I think the hostilities may be ramping up...
One of the perks of traveling on business is the ability to get a little closer to the world than I'm comfortable exposing my family to. I mean, I never want to be a stumbling block in their spiritual growth and I know what I can handle and not stumble...so I'll end up at places or watching movies that I wouldn't want my family watching (don't let your mind wander to the gutter...none of which I'd be uncomfortable discussing with Jesus).
Anyway...this trip had two documentaries catching my attention. One on in-room pay per view on "evangelical kids' camp" and the other an HBO documentary on "the evangelical movement". I only watched the preview of the camp thing...couldn't see investing $11.99 to get fired up at some liberal arts project. But I saw enough to see how we are viewed.
I did watch the last 35 minutes of the HBO documentary and the lady filming and interviewing did her best to be balanced and not come off condescending...like a good documentary, she tried to let the information tell the story. Every person she interviewed from Jerry Fallwell to this home school family of 12 in the mid-west was cordial, inviting, and I could see myself enjoying their company.
What's crazy is...I'm not sure that was the intention, nor was I the target market for the documentary. The narator is from New York City...female, artsy, horn rimmed glasses, short, straight hair, inteligent...very NPR-like. I got the distinct impression that she thought every one of these people were nuts...the old guy spending $22K per cross to erect 35' tall crosses in every state...the Liberty University student going door to door educating people about the importance of the upcoming election on family values...the beauty queen, would be lawyer, but mother of 12 who is content post conversion (which occured somewhere between law school and marriage to her pastor husband), the old man driving the red pick-up with "Jesus died for you and me" accross the tail gate...you get the point.
And if she thinks we're nuts, and HBO bought this film, there is probably a distinct chance that a large part of the population thinks we're nuts. And if that's the case, here in America, things are going to be drastically different for my children than say they were for my mother when she was a child. I'm not sure what that looks like, but I am sure I better be making sure that their faith is not luke warm.
posted by Hollywood at 1:50 PM
10 Comments:
Hollywood, I think it's absolutely safe to say that the world thinks we're nuts. But then again, they did the same thing to Christians in and around 60 A.D. It's nothing new.
And, don't be too wowed by what people tell you about the 1950's...or the time of the Puritans (where, by the way, church attendance was around 20%). There's never been a time that true followers of Christ were considered normal. If they were, they were milquetoast...so you're right in that your children better be anything other than lukewarm.
But that's a vicious circle...because if they're "hot" they'll be considered oddballs. Such is life on this side of the Kingdom. But the sky is not falling, Hollywood.
It already fell.
6:38 PM
Alexandra PELOSI (the director of the film you saw) isn't from New York, she's from CALIFORNIA. Don't you recognize her *extremely well known* last name??? And I saw that movie. She doesn't portray those people as nuts, the subjects themselves do.
7:56 AM
SHE was very polite...and inteligent...but like most ART, the artist's desire is to lead or move the viewers to a conclusion while staying in the background, nowhere moreso than a documentary...which can be very thoughfully and strategically clipped together.
This was a classic case of building a two hour case, out of context, for how crazy evangelicals are.
For example, the beauty queen turned mother of 12...I'm sure she spoke of the emptiness of her beauty queen accomplishments and the vanity involved, and the relative selfishness that may have come from chasing the dollar as an attorney vs. sacrificing herself to invest in her 12 children...however, none of that made it on film...just a clip here and there to lead a veiwer to think..."these people are crazy, whatever they're smoking, I don't want it."
And at the core...this very intelligent Pelosi woman...was on the offensive...going after this group...and my point was...I haven't noticed this societally before.
3:28 AM
Hollywood, I saw that same film and the subjects did just fine at looking nuts. They knew they were going to be on film and even signed releases...hence, subject to whatever edits the director chooses. They weren't showing anything the people didn't do.
But that's really beside the point. An artists desire is not to lead or move a viewer to any conclusion, but rather to provoke thought. Naturally, this will come from the worldview of the artist--but the artists that all live in my house will be the first to tell you that they will leave any and all conclusions to the viewer.
And you haven't seen artists on the "offensive?" Are you kidding? Van Gogh (Bible in Still Life might be one of the most anti-Christian statements on canvas), the Beatles (in their Ravi Shankar phase), John Gage, it's been going on as long as there've been artists...
4:32 AM
What makes the Bible in still life so offensive...I just checked it out, for the first time, and...?
2:47 PM
Oh, Hollywood...while you were in all those engineering classes or taking the 3 minutes (that should've taken you 3 hours) to get ready for ROTC, I was taking liberal arts classes.
Notice the candle that's out? Symbolism--the Spirit of God is gone (some say it was in reference to his father, the preacher, who died--but either way, God to Van Gogh was dead).
Notice the Bible's words? Gray. Murky. Unreadable. Nothing to say.
Notice the only bright color in the painting? It's a book that embraces unbiblical choices and lifestyles--a rarity in Van Gogh's culture.
I stood 3 feet from it--and purchased a re-print that sits in my office. It reminds me of what I'm up against.
4:52 AM
I kind of like not knowing...but you did prove my point, kind of...the painter did have a message HE was trying to push...it wasn't all up to the audience to interpret...right. And, you can't tell me the baby Pelosi didn't have an agenda when making that film can you?
Thanks for educating me on the painting...it's cool to know now.
Your artsy ignorant friend...Hwood
4:06 PM
Actually, Hollywood, I proved my point: Van Gogh saw the world a certain way, and painted his picture in that manner. He was being true to what he believed, and really didn't care if you agreed with him or not. He was pushing you to think for yourself.
So, yes, he (and I'd suggest any filmmaker, just like in "Super Size Me" where the documentary didn't eat much fast food, but then wanted to do a documentary on it) had a worldview--we all do--but he didn't care whether or not you agreed with him.
He just wanted to provoke thought through his medium.
But then he went crazy and cut his ear off for a girl.
5:05 AM
Sporlock from Super Size me cut his ear off...I thought he was maried to a vegan.
2:25 PM
The parenthesis indicate a "rabbit trail," silly. Van Gogh was the line of thought that continued, and the diversion of Spurlock was an illustration of the same point, designed to enhance that point.
Really, did you pay attention at ALL in the English classes you took at Auburn?
Of course, if this discussion were about higher mathematics, you'd be schooling me, too.
5:19 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home