ON THE MARIAN IMAGERY IN _THE TERMINATOR_
by Br. Dennis Kriz, OSM
(c) 1997 Dennis Kriz, OSM
Friar Servants of Mary
This paper may not be reprinted for profit without my permission
-- Br. Dennis Kriz, OSM
INTRODUCTION
This Thursday night (Sept 17) CINEMAX will be broadcasting once
again the Terminator. Since the film has been around for over
twelve years now, that it is being broadcast then is, in itself
unimportant (One can also rent it at any given time). At the same
time, I would like to call attention to this film in a manner which
I think would be fascinating to many, but which, I think most,
including most critics, up until this time have missed.
For the movie THE TERMINATOR turns out to be an interesting and
remarkably faithful adaptation of the Bible's Apocalypse/Revelation
12 expressed in the contemporary idiom.
So get out your Bibles, read Chpt 12 from Revelation (or in
Catholic lingo, the Apocalypse) and let me explain...
THE "DRAGON"
The Terminator monster played by Arnold Schwarzenegger serves a
terrifying updated expression of Apoc/Rev 12's "dragon." Indeed,
the Terminator is portrayed as having been born of human arrogance
(that is, Sin) with a single-minded task -- to simply destroy
everything it its path until its programmed objective, whatever it
may be, is obliterated. In otherwords, the Terminator's mission is
simply to kill, kill, kill. The Terminator thus serves as a
horrific "image of man", a product indeed, of humanity's thrust to
mold and dominate all the world in its image.
Indeed, in the Terminator's time, humanity has succeeded all too
well. The machines they have created (the great computers), gain
a "consciousness." Then, no doubt, still operating out of their
human _programming_ the computers decide in their Macchiavelian /
Nitzschean "beyond good and evil" and then monstrously efficient /
"singleminded" / machinelike sort of way - after a nanosecond's
deliberation (more that enough time in the cyber-realm...) - decide
that it is in "their interest" to simply destroy humanity (their
maker) before humanity knows what hit it.
Most of humanity is destroyed in the nuclear war set-off by the
machines themselves, and the movie is then set, in part, during the
machines' subesequent "mop-up operations" - The Terminator
monster/machine is sent back into the past by the machines, to kill
the mother of the humanity's resistance leader so that he would
never be born (Cf. Apoc/Rev 12:4-5).
The Terminator, played by eminently Aryan, Arnold Schwarzennegger,
is thus both the Nietzschean Superman and "Dragon" of his time.
THE "SAVIOR"
The future "warrior savior" (Cf. Apoc/Rev 12:5) in the movie has
even a name, John Conner, whose initials are "J.C." Despite his
future messianic stature, his name is also a _common one_ to a
contemporary American audience. He is thus portrayed as being both
"super" and as having come out of "one of us."
THE "ANGEL"
Kevin Reese is the messanger/protector sent back in time by the
adult John Conner to his mother, announcing to her both her
importance/mission and protecting her from the Terminator, who was
sent back in time by "the machines" in order to kill her. Reese
serves thus a conflated Gabriel (Cf. Lk 1:26-38) and Michael (Cf.
Apoc/Rev 12) character in the story.
THE "VIRGIN"
Sarah Conner was John Conner's mother in the movie. Sarah is a
Biblical name. Further the Biblical Sarah shared something in
common with the Biblical Mary: both had the birth of their sons
announced to them in advance by God (cf. Genesis 18:1-15) or by a
messanger from God (cf. Luke 1:26-38).
Sarah Conner's physical virginity at the beginning of the film is
ambiguous. One indeed gets the impression that she probably was
not still a virgin at the beginning of the film, and is definitely
not a virgin at the film's end (as John Conner is conceived as a
result of Sarah inviting Reese - who was in fact, up until that
time a virgin - to have sex with her at a point in the film).
Perhaps it would be too much to expect of a Hollywood film flirting
with so much more-or-less obvious christ-referring imagery to
portray Sarah as being explicitely a Virgin in a traditional
physical sense. However, Sarah retains many very interesting
"Virgin-like" characteristics: She's a nobody. In fact, she's a
waitress -- a modern-day "servant/handmaid." She's somewhat
awkward. A little wise-guy kid plays a joke on her in the
"Denny's-like" restaurant in which she works causing her to spill
something on herself (water?) in the openning scene of the movie.
She is definitely not part of the "social elite." Indeed, her
"one-of-us" "innocence" is further reinforced by her being "stood-
up" by her boy-friend the night she meets Reese and the Terminator
out to kill her.
Sarah's "Virgin-likeness" is thus expressed in this movie through
her awkwardness/innocence. In this "nothing-special" innocence,
Sarah Conner, like the Biblical Mary reflects _us_.
In fact, the Sarah Conner character finds countless reexpression
in the readily identifiable "Virgin" character in 1970s-early 1980s
"Mad slasher" films -- "Halloween," "Friday the 13th," "Prom
Night," etc, even, if more distantly, in Steven King's "Carrie."
In each case, while the monster, who systematically liquidates "the
elite", often to the cheers of the audience, is finally overcome by
who one critic calls "The Final Girl" but who we as uncoothed
teenagers used to simply call "The Virgin." (In the case of
"Carrie", Steven King has noted, Carrie herself, in "Solomonlike
fashion" liquidates the elite who oppressed her). What has
interested some feminist critics has been that IN ALL THESE MOVIES,
the audience has been predominantly or even OVERWHELMINGLY male,
and yet, the audience at the end of the picture _identified with_
"the Final Girl" cheering her on, until she defeated the monster
who tormented her.
THE CLIMAX
This brings us to the climax of THE TERMINATOR. Events bring
Reese, Sarah and the Terminator monster to a robotics plant (where
the still mindless precursors of the Terminator work). Reese, in
a dieing gasp of traditional but INSUFFICIENT male chivalry/bravado
is able to damage but not destroy the Terminator monster, whose
humanlike skin had by now been seared-off and was now exposed to
all for the mechanical horror that it always was. The Terminator
monster, now simply a metalic, but still functioning skeleton, no
longer with legs (which were blown-off of it by Reese in his
parting suicidal attack) is reduced to dragging itself along the
floor (like the ancient serpent of the Garden of Eden [Cf. Genesis
3:14]). But, programmed as it was to destroy Sarah Conner, it
continues to do so, dragging itself along the floor with one arm
and GRABBING AT SARAH'S FEET with the other. Sarah destroys the
Terminator monster once-and-for-all BY CRUSHING ITS HEAD IN A
_GIANT_ MECHANICAL PRESS: "I will put emnity between you (the
serpant) and the woman, and between your offspring and hers: He/She
(*) will strike at your head while you strike at his/her heel" (Gen
3:15).
(*) Pronoun unclear: He, refering generically (he/she) to the
woman's offspring, she if refering to the woman herself.
To any traditional Catholic, the Mariological imagery should be
clear: The iconography of Mary as the Immaculate Conception has
been of Mary standing over the Serpant having crushed his head
against the Earth with her heel.
THE FINAL SCENE
If however, one were to still miss Mariological imagery of the
Terminator, the movie ends, with the now obviously pregnant Sarah
Conner driving off "into the desert" to safety until the proper
time (Cf. Apoc/Rev 12:14), indeed, to the neighboring country of
Mexico (as Mary/Joseph did by fleeing with the infant Jesus to
Egypt, [Matthew 2:13-15]).
(End of Part 1 of 2)
ON THE MARIAN IMAGERY IN _THE TERMINATOR_ [Continued...]
by Br. Dennis Kriz, OSM
(c) 1997 Dennis Kriz, OSM
Friar Servants of Mary
This paper may not be reprinted for profit without my permission
-- Br. Dennis Kriz, OSM
SOME POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION: ON THE VALUE (?) OF A MOVIE LIKE THE
TERMINATOR
In this presentation I have shown the by-now more-or-less obvious
parallels between the film THE TERMINATOR and the imagery portrayed
in the 12th Chapter of the Apocalypse/Revelation along with the
traditional Catholic interpretation of this text (which has linked
this text with the passage in Gen. 3:15 giving a lively and
glorious image of Mary as the "Woman Clothed in the Sun" and the
"New Eve" who helped crush the head of the serpant with her "yes"
to the will of God).
There are questions to be asked as to the value to such "updated"
adaptations of the Scriptures.
On the positive side, there is little doubt that the detailing of
the parallels between this movie and these highly esoteric Biblical
texts can give today's generation of Americans/Westerners a
PROFOUNDLY MORE COMPREHENSIBLE PERSPECTIVE on the meaning of the
symbols used in these texts, as well as the theology behind them.
I found the employment of the Terminator cyborg/android monster as
a contemporary expression of the "dragon" of Apoc/Rev 12
particularly compelling, this in particular because the _humanly_
created Terminator mechanical monster explicitely points to the
source of the Evil expressed in this monstrocity in human
arrogance, that is, sin.
Further, while in part amusing (that Hollywood can't seem to bring
itself to put on the screen a true, even physical Virgin), I found
the film's exploration of what characteristics in Virginity are
indeed the most important in making symbol of "the Virgin" a symbol
of "one of us" _very interesting_. And I do think that this movie
can help give the contemporary person a greater appreciation of
what exactly Mary symbolized in the Annunciation scene of Luke's
Gospel (Lk 1:26-38): She symbolized "the Daughter of Zion", a
member of the people of God and indeed a member the whole of
Creation. Her "Yes", prefigured in fact, or made possible the
whole of Creation's eventual saying of "Yes" to God (Cf. Lk 1:38,
Rom 8:18-25).
There are those who would question the violence of the movie (as if
Apoc/Rev. 12 or indeed the just about all of Apoc/Rev was not
violent). There are also those who would find the unmarried sex
scene between Sarah and Reese (which in the movie was heavily
implied to have been the cause of the conception of John, who would
become the future savior of the world - in the universe of this
particular movie) as bordering on blasphamous. On the flip-side
some could perhaps see this particular scene as somehow a "proof"
that Jesus whom we Christians hold as the Christ would "have to
have been" conceived in a similar (non-virginal) way. A "proof" it
clearly is not... and it certainly would not take the production of
a Hollywood movie to say the obvious: that true virginal conception
would be something truly outside the natural order of things. And
that is of course exactly what the Gospels Matthew/Luke claim. To
take away Jesus' divinity to reduce him to one of many other "great
human leaders," and it goes without saying that many "human
leaders" would probably be more "relavent" today that a purely
human Jesus would be (One thinks of Martin Luther King, Mohatma
Gandhi, even Mother Teresa - on her own). But none of these purely
human leaders can save...
One can perhaps question the employment of violence in the
Terminator in another way: that it seems to propose violence
(against machines) as the way to go, while at least many would
argue that Christianity is or should be inherently non-violent.
Again, we would fall back to the reality that the book of the
Apocalypse/Revelation is graphically violent. Yet here many
Christians, and correctly I believe, would argue that the book of
the Apocalyse/Revelation is really to be understood as a "spiritual
conflict" not to be taken _literally_ but whose drama simply
requires the wide-open glorious canvas _portraying_ the whole of
creation "blowing up" -- afterall, we are talking about the great
"fireworks" consumation of all Creation.
Yet, this could, and I would argue _should_ be said of the
Terminator as well. And I say this because I think most people
intrinsically recognise these graphically violent movies like the
Terminator as _fictional_ (not real and yet very emotional ...
requireing again a very large canvas and fireworks) and watch them
in a very different way from the way they would watch a movie like
Schindler's List which is also graphically violent and yet
obviously more real. Indeed, I have _met_ people who have had
little or no trouble watching, popcorn in hand, the standard
Schwarzennegger/Van Damme/Segal movies in bliss, and yet become
very disturbed by the violence of the far more closer to home, far
more real accounting presented in Schindler's List.
Perhaps an even better comparison would be between the all-but
unwatchable realism of "The Texas Chain-Saw Massacre" and the
subsequent "teenie bopper" mad-slasher films which imported from
the "Texas Chain-Saw Massacre" its principle icon -- the hockey-
masked madman with a buzzing-chain saw -- but placed him in such a
stylized (and safe) environment of the high school crowd from the
American suburb of the 1970s-80s, that there was no question that
the subsequent slew of spin-offs - Halloween, Friday the 13th, etc
- were basically "morality tales" (the arrogant and the oppressors
all get killed, and the virgin representing all the "humble folks"
triumphs in the end).
As such, a very interesting, and in our contemporary
American/Western culture, a very important study could be made of
how the cueing of audiences as to what is meant to document a
literal/physical reality (ie the horror of War (as, in for example,
the movie "Memphis Belle" a 'new generation' WW II movie), the
horror of the Holocaust (as in "Schindler's List"), or the result
of the progressive desensitization resulting from ongoing
dehumanizing work (which I believe was the primary or certainly
most viable motivation behind the making of the "Texas Chain Saw
Massacre") and what is meant to be above all a flamboyant stylized,
symbolic expression of emotion or reality (think of Kafka or "The
Far Side") _beyond_ the literal, physical plane. (If one were to
for instance consider the sheer number of potentially debilitating
'horrors' awaiting the average high school kid who approaches 'Prom
Night' -- where one is going to be mercilessly scrutinized by
his/her peers on basis of one's appearance, wealth, wit, one's date
and often enough even one's sexual performance -- it should
surprize no one that a great many teenagers would really wish that
_someone_ would just come out and "cut down" the elite of one's
class who would be oppressing him/her).
So in this light, even the violence of the Terminator needs to be
discussed in the future in more thoughtful light.
CONCLUSION
All in all, I hope that you will have found this exposition on the
Terminator as interesting as I have. In recent years, there has
been a great deal of interest, both among Protestant and Catholic
thinkers to better seek to understand the emerging post-modern
culture, which is proving to be a "new world" for secularist and
believer alike. And I do hope that even the avowed secularist will
be able through this reflection on the Terminator and its borrowed
motiffs and themes from Apoc/Rev 12 to see the Christian concepts
as Sin and even the role of the Virgin Mary in Catholic thought in
a new and more comprehensible light. For the Scriptures became the
Scriptures precisely because they were meaningful. If time and
changing location and circumstances causes us lose our
comprehension of the manners of expression used by the Scriptural
writers, then it is the challenge of the believers of today to re-
express this same message in imagery and language understandable
today. The screen-writer of the Terminator may or may not have
this intention at all in creating the Terminator, but this screen-
writer has given us a vivid example of what in fact is possible.
In peace,
Br. Dennis Kriz, OSM