can see the Soviets excavating the tower site, the American government contacting Indy to try and figure out what's going on, and Indy locating the plaque that leads to the location of Eden. After that, it's a race.
Is it a Raiders clone? Maybe...it's also got a lot of elements of Infernal Machine. Where else can we take the story?
I really like the tree of life serving as the philosphical aspect of the film, as well as the sword of fire being the tangible, though deadly artifact. Not only would we as fans get a look into how Indy is realizing more and more his mortality, but we also get a very believable weapon which could be harnessed for evil. It is a McGuffin which may never have to be fully explored within the context of one movie.
The Tower of Babel as a holding tank for such an artifact at this point is a stretch for me. Here are a few reasons why:
1) The Tower of Babel was man's attempt to come together lest they be scattered all around the world. They spoke few words under one language.
2) God, by His own admission nothing that man proposes to do will be impossible (WOW) except live forever (no tree of life, available...) because of the unity of communication and purpose [internet?]
3) The Tower comes after the flood, and by my logic, after the separation of Pangeia as well as the tilt and creation of the seasons.
4) Since the Garden would have been altered by the flood, it would be highly unlikely that man would have found the sword (the fullness of the word) in order to build a Tower which was proclaimed to make a name for themselves.
Dang it lorn, not you got me thinking of strong rebutals, as well as some possible interpretation of prophecy....!
The only arguement I have is that the Word of God hadn't been fully revealed until after the coming of Christ, and the writing of the new testament. I might argue the writing of the Torah but that is a stretch with as much as I know about theology, so a full understanding of the way past the sword would not be available at the time of construction of the Tower.
The only thing that makes the Tower an interesting sub plot to the whole beginnning of time, Eden, Tree of Life thread we have here is the Babel means "The gate of God" and Balel in Hebrew means "confusion"
Who knows, maybe the Tower of Babel was one of the first original archeological sights (near the believed sight of Eden at the time) and whose sole puropse was to get man back into Heaven with God, only they did not have the knowledge of the sword at the time...
I think you may've misinterpreted some of my idea, so I'm going to clarify here.
I'm going to use communists as the adversaries for this theory, though really it could be anybody. Communists just happen to be convenient for the time period.
Firstly, I agree with you that the Sword of Fire represents the word of God. The scripture states that God had placed "a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."
In many biblical passages, there are dual meanings recorded. We can interpret this to mean that the way through the Guardians of the Garden (cherubim) can only be made by coming by the Word of God.
However, it can also be interpreted to mean that at the Garden itself is a guardian "which turns every way" and will destroy any who attempt to breach it.
The thing that I keep focusing on is the plaque that was located near Babylon which pointed to the location of the Garden.
You're correct in that the Tower of Babylon and the Confusion of the tongues happened much later....but I'm looking at it this way -
The tower itself was built to try and reach the Heavens themselves...God had given his command to go out to the corners of the globe, and man, in defiance, stayed right where they were at.
The tower was struck down, and the confusion of the tongues ocurred, forcing man to scatter with those whom he could communicate with.
That's the literal translation.
Heres' where I take artistic license.
Imagine that the plaque that I spoke of earlier had been located near the ruins of the tower of Babel. Imagine that the communists were the ones who discovered the plaque that pointed out the location of the Garden. Now imagine that there was another part of the plaque that spoke of Babylonians building a defensive mechanism housed within the tower itself, and how this great machine led to the destruction of the tower and the spreading of the peoples from Babylon.
Taking these two pieces of the plaque together, the Communists could conclude that the device housed in the tower was similar to the Sword of Fire referenced in Genesis...a weapon, in an ancient arms race.
Seeking to capitalize on this to use in their OWN burgeoning arms race, they search for the location of Eden in the hopes that the Sword of Fire is actually another weapon. (Of course, it is not....but that's part of what makes this episode interesting)
This makes the story a bit of a cautionary tale...if you can imagine the Babylonians building a tower up to the Heavens to thumb their nose at God, you can also imagine them building a great weapon within it. They were struck down for their pride, and forced to disperse.
When man (represented by the Russian and American governments in a new arms race) seek the power of a weapon, they are likewise humbled (or destroyed) to discover that the power of God lies not in weapons, but in knowledge.
Those who are too arrogant to come before God by the Sword of Fire would be destroyed by the weapons of God, which no man can wield.
I am not trying to beat a dead horse, I swear. but all of the stuff within this thread have sparked a unquenchable desire to understand some of the most misunderstood passages of writing we have.
Let me compliment you lorn for the interpretation of the sword of fire. That was your idea, not mine. My goal, ultimately was to see if the tree of life has merit, especially from a biotech point of view. I am not disappointed about the way this has weaved itself, though. Even some older members have complimented on the merit of such a musing. We should all be proud.
What I want to address now, if it’s not too much of a departure, is why tell us of a Garden. I truly hope we are not too far into the thread that such a question would be ignored. I mean really. WHAT’S THE POINT OF TELLING US WE HAD PARADISE BUT LOST IT, AND IT CANNOT BE FOUND?
I don’t want to get too theological right now, but here is my thinking. For ordinary men, like all of us at the Raven here, we ALL get to see Eden when we die.
Yep, ALL of us. It’s that light we all see, the path, voices, the aliens in Ghost, and the whole interpretation of those experiences. SO, what do we have…assuming this thread is worthy of screen time? [If so lorn, I think you and I should at least be invited to Hollywood, if not given a paycheck. Lol]
1950’s arms race.
Garden of Eden in the middle of 4 rivers, two that we know.
Rivers headwaters are near Caspian Sea (“God” always starts at the beginning).
Babylon plaque was origin of Eden inscribed.
Sword of Fire equals death.
Kill the Capitalistic bastards.
Indy’s protégé works with Red’s.
Indy must save the world from being a cog in the machine.
Indy finds the Garden of Eden (as we all do).
Indy wins but loses his soul or dies. (Thanks Attila)………….
You see, Eden is found by all at death, so in order for Indy to find it he must die by the Sword of Fire.
I believe that the concept of Eden is that we all were created and existed in the 'Source'. Along the way our ego removed us from the 'source' and we existed materialistically from that point on. The mythological impact of the story of Eden has a moral message about the importance of trying to find the 'source' or rediscover the 'source' again.
This is based on the usual spiritual shedding the ego kind of theology.
As a side note, whatever happened to Eden representing the origin of mankind? I mean, does it hold the secret of whether we are extraterrestrial in origin? Or will it reveal that we are much older than previously thought?
[Edited by thegreatimposter on 06-28-2003 at 09:45 am]
Has anyone heard of the ancient eucalyptus tree in Iraq, that was burned by Hussain during the scorched earth policy he promoted? It was called "Adam's Tree" and is now in ruin. Am I the onlyone who has heard of this?
All the movies seem to have culminated in a kind of spiritual journey for Indy. He realized (albeit briefly) the power of the supernatural in ToD, he actually captured the Ark, he had the Grail in his hands. Perhaps just seeing the Tree of Life, even if it's over the shoulder of the cherub, could bring some closure to the journey. It would have to end in a cryptic one liner from the angel, of course. And that far-away, introspective stare from Indy...