# Using existing symbols.



## Kevlar (Nov 2, 2011)

Once again I find myself up against a wall in my worldbuilding. The main religion of the locals worships a god at each of the four points of the compass. Because compass roses aren't exactly what I consider material for religious symbols or heraldry, I realize that a cross (and here I state: NOT a crucifix, but a cross of equal arms-length) is the best symbol.

While such a cross has been used repeatedly throughout the history of symbolism to represent a multitude of things, most of the modern populace will be quick to associate it with Christianity.

Would you use such a smbol, or would you be worried about the criticism and misunderstanding you would be subject to?


----------



## Devor (Nov 2, 2011)

I had a friend in college who used footage of the twin towers falling for a project in film class.  Afterwards he said that nobody could look beyond it to see whatever point he was trying to make.

I saw the video and have no idea what his point was, but knowing him I'm sure it was brilliant.

I'm sure you understand my point.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Nov 2, 2011)

How about a circle with a node at each compass point, and nothing in the middle?


----------



## Kevlar (Nov 3, 2011)

Yes, I see your point Devor, and it is precisely what I was worried about. However, your friend was using a well known and specific event as a symbol of what I suspect was a moral or perspective purpose. I wanted to use the cross (again, not the crucifix) to represent identity. I am, of course, aware how the more presumptuous might not realize the line, and that makes your point an important one.



			
				Benjamin Clayborne said:
			
		

> How about a circle with a node at each compass point, and nothing in the middle?



I was thinking of something quite similar, basically a cross with a circle around it, but I sort of decided this to be the symbol of a certain sect that believes in a godly unity, and that all four gods are but a representation of one. This simply because a circle is often used to symbolize unity and the local sect does not believe in such a thing. One does not realize the symbolism behind choosing a religious symbol until trying to do just that.

The cross, after all, has been used since the stone age for unknown reasons. Celtic and Germanic cultures used the cross extensively. The Chinese use it to represent the number ten. We have the plus sign. The ankh was similar to the crucifix. There was a cross in a temple in Knossos, Greece. As far as I know Christianity adopted it much after its inception and took it from the shape of the torture device that killed their messiah, though a quick bit of tivia: many historians agree that the crucifix was actually shaped T not t. They believe that only later representations give it the "cruciform" geometry.

Even the crooked cross, the swastika, enjoyed a long history before the Nazi Party. Korea, China, Hindu and Buddhist tradition as a symbol of luck, Greece, Rome, Islam, Persia, and even Native Americans.

I'm sure my examples are incomplete but am pretty sure all are correct.

Egh, I'm about to make my dilemma worse.

I agree that the cross might be controversial, but I have started considering something while writing this: If writers cater to their readers are we doing our job? A good book makes someone think. Okay, even bad books do that. Books should also draw people in emotionally. Mediocre to good books can do this. But, perhaps, it may be a great book that will, to put it bluntly, piss you off. If a book can illicit this sort of reaction without actually provoking it it may cause people to think and wonder, and to question just WHY they became mad. And, perhaps, it will bring them to the realization that they were angry without cause. That the media, and that social stigma and taboo are compelling them to be "pissed off" over nothing. Perhaps they will be enlightened.

Opinions, please? I feel this is either a eureka moment or an early warning sign of insanity. But it sure got me thinking, and perhaps this distraction is what causes my prose in displaying my thoughts to be inadequate.


----------



## Amanita (Nov 3, 2011)

Well, you come from Canada as your profile says and your writing in English. Therefore most of your readers are likely to have a Christian background. Yes, I know, many people aren't devout Christians anymore but this doesn't mean that they aren't familiar with the symbolism and don't see crosses in churches on graveyards or somewhere. I don't know about Canada but here it is rather common to have crucifices at the side of streets, especially in Catholic regions. 
Therefore, most of your readers will associate the cross with Christianity, no matter how many other groups used it before or use it in other parts of the world. 
This would probably offend some people, others like me wouldn't be offended but would wonder how creative this person is, if he can't think of something other to use as a symbol for his fantasy religion than the symbol used by the most common religion around him. Obviously, this isn't the case and you've given the matter quite a bit of thought, but as a reader I wouldn't know that.

Another suggestions for a symbol that represents the number four would be a circle with a "flower" in it that has four petals like in a very simple mandala. This can easily be drawn with a drawing compass.


----------



## Shadoe (Nov 3, 2011)

Why not call it something other than a "cross." If you use the word "cross" in the context of religion, yes, it does bring up the concept of Christianity, which will certainly derail your story. However, if you refer to it in the story as a... gildersnarb, instead, then that takes it out of the realm of earthly religions. You would only have to occasionally refer to it as a "cross" to describe it. Something like, "He carried a flag with the gildersnarb, the equal-armed cross and symbol of the Gildersnarbians."

As an example, you refer to the word "crucifix." That word brings up a specific image to most. It's not a cross, specifically, it's a cross with a body nailed to it. In the same manner, a "gildersnarb" is technically "a cross," but it is specifically "an equal-armed cross that is the symbol of the Gildersnarbians."


----------



## Dreamhand (Nov 3, 2011)

Kevlar, have you drafted a history for these religions (both actual and the dogmatic mythology that inevitable evolves in such things)?  If not, may you can try building that history and examine the foundational events that were the genesis (pardon the pun) of the faith, from cult to sect to full-blown religion.

The initial passions and devotions of the first followers would have determined the initial symbols they identified with.  They'd be simple because they were intimate and personal (no one thinks they're building a religion initially), and then evolve as events, egos, epiphanies, and ambitions began to add layers of meaning and context.

What was the very first symbol of these gods BEFORE they were gods?  That would be the seed for whatever grand design their churches would adopt.


----------



## Elder the Dwarf (Nov 3, 2011)

What if you shaped it a little differently?  It could be two diamonds connecting the north to south and the west to east.  Or just a diamond connecting all of them.  Or you could make the ends into circles or points.  Maybe just change it up a little.


----------



## Devor (Nov 3, 2011)

Call it an "X" and say they don't hold their compasses straight up.


----------



## CharlieDay (Nov 3, 2011)

You could use the cross that you want to with a subtle addition such as small arrow points on all four ends, a small circle at the base, or a diamond around the center.


----------



## Kevlar (Nov 3, 2011)

Yes, many issues arise. Preumption and criticism being the most prevelant, and this being anathema to what an author wants.

As I've read your comments another shape has taken... shape... In my mind. The mythology of this faith believes in the earth as a circle, not a sphere as it is. Now perhaps this circle need not represent unity, a cycle, or a continuity, but simply the earth. My question is whether, in your much valued opinion, adding a cross in the middle that extends out a little beyond the circle would hold those same religious conotations. This cross is often found in neolithic artifacts, and eventually evolved into the celtic cross. Without the extended lower limb it hardly resembles the Christian cross... does it?

Thank you all for your input, and helping me realize just how bad the idea was. Most people will not follow the thought process I outlined, at least not with something of such cultural significance.


----------



## Elder the Dwarf (Nov 3, 2011)

It wasn't a bad idea, just one that maybe needed tweaking.  The circle with the cross sounds much better, best of luck.


----------



## Ravana (Nov 5, 2011)

Two lines at right angles to one another is one of the most basic and obvious symbols humans make. 

And, no, you'll never be able to use it without invoking Christianity. Not as a religious symbol, certainly. 

Symbols that consist of or include fours, suggesting unity… hmm. Square or diamond, as mentioned. Four-spoked wheel, also as mentioned. Four circles joined together in the middle, either overlapping or linked by a fifth. A four-pointed star or four-rayed sun. Four hands emerging from one wrist. A fret (easier to show than describe: see Machiavel, "Visual Aids," p. 2, post #13, bottom left figure: essentially, looks like a cut-out from a weave). A meander, possibly. A four-lobed endless knot, or Bowen knot. (Might be the best bet. Solomon's knot is another variation.) A pyramid. 

Try such things as Celtic knots, or interlacing ornamentation in general. Or any good visual reference on heraldry: I'm sure there are any number of four-based designs I'm not remembering at the moment… not all of which will suggest unity, of course.


----------



## Worldbreaker (Nov 5, 2011)

Yeah I think if you describe it right people will register it as its own thing, unrelated to Christianity or anything real world religion.


----------

