The Bare Bodkinrnby joe SobranrnAbe-WorshiprnAt the end of the recent remake oi Planetrnof the Apes —[um the page now if ‘ou stillrnplan to see it—the hero escapes from saidrnplanet and its monstrous chimp-tyrant,rnC^,eneral Thade. Returning to Earth atrnnight, his spacecraft crashes in, of allrnplaces, the Reflecting Pool at the WashingtonrnMall, and he solemnly marchesrnup the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.rnTliere. he finds that Lincoln’s face hasrnheen replaced by the image of the eilrnThade. Just then, squad cars screech up,rnand the cops who jump out to arrest ourrnhero are all gorillas! The simians havernsomehow taken over Tellus.rnSubbing Thade for Abe is a bit of secularrnblasphcm’, since Lincoln has been asrnsureK deified as any Roman emperor.rnLen in the ear 2001, when the wordrn”irreerent” has become the moie re-rnie\er’s highest encomium, when \e’crnbeen inured to rock bands called I’hernDead Kennedys and subsidized sacrilegesrnin art museums, it’s shocking to seernliberties taken with the Great Emancipator.rnI laughed alone. Nobody else in therntheater seemed to think it was funny, butrnI felt diis movie had been made just forrnme. [ was finishing my own book on Lincoln,rnin which I try to explain why controlrnof the United States government, ifrnnot the entire planet (there’s alwavsrnSwitzerland), has fallen into simianrnhands. And I blame Lincoln. If, onedav,rnhis image on penny and sawbuck is replacedrnby that of a chimpanzee, he canrnthank himselfrnIdolatiy of Lincoln—himself often deridedrnas a “gorilla” or “baboon” in thernhostile press of his day—began the momentrnJohn Wilkes Booth fired his derringer.rnIt was Good Friday, perhaps anrnunseemly time to be at the theater; but byrnEaster morning, sernrons across the landrnwere likening the fallen president tornGhrist. In Lincoln in American hlemon’,rnMerrill D. Peterson tells of a Detroitrnchurch in 1929 that featured a stainedglassrnwindow portraying Lincoln unshacklingrna Negro boy. A Southernrnwoman isiting the church one Sundayrnnudged her son and cried out: “Oh myrnsoul! Yes! Look! Abe Lincoln in a churchrnvviiiclow!”rnAbe-worship is surely odd, consideringrnthat Lincoln was not a worshiper-“not arntechnical Ghristian,” as his wife admitted.rnHis law partner, Billy Herndon, recountsrnthat, as a young man, Lincoln —rnhaving imbibed infidelitv’ from Voltairernand Tom Paine—wrote a book attackingrnthe tenets of Ghristianity, including therntruth of the Bible and the dixinity ofrnChrist. A well-meaning friend bunicd it,rnhoping to save Lincoln’s future—and hernprobably did. I’rorn then on, Lincolnrnmaintained a careful ambiguit)’ about religion.rnHe coidd always cite Scripture forrnhis purpose, but he never really said hernbelieved it himself As lorrg as the publicrnaccepted it, he could use it rhetoricallyrnfor his purposes.rnLincoln even sounds like the Bible —rnthe King James one, anyway. His ear forrnthe archaic was marvelous: house divided,rncharity, memory, hallow, dedicate,rnconsecrate, devofion, scourge, etc. Hisrnvocabulary was purposely c|uaint. Hernknew enough Scripture and Shakespearernto create the impression that he wasrnspeaking with the ancestral voice of “ourrnfathers.”rnHe wasn’t, though. Lincoln’s self-educationrnhad serious gaps. Other lawyersrnniarveied at his comtroom prowess inrnswa ing juries, but he was also coveringrnup his deficiencies in technical knowledgernof the law. He perfonued a parallelrnfeat in his political career: seeming tornembody a tradition of which he was actuallyrnignorant.rnIt was only gradually, while writing m)’rnbook, that I came to realize how seldomrnLincoln appealed to the Founding Fathers.rnIn fact, he rarely quoted them, exceptrnfor his obsessive citation of thern”proposifion” to which he said the “newrnnation” of 1776 had been “dedicated.”rnAnd he e’en got this wrong: What thernDeclaration of Independence declaredrnwas not a monolithic “nation” orrn”Union,” but 15 disfinct “free and independentrnstates.” For Lincoln, it was crucialrnto deny that the states had e’er enjoyedrnsovereignt}’; otherwise, their rightrnto secede was plausible. He even contendedrnthat the Articles of Gonfederafionrnhad “further matured” the (unbreakable)rnUm’on; he forgot—or pretended to forgetrn—that the Arficles began by asserfing:rn”Each state retains its soercignt’, freedom,rnand independence.” For an anfisecessionistrnpresident, crushing what hernpleased to call “rebellion,” that wouldrnnever do.rnIn Lincoln’s writings, I have foundrnonly three fleeting menfions of Madisonrnand Hamilton; even his references to Jefferson,rnhis favorite Founding Father, arernfev’ and superficial. He shows no acquaintancernwith the formative debaternover “consolidation” and “confederation”rnin the 1780’s, or with Jefferson’srnKentucky Resolutions of 1798. The subdefiesrnof dividing power and separatingrndepartments seem alien to him; he reasonedrnfrom a handful of snippets. Byrncontrast, Jefferson l^avis was steeped inrnthe thinking of the founding period. UnlikernLincoln, Davis could have held hisrnown in a conversation with Madison andrncompany.rnThe most impressive thing about Lincolnrnis how impressive he could makernhimself sound. He sfill impresses by dintrnof sheer eloquence. Nobody can denyrnthat his words are memorable: We all rememberrnthem.rnAnd that was what Lincoln wantedrnmost: to be remembered. In his 1838rnspeech to Springfield’s Young Men’srnLyceum, he foresaw the rise of a tv’rantrnwho would seek immortalit in destroyingrnthe free institufions the Founding Fathersrnhad won immortalih’ by building.rnDuring the depths of his depression a fewrnyears later, as his friend Joshua Speed laterrnrecalled, Lincoln w as despondent thatrn”he had done nothing to make any humanrnbeing remember that he had lived.”rnWhen he signed the EmancipationrnProclamation, he remarked: “If my namerngoes into history, it will be for this act.”rnHis ambition was finally fidfilled.rnLincoln’s speeches are memorable inrnOCTOBER 2001/nrnrnrn