An Analysis of Flann O'Brien's The Third Policeman

Hell - a concept which is a topic of heated debate among religious figures, mythologies, and philosophers alike is prevalent in Flann O’Brien’s The Third Policeman. Hell, in Christianity, is a place located within the Earth. It is the place of perpetual torment for sinners. In going to Hell, the sinner retains all knowledge of life, and that knowledge is used in torment for all of eternity. This is similar to the world the narrator of O’Brien’s work enters after having committed a murder. In his Hell, the character is tormented with unfinished business, being that he was never able to publish his life’s work, the De Selby index, and the knowledge that the money to do so was always just out of reach.
In order for a person to be committed to Hell, they must commit a crime against God, or in other words, commit a sin. A sin which has not been repented for will result in the sinner being sent to Hell. “The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil”(Matt.13.41). Committing a sin means to break one of the ten commandments. Generally speaking, a sinner is a repeat offender. This is a result of not being close to God, and not understanding the error of his or her ways. The narrator in O’Brien’s work is one such repeat offender.
The fifth commandment is thou shall not kill. The narrator in O’Brien’s novel breaks this commandment when he assists in the planning and murder of Mathers. The narrator comments, suggesting the murder in the following: “I [...] smashed the blade of it with all my strength against the protruding chin. I felt and almost heard the fabric of his skull crumple up crisply like an empty eggshell. I do not know how often I struck him, but I did not stop until I was tired” (O’Brien, 16). If murder had been the only crime the narrator had committed, and he’d repented, he might not have been sent to Hell. However, this was not the case.
The narrator’s initial intention had not been to kill Mathers, but rather, to steal from him his cash box which was known to contain a large sum of money. The narrator needed it to publish his life’s work, the De Selby Index, and “[...] he meant to kill him as well in order to avoid the possibility of being identified as the robber afterwards” (O’Brien, 15). Divney succeeded in getting “[...] the black cash-box in his hand” and though it wasn’t the narrator whom actually removed the box from Mathers’ person, he conspired to steal the money from the old man alongside Divney. Therefore, he is also guilty of breaking the seventh commandment, thou shall not steal. As such, he is committed to a hellish place as punishment for his sins in life.
The Bible, one of the only sources of information on the topic of Hell, suggests that, in Hell “[...] there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matt. 8.12). Though there is little weeping in The Third Policeman, teeth are discussed in length upon the arrival of the narrator in “Hell”. Gnashing, or grinding of teeth is also present in the dialog of the novel. Being that the above quote is regarded as one of the most famous commentaries on Hell, and that as soon as the character arrives in “Hell” in O’Brien’s work he is immediately bombarded with discussions of teeth, it is obvious that this is not coincidental. Rather, the discussions are alluding to the book of Matthew and the discussion of Hell therein.
Upon arrival at the barracks, the narrator was met by a policeman “[...] as he gazed into a mirror” (O’Brien, 54). “ ‘It’s my teeth. [...] Nearly every sickness is from the teeth,’ “ (O’Brien, 54) the policeman said. Teeth are not a topic one would consider commonplace in conversation, especially upon meeting somebody for the first time. Until this moment, Pluck and the narrator had not been acquainted, and as such one might expect an introduction before conversation of teeth or the like. This is, no doubt, an allusion to the book of Matthew.
However, this instance is not the only allusion to the biblical passage aforementioned. In the following, the author again alludes to the New Testament:

“Nowadays,” the Sergeant said, “it is nothing strange to see a class of boys at First Book with wholesome teeth and with junior plates manufactured by the County Council for half nothing.”
“Grinding the teeth half-way up a hill,” said Gilhaney, “there is nothing worse, it files away the best part of them and leads to a hob-nailed liver indirectly.”
“In Russia,” said the Sergeant, “they make teeth out of old piano-keys for elderly cows”(O’Brien, 80).

In the above, O’Brien directly alludes to the gnashing or grinding of teeth present within the book of Matthew. Gilhaney directly suggests a grinding of teeth common in the “Hell” of O’Brien’s The Third Policeman. As such, the author’s intent of creating a sort of “Hell” within his novel becomes apparent to the audience.
Followers of the Catholic church believe that the knowledge attained in life is carried on to the afterlife. This knowledge is used against an individual as a form of torment, either physical or mental. This belief comes from the following passage:

There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony
in this fire.'
But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you
received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'
He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'
Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'
'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'
He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead' (Luke.16.19-31).

In the above, the rich man is sent to Hell remembering his family and the beggar Lazarus. He is tormented knowing that he has committed a sin and that his brothers will soon face a similar fate.
The narrator in The Third Policeman also enters Hell having retained the knowledge he acquired in life. This is evident because as he sets out into Hell, his first thought was that he “[...] recalled John Divney and [...] life with him” (O’Brien, 39). Furthermore, he recalls how he and Divney “[...] came to wait under the dripping trees” the night of Mathers murder (Ibid). The fact that he retains the knowledge he had of life suggests that the narrator has entered a form of Hell. However, this does not necessarily constitute Hell.
Hell is the place of perpetual torment for sinners. Sinners are cast into Hell where they are forever tormented with the knowledge they retained from life. In the case of the narrator, it was mainly two pieces of knowledge he was initially tormented with - that of the whereabouts of the cash box, and the need to publish and complete the De Selby Index. As he walks about Hell, the narrator wonders about “[...] the hiding-place of the black box” (Ibid). Throughout the novel, he attempts to trick the policemen into leading him to the box suggesting that he’d lost his American gold watch (O’Brien, 60). Throughout the entirety of the novel, the narrator is on a quest to find the cash-box. However, he never succeeds in actually doing so.
While on the quest to find the stolen money, the narrator is constantly reminded of De Selby, the philosopher on which he’d compiled an Index. These reminders are present in the text in the form of footnotes outlining how De Selby would have felt about many of the situations the narrator is faced with. The Index was likely the narrator’s greatest accomplishment and to complete it, all that was required was to have the work published. However, money was required to ensure that such a thing would happen. Essentially, it was a never ending cycle where the money was required to publish his works, and the money had to be found. However, neither occurs.
When the reader assumes that the book is finally coming to an end, we are made aware that the narrator has been dead all along.

“He said I was dead. He said that what he had put under the boards in the big house was not the black box but a mine, a bomb. I had gone up when I touched it. He had watched the bursting of it from where I had left him. The house was blown to bits. I was dead, [...] I was dead for sixteen years” (O’Brien, 197).

At this point, the narrator realizes that the search he had undergone for the box had been futile and that, furthermore, his lifes work would never be published. He had been dead all along, living in a hellish afterlife, tormented, thinking he was alive and still had an opportunity to complete his life work.
However, Hell suggests that one suffers torment perpetually, or for eternity. At the beginning of the book, when the narrator is initially cast into hell, he encounters the police barracks.

I saw, standing with his back to me, an enormous policeman. His back appearance was unusual. He was standing behind a little counter in a neat whitewashed day-room; his mouth was open and he was looking into a mirror which hung upon the wall.
[...]
“It’s my teeth,” I heard him say abstractedly and half
aloud. [...] “Nearly every sickness is from the teeth.”
His face gave me one more surprise. It was enormously fat, red and widespread, sitting squarely on the neck of his tunic with a clumsy weightiness that reminded me of a sack of
flour. The lower half of it was hidden by a violent red moustache which shot out from his skin far into the air like the antennae of some unusual animal. His cheeks were red and chubby and his eyes were nearly invisible, hidden from above
by the obstruction of his tufted brows and from below by the fat foldings of his skin. He came over ponderously to the inside of the counter and I advanced meekly from the door until we were face to face.
“Is it about a bicycle?” he asked (O’Brien, 54).

Being that Hell is a place of eternal torment, it would not have been a fitting ending had the book concluded with the narrators realization that he had been dead the whole time. Rather, the book ends in the same way Hell had begun.

We saw, standing with his back to us, an enormous policeman. His back appearance was unusual. He was standing behind a little counter in a neat whitewashed day-room; his mouth was open and he was looking into a mirror which hung upon the wall.
“It’s my teeth,” I heard him say abstractedly and half aloud. “Nearly every sickness is from the teeth.”
His face, when he turned, surprised us. It was enormously fat, red and widespread, sitting squarely on the neck of his tunic with a clumsy weightiness that reminded me of a sack of flour. The lower half of it was hidden by a violent red moustache which shot out from his skin far into the air like the antennae of some unusual animal. His cheeks were red and chubby and his eyes were nearly invisible, hidden from above by the obstruction of his tufted brows and from below by the fat foldings of his skin. He came over ponderously to the inside of the counter and I advanced meekly from the door until we were face to face.
“Is it about a bicycle?” he asked
(O’Brien, 199).

This ending suggests that the narrator will forever search, to no avail, for the black cash-box in an attempt to publish the De Selby Index. This, though not a physical torment, is the emotional torment the narrator must undergo in his Hell.
It is evident that it was O’Brien’s intent in writing The Third Policeman to create a Hell which the narrator was to navigate. This unnamed character was cast there for having broken two of the ten commandments. O’Brien created this Hell by alluding to the Bible, specifically the books of Mathew and Luke. He created a world like Hell in that the narrator retained his knowledge from life, and was tormented with this knowledge. Further, he was tormented perpetually. Therefore, it can be concluded that the setting in which the majority of Flann O’Brien’s The Third Policeman takes place is Hell.

The Collective Unconcious Synonymous with Oz

The Wizard of Oz (circa 1939) is a movie in which a young woman, Dorothy, is knocked unconscious and enters a land called Oz. Archetypal theorists, such as Carl Jung, would argue that her unconscious journey to ‘Oz’ is interchangeable with a journey into the collective unconscious. While in Oz, Dorothy encounters many characters which are eerily similar to those she had met in Kansas but with one major difference - the ones she met in Oz were exaggerated. These ‘ideal’ versions of the characters, undistorted and clear-cut, could be considered the essence or ideal form of the characters found in Kansas. Being that the term ‘ideal form’ was made synonymous with ‘archetype’ by Carl Jung and the ‘ideal forms’ in Oz are those of people in Kansas, Northrop Frye might argue that these characters must then also be archetypal. An archetypal critic would argue that because The Wizard of Oz shares many of the concepts theorized by Plato, Carl Jung, and Northrop Frye that shape archetypal criticism as a literary school of thought, this movie must then be archetypal.

Plato, a Greek philosopher (circa 424-347 BC), suggested a Theory of Forms. He suggested that the world as we see it is not the real world but rather a shadow of the real world or distortion. He had concluded that there was a place in which existed the essence of all objects. For example, the essence of the concept of a chair would exist in such a place. Further, he theorized that the chairs we see in reality are but distortions of the ideal. Through analysis of The Wizard of Oz, a comparison of the characters in Kansas versus the characters in Oz results in evidence of these forms manifested in the movie.

Zeke, a farm-hand on the Kansas farm, is a perfect exemplar of this. While in Kansas, Dorothy falls into a pig pen from which Zeke rescues her. After being pulled out, Dorothy replies saying, “Why, Zeke, -- you're just as scared as I am!” Hunk, another farm hand then alludes to the character of the Lion in Oz in the following way: “What's the matter -- gonna let a little old pig make a coward out of you?” This allusion allows the viewer to see the parallel between the character of the cowardly lion in Oz and Zeke, the cowardly farm-hand. However, a key difference to be noted is the way in which Zeke acts in comparison to the Lion. At first glance, Zeke is alike to any other person - his cowardice goes unnoticed - whereas the cowardice in the lion is recognizable right away. Dorothy comments saying, “Why, you're nothing but a great big coward!” Admittedly, the lion is a coward; “You're right -- I am a coward.” The parallels between said characters are further engrained in the viewers by the choice, made by the directors, to have the same actor (Bert Lahr) play both the Lion and Zeke making it impossible not to see the similarities between the two. Therefore, the similarities imply that the Lion is the ideal and undistorted form of Zeke; his qualities are obvious and unhidden as should be the case in the ideal, whereas Zeke is distorted.

Hunk, another farm hand, can also be used as an example of the ideal forms present in The Wizard of Oz. He too alludes to his alter-ego present in Oz while talking to Dorothy in Kansas; “Now lookit, Dorothy, you ain't using your head about Miss Gulch. Think you didn't have any brains at all.” He infers the concept of lacking a brain which is what afflicts the Scarecrow in Oz, and is the only character in Kansas to do so. The Scarecrow affirms this lack of a brain by saying, “That's the trouble. I can't make up my mind. I haven't got a brain -- only straw.” Although the parallels are vague, the allusion is there inferring that the characters are meant to mirror one another. Again, in order to accurately depict this the director of the movie chose to have the same actor (Ray Bolger) play both the Scarecrow and Hunk. Therefore, though the similarities are not as evident as in the case of Zeke and the Lion, the allusions made by Hunk to the character of the Scarecrow and the choice of the director to have the same actor play both characters allows the viewer to conclude that the Scarecrow must be the ideal form of Hunk located in the collective unconscious, or Oz.

Carl Jung took Plato’s theory of the ideal form and recoined the term calling them archetypes as opposed to forms. Northrop Frye then took the concept of an archetype and applied the idea to works of fiction. Both Jung and Frye concluded that these archetypes were known to all people and present everywhere. Being that the ideal forms present in Oz are those of characters, one might then suggest that these characters must also be archetypal. An archetypal character is one which shares characteristics with other characters in texts which acts in much the same manner in all instances in which the character is present. There are many archetypal characters, such as the wise old man and skeptic, which can be applied to more or less any piece of work - The Wizard of Oz is one.

The wise old man, described by Carl Jung, is typically described as a kind wise character who uses personal knowledge to guide the hero. The Scarecrow guides Dorothy in the right direction when she finds herself lost; “Now which way do we go?” she asks to which the Scarecrow replies, “That way.” However, this is not the only instance in which he uses his knowledge to guide the hero, Dorothy. When she becomes hungry, she cannot get any apples from the trees. The Scarecrow, however, knows a way to do this.

DOROTHY We've been walking a long ways and I was hungry and -- Did you
say...
FIRST TREE She...was hungry! Well, how would you like to have someone
come along and pick something off of you?
DOROTHY Oh, dear -- I keep
forgetting I'm not in Kansas.
SCARECROW Come along, Dorothy -- you don't
want any of those apples. Hmm!
FIRST TREE What do you mean - she doesn't
want any of those apples? Are you hinting my apples aren't what they ought to
be?
SCARECROW Oh, no! It's just that she doesn't like little green...worms!
TREE Oh...you...
SCARECROW Go -- Go!
TREE ...Oh -- Help -- let me
out. I'll give you little green...worms!
SCARECROW I'll show you how to get
apples!

The Scarecrow knows that getting a rise out of the trees will cause them to throw their apples, and in this way obtains food for Dorothy. It is his knowledge of the land that allows him to guide and aid the hero, Dorothy on her quest to see the Wizard.

The skeptic is self explanatory; it is a character whom is skeptical about the ideas which are supported by the hero, in this case Dorothy. Dorothy supports going to see Oz and believes that Oz will be the cause of all the characters’ problems. However, the Lion is always looking for reasons to opt out of going to see the Wizard. For instance, when he says, “Wait a minute, fellahs. I was just thinkin'. I really don't want to see the Wizard this much.” Throughout the plot, the Lion does things such as those outlined above. However, it is characteristic of a skeptic to eventually support the ideas supported by other characters in the plot. Such is the case of the Lion when he visits Oz, despite his hesitance and skepticism, and receives a medal for his courage.

Evidently, the collective unconscious is present in The Wizard of Oz being Oz itself as it is the place in which the ideal forms exist. These ideal forms are the Lion and Scarecrow, among other characters, and are the undistorted forms of Zeke and Hunk from Kansas. These characters, being that they are characters and not objects, are also archetypal being the wise old man, and the skeptic. Evidently, though the movie The Wizard of Oz is an atypical archetypal piece of work, it is archetypal. This is because regardless of its not following many characteristics common to archetypal pieces, it does contain many concepts suggested by theorists such as Plato, Carl Jung, and Northrop Frye as being the groundwork for this form of criticism. Therefore, because The Wizard of Oz contains the concepts of the collective unconscious, the ideal forms, and archetypal characters, the piece is archetypal.

Bibliography:

The Wizard of Oz. Dir. Victor Fleming. Based on the book by L. Frank Baum. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1939.

A Postmodernist's Playground

Ron Currie Junior’s debut novel God is Dead is a humorous work of fiction outlining what would happen in a world devoid of God. Its plot unfolds to become a playground for the postmodern critic. However, what is postmodernism? A true definition has yet to be determined. However, a work that is postmodern is said to have come after the modern movement of the late twentieth century. Postmodern theorists and critics, however, have come to some agreement as to what characteristics a postmodern piece of literature should contain such as black humor, pastiche, and temporal distortion. Currie’s piece God is Dead contains all of these through his combination of both fictitious and non-fictitious events, his satirical view of religion and God, and through his use of multiple narrators and a non-linear plot line.

Pastiche, by definition, is a postmodern writing technique that fuses a variety of styles, genres, and story lines to create a new form (Theatre Glossary). In Currie’s work, the pastiche is a combination of fictitious and non-fictitious events to create a larger work of fiction in which God has died. The first short story in the set of nine which make up the novel is set in “a refugee camp in the North Darfur region of Sudan” (Currie, 3). The chapter outlines the efforts of God who has manifested Himself as a "young Dinka woman" in His endeavors to atone to humanity for His sins. As He embarks on this journey, we are made aware of the "Janjaweed raiding parties" and their "slashing machetes"(Currie, 3). Being that the genocide in Darfur is a concern of current events, it cannot be argued that this portion of the novel is non-fictitious. Furthermore, the genocide happening in Darfur is a result of the Janjaweed, an Arab rebel group, whom have specifically targeted the Dinka people. Michael Garang, a forty-two year old Dinka, responded to the genocide by saying, “When the Janjaweed came to our village, they wanted to kill the Dinkas” (Thibodeaux). The word ‘Janjaweed’ translates to ‘men on horseback’, however, being that we now have modern forms of transportation they also travel in vehicles. This is also true of the Janjaweed in Currie’s novel - “God, still paralyzed, could only lie in the grass and listen at the mass of horses and Land Rovers rumble closer” (Currie, 4). Lastly, the Janjaweed are held responsible for the brutal raping of countless Darfurian women. Currie, commenting on this writes, “His paralysis saved Him from the Janjaweed; had He been able to rise and run, they would have captured him easily, and seeing in Him not the creator of the universe but rather a slender Dinka woman with a long, elegant neck an almond shaped eyes, they would have raped Him over and over.” (Currie, 4). Evidently, though Currie’s work is largely that of a fictitious world in which God has inexplicably died on Earth, the novel contains some events which have, in reality, occurred.

Moreover, Currie’s work does not only contain non-fictitious current events, is also contains characters whom have somewhat of a celebrity status in today’s society. Colin Powell, for example, former Secretary of State serving under George W. Bush between 2001 and 2005, is one such character. Being that the war in Darfur began in 2004, not only was Powell still in office, he actually commented on the events taking place there, and brought major attention to the events taking place in Darfur during his time in office. “Colin Powell hid from an angry sun in the air-conditioned interior of his Chevrolet Suburban” (Currie, 6) after being sent to a Darfurian refugee camp for a press conference. Whilst there he gave a speech; “We are anxious to see the end of militarism," Powell said. "We are anxious to see the Janjaweed brought under control and disbanded so people can leave the camps in safety and go back to their homes” (Currie, 9). The real Colin Powell traveled to a refugee camp located in Darfur in late June 2004. “Powell said after a fifteen minute walking tour, “We are anxious to see the end of militarism, we are anxious to see the Janjaweed brought under control and disbanded so people can leave camps in safety and go back to their homes.” “(Kessler). Clearly, the use of actual people as characters in Currie’s piece is only further evidence of his use of pastiche to create a larger work in his novel God is Dead.

Black humor, an element of many works regarded to be postmodern, occurs when events, objects, and/or topics that are generally regarded to be taboo such as death and religion, for example, are treated in a satirical or humorous way. When used as a basis for plotline in literature, it can usually found alongside a society in an unhealthy state much like the apocalyptic society depicted in God is Dead. The novel creates a world in which God has died, and the humorous repercussions of that. This topic may be considered taboo by theologists and the religious community. Therefore, this type of humor can be considered black humor. After God’s demise, society in Currie’s novel is left with a spiritual void. Looking to fill that void, they began searching for a new idol.

People everywhere were casting about for something to place their recently orphaned faith in. Agnostics joined the atheists and put their money on science, but they were, as always, hopelessly outnumbered. Many people, including most of the population of Africa, built temples dedicated to the dogs who had feasted on God’s flesh, churches where the hymnals consisted entirely of barks and whines transcribed phonetically onto the page. And here, out of the swamps of Louisiana’s Atchafalaya basin and into this burgeoning chaos came a sort of secular evangelist known as The Child. The Child was just that - a boy of three or so, serene and flawless, with cocoa skin and a vocabulary so rich it seemed he must have swallowed an Oxford English Dictionary. His message, delivered
first in town halls and opera houses, and later, as his popularity grew, in arenas and baseball stadiums, was simple : God has abandoned us. The way to salvation is through the child (Currie, 62).

In creating these new religions the author comments on the absurdity of religion as a whole generalizing that worshiping God is no different that idolizing a child or dog. Currie ridicules religion, and religion being that the majority of the population is devout to one religion or another, could offend many people. Therefore, this ridicule of religion could be considered black humor.

Furthermore, Currie writes of the suicides of clergymen and nuns as if their death has meant nothing. In the short story entitled The Bridge Currie examines how the death of a priest might affect society in a godless world. Dani, the narrator, “saw that the man on the wrong side of the railing was in fact a priest”(Currie, 33). “When she looked back the priest was gone. For a long moment, everything was frozen just like that. And then the sun came out from behind the cloud, and the Earth brightened, and things started moving again” (Currie, 35). The text allows the reader to see that their deaths are humorous in the aspect that these men and women are no longer needed in a society devoid of God. Currie then juxtaposes the deaths of these people of the church the purchase of food. “Suicide among nuns and clergy reached epidemic proportions, as did the looting of stores for comfort foods such as Little Debbie snack cakes” (Currie, 61). This apathetic attitude with regard to a serious matter such as death is synonymous with the definition of black humor.

Temporal Distortion, recognized in text by fragmentation of plot and non-linear narratives, is also a characteristic of works generally considered to be of the postmodern movement. Being that Currie has chosen to create a novel that is a compilation of many short stories, the plot line is intrinsically fragmented. Each short story ends, and the next begins seemingly disconnected from the first with the only link being that each takes place in a world without God. The first story takes place in Darfur where God dies, while others take place in America and even Europe. Though the novel is a set of short stories, an individual story could not stand on it’s own as each builds on the knowledge obtained from the prior stories. Therefore, the plot can be said to be fragmented amongst many overlapping plots, and thus, is postmodern in context.

As was previously discussed, Curries novel God is Dead has been composed of a series of short stories producing a fragmented plot. As such, being that each story has links to the prior stories, but a different set of characters and plot it would make sense that the narrators would also change. This is the case being that the narrator in the first of the series of short stories, God, dies. Dani, a young woman, takes over the narrative in the second story, and so on. As this non-linear narrative pattern is characteristic of postmodern pieces of literature, it is evident that this element of Currie’s work draws from the postmodern school of thought.

Evidently, as has been outlined, Ron Currie Junior’s God is Dead can be classified as a postmodern piece of literature - that which has occurred after the modernist movement of the nineteenth century. Though what makes a work postmodern is a topic that has been heavily debated, critics and theorists have agreed that certain elements are unique to works that are postmodern. These elements are pastiche, black humor, and temporal distortion. Being that Curries work contains events both fictional and non-fictional, satirizes religion and ridicules the death of people of the church, and is a novel composed of short stories told by multiple narrators, it contains all the characteristics of a work of postmodern literature. Thus, the novel can be considered a piece of literature of the postmodern movement.




Bibliography:

Text:

Currie, Ron. God is Dead. New York: Penguin Books, 2008.

Web Documents:

Kessler, Glenn. "Powell, in Sudan, Presses for Action ." The Washington Post 01 Jul 2004. 16 Oct 2008 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17471-2004Jun30.html>.

Thibodeaux, Raymond. "Displaced to Darfur, Dinkas fall victim to two Sudan wars." The Boston Globe 19 Dec 2004. 16 Oct 2008 <http://www.boston.com/news/world/africa/articles/2004/12/19/displaced_to_darfur_dinkas_fall_victim_to_2_sudan_wars?pg=full>.

Unknown. “Colin Powell.” Wikipedia. 2008. 16 Oct 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Powell>.

Unknown. “Postmodernism.” Wikipedia. 2008. 16 Oct 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism>.

Unknown. "Theatre Glossary." FilmPlus. 2004. 16 Oct 2008

<http://filmplus.org/thr/dic4.html>.

Unknown. “War in Darfur.” Wikipedia. 2008. 16 Oct 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur_conflict>.