by Peter John
The reception of any message depends both on the form of expression in which it is given and the frame of perception in which it is received.
Cultures provide means to shape the frame of reference for ideas they consider important, as well as sanctioning the means for presentation of those ideas. Shamans, bards, storytellers, priests, teachers, or curriculum committees are examples of the former. Sacred clowns serve the latter purpose, though sometimes filling both roles.
Sacred Clowns in the Pueblo Nations of the American Southwest, as in many other First Nations, entertain while educating, transfering experience, and protecting the people from spirtual threats while inviting related blessings. Caucasian American culture has developed a similar practice with its rodeo clowns. While lacking a directly spiritual affiliation, they do serve a role in preserving their cultural heritage. As the audience focuses on their wild antics, the clowns focus on their primary task. They provide safety, distract from the wildness of the animals, and augment the perception of rider control.
By the very nature of monarchy potentates could not be wrong. Social stability rested on their infallibility. Of those who had their ears, only the court jesters could safely contradict the king or emperor, or even draw his judgment into question. He did of course have to disguise it as a joke, a prank, or outright buffoonery. Ideally this would strike to the core of "the conscience of the king" on a a personal level. Edward Rowland Sill's "The Fool's Prayer" demonstrates one way this might have worked.
In western liberal democracy reaching the ruler's conscience involves reaching the people themselves -- even if that amounts to manipulating the public mind. The United States takes it further than most. Henry Kissingers Diplomacy emphasizes that a central challenge of American government is that the puiblic needs to find a moral imperative for actions actually dictated by the Westphalian standards of international relations.
That is all governments, don't need to recognize the laws of any other nation, and determine foreign and domestic policy based on the perceived strength an weakness of other nations. While the government makes decisions on that basis, Americans won't support them unless they can justify it by the majority standards of right and wrong: Americans have to believe they work for a greater cause, not just believe they need another nation's oil to invade an oil producing nation.
In this society freedom of the press approaches a symbolic level of sanctity at least. Americans deride its abuse, oppose its suppression, and tolerate all manner of unpopular expression to secure it. In a very real way our Bill Mauldins, Andy Rooneys, Stephen Colberts, and Jon Stewarts serve as our sacred clowns.
Does it stop there? Consider general approaches to sacred writ, what Christians call scripture. A Judeo-Islamic view, and minority Christian approach, is that God essentially dictates his Word and Will to the Prophet, who writes it down, and any alteration corrupts it. Hence, one does not read the Koran unless reading it in the original language. Copies of the Torah must essentially be like photocopies by hand -- even the letter's placement on the page matters.
The majority Christian view has more interesting implications to this topic. In this view God uses the authors of scripture as pens in his hand, not necessarily telling them what to write word for word, but creating the experiences and knowledge in them that produce exactly what he wants -- and this extends to translators and innovators who help it reach broader audiences. In this view Guttenberg is as important as St. Matthew in proclaiming the Word of God -- a tool in God's hands in broadcasting his Word, or in other words, the Lord's anointed.
Given this view for those who've determined the way that scripture reaches people today, what does that say about any divinely proclaimed role of the sacred clowns in our present society? Are those who shape our perceptions now just as divinely ordained as those who brought scripture to us? Who are they? Who most affects how we perceive things now?
