In the Old Testament, the righteous man Job is the archetype of undeserved human suffering. In the complete absence of reasons that would make his misfortune understandable, he is deprived of his health, wealth, and children. His tragedy goes beyond material and personal losses and is reflected in the gap between the world as it should be and the harsh reality that unfolds before him. His fate raises painful questions about the metaphysical order: if justice is at the foundation of the world, why does the innocent suffer; if there is a higher order, why is there so much chaos on earth; and finally, if there is a heavenly authority, how can we explain its devastating silence?
Job speaks. Instead of accepting his suffering with dignified silence or reducing it to a sentimental lesson in patience, Job enters into open conflict with the Creator - he demands answers. At the heart of his cry lies faith in the existence of absolute justice, no matter how inscrutable its inner logic may seem to the human mind. Job stretches out his hands to heaven because he believes that there is someone there who can see them. By directing his anger towards the heavens, he paradoxically confirms faith itself: to rebel against God means still to believe that there is a higher authority before which the question of justice makes sense.
When the Almighty finally speaks, the answers he seeks about the hidden logic of suffering remain beyond the reach of Job's mind. The answer he receives does not explain why he was left without everything he had gained over the years. Nor does it explain why his children had to die. God presents before Job the majesty of his own creation: the creation of the earth, the sea, the constellations, the beasts, and the forces that precede man. The voice from the whirlwind shifts the focus from individual human destiny to the cosmic whole, announcing that the meaning of existence cannot be subordinated to the standards of human understanding.
For the modern reader, such an answer has the air of cruelty, since God responds to the specific question of human suffering by presenting his own greatness. Yet within this exchange lies a dimension that will become precious in later eras precisely through his own disappearance: Job, in the end, receives an answer. His cry has not gone in vain. Despite the universe remaining out of harmony with his desires, the existence of a final addressee to whom the cry is addressed is confirmed. The sky, if only for a moment, nevertheless opens. What happens to Job when the sky remains silent? Man retains the need to ask “why?”, but he is no longer certain that there is anyone who could answer. With the disappearance of this certainty, the drama of modernity begins.
One of the striking hints of this transformation appears as early as 1872 in the painting Christ in the Desert by the Russian painter Ivan Kramskoy. The traditional temptation scene is almost completely devoid of supernatural spectacle because there is no visible Satan standing opposite the Son of God, as the embodiment of temptation. Christ sits among the cold rocks, bent and exhausted, with his hands clasped in convulsions, while the drama shifts from the external world to the consciousness of the Nazarene. Kramskoy does not abandon the religious register, but he moves the divine drama into the space of the human psyche, and temptation into a solitary hesitation. Between the biblical Job, to whom God finally speaks from the whirlwind, and modern man who waits in vain for the same voice, stands Kramskoy's Christ - still within the world, but frighteningly alone in its silence.
Suffering without a heavenly addressee
The process of modernization was described by Max Weber as the “disenchantment of the world,” signifying a profound transformation in which the cosmos is reshaped into a space subordinated to predictable causes, rational procedures, institutions, and technical knowledge. In such an order, stars lose their role in predicting fate, storms cease to be manifestations of divine wrath, and disease is no longer interpreted as a metaphysical temptation. Although the world becomes more explicable, its intelligibility simultaneously creates a profound void: while scientific progress provides us with answers to the question of the physical causes of thunder, it denies us an explanation for why a bolt of lightning struck right above our heads.
Far from dwelling in metaphysical indifference, premodern man's world was marked by everyday brutality and uncertainty. Premodern man's suffering, however brutal, still had a clear place within a coherent symbolic order: it could be understood as temptation, punishment, sacrifice, fate, or a path to redemption.
Modernity has not destroyed this language, it has made it profoundly unstable. Nietzsche's proclamation of the death of God goes beyond the level of banal atheistic triumph. It is not the triumphant slogan of a man who has finally freed himself from religion, but the diagnosis of a civilizational earthquake. With the disappearance of the point towards which meaning and values have gravitated for centuries, the need for them remains undiminished. Man remains bound by old questions in an order that no longer guarantees the existence of answers. In this sense, the death of God signifies a situation in which the human being continues to gaze towards the firmament, drowning in complete uncertainty about whether anyone lives there.
It is for these reasons that Job has never completely disappeared from contemporary culture, continuing to inhabit it through new artistic interpretations. In the poem The Sire of Sorrow (Job's Sad Song) - Lord of Sorrows (Job's Sad Song), Joni Mitchell translates the biblical cry into the language of modern authorial music, focusing primarily on the dramatic moment of human rebellion. In her reading of the Book of Job, the focus shifts from the comforting epilogue to the fate of a broken individual who refuses passivity and invests his preserved dignity in an uncompromising demand for a divine explanation of his own suffering. Her Job still knows to whom he is speaking. He still has a clear idea of his heavenly addressee: despite the outburst of rage and the feeling of complete abandonment, the force of his accusation keeps alive the vertical bond between man and transcendence. Divine silence and apparent injustice, although difficult to bear, do not abolish God as an interlocutor.
In the movie A serious man (A Serious Man) The Coen brothers provide one of the most intriguing modern reincarnations of an Old Testament martyr through the character of Larry Gopnik, a physics professor from a small town in rural America whose existence is crumbling under the sudden burden of family breakdown, professional insecurity, and financial abyss. Immersed in accumulated troubles with no discernible cause, Larry carries the same primal need to know the reason, but his fate crucially diverges from the ancient model. While the biblical righteous man ultimately receives a divine answer from a whirlwind, Larry's pilgrimage from one rabbi to another brings only vague parables and devastating silence. The confrontation with the existential crisis reaches its climax in the film's final scene, when a literal whirlwind appears on the horizon, but no voice comes from it. The questions remain alive, but the very possibility of obtaining answers has seemingly disappeared.
The bitter seeds of the profane world
Job’s cry did not disappear with the decline of the religious horizon; it merely changed language. In contemporary music, one of its strongest echoes is found in The Veils. Although they produced some of the most powerful compositions in alternative rock over more than two decades, they remained largely outside the mainstream. Instead, they became a kind of sacred secret of popular music, gaining a cult following and the unusual favor of film visionaries. Their raw sound and lyrics that constantly oscillate between beauty and despair have found a place in the cinematic worlds of Paolo Sorrentino, Tim Burton, and David Lynch.
The reason for this appeal lies in the lyrics that resist the thematic constants of our time, preserving within themselves an archetypal iconography: sin, water, blood, prophecy and punishment. These ancient symbols, transferred to a contemporary landscape of money, institutions, oligarchic power and social degradation, gain strength through the voice of Finn Andrews, the band's songwriter and frontman. Andrews, who is not without reason compared to great alternative rock storytellers such as Nick Cave and Mark Lanegan, sounds like a clergyman who has lost his faith in the middle of his own sermon, but continues it anyway because he no longer knows what else to do. The song Nux Vomica, from the band's self-titled album, is the most complete testimony to this state.
The title itself is taken from the Latin name for the plant. strychnos nux vomica from whose seeds the poison strychnine is obtained. An appropriate title for a song in which reality itself feels like a harsh substance that a man has swallowed and can no longer expel. The question posed in the chorus What say you, Lord? (What say you, Lord?) becomes the construction principle of the poem. Andrews presents an accusation before God in which the entire modern era becomes evidence: from prisoners in reformatories to a man who has lost consciousness of the direction of his own movement.
Unlike the biblical ancestor focused on personal misfortune, this Job brings the collective downfall of the species before the invisible judge. His cry transcends private drama: the question is no longer why am I suffering? The question takes on a terrifying form: What do you say to all this? A series of tragedies does not fall from the sky nor await divine justification. They are produced here systemically, every day - as a direct consequence of social structures and the way we have chosen to create our own world.
The man of our time does not sit alone on the charred remains of his own life. Around him is a whole landscape of social defeats. The verses present a grotesque picture of the model of success that has become the norm today: a grieving wife versus a high profit margin. The man, according to the system's standards, may have succeeded. The numbers are good, the balance sheet looks impeccable, but the life behind it is ruined. This brutal demonstration of the separation of economic success from human well-being exposes a system in which suffering ceases to be just a metaphysical fact and acquires concrete causes.
Finn Andrews goes a step further in redefining the biblical motif: his Job lives within an order bounded by reformatories, business profits, mass media, political power, and nature brought to the brink of survival. At the crossroads between the Coen brothers' silent whirlwind and Andrews' singing, a postmodern Job is born. This attribute here does not designate a man who has ceased to believe in God, but a subject who inherits the disjointed world of modernity and finds it in a state of complete fragmentation, media mediation, and subordination to a logic in which suffering is transformed into a commodity or spectacle. His misfortune therefore loses its unique addressee. In this plurality of authority, God becomes just one of the possible interlocutors, alongside the market, the media, and institutions. and, ultimately, the audience itself. That is why his cry can no longer end with the question What do you say, Lord? Sooner or later it must acquire a collective dimension and become What say you, all? (What do you all say?)
Fragments of the sacred on a market stall
In the poem, suffering is transferred from the cosmic plane to the social framework. Existence is destroyed by mechanisms designed to organize human communities. The absurdity lies in the fact that order can function flawlessly, while within its cogs the individual systematically deteriorates. Horror does not come from the heights of heaven, but is produced daily on earth. At the same time, the poem opens a dark crack: the possibility of divine indifference. While the biblical Job grapples with the inscrutability of the Creator's plan, here a chilling foreboding emerges of the heavens that see human fate but choose silence.
The poem then takes on apocalyptic proportions. Animals are seized by madness, the cure for the plagues is increasingly difficult to find, and nature ceases to exist as a backdrop to human drama and directly takes on the role of its victim. These visions are read simultaneously through the prism of biblical symbolism and through the naked political reality. Ecological collapse is not the result of divine retribution, but springs from the mechanisms of industrial extraction, hyperproduction, frenzied consumption and economic logic that sees nature first as a resource, and only then as the world in which we live. Nux Vomice is not a prophecy of something that may come. Fragments of the predicted cataclysm are woven into our everyday lives. A white horse gallops through the verses - and in the biblical imagination, horses are messengers of trouble. With it comes an elusive threat in which ecological catastrophe, political implosion, nervous breakdown and physical death all overlap at the same time. The apocalypse loses the character of a one-time, final act and is transformed into a permanent state, into the very feeling of life within the dissolution that is unfolding before our eyes.
Phrases like To the Kingdom come (Until Your Kingdom Come) in the Christian tradition carry the promise of final salvation, while in Nux Vomica they take on ambivalent tones. The longing for the arrival of the kingdom of heaven is intertwined with terror, revealing a man who, exhausted by the intolerability of the existing world, desires its complete collapse without any need for knowledge of what follows. Here the poem grows into a loss of faith. Sacred language survives even after the collapse of religious certainty: the Lord, Christ, the Kingdom, the patriarchs and the apocalyptic horse continue to inhabit the verses. Fragments of the sacred are still there, although they no longer build a stable cosmological order, but are scattered through a reality marked by the race for profit, newspaper headlines, corrupt statesmen, bureaucracy and general disintegration. It is a stripped-down image of religion after disillusionment: fragments of the sacred scattered within a profane space.
One of the most poignant moments in the poem juxtaposes the wounds of Christ with the front pages of the right-wing tabloid Daily Mail. The body of Christ, once the center of civilization's hope for redemption, now deserves the same place in symbolic space as the sensationalist machinery of mass media. Suffering, once a subject of theology, has become no less real, but today it is a content consumed with the first morning coffee.
Disaster comes in the same packaging as banality: the horrors of war, the suffering of children, political malfeasance, advertisements, the lives of celebrities, and the weather forecast all inhabit the same digital surface. Within minutes, the modern viewer consumes scenes of unimaginable human tragedy, only to swipe to a photo of a famous athlete’s meal in the next. The paradox of media overproduction is that random and constant exposure to audiovisual noise gradually produces blindness. We see everything now. And that’s why it’s getting harder and harder to see anything.
This is where the concept of interpassivity, developed by the Austrian philosopher Robert Pfaller, comes in. If interactivity implies our direct participation, interpassivity denotes the possibility of transferring part of our own feelings, beliefs, or reactions to another—to the medium, the audience, or the technology itself. Just as recorded laughter can laugh for the viewer, so too can the media machinery grieve, indignate, and be appalled for us. The disaster gets a headline, a photograph, an emotional response, and thousands of comments; condemnation is pronounced, anger is demonstrated, sympathy is publicly affirmed. It all happened without necessarily requiring anything from the observer except a look.
The problem of the modern Job, however, is no longer confined to the silence of God, but rather to the fact that we have created an entire system that constantly speaks for us. Human agony is given its mediated compassion, rebellion its pre-ordained form, and moral discomfort a channel through which it can flow harmlessly. Suffering, along with all other aspects of existence, is subjected to the laws of commodity exchange. The sight of misfortune generates a click, anger mobilizes attention, and fear secures an audience, while criticism of the system is easily repackaged and resold to those from whose rebellion it grew. Within such a dynamic, even light itself - the oldest metaphor for sacred presence - is ground down and brought to the market stall. Andrews, of course, avoids presenting an alternative political-economic vision, offering instead a series of suggestive images that expose the constant shifting of the boundaries of market logic. Land, water, time, the human body, intimacy, cultural artifacts, and political resistance become commodities one after another.
The politicization of suffering in Nux Vomica
The most dramatic political twist of Nux Vomica is the transformation of the question What sayest thou, Lord? into the imperative: What sayest ye all? When Andrews turns his gaze from heaven to us, the very nature of the questioning is radically altered. Profit margins, mass media, political elites, and a devastated ecosystem cease to be the setting for a metaphysical tragedy. They belong entirely to the historical and social order—the tangible system that humans have created and reproduce daily.
Long before modern discussions of alienation, capital, or social structures, Shakespeare gave the conspirator Gaius Longinus Cassius a sentence in the tragedy Julius Caesar that resonates uncomfortably contemporary: The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars. But in ourselves, that we are underlings (The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in us for being subjects.) The fault remains in us, far beyond the stellar constellations. In Andrews's change of addressee lies the same unpleasant demand: deprived of the divine answer, man loses the luxury of waiting for it endlessly and passively. What do you all say? is no longer a rhetorical question. The religious cry overflows into a political imperative, and responsibility returns to where it belonged from the beginning - to man.
The biblical Job rebels with faith in the necessity of justice, and Andrews follows in his footsteps. Man does not howl to the heavens for no reason, but because of prisoners, exploited animals, corrupt leaders, and ubiquitous commodification. This cry is irrefutable proof that something in us still refuses to die.
Camus located the absurd in the gap between the human desire for meaning and the inexorable silence of the world. However, searching for a reason for the silence in the cosmos loses its meaning when we turn a deaf ear to the cries of those who tell us clearly what hurts them. The silence of the sky too often serves as an elegant alibi for the silence of society itself. Job becomes our contemporary once again. His friends try to convince him that he must somehow have deserved everything that happened to him, guided by simple logic: the world is a perfectly ordered whole, so your suffering infallibly proves your guilt. Job resolutely rejects the pact with the appearance of justice.
Modern society builds its own, sophisticated versions of Job's friends. Poverty is rechristened a lack of effort, professional burnout an inability to manage stress, loneliness an inability to "work on oneself", and ontological insecurity an inability to resist personal resistance. Numerous critics of modern capitalism have recognized this perfidious maneuver: by relocating social contradictions to the domain of private failures, the system itself completely evaporates from sight, leaving behind only the individual forced to eternally self-repair. The author of Nux Vomice abhors the aforementioned defense mechanism. Numerous wounds grow beyond the reach of personal responsibility. Many misfortunes transcend the private sphere. Instead of dealing with the person who constantly needs to be optimized, the focus of the problem lies in the very foundations of the world around him.
Redemption without heaven
To ancient Job, God speaks from a whirlwind and, without any rational explanation, thereby confirms his own presence. Larry Gopnik is confronted by a whirlwind devoid of any voice. Andrews' cry echoes through unhappy marriages, tortured animals, Christ, tabloids, and heads of state, to eventually redirect towards a man who is frantically trying to maintain some kind of meaningful connection with his own existence. The sky is enveloped in silence during this time. But the song survives. By transforming the cry into a song, a new addressee is created: that addressee is us.
Art, in fact, grows where theodicy breaks down. Denied the power to explain the origin of suffering, bring back the dead, or offer a final metaphysical resolution, art retains the capacity to bear witness. Transformed into song, the cry loses its property of private property; the listener takes it over, recognizing his own fate in the voice of another, thus bringing two isolated solitudes together, if only for a moment.
Therein lies one of the rare forms of redemption available to the postmodern Job: instead of waiting for an answer from on high, salvation comes from a horizontal plane – through the presence of another who has heard. Once we hear, we lose the possibility of pretending to be deaf. The question What do you all say? grows from a metaphysical plane into a direct political responsibility. That is why Nux Vomica is not a poem in which nihilism triumphs supremely. Nihilism would begin when Andrews stopped asking. When it would no longer matter what we say. When a white horse could gallop through the world, animals would go mad, light would be sold, and man would just shrug his shoulders. The author of Nux Vomica refuses to shrug his shoulders indifferently. He roars. Earthly-produced injustices do not require heavenly arbitration: they have their historical causes, their perpetrators, and their profiteers, and resistance to them must be equally earthly. The deepest fear of the modern Job is that suffering has gone unwitnessed. If the sky is already silent, the human presence becomes the last instance to which the cry can be addressed.
From Job to Larry Gopnik, and from Larry to Finn Andrews, the question remains the same. Only we no longer expect the answer from the same place. So the final question remains open: What do you all say? God will not answer. We, however, are called to listen. If heaven no longer answers, the silence that remains is not a void in which we lose ourselves, but a space in which we are forced to finally speak to each other.
Enjoy the song, if you can.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
