Wow, it seems that everybody has been feeling the need to shake things up lately, blog-design-wise. Kim, Jon, Bill, me and now Michele. And I’m probably forgetting to mention somebody else.
I’m sitting in my hotel room now, where somehow the wireless network is reaching six floors up and providing me with internet* access. Tomorrow is the final day of our annual internet-ministry conference, which has been a good experience thus far. Michele will be joining me here tomorrow after she puts some research time in at the University of Chicago library.
Then, Sunday morning is when Michele and I are being officially welcomed as members at our church. So it’s been a somewhat busy week and weekend for us–at least, compared to our usual weekly schedule.
(* Wired magazine recently declared that it was time to stop capitalizing the words “Internet” and “Web”, and I say it’s about time. So from now on, I’ll try to incorporate that into my online writing.)
Look & feel
There’s obviously been some changes around here. I’ve been getting annoyed by the Movable Type boring default blog style, so I’m trying out something new. Hope you find it at least a mild improvement.
The CSS is a modified version of one of the styles available at Movable Style, a very nifty little site for people like myself who prefer meddling with already-written CSS to creating it from scratch. And if you’re curious, the image atop the page is of the Squad Leader game board and a few playing pieces that I dug out of storage in the hall closet. This particular board is a map of the infamous Stalingrad Tractor Works, the scene of many a desperate Squad Leader battle.
Let me know if the blog breaks in your browser or anything. There were some funky Mozilla/Safari issues going on earlier, but I think those are fixed now.
X-phile
Michele and I have been watching through The X-Files, starting with season 1, and are a dozen or so episodes into the show. It’s a great show, and even the earliest episodes have aged fairly well.
But like all great shows, it can lay claim to a handful of abominably bad episodes. One of the episodes we watched this weekend (“Space,” about midway through season 1) fit easily into the Worst Episode Ever category.
And for the record, the addition of “Space” to my Worst X-Files Episodes Ever list brings the total to three:
- “Home”–the infamous episode that was BANNED ON TELEVISION! When I first got my hands on this episode, I eagerly popped it into the VCR and hit play, excited to finally learn what those censoring network executives didn’t want me to see. Oh, if only I could rewind my life and choose otherwise.
- the baseball-playing alien episode. Oh man.
- …and now “Space.”
It’s a great show, though, despite a few bad episodes (and more than a few mediocre ones). Once it hit its stride–around season 3 or so–it was the best thing on television, no question. It went on longer than it should’ve… but mostly, it was pretty darn good.
update: Other Worst Episodes Ever, which have since come to mind:
- any episode about Scully having a cloned alien baby
- the one with a circus freak who had a mutated Siamese twin or something which would detach from his torso and eat people. Yeah… that ep was every bit as good as it sounds.
Shakespeare in the Bush
Prompted by a lunchtime discussion about the seemingly universal relevance of Shakespeare, Michele sent me a link to this amusing story. A very fun read.
byThrone of heroes
Michele and I have seen several interesting movies lately, and in the American tradition of defining my life by the pieces of entertainment I experience, I’ll tell you all about them. Spoilers follow.
Most recent was Hero, which has received a lot of praise from critics. Personally, I thought it was amazing film in many respects–visually, you are not likely to see a more impressive movie anytime soon. Several scenes were so vibrant with color and style that they remained indelibly stamped in memory long after I left the theater. (A scene in which two brightly-colored warriors gracefully cut their way up an endless stairway through hundreds of enemy soldiers was just… breathtaking.)
That said, the movie toppled ignobly off of the pedestal upon which I had placed it about twenty minutes short of the closing credits. At that point, we learn the Real Message behind the Movie when one of the main characters reaches up and yanks off his plastic face-mask to reveal the grinning face of… Chairman Mao! Well, not really. But for the final twenty cringe-inducing minutes of this movie, we get a long and painful lecture from the Mao stand-in character about how it’s really too bad when people must be killed for the Good of the Unity of Mother China, but that’s just the Way Things Work. Subtle.
That was what knocked this film out of Best Movie Ever territory as far as I was concerned. Until our Great and Beloved Leader launches into his little propogandist speech, however, the movie is incredibly entertaining. So take that however you will–but in my mind, it’s a bit of otherwise brilliant cinema ruined by a ghastly message. (For what it’s worth, Michele didn’t seem as bothered by the People’s Party propoganda as I was, so it’s quite possible I’m blowing it all way out of proportion.)
The other recently-viewed film of note is Kurosawa’s Throne of Blood. Michele and I have very much enjoyed each of the Kurosawa films we’ve seen–Seven Samurai is of course a classic, and we loved Rashomon (which we managed to watch with Alan and his family before they moved out of state). Throne of Blood is a re-telling of the Macbeth story, but set in feudal Japan. Instead of scheming nobles and princes, we are treated to plotting samurai, and the characters are as wonderfully flawed and intriguing as they are in the original tale. Highly recommended.
Politigeeks
Scooped!
This news is a week or two old already, but if you’re not aware, Jon, husband of Kim and fellow refugee from hell (ha ha) has returned to the world of blogging with a very cool new blog focused around sci-fi literature, a subject in which Jon is about as expert as they come.
This is rather timely for me, as I’ve been recently feeling a desire to read a bit more sci-fi literature. In that spirit, I’m currently making my way through Perdido Street Station by China Mieville. Thus far my feelings on the novel are somewhat mixed, but I’ll wait until I’ve finished it to comment further.
Tractilicious
Last week, I went out during lunch to visit the local comic/game store (to pick up a shiny copy of BESM d20); while the store owner rang the book up at the register, we started chatting. I asked what sorts of local games were run at the store (as there always seems to be a pack of bespeckled D&D players rolling dice in the store’s back room when I visit).
He didn’t have the schedule with him, but asked if I wanted the store contact info so I could get in touch with the employee who oversaw the game scheduling. Sure thing, I said. So he handed me a little packet of paper with the store’s contact info printed neatly on it. But this isn’t an ordinary business card! I slowly turn it over, and discover that their contact info is actually printed on the back of a…
Jack Chick tract!
This tract, to be precise. Now, Jack Chick, if you’re not familiar with him, is the guy who is best known in gaming circles for his rather melodramatic anti-D&D tracts (actual tagline: “Debby thought playing Dungeons and Dragons was fun… until it destroyed her friend”). Jack Chick also has a lot to say about Catholics, Muslims, rock-n-rollers, Jews, Masons, wishy-washy Protestants, and those Satanic New Age Bible versions like the NIV. And here is a roleplaying game store with a giant shelf full of D&D books handing out Chick tracts at the counter.
I shouldn’t read too much into it. I’m sure it not a sly jab at Chick’s expense–the store owners seem very kind and sincere and I’ve remarked before to Michele that they seem to have a really good influence on the kids who hang out at the store. And I’d previously deduced that they were Christians by conversations I overheard and the occasional strains of Michael W. Smith that wafted out of the CD player behind the front counter. And it’s not like you have to subscribe to Chick’s brand of wackiness to pass out one of his tracts–especially a relatively straightforward one like this.
But it did make me smile.
Whatever happened to The Passion?
Note: I’ve written about this topic elsewhere, but would like to explore the issue in more depth (or at least more length) here.
Earlier this year I watched The Passion of the Christ–perhaps you’ve heard of it? In the weeks leading up to its release, the buzz within the “Christian community” (have fun defining that one) had become a deafening roar. Amidst all the controversy about the film, Christians and ministries throughout the country were gearing up to take advantage of what they anticipated would be a massive spiritual revival. Passion-themed websites were created, books were written, tracts were penned, Bible studies and discussion guides were distributed. All were designed in the hopes of sharing the Gospel with non-Christians who saw the film and were sufficiently moved or interested by it to do some research into What It All Means. At least one or two organizations touted The Passion as the greatest evangelistic opportunity in recent history.
Now, I am oversimplifying things a bit for effect–none of the Christians I talked to (or read) believed that millions of moviegoers would instantly convert upon watching the movie. But there was a very, very strong hope that the film would break down the walls of resistance in unbelievers and give Christians an unprecedented opportunity to share the Gospel with people who might otherwise not give it a second thought. The ministry where I work was closely involved in efforts to promote the film as an evangelistic opportunity, and I shared the hope that the film, good or bad, would pique a popular interest in Jesus that would lead them to turn to the Gospels for answers.
Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to have happened at all. Recent Barna research noted positive initial spiritual responses to the film, but concludes with a troubling piece of news:
Among the most startling outcomes drawn from the research is the apparent absence of a direct evangelistic impact by the movie. Despite marketing campaigns labeling the movie the “greatest evangelistic tool” of our era, less than one-tenth of one percent of those who saw the film stated that they made a profession of faith or accepted Jesus Christ as their savior in reaction to the film’s content.
Equally surprising was the lack of impact on people’s determination to engage in evangelism. Less than one-half of one percent of the audience said they were motivated to be more active in sharing their faith in Christ with others as a result of having seen the movie.
Now, “less than one-tenth of one percent of those who saw the film” means that some people did find Christ as a result of watching it–and that’s good news. But that’s a tiny, tiny number compared to the hopes Christians had for Passion-related evangelism. In numerical form, thats what, <.05%? Ouch.
So what does this mean? One of the biggest-hyped evangelism opportunities in recent years has proved to be a bust (with the disclaimer that a small number of people were positively impacted by it). Somewhere, something went wrong. Where, and what should we think about all this?
One possibility is that the film simply didn’t live up to Christian expectations. Perhaps the film was so bad or so inaccurate that nobody liked it, let alone felt inspired by it? This seems unlikely given the movie’s massive success in theaters, and I don’t know anyone personally who didn’t find the film both moving and well-crafted. I saw it myself, and while I can easily imagine somebody not liking it, it certainly doesn’t fall into the category of “cringe-o-matic Christian cheese.” (Well, it does cause cringing, but not for the usual reasons.) Furthermore, many of the Christians who hoped to see a spiritual revival in the wake of the movie didn’t pin those hopes on the anticipated high quality of the movie–for many, it was enough that the person of Jesus was the subject of such intense public scrutiny, whether out of adoration or controversy or anything else. If the movie turned out to be good, so much the better, but it didn’t have to be good or accurate from an evangelistic perspective–it just had to get people thinking about Christ. The person of Christ, and the story of the Gospel, would speak for themselves, no matter what the movie did or didn’t get right–or so their hopes went.
So I don’t think it’s a simple matter of the movie not meeting expectations or standards of quality. What are some other reasons?
One other troubling possibility is simply that the Christian community utterly and completely misjudged the situation and saw an evangelism opportunity where none really existed. It wouldn’t be the first time that Christians have predicted a mass spiritual awakening, only to be disappointed: it happened after 9/11 and before that–oh, how it pains me to even write this–regarding the Left Behind movie. The idea of “Big Event” evangelism–witnessing based around a major world event or prevailing cultural trends–isn’t new, and there are success stories to be found in history. Sometimes it works–think everything from Jonathan Edwards to the Billy Graham crusades–and sometimes it doesn’t. That’s what happens when fallible humans try to anticipate the inner workings of the heart–or the plans of the Holy Spirit. If it is the case that the Christian community misjudged, maybe it’s just another item in a very long list of hits and misses when it comes to anticipating pop culture’s response to the Gospel.
Which leads me to another possibility, and that is that God simply didn’t intend to use this movie to spread the Gospel far and wide. I believe strongly that words and images–even when crafted into something as compelling as The Passion of the Christ–have no power to bring you to God unless God himself chooses to work through them for his purposes. Perhaps it is simply the case that Christians’ hopes for the film just didn’t match up with God’s plans, and that’s that. If so, it wouldn’t be the first time Christians have embarked on evangelism efforts without first checking to see if it’s what God really wants (not that figuring out “what God wants” is as easy as that, of course).
And lastly, I suppose it’s possible that this film really did hold massive evangelistic potential, and we as Christians completely botched it somehow. Perhaps we have separated ourselves so far from the interests, loves, and desires of non-Christians that we are unable to anticipate their spiritual impulses–and thus cannot provide them with the Answer in a way that they understand. If this is the case–that Christians dropped the ball on a huge opportunity–I’d say we as a community of believers have a lot of thinking, talking, and praying to do about how we should be bringing the Gospel to the world.
What do you think? It’s an issue that has been on my mind lately. Why do you think that Passion evangelism has produced so little fruit compared to the veritable harvest for which evangelicals hoped? Somewhere along the line, we miscalulated or misguessed the impact that this film would have. Some were saved, yes, but for the most part, spiritual life in America has returned to its pre-Passion levels. We shouldn’t judge Passion evangelism a failure just because it produced fewer visible results than anticipated, but I think it’s important to ask ourselves why our expectations of spiritual revival so far exceeded the results.
final paragraph edited 8/15 for clarity and to remove an implication I hadn’t intended to make.
Worth reading
A couple of quick notes again today.
If you’ve got some time to spare, you really ought to read Losing the War, about the general weirdness, horror, and confusion that was World War II. It’s incredibly lengthy, so if time is limited, I suggest starting in on the second half of the piece, which is where the most interesting discussion material surfaces.
I read this last week and have been pondering it ever since. (I may comment on parts of it at more length in the future if I can muster the will to do so.) At any rate, it has some terribly insightful perspectives on how and why the war was perceived as it was. Well worth the read.
On a different note, Kim and Jon have posted their much-anticipated dual-reviews of Left Behind and The Da Vinci Code, and the results are spectacular.
There, that’s two (three, if you count the book reviews as separate entities) items for you to read today, which should tide you over until I post some real content here one of these days.