catapult magazine

I believe there is a big difference between seeing somthing and reading about it. When you see it, everything is there, layed out for you nice and neat, but when you read about something it is not all supplied for you, you have to use your own perception of the world to fill in the gaps. The same goes for drama as well, expecially certian types of drama. TV and Movies on the other hand give it all to you, expecting little of the viewer, for some movies and tv the attention of the viewer is not even expected, it is the film or show’s job to keep you attention.

Though I see nothing abnormally sinful in the presentation of voilence, sex,. etc. I think that we must remember that though “‘Everything is permissable for me’—but not everything is beneficial. ‘Everything is permissible for me’—but I will not be mastered by anything” (1 Cor. 6:12).

That is why I think that there is a point in which it should be turned off, by even the strongest of believers. To me it is analogous to smoking or drinking, though it may not be a sin for a Christian to do either, it is not healthy either and they both can lead to even worse things. In treating our bodies as temples we must not forget our minds as well, for what is inside is what makes a man “unclean”.

As for Christian depiction of violence, sex, etc. I would say that at its most basic level it must first show truth but at the same time not cause us to stray. I am very interested in what others think of what everyone else thinks.

Two thoughts (both of them hearty affirmations of what Grant just said):
One: When I talked before about films containing Truth, that doesn’t mean that they have a single clearly articulated one-sentence theme. I think the nature of art is that it captures what we cannot capture directly — such that when I see a really good film I am often left with an absolute conviction that the film has captured something that cannot be expressed any other way. And when film critics (or English teachers) try to articulate exactly what the film is saying, that meaning gets truncated. So I agree with Grant that films don’t have to be “efficient machines of meaning”, but I do what Films to capture truth in the way that only they can. If a film is solely there for entertainment, and bears no message (and frankly, I can’t imagine a film that bears no message), I am not as interested.

Two: If a film is filled with anything superfluous it reduces the quality of the film, whether that is sex and violence or preachiness or excessive lingering shots of landscapes that have no bearing on the story. But I think Christians opposed to sex and violence and language in film don’t make a distinction between superflous use of these things and use that is vital to the story. We should make such a distinction. The Bible shies away from nothing, but obviously includes that which suits the story. We are not told details of Adam and Eve’s sex life because it is not important, save to know that they had children and that after the fall childbirth became a painful thing. We are told about some of David’s lusts and the trouble they got him into because these things do matter to the story.

thanks for this discussion. I have enjoyed it.

Exactly, Christians should be able to discern what is and is not superfluous. I’m just trying to say that in my opinion Christians should not sit through a movie with for example; multiple lingering graphic sex scenes that serve no purpose and say “it’s fine that I watch this because I can discern that it’s wrong. Other than that part the movie is ‘good’” I’ve had people use that argument before and something about that just doesn’t sit well with me.

Is it possible to learn something from everything? In other words can something with very little “meaning” (How about some run of the mill fairly pointless movie like “Kingpin” or something) still be classified as useful for Christians in learning new things

perhaps we will not learn something new from everything, but we can certainly always re-learn or remember something. i haven’t seen Kingpin, but i’m assuming it’s something purely entertaining, like the Big Lebowski. these types of movies are important for remembering (or re-learning) how to laugh at ourselves—a reminder that humor is a communicable attribute—and just as important as a movie from which we learn something new.

I agree that aesthetic response isn’t just about getting the idea. There are many other dimensions of the art to ‘get’. The substance of an artpiece is just as much the way it tastes as the way it makes you think.

Big Lebowski has some richly pathetic characters. It has ideas about art and cultural commentary you can ‘get’ but it also forces you to feel people in a different way.

I like art that I respond to physicaly. “There’s a giant pimple in your toilet”. It might have a meaning. I wouldn’t want to keep it in my imagination to long though.

It is interesting that you bring up humor, Kirsten. I’ll probably get called a killjoy (or worse, a naked snow angel) for proposing this, but I think we have to discern in the area of humor too. Christians are certainly called to laugh, and maybe i am goofy for suggesting we ought to have some control over what we laugh at (especially in a society obsessed with amusing itself to death, to borrow Postman;s phrase). My concern is that I think, on some level, laughing at something represents some degree of approval. When my daughter was a baby, if she would plop mashed potatoes on the floor and then I laughed at them, that was a signal to her that i approved of her actions and wanted her to do it again. Most jokes, it seems to me, are putting forth, on some level, some version of truth. When we laugh at them, we affirm that version of truth. That’s why dirty jokes and racist humor are often so offensive. They are putting an intense amount of pressure on you to buy into a messed up world view. But if you don’t laugh, you are a prude or whatever.

I was serious when I said Christians are called to laugh. Specifically, I think we are called to craft edifying humor that heals rather than hurts. I think we can rule out stupid movies not because saying the word “fart” is evil and morally reprehensible, but because if that is all the humor is based on, it is stupid.