JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755
DISCOURSE OF MYTH AND DEMYTHIFICATION IN GORE VIDAL’S JULIAN
Dr.G.Dhanavel, Assistant professor, Sri Balaji Arts and Science College, Chennai.
Abstract
Gore Vidal is one of the greatest twentieth century American novelists. He wrote
almost every genre except poetry. He wrote short-stories and novels, and he was also
considered as a master essayist. His powerful satire of the religious, mythological, historical,
sexual, literary and academic ideologies of America in the characteristic method of textual
play of conflictive discourses which engenders a decenterd worldview thus proves beyond
doubt that he is a deconstructive satirist.
This paper deals with Gore Vidal’s parody on the myths perpetuated by religious
ideologies as perceived in Vidal’s Julian. It shows how Vidal uncovers the fraudulency of the
religions, especially Christianity and the various cults that emanate from them. He also
deconstructs Christ by exploiting the volatility of these signifiers which do not have any
objective signified, and by a reversal of the Christ/Antichrist opposition in John Cave. The
deconstruction of these figures also effects the subversion of the doctrines of Christianity and
mocks at those who believe in them. The affectation, hypocrisy and superstition found m
historical Christianity and bred by the religions and cults are also delineated. It also
elucidates the effects of the commercialization of religion, its power and hegemony over the
masses that could result in a totalitarian religious order or unleash a potent destructive force
that can destroy the world, through the machinizations of a crazy cult leader. Vidal’s
uncovering of the evils within the ideology of the system of organized religions ruptures any
blind adherence to them.
Keywords: Christianity, Myth, Religion, Demythification
Volume XIII Issue III MARCH 2020 Page No: 1490 JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755
Gore Vidal is one of the greatest twentieth century American novelists. He wrote
almost every genre except poetry. He wrote short-stories and novels, and he was also
considered as a master essayist. His powerful satire of the religious, mythological, historical,
sexual, literary and academic ideologies of America in the characteristic method of textual
play of conflictive discourses which engenders a decenterd worldview thus proves beyond
doubt that he is a deconstructive satirist. But this has so far been lost on critics, clouded by
his reputation as a popular writer. This is further compounded by the fact of his versatility as
writer. The ease with which he succeeds in every field he enters has baffled many critics.
More than either of these factors, however, the radical indeterminacy of his works has made
it difficult for critics to categorize him. It is the decentered view of the world combined with
the radical indeterminacy in his novels and essays which makes it difficult for critics to
categorize Vidal. The indeterminacy of his novels is further evidenced in the dual nature of
his works which also defies a critic’s attempt at any final say on Vidal’s art. Having been
persistently anti-American, anti-institutional, anti-Christian and anti-traditional, His
purported allegiance to the eighteenth century aesthetic of the novel has puzzled many critics.
One would have expected a person so anti-traditional to have accepted the vanguard of
experimental art. Yet Vidal with his iconoclastic outlook of life and his ridicule of all that is
traditional only mocks at experimental art/postmodern theory. This is rather difficult for
critics to reconcile with.
The popularity, moreover, of Vidal’s writings is a sore in the eyes of the
academicians. For years, his books have been on the list of bestsellers. But, he has also
proved to his critics and readers alike that his books are not mere slapstick entertainers
without substance. The painstaking research of the historical novels and scholarship of all the
works in general, as well as the parody of the academic/experimental novels show that even
Vidal is academic to an extent and can play with the academic as the academic plays with
Volume XIII Issue III MARCH 2020 Page No: 1491 JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755
words. Again, his mobile skills defy unambiguous labeling.
Religion is a very common subject of satire. The serious demands religion imposes on
man and affectation and hypocrisy that it engenders has always been the butt of ridicule. Both
clergy and laymen are thus favourite targets of attack. Yet not many have attacked, mocked
or ridiculed Godhead itself. Traditionally, it is a forbidden subject and is considered an act of
hubris. But the sense of ennui, meaninglessness of life, and the consequent declaration of the
“death of god” by the existentialist, during the post-war period, saw the myth of godhead
exploded and made possible a satirical attack of godhead itself.
In Julian (1964) Vidal deconstructs the myths of Christ and attacks the religious
ideologies of Christianity. Through a subversive portrayal of the deity in the protagonist of
the novel, Vidal undoes the deityship of Christ, contests their doctrinal claims, and
simultaneously ridicules the adherents of these faiths. In the process Vidal uncovers the
superstition, hypocrisy, affectation, and destructive force of the religious cults that prosper on
the gullibility of masses. Vidal’s process of ‘demythification’ in his novels strikes at the very
heart of godhead and the spuriousness of religion itself, thereby positing a re-examination of
religious beliefs that man so blindly adheres to. Religion has played a major role in shaping
the character, society, and culture of America. As the Pilgrim Fathers flew from persecution
into the New World, they also created myths that assured them of God’s special protection
and care. America was, to them, the Promised Land, and they saw themselves as the covenant
people. While the country evolved through the centuries, religion too evolved into h plurality,
but the essence of the Christian beliefs was never lost. America still visualised itself as the
nation “under God” and religion directed the social, political, and even economic
considerations of the country, indeed of life itself.
The decades of the 1950s were no exception either. When Vidal wrote Julian,
America was revelling in the optimism of its post-war materialistic boom. Having emerged
Volume XIII Issue III MARCH 2020 Page No: 1492 JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755
unscathed from the war and establishing itself as a world power economically, militarily and
scientifically, America, proved itself, as it were, to be a nation “under God.” As dollars after
dollars rolled out from the mint with the legend “In God We Trust,” America experienced a
religious revival. Simultaneously there occurred a media explosion making the world a
“global village.” Revivalists were quick to grab this opportunity and turned the television into
a pulpit, where sinners could be saved by the “blood of the Lamb.” Consequently, religious
organizations on the lines of industries and enterprises cropped up their influence as ever
permeating the culture of the States. Each of them proclaimed a saviour, knowledge of
afterlife, a second coming, and the end of the world with different yet appealing flavours. In
spite of the seeping materialism and scientific spirit America accommodated various mystic
theologies propounding life after death that was, in Vidal’s view more often than not, ridden
with deep-seated superstitious beliefs.
Julian is written in this background but it is primarily products of Vidal’s reading of
the life of Christ in the Gospels, and Ecclesiastical history. The life of Christ exists as extant
myths in the national consciousness of the nation, America. This enabled Vidal to accomplish
with the participation of the reader, the deconstruction of the myths. Vidal’s strategy follows
the method explained in the last chapter. As he converts his reading into writing, that is, the
history of Christianity and the myths of Christ into the novel, Vidal retain the original
significance or the formal structure of the history/myth while introducing an opposing
signification, thereby rupturing the original mythical/historical text.
Julian supplements Messiah in its questioning of Christianity. Its method is that of
direct denunciation and the traditional ironic differences of ideal and practice/appearance and
reality. But the story emerges through the separate discourses of three narrators, which
question, relativize each other and render the text problematic. In the context of Christianity,
however, Vidal brings such binaries as Old Testament/New Testament,
Volume XIII Issue III MARCH 2020 Page No: 1493 JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755
Christianity/Hellenism into play to rupture the deityship of Christ and the doctrines of
Christianity. In the process he also works on the image of Julian, redeems him to that of a
secularist while simultaneously undercutting it by a contradictory ironic discourse of his
belief in Mithraism. He thus renders the figure of Julian problematic by juxtaposing his
opposition to Christianity with secularism which is in turn undermined by Julian’s faith in
Mithraism.
The mythical/historical content of all the three novels traverses, crosses and informs
each other. But Vidal uses this mythical/historical content in the postmodernist manner.
Traditionally mythology and literature were indistinguishable. The primal literature of many
nations is thus totally mythological. For example, Greek and Indian literatures cannot be
differentiated from their mythology. They are the same. In their use of such a mythology,
great masters drew heavily from it in the allusive and archetypal mode. Myths in literature
were a matter of common usage that more often than not provided the plot-structure and story
element of many works. It became a wholesome part of the content of these works thus
lending to them universality. In the modern age, however, myths emerged as a technique in
the works of modern writers. Coining the term ‘mythical method’ for this technique, Eliot in
his essay on Ulysses in 1923 defined it as a way of controlling and ordering the chaos of
contemporary history. Since there was no order m reality, the artist sought, through the
mythical method, to create order for himself in his work of art. He provided a semblance of
self- satisfying order to fill the lack in reality. But the postmodernist with his decentered view
of the world and his acceptance of chaos, sees this as an escape from reality. He disparages
this tendency of creating self-sustaining orders of art which cannot resolve the chaos of
reality. The postmodernist therefore carries out the “dismemberment of Orpheus.” He
incorporates myth in his work only to rupture its order, its semblance of unity and to
demonstrate the fact that no myth can suffice man’s needs. It is this kind of ‘demythification’
Volume XIII Issue III MARCH 2020 Page No: 1494 JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755
that Vidal indulges in, in Julian.
Julian targets the history of Christianity. By reading into the past and uncovering
Christianity inside out, Vidal not only exposes the hitherto spotless image of the religion but
also reveals Julian, the ‘apostate,’ in a new light. The differences between ideal and practice,
divisions in the church, the evolution of doctrines which end in absolutism, the contradictions
between the Old and New Testaments and the appropriation of Hellenism portray Christianity
as an evil, while Julian’s anti-Christian image is redeemed to that of a secularist.
Julian’s questioning of Christianity starts on a personal level. At an early age his
father is killed by Constantius who is supposed to be a devout Christian. On another occasion
in childhood, Julian witnesses two old men being man-handled by priests for being heretics.
These events of his childhood sow the seeds of rebellion in him against Christianity. He
reflects: “Even a child could see the divisions between what the Galileans say they believe
and what, in fact, they do believe as demonstrated by their action” (31). Later the divisions
that arise from doctrinal quarrels and the violence they engender establish his opposition to
the religion. The Athanasian and Arians differed on the interpretation of Jesus’ relationship to
the Father and engaged in continuous quarrels over it. Protestantism and Catholicism also
took root in Julian’s lifetime and resulted m much strife, violence, and bloodshed. Moreover,
these divisions based on differing doctrines were themselves made by extrapolatary
interpretation of the scripture in a series of Ecumenical councils. The dogmatism, absolutism,
and intolerance of others made Christianity a very disturbing and peace-breaking religion.
Julian’s analysis of early Christianity is very much Vidalian. He calls it “an age diseased by
the quarrels and intolerance of sect...” (22). Castigating the religion with utmost contempt, he
says: “No evil ever entered the world quite so vividly or on such a vast scale as Christianity
did” (129). Elsewhere Vidal makes the point that American society has been shaped morally
Volume XIII Issue III MARCH 2020 Page No: 1495 JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755
and intellectually for good or ill by Christianity. In “An Afterword” to The City and the
Pillar, Vidal says:
The murderous instincts of Christian absolutism first emerged in the
fourth century. And I do not think it an exaggeration to say that over the
centuries, Christianity has been responsible for more bloodshed than any
other force in Western life (163)
Julian’s record of contradictions between the Old and the New Testaments is rather
naive for an intellectual of his stature. Nevertheless they present indubitable paradoxes that
challenge the unity of the scriptures which are explained away as mysteries. Julian contends
that Jesus could not be the Son of God since he was a Jew and therefore calling himself Son
of God would mean blasphemy. He also disagrees with Paul’s vi6w that God is God both of
Jews and gentiles because by God’s own admission God is jealous God. Of Jesus’ deityship,
Julian says, “Are we to believe that there was no god until the appearance of a rabble-rousing
carpenter three-hundred years ago” (149). In Vidal’s final analysis, Jesus is a rebel Jewish
rabbi who acted out each prophetic requirement in order to fight the Roman empire.
Julian also accuses Christianity of appropriating all the myths of Hellenism. He
notes that in Christianity feast-days and saint were created as in Hellenism. Jesus was called
saviour-healer like Asklepois, while the doctrine of trinity is modelled on the Hellenist triune
Apollos, Helios, and Mithras. In this context Priscus remarks: “The Christians have slyly
incorporated most of the popular elements of Mithras and Demeter and Dionysus into their
own rites.Modern Christianity is an encyclopaedia of traditional superstition” (84).
Having shown early/historical Christianity in a denigrating light, Vidal now
establishes Julian as a secularist. He portrays Julian’s tolerance of all religions. After having
become an emperor, Julian issues an edict to the effect that all religions should be tolerated.
But the vindication of Julian does not overlook his weaknesses either. As Vidal lets
Volume XIII Issue III MARCH 2020 Page No: 1496 JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755
Christianity fall on its own shortcomings, so he allows the anti-rational and superstitious side
of Julian’s personality to be revealed. Julian embraces Hellenism through rituals and
mysteries, which to Priscus is as nonsensical as Christianity:
Granted, no educated man can accept the idea of a Jewish rebel as god.
But having rejected that myth, how can then one believe that the Persian
hero-god Mithras was born of light striking rock on December, 25...(84)
Pricus sees no essential difference between Christianity and Mithraism. But Julian embraces
it and feels that he is “born again”, that he is the chosen one of the Sun god for the
accomplishment of a mission. Once more, Priscus notes that Julian’s belief in a magic
ceremony makes him fall into the same nonsense as the superstition of the Christians. Thus
while allowing Julian to undermine Christianity, Vidal does not vindicate Julian’s fanatical
adherence to Hellenism. Julian’s belief in Mithraism is shown to be as perverse as the belief
in Christianity. By debunking/decentering Christianity as a religion of superstition and ritual,
Julian undercuts his own rational stand, his only saving grace being his secularism. However
Vidal rewrites the early history of Christianity and through it reshapes the personality of
Julian to a positive one. The historical apostate of the Christian point of view is changed to a
secularist in Vidal’s version. While in Messiah Vidal displaces Christ from the centre of
history in Julian, he redeems Julian from the marginal and foregrounds him into the centre,
thus reversing the historical understanding of Julian’s image of apostasy.
In Julian, Vidal’s deconstructive satire demythifies the divinity of Christ, exalts
Julian the renegade, and thereby attacks the spuriousness of religion itself. Consequently, he
mocks at those who believe in these deities and the affectation and hypocrisy of those who
practice it. In choosing to examine two diametrically opposite religions, one Occidental and
one Oriental, Vidal points at the underlying continuum of incredulous beliefs that have
grasped people’s mind in the two hemispheres. The contrast between the two cultures and the
Volume XIII Issue III MARCH 2020 Page No: 1497 JAC : A Journal Of Composition Theory ISSN : 0731-6755
two religions is, however, overcome by the underlying similarity of the archetype of the
incarnations. Julian thus has sceptical narrators who do not believe in an after-life and as
Luther points out, do not accept one recorded revelation at the expense of the other. Yet
ambiguously, Julian the intellectual who rejects Christianity almost embraces Mithraism.
Vidal’s questioning of the religious ideologies of Christianity subversion of the
divinity of Christ and exaltation of Julian demonstrate that man himself could fabricate such
ideologies for selfish ends. It opens the religious ideologies to a re-examination, a testing of
its validity without blind adherence to them, and is therefore to be viewed in a positive light.
It is pertinent that in his early twenties, Vidal met Santayana at the hospital of the Blue Nuns
in Home. At his parting Santayana told him: “I think you’ll have a happy life because you
lack superstition (88) as quoted in Berryman’s “Satire in Gore Vidal’s Kalki.” The prophecy
has proved true.
References
Berryman, Charles. “Satire in Gore Vidal’s Kalki.” Critique 22.2 (1980): 88-96. Print.
Davidon, A.M. “Gore Vidal and the Two Headed Monster.” Nation 218 (1974): 661-3. Print.
Dick, Bernard F. The Apostate Angel: A Critical Study of Gore Vidal. New York: Random
House, 1974. Print.
Kiernan, Robert F. Gore Vidal. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing, 1982. Print.
Vidal, Gore. Julian: A Novel. New York: Signet Books, 1985. Print.
---. “An Afterword.” The City and the Pillar Revised. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1965. Print.
Volume XIII Issue III MARCH 2020 Page No: 1498