Will arguing semantics further the dialogue?
I read some interesting thoughts the other day about The Book of Eli. Apparently there’s some debate about whether or not it’s a Christian movie. In part, Mike Parker says:
But the question remains: is “The Book of Eli” a Christian movie?
I say, no.
Not because “The Book of Eli” is violent or at times profane. But because I don’t think there is such a thing as a Christian movie. Or a Christian novel. Or a Christian radio station.
I think Christ died for people, and only people can be Christians.
What we do with the art we create, be it a painting, stage play, sculpture or film, should be a reflection of the redemption we have experienced. It should be good art; art that deserves a place at the table of cultural relevance.
Unfortunately, most of what we get from so-called ‘Christian’ art is explicit art, and most of the time it is not very good.
No, I don’t think “The Book of Eli” is a Christian movie. But I do think it is a good movie, and I think it is good art. Just my thoughts, what about yours?
I agree with the sentiments he expresses about the art we create as people Christ died for. I agree with his criticism of a lot of “so called ‘Christian Art’” too.
What I wonder is, do we inhibit further dialogue about this by continuing the “There’s no such thing as…” argument. I mean, I get it. I see the point. I understand that it becomes easier to get away with poor quality when the community isolates itself, so by fighting the artistic isolation, perhaps something could be accomplished.
But maybe it’d be better just to speak the truth as honestly as possible, without the semantics. “Call it what you want, but as long as the art produced in the Christian community continues to be this bad, our seat at the world’s art discussion will be at the kid’s table.” After all, what it’s called isn’t as big a deal as the consistent quality issues, is it?
But…people don’t mean “Is the movie a Christian?”; they mean “Does the movie reflect/support/advocate/illustrate a Christian world view and Christian values?” Indeed, they do mean “Is it a reflection of the redemption we have experienced?”
Isn’t the quality of it a separate issue (except of course that anything done to reflect our redemption should preferably be of the highest quality)?
The Hermit Editor
27 Jan 10 at 11:30 am
Exactly my point, oh Hermit Editor — I guess I’m not as clear as I think I am. I’m concerned that there ought to be at least two discussions occurring:
1. What does a movie that reflects/supports/advocates/illustrates a Christian world view and Christian values look like?
2. What should the quality of a movie that reflects/supports/advocates/illustrates a Christian world view be like?
Because right now, the conversation breaks down at “is it a Christian movie / song / painting” and breaks down into semantics like, “There’s no such thing as a Christian movie.”
andrew mackay
27 Jan 10 at 11:36 am
Can i add another discussion that would happen, but possibly shouldn’t? Rhetorical, because i’m going to.
3. Which Christian world view and values will be reflected/supported/advocated/illustrated?
To be honest, this is one of the things that drives me nuts about Christianity. The fact that something that completely supports one Christian (and by that i mean protestant) worldview, may be contradictory to many other protestant worldviews, based on certain much-argued points of theology, history, attitudes, etc.
…I’m just saying.
Mattymac
27 Jan 10 at 11:27 pm
Matt, while I understand your frustration, I guess I just think it shouldn’t be surprising: Paul predicted it in 1 Cor 11:18-19. “For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.” So, there’s going to be some of that.
andrew mackay
28 Jan 10 at 5:59 am