i will follow where this takes me

o CHIASTIC STRUCTURE o A narrative device in which words, ideas, story elements, etc., are repeated in reverse order, in the same or a modified form; also called ring structure since it often creates a complete circle. This device is commonly found in ancient literature such as the Hebrew Bible.

Bonus: the center or turning point of the chiastic structure (God appears before Moses)

I choose life and hope, and the parted sea that brings me home

I choose my people I am a Jew, from now and forever and I will always choose

takes place after the scene at the well.  aaron’s pov.  based on a headcanon of mine that this was also aaron’s first time hearing his mother’s lullaby since moses was relinquished.  companion to this piece.  originally posted in 2016.

That song.

Aaron could hear the soul-rending cries of women and babies, the harsh shouts of Pharaoh’s soldiers.  He felt his mother’s fingers running through his hair, saw her kneeling in the river’s muddy water.

He could hear his mother’s voice.

He had stood on the shore, holding his sister’s hand as they watched the current carry the small basket away.

That song.

Tonight it was his sister who sang it.

Tonight, a prince of Egypt who pulled away from them.

Perhaps there was a time when Aaron believed in their deliverance, back when he was a child and his mother and sister made hope feel real and his world safe.  But over the years, as whips replaced wonder and people left more than they stayed, he found himself countering his sister’s fervent someday’s with yeah but when’s.

He simply stared when the prince appeared this evening.  The prince-not-prince.  Brother-not-brother.  His pulse had quickened.  Then threats formed against her and he blocked out all other thoughts.  He threw his own body between them, bowed his head.  Right.  A prince.  More than not.

The prince ran, leaving them behind.  Aaron moved to his sister’s side.  She was gazing into the gathering darkness.  As if trying to call the prince back using the strength of her convictions.  Seeing her there, her hair undone and cheeks streaked with tears, Aaron felt the ground might give way beneath him.

Then his palms met fabric and he felt her shift almost imperceptibly under the sudden touch, and he banished the thought of ghosts from his mind, scolding himself for thinking foolishly.  She at least was there, real.

Still, he kept his hands on her shoulders as he helped her onto her feet and into the house.

Sitting with her at the table, he searched her face, wanting to say something — a million somethings.  But words and emotions tumbled and bumped past each other.  He felt tension build between his brows.  He noticed her watching him then, a trace of a tease making the corners of her eyes crinkle slightly, as she reached across to soothe the worry lines on his face.

Her expression was gentle, clear.

Someday.

this could be the beginning of a journey to becoming a better person, a better parent, and a better global citizen. you have a choice to make. i choose to have a higher standard for the ethics of adoption than “children do not die.” children deserve better than that.

you saved your children’s lives. now choose a higher standard, and save their worth, dignity, and heritage. the brutal, unethical history and present of international adoption is as much a part of their heritage as their nationality and race, doubly so, because it is intimately tied to their nationality and race. you are willingly closing your eyes to a huge part of your childrens’ experiences because it hurts your pride and forces an uncomfortable change in your worldview and view of yourself. you asked – well, actually, didn’t ask, they didn’t have a choice – your children to do that for a lifetime when you adopted them. it will not destroy you to do it, too. it has not destroyed them

you can be better. if you want to. if this piece of your children matters to you. saving a life does not make you not racist. the two things have nothing to do with one another. saving a life makes you a person who saved a life. it will cure nothing within you. if you want to stop there, you can. i hope you want to do more. you pledged once that you would do more than save a life when you committed yourself to these children. within that pledge, you can choose to learn how a good deed can still be a racist deed.

there needs to be people downstream picking up the children who float by, half drowned. but there also needs to be people upstream finding out why the children are falling in and trying to stop their suffering from ever occurring.

when adoptive parents insult the history and heritage of their children, they are telling their children that their purpose in life is to be saved, that without being saved by their white parent, they would have had no worth, that the only worthwhile thing about them is their association with whiteness. because without it, they would either be dead, or they would be one of the invisible terrible people from their country who let children die.

your kids hear and understand what you’re telling them about their worth and their function in your life (to make you look and feel good, at the expense of their love and respect for every part of themselves). they hear and understand that, even if you don’t.

it’s not that hard to figure out. imagine if every day your partner turned to you and said, if i had not found you, if i had not decided in my beautiful heart to love you, you would be dead. you would be living a worthless life with worthless people and your story would never have mattered. you would have existed with only the qualities you were born with and those would not have mattered. how dare you ever say anything i ever do can be wrong. i have loved you and kept you alive though you were not born deserving love or life, and nobody would have given it to you if not me. never forget, you are very happy, and you never would have been without me.

And so far as I can tell, Russia is nowhere near as miserable than poor African countries.

international adoption exists because of and is maintained by capitalism, colonialism, racism, and exploitation

many international adoption agencies operate unethically and illegally and traffic children

the amount of money spent on international adoption could keep the birth family together several times over

there are international (and domestic) children who desperately need adequate caretaking and love at this very moment and cannot wait for capitalism, colonialism, racism, and exploitation to be solved

ignorant, racist, callous white american parents can adopt and give a child a loving, healthy life. they can also be mildly to moderately abusive. they can also be as or more abusive than the child would have experienced had they never been adopted.

adopted children with great upbringings can still experience grief and anger over the knowledge that their birth parents might have been able to keep them if their loving adopted parents had wanted to do that instead of adopt them

adoptees can be expected to be grateful and prop up the savior feelings of their adoptive parents

adoptees, birth parents, and adoptive parents can all experience grief, loss, growth, and acceptance and accept adoption as a good outcome for everybody

all these things exist at once

all these things are true

none of these things diminish or eliminate each other

but it is impossible to start the adoption discourse without somebody busting in to argue about something you never said or is not at odds with your argument, because your argument touched a personal nerve and that’s all they can talk about now

it’s like if you were living in a house and noticed the window was broken and said so, and somebody from outside your house shouted that you should be grateful to have a house at all. you call a repair person to come fix the window and while they’re in your house they tsk at your lack of a compost heap and tell you testily that global warming is eliminating the need for windows and putting them out of a job. in the meantime you go to find your spouse and tell them the window is being fixed and they shout at you because you should know the most important thing to keeping a home’s temperature regulated is the furnace but you didn’t call somebody to repair that now did you. the furnace is not great but it’s not broken and you don’t really have the money to fix it at the moment, so that same person outside your house shouts that if you had started a home repair savings account when you were 17 you could have fixed it, and THEY save all their money fastidiously and feel personally attacked that you do not do the same

all these things are true

some of them are related to each other

some are related only by virtue of being things that happen in and around the same house

discussing the broken window does not mean we are personally attacking the spendthrift lurking outside

if you would like to discuss the experience of somebody from a country known for international adoption, wonderful, do it

if you would like to discuss the experience of adopting internationally, what motivated you, what it felt like to see the pain these children were in when they came to you, do it

if i would like to write about the racist and colonialist underpinnings of international adoption and the psychology of american adoption that erases the personhood and experiences of adoptees, i’m gonna do that

all these things exist at once

all are true things, at once

this can be a conversation. it does not have to be an either/or.

but it’s always an either/or in adoption discourse, because every person involved in the discourse has some core beliefs about family, children, abuse, money, women, community, race, ethics, rights, etc. that conflict with something in adoption, which touches on all these topics. and when a core belief is touched, it threatens the structured narrative we like to tell ourselves about how the world works, what is important, and what is good. which is how a muttered sigh about a broken window can lead to a stranger on your lawn shouting that you are being mean to them personally because of their savings account. or, more to the point, how a statement about the exploitation and inequality necessary and inherent in adoption leads to somebody telling you (in a confusing mishmash of the core values touched upon) that they are not racist, that your personal blog is unprofessional, and their children would be dead without them. and a statement about the erasure of the real and full personhood of adopted children leads to somebody telling you that Putin is bad and you are privileged so think about that maybe.

complex topics are complex

they contain multitudes

and every time i have the adoption discourse and the broken window turns into a personal finance referendum i think about the number of people with important information, experiences, and perspectives on adoption who will never share them, because they see what happens, and don’t have the mental energy or patience to engage in bad faith arguments on topics they never raised

the adoption discourse needs to happen. it is shut down by anger and shame almost every time it arises. not to be flippant, but this discourse needs improv rules. international adoption is supported by racist exploitative colonialist capitalism. yes, AND adoptive parents love their children. yes, AND adoptive parents who love their children can be racist. yes, AND adoptable children are whole and worthwhile people no matter where they come from or how they live. yes, AND the conditions in providing countries means adoptable children there are experiencing terrible things that could be better in a more privileged area. yes, AND adopted children in America are still abused, neglected, and psychologically mistreated because of the exploitative nature of adoption. yes, AND that abuse might not be as bad as what they would have encountered had they not been adopted. yes, AND that doesn’t mean their abuse is not significant, important, and deserving of attention.

It. Does. Not. Have. To. Be. This. Hard.

i’m not going to stop pointing out the broken window. i have faith that if we all try very hard, we can avoid the gymnast quality logic that is required to make a broken window into a personal attack.

international adoption is fucked up

private adoption is fucked up

foster care adoption is fucked up

if anybody feels personally attacked by those statements, it’s because you’re imagining words i did not say that imply things about you i would not have any ability to know.

*Aaron voice* Moses, uh, what do you mean?

—

In all seriousness, this is a great question! especially considering the differences between the source material and The Prince of Egypt.  I’m actually a little nervous* about answering, but I’ll give it a try because it’s something I’ve thought about before, and it’s related to topics that I nerd over in general.

I do infer (I’m not sure if I can call it a headcanon) that PoE Aaron becomes High Priest.  One of the things I find so powerful about Aaron and his arc is that he recovers his hope and faith — faith in a religious sense and as a sense of trust/certainty.  The message that something shaken or lost can be found again works beautifully to support the overall story, but it’s really uplifting to see it happen at a character level.  That being said, I feel that Aaron is in a place at the end of the movie where he would be more open to the role of High Priest, and more willing to reach out to it, when it came to him (through Moses, at God’s instruction).

…with some reservations, since he’s still Aaron.  Though this isn’t a perfect comparison, even Moses protests when he meets God and is told he’s the chosen deliverer of his people; he doubts his suitableness and whether they will listen to a former prince of Egypt.  The reason I bring this up is because, in the film, Moses and Aaron are alike at least in the regard that they’re not above voicing their grievances, which is a similarity I appreciate, to be honest (I like Moses’ casual “it’s too early for this” gripe, heh).  I definitely imagine Aaron reacting along these lines.  He’d object, and probably wonder about all the things that could go wrong (including whether he’ll do a credible job).  —Oh, this is also a chance for the brothers to bond, and solidify their partnership: “Don’t worry, Aaron.  You’ll do well.”

So, for me, PoE Aaron’s becoming a priest is a matter of when, rather than if, and I think his reaction would be one of… cautious agreement? — Really, a combination of the journey he takes in the movie and his typical (skeptical) outlook on life, which I don’t believe he’d lose completely.  Personally, I might also explore how he would then grow into this role.  My next fic is going to be The (Mis)adventures of Aaron the High Priest.  (I’m kind of half-writing it, in this post?)  However, those are deeper waters, and I already feel a bit out of my element… :x  (I’ll just continue to think about it on my own…)

*Note: I fell down several old and new rabbit holes, both out of genuine interest in the subject(s) and a desire to review/learn some cultural and religious context before writing.  I didn’t make as many direct (or even indirect) references to the source material as I thought I would, but still, I hope I didn’t make any offensive mistakes.

Also, in the Book of Exodus, God tells Moses that, for the High Priest (Aaron), “you shall make the robe of the ephod of pure blue” (28:31).  I haven’t seen/read confirmation of this, but there’s a part of me that would like to think that Aaron’s clothing in the movie (the color, not the style) is an homage.

This is something I started writing a month ago, as an addendum to the OP.  Since you’ve mentioned Nadav and Avihu, and how PoE Aaron might deal with their deaths, it seems pertinent now and I thought I’d copy it here:

I think about the differences and similarities between Aaron in the Torah and Aaron in PoE a lot (the truth since 2016)…  Something I find very evocative about the biblical Aaron is the line that literally says “and Aaron was silent” (Leviticus 10:3).  This occurs after his two sons Nadav and Avihu have offered strange fire to Gd and are consumed/killed for doing so.  …“And Aaron was silent.”  It can be read in so many ways — shock, guilt, acceptance, etc.; the assistant rabbi at my synagogue gave a beautiful d’var Torah about this kind of silence being a chance for us, the readers, to empathize with Aaron, and to listen to others’ moments of silence with empathy — and I guess that’s one of the things I love and find interesting about Aaron in the Torah.  His silence, like his fairly unreadable intentions/mindset during the Golden Calf episode, invite so much interpretation.  I do like to wonder how he feels about carrying out the duties of the High Priest (so much blood!), and I think there’s a different opportunity to do so with PoE Aaron because his personality is more fleshed out: There’s a shape to his personality, if that makes sense, and so I feel that it is possible to imagine how he would react to things.

—

Rereading “A Servant of” now makes me appreciate the emotion and psychology in that piece differently than I did back in 2017.  The biblical Aaron just accepts things (to a fault sometimes), as far as we’re told / how Jewish tradition constructs him.  …The Aaron in your piece is resigned, yet resistant… with a little bitterness and a raw/realness.  So willing to sacrifice himself in order to keep from losing others.  “Tonally like PoE Aaron.”  That’s one of the things that struck me when I first read your fic, and one of the things I loved about it.

“And Moses said to Aaron and to his sons Eleazar and Ithamar, “Do not bare your heads and do not rend your clothes, lest you die and anger strike the whole community.”

Basically G-d commands Aaron–via Moses–specifically not to grieve for Nadav and Avihu. So, in part, I think, a key part of the priesthood–as it’s portrayed in the bible, is serving as a public face of G-d and representing the people’s relationship with G-d. And that means, no matter one’s individual emotional state, having to swallow negative emotions to appear collected in front of the people.Accordingly, so much of what is demanded of the Biblical Aaron is to repress his own individual emotions (and needs) for the benefit of the people. As a priest, particularly the high priest, he does not act as indivdual, and has to maintain a particular–solemn, yet positive–affect. This is apparent in literal commands G-d gives him. 

Just a clarification, though, to check if I’m understanding what you’ve written: The line you quoted comes after the one regarding Aaron’s silence, right?  So, his silence (the silence itself) wasn’t commanded by Gd — it’s Aaron’s (own) immediate reaction?  But, beyond that (after that), as the priest, he’s unable to show more.

The whole “being for the people” thing, too.  I feel like PoE shows that process more, that growth?  It’s entirely possible, and I think important to illustrate, that Aaron is grasping hope and freedom for himself by walking into the Red Sea, but I also feel that this is the moment where he’s become, is becoming, someone who can and will act on his people’s behalf and well-being — he’s been speaking for their doubts and fears, communicating their needs and voice in that way, so why not also, when the time comes, their relationship with Gd?  I’m sure the idea of that evolution or process was what I was trying to express, or what was guiding my thoughts, particularly in the first paragraph of my OP, even if I wasn’t able to write about the responsibilities of or expectations for the High Priest back then.

(Oh, and now my brain is going haywire from thoughts about the Golden Calf episode.)

Yeah, I just looked back in the text, and yeah, we are first told that “Aaron was silent” (Leviticus 10:3), and then three verses later, Moses tells him and his other sons: 

“Do not bare your heads and do not rend your clothes, lest you die and anger strike the whole community” (Leviticus 10:6)

even though the rest of “the House of Israel, shall bewail the burning that the LORD has wrought” on Nadav and Avihu. (Leviticus 10:6). 

(Though, as an interesting side-note, I just looked at a few of the Commentaries on these verses, and Ramban–Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman or Nachmanides, one of the classical Medieval commentators on the Hebrew Bible–reads the “Aaron was silent” as “perhaps meaning that he had cried aloud, but then he became silent” or as crying tears but silently, without sobbing or audibly crying out or otherwise making a sound. I’m not sure either of these reflects the simple meaning of the biblical text itself, but it’s interesting to note, that that’s a reading that he gives.)

Anyway, yeah. If we consider the reading of 10:3 that says that “Aaron was silent” denotes that he actually was visibly/audibly showing no emotion–and I personally think it’s a compelling reading, possibly even the simplest reading of the text–then yes, Aaron first intuits that he shouldn’t show grief. And this intuition is later confirmed by Moses’s (and G-d’s) command to him three verses later.

I think I agree with you that this shows how Aaron as portrayed in the Bible is someone who slides very naturally into the role of being a public figure, one whose personal thoughts and feelings come after that. (And I think PoE, as you’ve said, portrays that really nicely. PoE!Aaron is used to speaking for the Jewish people. He’s used to putting himself on the chopping block–again, the well scene–if it means protecting Miriam, etc.)

In the Bible, I think the transition that Aaron makes is from being a representative of and subservient to the will of the People (embodied, perhaps, in the Golden Calf incident in the Book of Exodus–recall that Aaron does that at the request of the People) to being a representative of and subservient to G-d for the People (as embodied in this episode with his reaction to Nadav and Avihu.) 

This is a sentiment that can be difficult for some contemporary readers of the text. Some folks today, I think, may be uncomfy with this idea of subservience to G-d, and I understand that. But I do think that’s the point the Bible is kinda trying to make. 

Oh I love this.  I will discuss and go to bat for PoE’s interpretation and characterization of Aaron ‘til I’m hoarse.  @runrundoyourstuff thank you ---  I enjoyed our back-and-forth and love your commentary and insights!, and I hope you don’t mind my highlighting just a couple of sections of what you wrote.

In the Bible, I think the transition that Aaron makes is from being a representative of and subservient to the will of the People (embodied, perhaps, in the Golden Calf incident in the Book of Exodus–recall that Aaron does that at the request of the People) to being a representative of and subservient to G-d for the People (as embodied in this episode with his reaction to Nadav and Avihu.)

YES.  And oh wow --- like I said above, this thread is several months old, but immediately after reading what you wrote here I started thinking and rethinking the Golden Calf episode (I think I said as much in our chat a while back).  So, thank you!  I have new thoughts and interpretations now.

And I also think in some ways, PoE does depict this subtly, in having Aaron grow from someone who gives voice to the People’s anger and pain and fear and disgust–vented at Moses–to one who inspires them, and who models G-d’s will for them, by being the first to walk into the sea.

Gosh, I couldn’t agree more.  ♥

Aaron is a doubter and sort of a spokesman for the slaves, who are fickle.  They love Moses, then they’re upset with Moses.  Aaron starts out doubtful and upset with him, but when he walks into the bed of the Red Sea, I think he shows that if one person shows he believes, that’s all it takes for the whole thing to work.  It’s a nice transformation. — Jeff Goldblum (from The Prince of Egypt: A New Vision in Animation)