Candy canes and the manufacture of evangelical resentment

It’s late June, but candy canes are in the news. The U.S. Supreme Court last week let stand a lower appeals court ruling in the “Christian candy cane” case.

That’s the nickname given to Morgan v. Swanson, a case involving the Plano Independent School District and the parents of a child instructed to proselytize his classmates by passing out evangelistic tracts about candy canes. Chris Lisee has a good summary of the case, which involves the fascinating intersection of several competing First Amendment claims — free speech, free exercise and no establishment.

But this post isn’t about that case or those legal and constitutional questions. This post is about the evangelical urban legend at the heart of the case.

That legend has to do with candy canes — with their purported Christian symbolism and how that symbolism has been enlisted in the culture wars and in evangelicals’ struggle for religious hegemony and privilege.

Urban legends are not true stories. That, in itself, does not make them remarkable. Many wonderful stories are not true stories. Such untrue stories can be grouped, broadly, into two categories. Some untrue stories are fiction. And some untrue stories are lies.

That distinction matters when it comes to urban legends because this particular form of untrue story draws its power from being told and retold as though true. To be effective, an urban legend has to be presented as real — as something that really happened. And it must be heard and absorbed as real. That’s what makes them worth retelling and spreading like a virus.

In many cases, this pretense is as harmless as it is in any other fiction. Presenting an untrue story as true is often simply an effective storytelling tactic. This is true of many urban legends that function mainly as jokes. And it is true of most urban legends that function mainly as ghost stories. These sorts of urban legends are basically just fiction. The pretense of telling such untrue stories as though true serves the storyteller’s agenda, which is to elicit delight (laughter or chills, either way).

But in other cases this pretense is harmful because in those cases the storyteller has some other agenda. These other kinds of urban legends can’t really be considered fiction — they’re more like simple lies. Such stories are not told in the hopes of eliciting delight, but usually in order to create or to foster a sense of aggrieved victimhood and resentment.

Such stories, in other words, are propaganda. They are about sowing division, heightening the antipathy between groups or factions. They are about creating and enforcing and sustaining tribal conflict.

When a storyteller embellishes a good ghost story, those embellishments are acts of fiction. The storyteller fabricates — adding local details and inventing authoritative-sounding confirmations from supposed media reports or friend-of-a-friend testimonies. Such fictional details and embellishments make the story more compelling, recasting it as a “true story.” But it’s still basically just fiction.

But when a storyteller embellishes a propagandistic urban legend, those fabrications are something else. The process is similar — fabricating details, local touches, invented attributions — but the purpose is different. The storyteller isn’t serving the story, but is serving some other agenda. That’s not fiction. It’s more like simply lying. Where fictional urban legends aim to delight, these stories aim to deceive.

The Christian candy cane story is an intriguing example of this kind of agenda-driven, propagandistic urban legend.

It didn’t start out that way. It began as something innocent and sincere — as a simple object lesson or illustration. But while that object lesson served its intended purpose well enough, it wasn’t aggressive enough to function effectively as tribal propaganda for the culture wars. To serve that function it had to be changed, embellished, repurposed and fortified with lies.

The original basic idea was rather tame. Christmas is both a cultural festival and a Christian religious holiday. It’s easy to lose track of that religious holiday amidst all the trappings of parties, decorations and gift-giving. That’s particularly true for young children who can be swept away by the awesome prospect of getting lots of cool presents. Thus fretting about the “commercialization” of Christmas has become a standard part of the holiday for many Christians who are always seeking new ways to remind themselves of, as the cliché says, “the reason for the season.”

So consider the humble candy cane. It’s not particularly beloved as a confection, but come December it’s inescapable as part of our holiday decorating.

It’s a simple thing to enlist this ubiquitous symbol as a reminder of “the reason for the season.” Candy canes are shaped like shepherds’ crooks — a reminder of the shepherds watching their flocks by night in Bethlehem, and of the Good Shepherd himself. Turn a candy cane upside down and it looks kind of like the letter “J” — for Jesus. It has red and white stripes, allowing us to remember the words of Isaiah — both “though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow” (1:18) and “with his stripes we are healed” (53:5).

Maybe that’s not terribly profound, but it’s an effective “whenever you see this, remember this” type of lesson. I remember hearing some version of this as a child in Sunday school. I think our teacher had seen our young eyes ablaze with the Christmas-greed of present-hungry children and thus wanted to remind us again of the “reason for the season.” (At the end of class, she gave each of us one of those little candy canes that come in a chain of plastic sleeves, at which point our greed — rekindled by the prospect of free candy* — probably convinced her that her lesson had been useless.)

There’s a version of this candy cane object lesson at the website from which I borrowed the artwork above. It’s mainly still just an illustration in this form, but little embellishments have begun to creep in, such as the condemnation of “impostor” variations and the odd (and misleading) business about peppermint and “hyssop.”

But to see the fully transformed urban legend of the Christian candy cane go to the Snopes page, where mythbuster Barbara Mikkelson shares a basic version of the story. The gist of it is the same as the object lesson from my Sunday school class, but here the claim is embellished as history. This is what a real candy cane really means — what it was intended to mean by the (good, devout Christian) “candymaker in Indiana” who invented it to be “a witness” to “the birth, ministry, and death of Jesus Christ.”

This history is pure fabrication, but it’s still not far from the basically fictional impulse of the “true story” pretense of urban legends. As Mikkelson writes:

Claims made about the candy’s religious symbolism have become increasingly widespread as religious leaders have assured their congregations that these mythologies are factual, the press have published these claims as authoritative answers to readers’ inquiries about the confection’s meaning, and several lavishly illustrated books purport to tell the “true story” of the candy cane’s origins. This is charming folklore at best. …

At best it’s charming folklore. But at worst that folklore is employed to serve an agenda. Here is Mikkelson on how this story is being used:

It has become fashionable of late to claim that the candy cane was not only designed to be fraught with Christian symbolism, but that it was created as a means by which persecuted Christians could furtively identify each other. …

There it is: “persecuted Christians.” And we Christians are still being persecuted by those who would deny the true, legitimate reason for the season by saying “Happy Holidays” or by passing out candy canes with the wrong number of stripes or without the biblically correct hyssop flavor.

The Christian candy cane legend has come to serve the same purpose as all that silly demagoguery about the “War on Christmas.” It is told and retold to foster a sense of grievance and victimhood. The Sunday school teacher’s object lesson wanted us to see candy canes and to remember Jesus’ birth. The Christian candy cane legend wants us to see candy canes and remember that the culture used to be ours, that it rightfully belongs to us, and that it is being unjustly taken away from us by secular humanists, activist judges, liberals, academics, evolutionists, radical feminists and homosexuals.

Richard Beck cites James Davison Hunter on this “culture of victimhood,” from Hunter’s book To Change the World:

The sense of injury is the key. Over time, the perceived injustice becomes central to the person’s and the group’s identity. Understanding themselves to be victimized is not a passive acknowledgement but a belief that can be cultivated. Accounts of atrocity become a crucial subplot of the narrative, evidence that reinforces the sense that they have been or will be wronged or victimized. Cultivating the fear of further injury becomes a strategy for generating solidarity within the group and mobilizing the group to action. It is often useful at such times to exaggerate or magnify the threat. The injury or threat thereof is so central to the identity and dynamics of the group that to give it up is to give up a critical part of whom they understand themselves to be. Thus, instead of letting go, the sense of injury continues to get deeper.

In this logic, it is only natural that wrongs need to be righted. And so it is, then, that the injury — real or perceived — leads the aggrieved to accuse, blame, vilify, and then seek revenge on those whom they see as responsible. The adversary has to be shown for who they are, exposed for their corruption, and put in their place. [This] ressentiment, then, is expressed as a discourse of negation; the condemnation and denigration of enemies in the effort to subjugate and dominate those who are culpable.

Hunter here I think helps to explain one of the most puzzling aspects of American culture. In America, resentment always seems to flow backwards. The powerful resent the powerless. The haves resent the have-nots. Whites resent blacks. Men resent women. The healthy resent the sick. The majority resents the minority. The privileged resent the marginalized.

It’s not easy to make resentment flow backwards. It takes work. It takes design, intent, choice and effort.

And it takes stories. Lots of stories.

- – - – - – - – - – - -

* But not quite real candy.

Candy canes occupy an awkward place in the candy taxonomy. They’re minty — which tends to put them more toward the adult end of the candy spectrum. Yet they’re also unwieldy and inconvenient in a way that only children’s candy should be. (This is why there aren’t mint-flavored lollipops.)

Candy canes are a bit too sugary-sweet to appeal to those seeking a breath-freshener. If you’ve just had coffee or garlicky pizza and you’re heading into a business meeting, then you’ll reach for Altoids or Tic Tacs, not for a candy cane. This would be true even if they came in a more convenient, Altoid-sized shape (which they should – just as McDonald’s should have candy-cane colored versions of the Shamrock Shake every December).

And while they’re a bit too candy-ish to serve as proper mints, they’re also a bit too minty to serve as proper candy. Ask a small child if they’d like a piece of candy (not in a creepy way, please), and then, when they say yes, offer them a Tic Tac or an Altoid and witness their disappointment. This is why we don’t give out minty candies to Trick-or-Treaters at Halloween.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    You know, I just realized that only French seems to have the same “dzh” sound for the letter “j” aside from English. I could be wrong, but it would be interesting to know how that morphed from the Latin i/j which were interchangeable and decidedly not pronounced “dzh” as far as I know.

  • GDwarf

    I love spearmint, but cannot stand peppermint, it’s much too strong.

    So, of course, something like 80% of mint products are pepper.

    Anyways, Candy canes are odd, I liked them as a child, but yeah, they were never the best candy, and were always a pain to eat, with sugar and saliva getting everywhere. You’d think we’d have solved that problem by now…

  • Joshua

    I give you 
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J as a starting point, which I was just looking at.

    The gist is, apparently, romance languages (and Middle High German I guess) had two noises 
    (not always the same ones of course) related to the Latin I, and behold, Latin had two previously interchangeable letter forms.

  • http://jamoche.dreamwidth.org/ Jamoche

    Last Christmas I picked up a bottle of Peppermint Mocha Kahlua. Nice by itself or in hot chocolate.

  • Mark Z.

    They should just plaster a picture of Admiral Akbar on the front and be done with it.
    Your colon can’t repel osmosis of this magnitude!

  • gocart mozart

    That’s awesome, I must repost the letter in full.

    SO WHAT ABOUT CARNATIONS?
    Something in the “Just Ask” column (Page A3, May 29) disturbed me. According to the column, “the Ohio buckeye, Aesculus glabra, bears flowers with both male and female organs on the same tree. It is a monoecious species.”
    I couldn’t believe this, so I did some research and, sure enough, a science website (forestry.about.com) states that “the Ohio buckeye is polygamo-monoecious, bearing both bisexual and male flowers.”
    The buckeye is our state tree and most of us gladly wear the nickname, “buckeyes.” But it is shameful and unacceptable that a bisexual tree should represent us! We are flaunting the Holy Bible!
    I urge everyone to contact their state representative and demand legislation removing the buckeye as our state tree and condemning the use of the term “buckeye” as a nickname for residents of Ohio.
    Does anyone know if carnations are bisexual?
    Jim Flechtner Findlay

  • gocart mozart

    Well, in my urban legend he is completely serious.

  • Münchner Kindl

    Huh. And here I thought candy canes were nothing more than schoolyard shivs. At least, that’s why they banned them from my elementary school when a kid licked one to a point and stabbed* another kid with it — but now I know that young sociopath-in-training was really a Christian Avenger sticking it to the (secular) Man!*It didn’t break the skin, but the teachers took the point.

    Seriously? A child fashions a weapon and attacks another child, and the solution by the teacher is not addressing the violence and attitude, but forbidding the weapon? How does this solve the problem?Or is this another case of “treat the symptom, not the cause” discussed in the birthday party invitation thread – when children are bullied, and one of the ways is being excluded from parties, the solution is not to adress the bullying, but to mandate the invitation process, and declare it a sucess because the bullying that way stops, while ignoring the many other new ways opened up and that the bullying itself continues.

  • konrad_arflane

     AFAIK, the most common French pronunciation of “j” is “zh”, not “dzh”. Aside from that, I think most of the names (and possibly other words) that start with a J in English – such as Jesus – have the same initial sound in Italian, it’s just spelled differently (with a “g” or “gi” depending on the succeeding vowel).

  • Elizabeth

    I’m surprised *anyone* adult or child can eat these things – mint on its own isn’t very nice, IMHO. I don’t mind a dash of mint in my chocolate – but I’d prefer chilli or salt really. My daughter loathes mint – to the point that I have to find other flavours of toothpaste for her, which is not easy. And cleaning your teeth with bubble-gum flavoured toothpaste is not an improvement, IMO, even if it is sugar free!

  • rizzo

    Minty isn’t good for candy?  Someone never had York Peppermint Bites eh?

  • Edo

    Seconded so much. That footnote is like an appendix that Claude Lévi-Strauss left out of “The Raw and the Cooked.”

  • redsixwing

     

    Also, the sugar-free ones don’t sound quite right. (I’m possibly the
    only person who has this weird little foible: I love the sound a York
    Peppermint Patty makes when you snap one in half)

    You’re definitely not the only one. >.>
    I always end up with a few pieces of York Patty, because they are so much fun to break before nomming.

  • Jenora Feuer

     

    A child fashions a weapon and attacks another child, and the solution by
    the teacher is not addressing the violence and attitude, but forbidding
    the weapon? How does this solve the problem?

    It’s the whole ‘be seen to be doing something’ thing.  They don’t care about solving the problem so much as they care about being seen to respond to the problem.  Which means that then nobody can blame them if the problem happens again.

    A close relative of the ‘something must be done!  This is something, therefore this must be done’ attitude.

  • http://dpolicar.livejournal.com/ Dave

    In America, resentment always seems to flow backwards.

    That’s unsurprising. When the powerless express resentment against the powerful, that’s dangerous. When the powerful express resentment against the powerless, that’s safe.

  • The_L1985

    Welcome to the wonderful world of zero tolerance. Nobody cares whether or not the problem actually stops, as long as we’re seen to strongly disapprove of it.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    “Look at it from my point of view,” said Fudge, fidgeting with his
    bowler. “I’m under a lot of pressure. Got to be seen to be doing
    something.”

    Being “seen” to do something is more important than doing the right thing. In the fictional instance noted above (HP and the Chamber of Secrets), an innocent man gets taken to Azkaban prison (although later released), all because people are pushing for some kind of action, instead of proper investigation.

  • Albanaeon

    Wow.  I haven’t heard this of this particular front on the War on Christmas, which is somewhat surprising.  Still, happily add occasionally enjoying a minty candy to my ongoing onslaught… 

  • Tricksterson

    My attitude is they can bitch about “the War Against Christmas “when they give Yule back to us

  • Tricksterson

    Isn’t that the whole idea behind most rules?  It doesn’t matter if anything is actually accomplished as long as it looks like you care.

  • MadGastronomer

     The Chocolate Ritual (which is easily modified to miss the fat-shame and use much higher-quality chocolate)

  • http://twitter.com/mattmcirvin Matt McIrvin

    I’m not sure an appeal to universals can explain the extent to which resentment flows backwards in modern America.  There have been times and places when that wasn’t how it worked.

    I suspect it’s mostly a long-term reaction to Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and, specifically, the extension of government benefits to poor *black* Americans, who had been largely denied the benefits of the New Deal as part of the arrangement that held the FDR Democratic majority together.

    Overt racism became taboo, but the resentment that white people were shelling out tax dollars to benefit black people remained, and it became expressed as a general, somewhat abstract opposition to any sort of government handouts to the unfortunate, even among people who themselves benefited from them.

    I think things are going to change in a big way in the next couple of decades.  Because the Millennials largely don’t feel this resentment, and they’re getting the short end of the stick themselves, and they’re angry.  Currently, the attitude of most of the electorate is that they’re just a bunch of spoiled kids.  Eventually, they’ll become fond of voting.

  • Mau de Katt

     You could always use peppermint extract instead of wintergreen extract for that cake recipe.

  • Porlockjr

     I’m on a mailing list that’s currently discussing a rather involved piece of bad logic, in which the fallacy of the undistributed middle figures promptly. Thank you for this excellent specimen, which I have now cited there.

    (It’s the Lord Peter list in Yahoo Groups.

  • erikagillian

    I used to have a wonderful recipe for cookies with crushed candy canes in them.  And no chocolate.  Chocolate is fine in its place, but do you have to put it in everything?

    And with toothpaste, my problem is they put too much mint in them, and this has been going on sometime in the last ten years or so.  I think it’s part of the I can eat things this hot! machismo, they do it with cinnamon sometimes too.  So I use kiddy toothpaste, you can find strawberry pretty easily and I just got some watermelon, though I don’t mind the bubblegum either.  The tube of High School Musical toothpaste is a bit embarrassing.

    And just because I have to be a folklore geek sometimes:  Folklore definition of legends includes the told as true.  Nothing about if either party believes it to be true, but told as.  And things like jokes can fit in a few folklore categories depending on how they’re used or told.  The other criteria include that the story takes place in historical time, not in a creation time or once upon a time, can include historical or quasi-historical figures, can include supernatural creatures, ie gods and ghosts etc.  I think I’m forgetting some of it.  Washington and the cherry tree and I cannot tell a lie is a legend.  You usually hear them defined right after a definition of what a myth is (gods, not historical time, telling how the world came to be, etc) and a tale (take place anytime, told as fiction, etc) so you define them against each other.  All types of folk narrative along with ballads and stuff I’m forgetting.  Fairytales or maerchen are a subtype of folktale.  Tales that actually contain fairies tend to be legends.

  • erikagillian

    And if you’re looking for a more straightforward way to use confectionery to worship there is the Chocolate Jesus.

  • Gaudior

    What are religious implications… of your favorite candy?

    The Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup symbolizes the unity of body (the chocolate coating) and soul (the peanut-butter hidden within).  Though you can try to separate them, they are forever shaped and flavored by one another, and the candy is tastiest when you enjoy them as one synchronous whole.

    Grin.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=30319652 Tim Lehnerer

    I can’t wait to find out what the different colors of Dots mean. The pinkish-red strawberry ones and the reddish-pink cherry ones MUST have a hidden meaning.

  • Tonio

     M&Ms could stand for Mary the mother of Jesus and Mary Magdalene.

    Smarties – a slam at intellectuals who RTCs perceive as being hostile to religion?

  • ASeriesOfWords

    Traditional peppermint candy canes are in the same candy taxonomy as candy corn. The special flavored candy canes however are definitely ‘real’ candy.

  • Impulse725

    The existence of worthwhile fiction and the foolishness of peddling lies are not contradictory statements.

  • Nick

    I always liked candy canes as a child (and Tic Tacs as well) — the only problem was that with candy canes there was no good place to hold the thing, and it ended up slightly melting anyway from the heat (it’s summer at Christmas here), so your hand would always end up sticky.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X