 The author of Of Angelic Blood talks about his book, his characters, his polemics, his writing style, his reading list, his hobbies, and more.
How would you describe the novella, Of Angelic Blood?
Of Angelic Blood qualifies as normative fiction. Just beneath the surface of this ostensible love story rests the mandate for the elevation of human dignity and value. The angelic character, Sophia, represents humanity's universal position as imago viva Dei (created in the image of the Creator) and man's potential for greatness. She is also a metaphor for the categorical imperative. In a Kantian sense, she is a maxim to be universalized.
If I may add a little disclaimer, I am not proffering an anthropocentric message. It is a theocentric message, emphasizing humanity's dependence upon a transcendant Creator. Anthropocentricism can be most succinctly encapsulated in the dictum of Protagoras, "Man is the measure of all things." When universalized, this maxim invariably promotes moral relativism and anthropocentric hubris. Every modern form of totalitarianism has been premised upon such thinking. Theocentricism, however, does not allow for moral relativism and anthropocentric hubris. In acknowledging a transcendant Creator, theocentricism also acknowledges a transcendant moral code and humanity's subordinate position to some one higher. Humanity still holds the potential for greatness, but only by acknowledging his Creator and the values embodied by that Creator. So, theocentricism transcends the dialectic of anthropocentric hubris and anti-human self-loathing.
Sophia represents the glory that is reserved for humanity alone. Ironically, Sophia suffers from self-loathing because she is not human and, therefore, is precluded from consideration for such glory. But, instead of becoming envious, she has fallen in love with humanity. She recognizes the innate greatness that lurks beneath man's exterior. This was one idiosyncrasy that I really liked about the character. It would be extremely easy (not to mention cliched) to depict angels as superior to man. In recent years, there has been this disturbing preoccupation with Nietzsche's Ubermensch, the man who has abolished his own humanity and has become something else. You see this theme expressed through the romanticized view of vampires that proliferates modern horror fiction (e.g., Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles). The cultural impact of such literature is becoming disturbingly evident. I know people who have become virtually obsessed with vampires and have literally rejected their own humanity in the process. In addition, with the Human Genome Project and the popularization of genetic research, institutionally accredited science has been gradually migrating back towards a eugenical view of man. This shift is also inspired by Nietzsche's mandate for man to slay himself and become something else. Of Angelic Blood is a literary polemic against this Nietzschean, anti-human paradigm.
Where did the original idea for the novella come from?
Of Angelic Blood began to take shape when I was studying Immanuel Kant. Although I didn't entirely agree with Kant's purely rational approach to morality, I found his concept of the categorical imperative particularly compelling. According to Kant, man is capable of rationally discerning right and wrong. The human mind does this by critically assessing the hypothetical maxims that life presents. If a maxim can be universalized without a logical contradiction, Kant contends that the maxim is morally valid and good. A maxim that is good becomes a categorical imperative. It is the required course of action in all circumstances and conditions. Kant synopsized it with the following aphorism, "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
I wondered if anyone could so perfectly encapsulate what is good that he or she could actually become a maxim incarnate. Of course, Jesus Christ would be the foremost example. Being perfect and without sin, Jesus Himself is a maxim to be universalized. Is it possible for man to achieve such a high standard. Well, in Romans 2:14, the apostle Paul talks about how the Gentiles did not have the law, but still conducted themselves lawfully. Thus, they became a "law unto themselves." Evidently, the Lord was leading them in some way. Kant would probably argue they the Gentiles were just using their rational minds to discern the same moral truths that were identified by those who had the law. However, given man's ability to rationalize just about anything, including self-interest, I would have to argue that the Lord was working on a deeper, spiritual level with the Gentiles. At any rate, the point is that perfection was always man's first estate, one which he is destin ed to reclaim through God. The propitiatory death and miraculous resurrection of Jesus Christ began the process by which this would happen. So, in spite of the systemic corruption that besets man, humanity still possesses an inherent potential for perfection. Given this innate propensity for greatness, why would we long to be anything other than human?
This view of humanity prompted me to re-examine angels. I think angels have been disproportionately idealized. To be sure, there is a glory within them, but that does not make humanity their subordinates. In fact, in I Corinthians 6:2-3, it is written that we shall actually judge angels. Evidently, man is meant for greater things than angels. In Psalm 8:4-5, it is revealed that we were made only "a little lower than the angels." When God incarnated Himself as a man in the person of Jesus Christ, the dignity of humanity was raised. Now, we are above the angels, as is evidenced by the words of I Corinthians 6:2-3.
Of course, man's favored station in the universal order made him some enemies. Lucifer's jealousy of humanity was one of the motives that prompted his rebellion against God. This made me wonder if any angels responded in exactly the opposite way. Did some angels recognize humanity's intrinsic greatness and become so enamored of man that they actually derided themselves? And so, the character of Sophia began to take shape. I think that Sophia is a wonderfully paradoxical character. She is beautiful, kind, loving, and selfless... everything that the modern pop culture "woman" (e.g., Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, etc.) is not. Yet, she suffers from self-loathing. She wishes that she could be human. Her inability to escape the angelic condition makes her profoundly unhappy. Ironically, the very human that she falls in love with also suffers from self-loathing. Like Sophia, Filo hates himself. Together, the two rediscover their own intrinsic value.
How would you describe the central character, Filo?
Filo is contemplative, probing, and inquisitive. He is also terminally shy. He has spent a majority of his life on the outskirts of mainstream culture and is thoroughly unfamiliar with the elaborate system of semiotic codes that constitute modern social discourses.
There is a tendency by readers to look for something autobiographical in a writer's work. How close are you to the character of Filo? Is he someone you relate to?
More than I care to admit.
A reviewer from Ghostwriter Literary Reviews said "Phillip D. Collins is a brilliant writer, who expresses his hypnotic scripts into powerfully poetic stories that will keep your interest." But the same reviewer also noted "My only problem with this book was that a lot of the vocabulary would go over the average reader's head. It sounds good, but can confuse the less than average genius." Do you feel that is a valid criticism, or are you concerned as a writer about writing over the reader's head?
Oh, it's a valid criticism. Ironically, many of my favorite writers and artists are capable of expressing complex concepts and profound through simplicity. I guess that I write precisely the same way that I talk. Having spent so many years in academia, I guess I have been communicatively institutionalized, so-to-speak. I speak like an academician. So, I can't help but use the words that I use.
At the same time, I do think that it is good for the reader to stretch his or her mental muscles a little bit. Sure, some of the words and concepts presented in Of Angelic Blood might require explication. But, you can always look them up. And, what is wrong with expanding one's own knowledge a little bit.
You seem to draw a very clear line between good and evil in the novella, this at a time when most fiction is more interested in the "anti-hero" or a lot of shades of gray. There is also an obvious spiritual component to the story. Do you consider yourself a spiritual person? What's your personal philosophy on good and evil?
I am a Christian, so that should already give readers an idea about my philosophy on good and evil. That being said, I wanted to write a story that communicated Christian messages without being overtly Christian. That way, I could convey what I know to be true to a wider audience. In addition, much of the overtly Christian fiction that is out today is campy, overwrought drivel (e.g., the Left Behind series). I wanted to do what Samuel Johnson did with Rasselas, which, by the way, is a work that I allude to several times in Of Angelic Blood. I wanted to share the Gospel without alienating anyone. Most contemporary Christian fiction reads like propaganda. But, a love story like Of Angelic Blood has elements that everyone can relate with. I feel that the truth of the Gospel is so universal that it can be communicated through just about any artistic medium without pontificating or sermonizing.
As for the popularity of the "anti-hero," I think that this literary trends bespeaks the same cultural proclivity towards an "anti-human" Weltanschauung, which I mentioned earlier. William Blatty, author of The Exorcist, once remarked, "The young audiences of today are largely spiritual and mental troglodytes." Sadly enough, I can't argue with him. Young audiences tend to be attracted to morally bankrupt characters. Moral characters are caricatured as either naive and trite or fanatical and condemning. Suddenly, all that is corrupt and base is exalted. Man is not encouraged to regain his first estate, but to embrace the antithesis.
Those who paint with a "lot of shades of gray" are just attempting to legitimize amorality. They often construe moral complexities as cases in point for the complete rejection of any objective moral code. Subsequently, they advocate moral relativism. The problem with relativism is a systemic one, a dilemma intrinsic to the view itself. Relativism is predicated upon the contention that there are no absolutes. Yet, if there are no absolutes, then one cannot absolutely declare that there are no absolutes. In fact, declarative statements cannot exist because they are statements of fact. Facts are absolutes and, according to relativism, do not exist. Immediately, the position implodes, crushed by its own intrinsic irrationality. Relativism is a self-refuting philosophical position.
What do you hope the reader walks away with at the end of the story?
I'd hope that readers would re-examine the value of being human. Contrary to the Nietzschean view of man, humanity is not a liability. It is our greatest asset.
What do you do when you aren't writing?
I am very active in theatre. I have acted in over twenty plays and one independent film. I most recently performed in a production of The Sand Storm, a play about returning Iraqi War veterans. A trailer for the show can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BU6-gnxVpy0. I was very happy with the show. Audiences were visibly moved. I will be auditioning for another show in January.
I have also directed and edited a short horror movie entitled Harvest Moon. It is a modest film. It boasts a few visceral highlights, including an exploding and disappearing cornfield. The film is available through DRE5 Productions, which can be visited at www.dre5productions.com.
In addition to acting, I also play music. I've had over seven-years of formal training on the guitar. I love neo-classical, progressive rock (e.g., Yngwie Malmsteen, Chris Impellitteri, ect.). My brother and I have been assembling material for demo, which we hope to record some time later in 2008.
What is on your current reading list?
Jesus Among Other Gods by Ravi Zacharias
Fire in the Minds of Men by James Billington
Discipline and Punish by Michel Foucault
Oleana by David Mamet
"Innocence Lost," an excellent short story by Angel (my favorite local author)
"Ocean Friend," a wonderfully emotive poem by Snow (another local author and personal collaborator)
Any upcoming projects?
I am working on a story entitled "Privation of Good." It examines evil as the absence of good. The story is set in the middle ages, when Europe had reached a demographic nadir because of the Black Death. Like Of Angelic Blood, it will involve spiritual forces and ethereal entities.
I will also be auditioning for a production in January 2008. It is a Gore Vidal play entitled The Best Man. The characters are very well-written and the topic is timely. I have a particular role in mind, so I am going to give the best audition I can to win it.
Of Angelic Blood can be found here.
|
