|
.
Introduction
Reformed Christians
generally hold that Christians ought to be involved in bringing
Christ’s redemption to all facets of society. We base this on
passages such as the Cultural mandate (Gen. 1), which exhort us to rule
over the world and Paul’s exhortation to “redeem the
times” because of the evilness of the days (Eph. 5). Yet Paul
also tells us to destroy every cultural argument that detracts from the
supremacy of Christ (2 Cor. 10; Col.
2).
Many Christians today
turn the latter into a violation of the former by our simplistic criticism
of cultural arts. Christian magazines reduce artistic criticism to
tabulating the number of instances of sexuality, drug use, violence and
language. In such a reductionistic approach
(based ironically on the secular rating system, not on the Bible), however,
if applied consistently, even the Bible itself would fall under criticism
and scrutiny for its depictions of sex, violence, alcohol, and even
language.
If we as Christians
today are going to take seriously Paul’s example of destroying
arguments and pretensions that set themselves up against the knowledge of
God, we need to allow our thoughts to be taken captive by Christ. We
need to take seriously the cultural mandate and look redemptively
at the world around us, looking for opportunities to “redeem the
times” as well as condemn wickedness. Yet if we are going to
engage in the arts in a significant manner, we need to learn about the arts
and understand how they work.
We need to become first
and foremost listeners before we turn into criticizers. This paper is
intended to provide a framework for doing just that—learning how to
listen to the arts so that we can learn from them and criticize them more
effectively.
2.
Authors, Media and Audiences
2.1. Reference
and Mimesis
The following
description applies to all expressions of fictional arts, whether they be
music, poetry, fictional literature or movies. We will distinguish
between two rather technical terms: reference and mimesis with a view
towards learning how to engage in artistic criticism. For the sake of
simplicity, we will use the word “author” to stand for music
composers and movie directors, and we will use the word “text”
to stand for movies, books and music.
Reference—Authors write their texts by making
reference to an imagined world. In other words, fictional texts use
their words to create and project a world that does not actually
exist. Clarence Walhout writes, “The
language of a novel descriptively refers to or designates the fictional
objects and states of affairs that the author picks out or projects by
means of language.” For instance, Tom Sawyer’s
whitewashed fence does not exist in the actual world. It only exists
in the world created by Mark Twain.
Mimesis—The imagined worlds created by authors
have a mimetic relationship to the actual world. Walhout writes, “mimesis involves a relation
between the imagined world of the text and the actual world as it is perceived
and interpreted by the author of the text.” For instance, J. R.
R. Tolkein’s Gandalf is a wizard living in
a world in which he is capable of performing magic spells. The actual
world is dissimilar from Gandalf’s world in that sense. At the
same time, Gandalf appears human and lives in a world that is remarkably similar
to our own. Many, if not most, works of fiction generate worlds that
obey all the laws of physics we understand, but the stories depend on
characters and events that don’t exist. Circumstances are often
extremely coincidental, there is always a limited perspective (the
perspective of the author), and details given are extremely
selective.
The imagined world of
authors imitate the actual world, but they do not duplicate the actual
world—there are similarities and dissimilarities. It is in the
way that authors construct their imagined world in mimetic relation to the
actual world that texts have their meaning or message.
Distinguishing between
reference and mimesis allows us to properly critique books and
movies. Understanding the mimetic functions of literature allow us to
see fictional texts as interpretations of the actual world, through which
the author can make judgements about it. Walhout writes, “Fiction is itself
hermeneutical. It offers us new ways of seeing and thinking about the
world. And if this is so, fiction works also serve a heuristic
purpose: they open for us new ways of reflecting on the world…
works of fiction present us with new models for our thinking about the
actual world.”
We may criticize a text
on a formal, referential, and mimetic level:
·
Formal—We may criticize the ability
of the artist in constructing his text—that is, we may criticize the
artist’s artistic ability—alliteration, imagery, plot devices,
etc.
·
Referential—We may criticize what the text
says—that is, we can determine whether the events make sense, whether
the characterization of the characters is consistent, etc. We may
further analyze the why the text what it says—the significance of a
character’s actions, etc.
·
Mimetic—We may also judge a
text’s interpretations of the world or judgments about the world—that
is, we may criticize a text’s message.
2.2. Authorial
Stance (or Intent)
It is the mimetic
function of literature that gives rise to authorial stance in a fictional
text. Walhout writes, “It is this
mimetic relationship that makes it possible for authors to use narrative
texts to express their beliefs about the actual world. How and for
what purposes authors use the mimetic qualities of narratives to give
expression to their beliefs is what we designate by the term narrative
stance.” An author’s intentions can be numerous.
They may include becoming famous, hurting a relative, making money,
etc. Authorial stance refers only to those intentions which are
related to what the author wants to communicate to his audience. An
author’s stance may be explicit or implicit, easy to determine or
difficult, but it is a necessary ingredient in understanding and applying a
text.
The authorial stance of
a text is what allows us to understand the author’s interpretations
and judgments about the actual world. Since authorial intentions are
often implied and difficult to determine, we often differ in our
understanding of an author’s intentions. We always approach a
text from within our own frame of reference, and we can never fully leave
ourselves to approach a text solely in the way its author wrote it. The
audience, therefore always adds an ingredient to the meaning of a text,
though it is certainly possible to judge one person’s understanding
of a text as being inadequate and even wrong. Engaging in a text then
involves an interaction between the author and reader/viewer, and both are
always influenced by a number of factors (the history of interpretation of
a text, personal concerns, cultural ideals, etc.).
3.
The Ethics of Artistic Engagement
3.1. Consistency
with a Biblical Ethic
It is common in
contemporary Christian circles to take a reductioistic
approach to criticism of the arts which fails to understand the mimetic
function of fictional narratives. Christian movie guides often base
their judgments about movies almost solely on the number and severity of
social taboos—sex, violence, language and drug use. The
standards used by many of these movie guides would condemn many Biblical
books if applied consistently. The books of Judges and Ezekiel, for
instance, contain depictions of sex and violence that would rival many
R-rated movies today. Consider the following examples:
·
Genesis 38 describes the
sin of Onan. The text says, “whenever
he lay with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to
keep from producing offspring for his brother.”
·
Judges 3 describes the
way Ehud found king Eglon
when he was relieving himself and stabbed him in the belly.
“The handle also went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the
blade, for he did not draw the sword out of his belly; and the refuse came
out.”
·
Judges 4 describes the
death of Sisera. He fled to Jael, who invited him into her tent and allowed him to
sleep there. While he was sleeping, she “drove the peg through
his temple into the ground, and he died.”
·
Judges 19 describes a
man who sent out his wife to be raped and abused throughout the night in
order to avoid being raped himself. When she was found dead the next
morning he cut up her body and sent it to the twelve tribes of Israel.
·
Ezekiel 23 graphically
describes Israel’s idolatry—“There
she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and
whose emission was like that of horses. So you longed for the lewdness of
your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young
breasts fondled.”
Obviously, the Bible is
not a Victorian document, and should not be held to such standards of proprietry. The same can be said of the popular
arts. The above passages are morally appropriate to write and read
because of the mimetic function that the texts serve. On a
referential level, each text explicitly describes immoral behavior.
Yet on a mimetic level, they all serve to accomplish a redemptive
purpose. Fictional texts ought to be held to the same standard.
The danger of Christian
reductionism in criticism is that we can turn the arts into sanitized and
moralistic pictures of the world.
This view can result in
Christians only engaging in texts that fail to portray human nature as it
is—that is, totally depraved. We can then only engage in texts
that exhibit good “role models” for godly living—people
who exemplify good parenting, etc. The real danger here is that we
replace the real gospel of redemption with another gospel of the good
example. We unwittingly condemn our own gospel by praising texts that
exalt the human ability to overcome their circumstances and be good without
redemption (see Rudy, for instance).
If we are going to seek
to engage in a Christian manner in the arts, we need to leave behind the
legalism of tabulating the number of sins and look at the arts through the
lens of the cross, valuing redemption over the good example. This, of
course, does not prevent us from claiming that certain acts shown in movies
and books are inappropriate and should not be there. On a mimetic
level, many sinful acts are depicted in texts for sinful purposes, and
Christians are free to condemn their presence. Pornographic movies
show nudity and sex for perverted purposes and need not be watched.
Movies such as Die Hard with a Vengeance portray violence seemingly
for the sole purpose of seeing cool special effects and cause an adrenaline
rush in viewers. Such criticism ought to stem from the mimetic
function of the movie, not simply by the presence of such acts in the
movie.
3.2. Example:
The Truman Show
Peter Weir created The
Truman Show for the purpose of social criticism. In the movie,
the director Christof has created a show called
“The Truman Show”centered
on a man named Truman Burbank. Truman was born into this show, but he
has no idea that he is part of a “Show.” He’s
living his live enclosed in a gigantic stage and he has no idea everybody
is watching him. Eventually, Truman learns the truth about his
condition and seeks to escape it. When he tries, Christof
begins to speak to him: “There’s no more truth out there than
in the world I’ve created for you.” Christof
wants Truman to stay in the “The Truman Show” because
ultimately the real world is too dangerous; the world of the show is
sanitized and safe, even controlled. For Christof,
it is better to live in the sanitized world than it is to live in the real
world.
Authors do with texts
what Christof did with “The Truman
Show.” Authors create imagined worlds in which readers can
engage, much like Truman was living in the imagined world of Christof. The difference, of course, is that we
are willing and knowledgeable participants in that world, and we
aren’t characters in the story. Truman’s world was
artificially safe and secure, but not all authors and directors seek artificiality
in their presentation of the world. Viewers, like Truman, will
suspend disbelief of the events that they encounter in the story. It
is not important to us that it may be impossible to construct the Truman
Show set.
Christof created “The Truman Show” not just
to make money. He had a social and artistic agenda, no matter how
warped we perceive it. He truly believed that the world of “The
Show” as a superior world to the outside world. He believed
Truman would be better off inside the bubble. Certainly there were
ulterior motives in his statements to Truman. However, he touched on
an aspect of human nature—we would prefer that the world was
sanitized so that we could be safe.
Weir (and screen writer
Andrew Niccol) are criticizing the voyeurism of
contemporary culture, but too often it seems that Christian movie reviewers
miss the point because of their reductionistic
approach to criticism. In fact, it seems they are all too comfortable
with Christof’s outlook on life.
Focus on the Family’s movie review in Plugged In writes of The
Truman Show,
Families
in search of an entertaining “discussion movie” will find lots
to chew on here. Several lines uttered by Christof
are themselves rich with possibilities when examined from a biblical
perspective (“We accept the reality of the world with which
we’re presented,” “There’s no more truth out there
than in the world I’ve created for you,”etc.).
However, the movie isn’t flawless. About a dozen profanities
(including two inappropriate uses of Jesus’ name) mar the dialogue.
And Truman’s best friend always seems to show up with a six-pack of
beer in hand. That’s a shame because, these moments aside, the film
responsibly deals with many positive, challenging themes.
The flaw of this movie,
according to this reviewer, was that in Christof’s
“Truman Show,” the characters acted just a little too much like
the way most Americans actually live their lives. Yet the movie is
praised because of the “positive” elements within it.
This movie reviewer seems to want us to experience only a “Truman
Show” when we enter into a movie theater. The world presented
to us must be sanitized, presenting us with a positive message for
discussion afterwards. When we succumb to the worldview of Christof, though, we become in many ways like the
audience of Christof’s show. We live
in the real world and yet enjoy the sanitized world more than our
own. We wish we could be there for a drama that is only an artificial
copy of reality. Even “The Truman Show’s” audience
routed for Truman in his escape, and yet voyeuristically watched every
moment of it.
The audience of a
legitimate work of art is neither to say in the Show or to leave it
unchanged. Like Truman, we are to leave with new models or new ways
of looking at the actual world. These new models may be good or poor,
but at the very least, we’ve had the chance to engage in
someone’s story. We are thus better equipped for engagement in
our world. At best, we leave the imagined world challenged, offended,
and encouraged to see the world we live in differently and engage in it
with a new perspective.
3.3. Responding
Theologically to the Arts
3.3.1. Listening
The first skill in
artistic engagement is the art of listening. In other words, we
can’t impose our own values on the work of art. We must first
let it speak to us on its own terms and then respond appropriately.
Failure to do so will cause us to misunderstand the work of art and misuse
it. We may falsely criticize it, or we may falsely praise it. I
remember one occasion when a friend of mine almost used the Guess Who song
“American Woman” for a patriotic occasion. In reality,
the song is a Canadian condemnation of many aspects of the American way of
life. My friend “falsely praised” the song because she
failed to understand its message.
One Christian music
reviewer once claimed that U2 could not be a Christian band because of the
use of foul language in the song “Wake Up, Dead Man.”
However, the song is sung in the tradition of the laments of the Psalms
(like Psalm 88) and is merely an expression of Bono’s
feelings at the time, crying out to the God whom he can’t see working
in the world. However, just like David in Psalm 88, he is still
crying out to God, and so his prayer is a prayer of faith. This
prayer of faith was missed by a Christian simply because Bono uses the
“f-word.”
We may legitimately
understand a work of art and yet disagree with its message, but we may also
learn a tremendous amount from the movie itself. At the
very least, we had the opportunity to listen to someone’s story and
gain insight to one aspect of the human condition. For instance,
movies such as The End of the Affair or The Cider House Rules
contain explicitly anti-Christian messages, but after watching them we can
feel that we have heard someone’s story and may respond to them from
a Christian perspective. Elie Weisel tells his story of the Holocaust in his book Night,
and through his story he comes to numerous conclusions about God with which
Christians would disagree. However, we as Christians must still be
willing to listen to him and engage with him in his story.
Robert Johnson,
following T. S. Eliot, writes that “whether a piece of literature was
worthy or not could only be decided on aesthetic grounds.” He continues, “Personal evaluation,
including theological dialogue, has its place in any human encounter, but
it must follow the act of first looking and listening.” We may
well evaluate a work of art to have a message contrary to what we
believe. Yet the work of art still has value in allowing us the
opportunity to engage in someone’s story. If the movie has
aesthetic value (formal/referential qualities), but has no message or a
contradictory message (mimetic), we may further judge the work of art to be
poor.
3.3.2. Self
Awareness
The second skill to
develop is self-awareness. We must be aware of how we are responding
to the work of art as we are experiencing it. Works of art generally
intend for you to respond emotionally to what you are experiencing. A
good work of art knows how it wants you to respond and constructs itself
accordingly.
3.3.3. Putting
on Theological Glasses
A third skill is
recognizing the “I” and the “Thou” in a work of
art. Often God is a character, whether implicit or explicit.
·
In Thirteen
Conversations about One Thing, God’s character is found in the
music, which foreshadows future events in the movie. The music was
composed to be omniscient.
·
In Forrest Gump,
many of the discussions ultimately have to do with God, but he never
actually shows Himself in a revelatory fashion. We must
interpret the events in the movie to draw conclusions about His
character—fate v. chance, predestination v. free will.
·
Weisel’s Night interprets his
treatment by the Germans as revelatory of God and his character.
·
Pulp Fiction includes a mysterious, glowing box
that everyone is after. A “miracle” in one
character’s life leads to a reinterpretation of a Biblical passage
and a conversion experience.
·
In the movie Field of
Dreams, God intervenes to bring restoration with a man and his father.
When God is written as
an implicit character, stories mimic the Biblical book of Esther, in which
God’s name is never mentioned, but who is providentially directing
the plot of the story.
4.
Artistic Criticism
4.1. Three
Levels of Criticism
Formal Level—Movies, music and books can be judged on a
formal level—that is, how well the author, director, etc. Has put
together his story, including the plot sequence, dialogue, etc.
·
The movie The Fellowship
of the Ring contains a scene in which the special effects are
distracting. The technology just isn’t there to do it
well. Since the scene isn’t necessary to the plot, it could be
deleted.
·
The movie Attack of
the Clones contains dialogue that is sub par. Lines such as
“I’m going to be the best Jedi ever” almost make you
wince.
·
The movie Thirteen
Conversations about One Thing beautifully organizes itself around,
well, thirteen conversations.
·
The movie Memento
rigorously structures itself in terms of time. The color scenes are
in reverse order and the black and white scenes are in forward order.
Referential Level—The arts may also be judged in terms of
how well they construct their worlds.
·
The plot of the movie All
the Pretty Horses breaks down because there is no apparent reason for
the main character to follow the leading lady besides the fact that she has
a pretty face.
·
Mary Jane’s
character in Spider-Man is so unconvincing that it renders Peter
Parker’s actions toward her unbelievable.
·
The movie Changing
Lanes has a great story line with wonderful character
development. However, it can be criticized for in part
resolving the plot conflict through extortion. In effect, the main
character adopted the same practice learned to condemn.
·
Much of the movie No
Man’s Land (a Serbo-Croation
“war” movie) is taken up with conversations between the two
main characters. These two characters form the basis for all the
action in the movie and shape your opinion of those actions.
Mimetic Level—The arts may also be judged in terms of
the messages they contain.
·
The movie Miss
Congeniality seems to have explicitly contradictory views of beauty
pageants and whether or not they serve a good purpose.
·
The romantic comedy As
Good as it Gets contains such well-developed characters and plot
elements that it transcends its own genre to say meaningful things about
all our relationships.
·
The movie Life as a
House makes wonderful statements about repentance and forgiveness that
we can apply to our own lives.
·
The Truman Show
is a criticism of the cultural voyeurism that permeates our society.
4.2. Three
Perspectives on Artistic Criticism
Genre Criticism refers to criticism based on the genres, or
“categories,” in which we place works of art. Literature
can be divided into fiction and nonfiction genres, and these can be
subdivided into more narrow genres such as Western, Mystery, Romance and
Fantasy novels. Music can be divided into genres of Rock, Country-Western,
Classical, etc. Poetry can be divided into numerous genres, such as
lyric or epic poetry. Movies as well can be divided: documentary,
romantic comedy, war, drama, action, etc.
The genre of a work of
art often determines the “rules” we use when engaging in
it. We watch a documentary about the life of John F. Kennedy with
different expectations that we would watch a romantic comedy. Many
would be upset if Disney produced an animated feature with dark and adult
themes. Many were upset by the last song in Disney’s Fantasia.
Genre categories are
descriptive, not prescriptive. Authors are under no obligation to
follow all the rules attributed to one genre. In fact, many movies
deliberately mix genres in their movies. Movies such as Life is
Beautiful or Moulin Rouge! deliberately mix tragedy and comedy
in the telling of their stories. Some movies, such as JFK,
will mix genres for the purpose of manipulating the audience.
Awareness of how genres subconsciously affect the “rules” by
which we interpret movies can be extremely important in such cases.
The movie Shrek made fun of Disney’s
romanticism through its story line. It also made fun of
Disney’s commercialism by turning the king’s palace into Disney
World.
Many movies follow
standard structures in their genre so faithfully that the movies become
predictable, pedantic and boring. Referring to some action
movies, William Romanowski writes, “These
films are so formulaic that they can be described as Die Hard on a
boat (Under Siege), a train (Under Siege 2: Dark Territory),
a bus (Speed), a plane (Executive Decision), and in a tunnel
(Daylight).”
Auteur Criticism refers to how authors (that is, writers,
composers, directors, poets, etc.) approach their works of art from the
perspective of their own world view, their own tastes, their own artistic
vision.
·
The movies of Peter Weir
will differ greatly from those of Wes Anderson, even if they each have the
same value.
·
J.R.R. Tolkein’s Lord of the Rings and C. S.
Lewis’ Space Trilogy fall roughly within the same genre of
literature and the two were friends, yet the books are vastly different in
their approach.
·
Beatle’s fans can
often tell the difference between a Paul McCartney song and a John Lennon
song solely on the basis of the lyrics (they never credited themselves
individually for their music—they simply said
“Lennon-McCartney”).
Critics may analyze the
entire work of an author and find common themes that enhance one’s
understanding and experience of each particular work of art. One may
notice trends and development in the movies of Peter Weir or find signature
elements in the movies of Alfred Hitchcock. One may also notice that
every movie of a particular director seems to be the exact same movie with
different characters and a different situation. See Gary Marshall’s
films or John Glen’s James Bond movies.
Cultural Criticism recognizes that many works of art attempt to say
something about an element of contemporary culture.
·
The Truman Show confronts cultural voyeurism.
·
Fight Club addresses the apathy of males who
disengage from life, only to find a false version of it in a “fight
club.”
·
Movies such as Traffic
or No Man’s Land confront the inability of governments and
agencies to make a genuine difference in international conflicts.
After properly listening
to a work of art, we may properly analyze the cultural message of the
movie. Does the movie present us with a true and accurate criticism
of our contemporary culture? Does the movie simply perpetuate
cultural myths that can no longer be assumed to be true? Many of our
most popular movies are simply reinventions of American myths such as
individualism, rags to riches stories, etc. (aka,
the triumph of the human spirit). Many movies of this nature contain
no sex, violence, language or drug use and they have a positive
outlook. This causes many Christians to applaud these films even
though the underlying elements are anti-Christian. In reality, these
American myths typically assume that people have the ability to tap into
their inner potential and innate goodness to overcome obstacles on their
own power. It is fundamentally anti-redemptive.
4.3. Intertextuality
Many books and movies
make reference to earlier works of literature to add significance to the
work of art. Intertextuality can be used
effectively to add a desired understanding of a movie to those who are at
least familiar with the other work of art.
·
Melville’s Moby
Dick makes reference to the Biblical character Ishamael.
·
The movie The
Spitfire Grill makes extensive use of the Jacob-Esau story in Gilead.
·
There is a scene in Life
is Beautiful where the main character defies authority by playing music
for the whole camp (and particularly his wife) to hear. That scene is
deeply reminiscent of a similar scene in the movie Shawshank
Redemption.
Many works of art make
use of mythological themes as plot devices.
·
Moulin Rouge! uses the Orpheus myth to shape the
plot of its stories, and the main characters are based on the incarnation
of Jesus (obviously not a myth) and the hindu god
Sati.
·
O Brother, Where Art
Thou? combines the
mythology of The Odyssey with mythology from the deep south,
including Robert Johnson’s supposed deal with the devil to become a
great guitarist.
·
The Truman Show relies heavily on Greek
mythology. The director is portrayed as Greek god opposed by the main
character. There is even a “Helen of Troy” figure, whose
face launched at least one ship to fight for freedom from this god.
·
The Empire Strikes
Back develops the
character of Yoda based on the forest wanderer motif in Hinduism.
5.
Conclusion
Artistic criticism is a
needed skill to develop if Christians are going to engage intelligently in
the arts around them. We cannot reduce it to a tabulation of sinful
activity portrayed in a text. We must engage in the the text, listen to it to understand its message.
Once we have understood it’s message (it’s mimetic value), we
may then criticize it for what it says. There are many avenues of
criticism that we may follow in this endeavor outlined above.
The goal here is not simply to become more “permissive”
of sinful activity in texts. Far from that, the result of a new kind
of criticism will perhaps make us more critical of senseless violence
portrayed in movies for the wrong purposes. It will also open our
eyes to the worldly moralism found in many
“family movies.” Lord willing, our critical eye will be
reoriented to view the arts, not through a set of moral criteria, but
through the lens of the gospel.
SJS
|
