Misadventures in the Land of Fables #23
Fables are used to make a point. A moral demonstrated by a short narrative. But the narrative does not prove the point but merely provides an illustration of it, an example more easily remembered, one that may lend some substance and colour to our arguments. The art of rhetoric. The Panchatantra is full of dialogues that branch into other stories as the characters call on narrative to advise and persuade.
Fables don’t represent a coherent body of ethical thought. They are discrete instances that can contradict each other. They can for example recommend telling lies and then also condemn it. They can be optimistic or cynical. Indeed, the same scenario may be developed to produce an opposing meaning.
THE PANTHER AND THE VILLAGERS
I was reminded of this recently when reading the tale of the panther who fell into a ditch [Perry 494]. Here’s a version based on a quick translation of the latin:
A panther fell into a ditch. When the villagers came upon her, she implored them not to hurt him, as she had never harmed any of their own. Some villagers took no notice of her pleas and pelted her with stones until she crawled wounded and bloodied into corner. Other villagers who had seen this cruelty came to her aid, brought her food, and kept her from further harm. One night, having recovered her strength, the panther managed to escape. She marauded through the village, something she had never done before, attacking the peasants who had treated her cruelly and leaving those who had been kind. “I know those to whom I am beholden, just as I know those by whom I have been beaten and struck and wounded,” she declared.
A simple tale of hostility punished and kindness spared. Karma, we’d probably call it, or the reassuring operations of a moral universe. Some authors used as an exhortation not to make enemies. Don’t kick someone when they’re down.
It brings to those heart-warming video clips of ordinary people working to save animals trapped in nets, ditches, fences, and would likely have been authored by someone for whom that behaviour felt more natural.
FROM OPTIMISM TO CYNICISM
But you might equally imagine a more cynical version in which the panther failed to discriminate between the villagers, murdering the cruel and the kind alike, its rage or its savage nature rendering it uninterested in such moral niceties. You might further argue that those who gave it succour enabled it to recover and escape, and were therefore culpable in the atrocity.
Crucial to the strength of the more optimistic original are the entreaties of the panther at the beginning. These draw attention to the lack of previous hostility between her and the villagers. The brutes make an enemy of the panther, while in the cynical retelling the author would have to emphasise the savagery of the beast, snarling back at them in its trap.
The moral of this version points to the implacable threat the panther represented and the naivety of those who thought it could be disarmed with kindness. The message of a political ‘realist,’ similar to that of ‘The Man who Warmed a Snake’ [Perry 176]. Not a message that appeals to me, but it might have applications in some encounters with criminals or between warring parties.
The line between kindness and naivety is sometimes a sweet, soft-focus blur, but only a fool makes unnecessary enemies.
