844
Spring is the Period
Express from God.
Among the other seasons
Himself abide,
But during March and April
None stir abroad
Without a cordial interview
With God.
Monday, April 24, 2006
Thursday, April 20, 2006
My DVC rant
Needless to say, I am getting lots of calls to do interviews about The Da Vinci Code. I duck as many of them as I can, so glad am I for the existence in the universe of Mark Shea and Amy Welborn!
Basically, I hate talking about The Da Vinci Code because I have a personal relationship with Jesus. I have met Him and He isn't a proto-feminist goddess-cultic with a weak personality that could have been simply co-opted by power-hungry misogynists. I love Jesus. It makes me physically sick to entertain discussion about the ways in which the defining acts of His life - His Passion, Resurrection and establishment of the Church - could be a diabolical scam that He never anticipated not experienced. It would make me sick to hear salacious lies about anyone I love, how much more my Savior?
Besides that, I don't think we should encourage people in the terrible sin against the Holy Spirit of speculating that things that are holy are evil, and that things that are evil are holy. Isn't that what is going on here? How is that not painful for anyone who knows the Lord?
I have heard several fellow Christians make the claim that DVC DVC is "a great opportunity for evangelism." 'Hmmm... Evangelism. I don't think you know what that word means.' The climate of evangelism is not consistent with a posture of defiance and cynicism. Is slander an opportunity? Is angry superiority an opportunity? DVC represents all the "opportunity" that the Roman persecutions offered the early Church. Rah.
And here's another thing that troubles me about the "opportunity for dialogue" stance. The debate is all on hell's terms. I am somebody who reads about exorcisms. I don't know why. I just do. And one of the first rules of exorcism is that you never answer the devil's questions. You don't debate the devil. You do not give evil the authority to question God. DVC represents a debate in which the questions start with Satan's presumptions. I find it beyond naive to convince myself that the folks who are lapping up DVC are on a "search for truth." They're not. They are on a crusade to validate their own rejection of the authority of Christ and the Church.
Here's a typical DVC inspired dialogue... See if you can find a search for truth in it.
It usually starts with something like this, "Everybody knows that the Church Fathers were liars. Can you prove the compilation of the Bible wasn't pure politics?"
And just when you start saying, "Well, I don't agree that the Church Fathers were--" the questioner moves on with eyes flashing unnaturally, "Why is the Church so afraid of women, huh? Why has it suppressed them since the beginning? Yeah? Answer THAT!"
So, you clear your throat and say, "Well, I wouldn't say that the Church is afr--"
But they've moved on again. "The fact is, there is no evidence for the Resurrection. Have you ever read the Gospel of Mary Magdalen?"
"Well, no, but--"
"See you people are all brain-washed." [exhalation of disgust] "How so many people could be so stupid is amazing to me....Where are my birth-control pills?!"
When you debate with Satan, there is no opportunity for anything but people digging their heels into the sludge of chaos and confusion.
--------------------------------------------
And I also hate the idea that some of the sheep would be scandalized away from Jesus by this idiotic story. And they will.
The sheep have been systematically prepared for slaughter by forty years of post-Consiliar insanity. Ineffective and insufficient catechesis and lack-lustre preaching. Liturgical chaos. Too often, the cruel injustice of liberal, intolerant leadership which so often had the added indignity of manifest hypocrisy.
The flock has been bred as teeming little narcissist lambs who stubbornly consider themselves "special" no matter how mediocre their understanding and living out of their life of discipleship. We have a global pasture full of sheep pasturing themselves, with coats shamefully besmirched by loving their sins. They bleat defiance and pride of their filth, and insist that Jesus is indifferent to their degradation and shame. "Who knows, Jesus is probably just like us!" They don't know, and don't know that they don't know, or don't know, and don't care that they don't know.
And now The Da Vinci Code comes along to sheepish ears that are primed and ready to be told that holiness is impossible. And that is why this damn book is a success. It says to people, "If Jesus was a sham, then anything is permissible." (Ref. "You shall be like gods!")
I thought of this when I read Mark Shea's little DVC rant today. He writes,
"I think the most maddening thing about this book is the thought of somebody losing their faith over this--this!--stupid piece of dimestore erudition.
If you are going to risk your eternal soul, it should at least be over something noble and romantic and big. If you are bound to damn yourself, then at least let it be over a torrid and star-crossed love affair, or out of tragic hubris that sought know What Man Was Not Meant to Know, or over some insane and violent of country, or out of desire for titanic powers to manipulate nature or some Byronic despair over a cold world's rejection of a Great Artiste.
But to lose your soul over this cartoonish, illiterate, dishonest piece of hack drivel...
It reminds me of Screwtape's maxim: "To get the man's soul and give him nothing in return--that is what really gladdens Our Father's heart." "
----------------------------------
I am perplexed by the Christian leaders going around saying that people are reading The Da Vinci Code in a search for truth. Good frickin' grief. Who was it that said, "They have Moses and the prophets...?" People searching for truth would not be reaching for enlightenment from a pulp-fiction rack. The other day, I heard a useful Christian idiot (to Sony Pictures, anyway) say that Christians should stop criticizing DVC as being a badly written story, because, "Let's face it, fifty million readers can't be wrong!"
Yes. They can. Let's try this, "Hey, let's face it, sixteen million readers of Hustler magazine can't be wrong!" Or hey, fifty million Germans who voted for Hitler couldn't be wrong!"
Yes, they could and they were.
As I said, I was one of the folks in the pews recently at a DVC event at a local Evangelical church. The funniest part of the night (and scariest...but if you don't laugh that only leaves screaming as an appropriate response) came after several of the Evangelical panel guys had gone through long speeches about how Christians should welcome DVC as an opportunity for dialogue. Then, they opened the floor up for questions and the first women querier did a version of, "I don't have any problem with the fact that Jesus had sex." HA!
Unbelievable! Let's all march our troops into dialogue. The fact that our troops are completely disarmed for a fight seems to be irrelevent!
Many of our Christian sheep will be ripe for slaughter from DVC. All they will have to go to battle with is the Bible. But DVC undermines Biblical authority by saying that the Bible was the product of a purely political process. This debate will shake the faith of many who are not prepared for it.
-------------------------------------
Don't go see this stupid movie. Don't pay money to have the insidious lies of the enemy introduced into your heart and mind.
Othercott DVC on May 19th. Go see Over the Hedge instead. And pray for everyone associated who is dancing with the devil through this movie.
Basically, I hate talking about The Da Vinci Code because I have a personal relationship with Jesus. I have met Him and He isn't a proto-feminist goddess-cultic with a weak personality that could have been simply co-opted by power-hungry misogynists. I love Jesus. It makes me physically sick to entertain discussion about the ways in which the defining acts of His life - His Passion, Resurrection and establishment of the Church - could be a diabolical scam that He never anticipated not experienced. It would make me sick to hear salacious lies about anyone I love, how much more my Savior?
Besides that, I don't think we should encourage people in the terrible sin against the Holy Spirit of speculating that things that are holy are evil, and that things that are evil are holy. Isn't that what is going on here? How is that not painful for anyone who knows the Lord?
I have heard several fellow Christians make the claim that DVC DVC is "a great opportunity for evangelism." 'Hmmm... Evangelism. I don't think you know what that word means.' The climate of evangelism is not consistent with a posture of defiance and cynicism. Is slander an opportunity? Is angry superiority an opportunity? DVC represents all the "opportunity" that the Roman persecutions offered the early Church. Rah.
And here's another thing that troubles me about the "opportunity for dialogue" stance. The debate is all on hell's terms. I am somebody who reads about exorcisms. I don't know why. I just do. And one of the first rules of exorcism is that you never answer the devil's questions. You don't debate the devil. You do not give evil the authority to question God. DVC represents a debate in which the questions start with Satan's presumptions. I find it beyond naive to convince myself that the folks who are lapping up DVC are on a "search for truth." They're not. They are on a crusade to validate their own rejection of the authority of Christ and the Church.
Here's a typical DVC inspired dialogue... See if you can find a search for truth in it.
It usually starts with something like this, "Everybody knows that the Church Fathers were liars. Can you prove the compilation of the Bible wasn't pure politics?"
And just when you start saying, "Well, I don't agree that the Church Fathers were--" the questioner moves on with eyes flashing unnaturally, "Why is the Church so afraid of women, huh? Why has it suppressed them since the beginning? Yeah? Answer THAT!"
So, you clear your throat and say, "Well, I wouldn't say that the Church is afr--"
But they've moved on again. "The fact is, there is no evidence for the Resurrection. Have you ever read the Gospel of Mary Magdalen?"
"Well, no, but--"
"See you people are all brain-washed." [exhalation of disgust] "How so many people could be so stupid is amazing to me....Where are my birth-control pills?!"
When you debate with Satan, there is no opportunity for anything but people digging their heels into the sludge of chaos and confusion.
--------------------------------------------
And I also hate the idea that some of the sheep would be scandalized away from Jesus by this idiotic story. And they will.
The sheep have been systematically prepared for slaughter by forty years of post-Consiliar insanity. Ineffective and insufficient catechesis and lack-lustre preaching. Liturgical chaos. Too often, the cruel injustice of liberal, intolerant leadership which so often had the added indignity of manifest hypocrisy.
The flock has been bred as teeming little narcissist lambs who stubbornly consider themselves "special" no matter how mediocre their understanding and living out of their life of discipleship. We have a global pasture full of sheep pasturing themselves, with coats shamefully besmirched by loving their sins. They bleat defiance and pride of their filth, and insist that Jesus is indifferent to their degradation and shame. "Who knows, Jesus is probably just like us!" They don't know, and don't know that they don't know, or don't know, and don't care that they don't know.
And now The Da Vinci Code comes along to sheepish ears that are primed and ready to be told that holiness is impossible. And that is why this damn book is a success. It says to people, "If Jesus was a sham, then anything is permissible." (Ref. "You shall be like gods!")
I thought of this when I read Mark Shea's little DVC rant today. He writes,
"I think the most maddening thing about this book is the thought of somebody losing their faith over this--this!--stupid piece of dimestore erudition.
If you are going to risk your eternal soul, it should at least be over something noble and romantic and big. If you are bound to damn yourself, then at least let it be over a torrid and star-crossed love affair, or out of tragic hubris that sought know What Man Was Not Meant to Know, or over some insane and violent of country, or out of desire for titanic powers to manipulate nature or some Byronic despair over a cold world's rejection of a Great Artiste.
But to lose your soul over this cartoonish, illiterate, dishonest piece of hack drivel...
It reminds me of Screwtape's maxim: "To get the man's soul and give him nothing in return--that is what really gladdens Our Father's heart." "
----------------------------------
I am perplexed by the Christian leaders going around saying that people are reading The Da Vinci Code in a search for truth. Good frickin' grief. Who was it that said, "They have Moses and the prophets...?" People searching for truth would not be reaching for enlightenment from a pulp-fiction rack. The other day, I heard a useful Christian idiot (to Sony Pictures, anyway) say that Christians should stop criticizing DVC as being a badly written story, because, "Let's face it, fifty million readers can't be wrong!"
Yes. They can. Let's try this, "Hey, let's face it, sixteen million readers of Hustler magazine can't be wrong!" Or hey, fifty million Germans who voted for Hitler couldn't be wrong!"
Yes, they could and they were.
As I said, I was one of the folks in the pews recently at a DVC event at a local Evangelical church. The funniest part of the night (and scariest...but if you don't laugh that only leaves screaming as an appropriate response) came after several of the Evangelical panel guys had gone through long speeches about how Christians should welcome DVC as an opportunity for dialogue. Then, they opened the floor up for questions and the first women querier did a version of, "I don't have any problem with the fact that Jesus had sex." HA!
Unbelievable! Let's all march our troops into dialogue. The fact that our troops are completely disarmed for a fight seems to be irrelevent!
Many of our Christian sheep will be ripe for slaughter from DVC. All they will have to go to battle with is the Bible. But DVC undermines Biblical authority by saying that the Bible was the product of a purely political process. This debate will shake the faith of many who are not prepared for it.
-------------------------------------
Don't go see this stupid movie. Don't pay money to have the insidious lies of the enemy introduced into your heart and mind.
Othercott DVC on May 19th. Go see Over the Hedge instead. And pray for everyone associated who is dancing with the devil through this movie.
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Val's Doing a Concert in RI
The Holy Rosary Song Recital
August 13, 2006, 4:00pm
Westerly, RI Chorus Hall
Mozart, Brahms, Schubert, Bach. These are just a few of the great composers who have left behind a legacy of “unsung” music honoring the lives of Jesus and Mary. These stunning and powerful songs are rarely performed because they are inappropriate for a Mass and they often require considerable artistic excellence.
On August 13, 2006 at 4:00pm in the Westerly Chorus Hall in Westerly, RI nationally acclaimed opera singer Valerie Nicolosi will sing a truly unique a beautiful song recital program, structured around the Holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Each song on this ninety minute concert has been carefully chosen to reflect either the story or the spiritual fruit of a particular mystery of the Holy Rosary.
The Holy Rosary Song Recital presents Christians with a unique opportunity to walk the path of Jesus’ Incarnation, Passion and Resurrection through the beauty of musical meditation. Songs will be performed in English, French, German, Italian and Latin. Translations for foreign texts will be printed in the program.
Tickets for this program are $20.00 and should be purchased in advance, as quantities are limited. All seats are general admission; first come, first seated. Miss Nicolosi is offering this recital as a benefit for St. Thomas Parish in Voluntown, CT, where her family resides. Tickets can be purchased with check, cash or money order only. To purchase tickets, please use the form below. For questions about the concert contact: rosaryrecital@sbcglobal.net
Phone: (860) 334-2269
Mail Ticket request forms to:
St. Thomas Church – Rosary Recital, PO Box 99, Voluntown, CT 06384
August 13, 2006, 4:00pm
Westerly, RI Chorus Hall
Mozart, Brahms, Schubert, Bach. These are just a few of the great composers who have left behind a legacy of “unsung” music honoring the lives of Jesus and Mary. These stunning and powerful songs are rarely performed because they are inappropriate for a Mass and they often require considerable artistic excellence.
On August 13, 2006 at 4:00pm in the Westerly Chorus Hall in Westerly, RI nationally acclaimed opera singer Valerie Nicolosi will sing a truly unique a beautiful song recital program, structured around the Holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Each song on this ninety minute concert has been carefully chosen to reflect either the story or the spiritual fruit of a particular mystery of the Holy Rosary.
The Holy Rosary Song Recital presents Christians with a unique opportunity to walk the path of Jesus’ Incarnation, Passion and Resurrection through the beauty of musical meditation. Songs will be performed in English, French, German, Italian and Latin. Translations for foreign texts will be printed in the program.
Tickets for this program are $20.00 and should be purchased in advance, as quantities are limited. All seats are general admission; first come, first seated. Miss Nicolosi is offering this recital as a benefit for St. Thomas Parish in Voluntown, CT, where her family resides. Tickets can be purchased with check, cash or money order only. To purchase tickets, please use the form below. For questions about the concert contact: rosaryrecital@sbcglobal.net
Phone: (860) 334-2269
Mail Ticket request forms to:
St. Thomas Church – Rosary Recital, PO Box 99, Voluntown, CT 06384
Inside Huh?
I was excited to see the new heist movie Inside Man. I like heist movies. I like a good puzzle that outsmarts me. I like a stylish, fun morality play that studio heist movies generally provide. For all these reasons, I didn't like Inside Man. Instead of a "Rah!" at the end of the film, I was left with an annoyed "Huh?" Save your money. The cleverness in this film is an inside joke between the producers and the studio p.r. machine.
Huh? So, what happened to the Nazi papers? Huh? How come the Nazi guy never spent the diamonds? On what did he build his fortune? Huh? Why tell the mayor about the warcrimes council at the end? Huh? What exactly kind of person was the Jodie Foster character? Huh? So, crime does pay if you rob bad guys?
The movie was all clever set-up but then didn't have the clever pay-offs to match. So, the audience never gets the warm rush of satisfaction. We sat there through the credits waiting for another ending to the film, because there was so much left unresolved by the movie's end. And using the holocaust as the plot lynchpin was cheap. The suggestion is that there is no injustice that could be perpetrated against anyone who collaborated with the Nazis. This, of course, is faulty logic which messes with the morality play aspect of the story.
We are seeing more and more of this "Criminal as Hero" story from the entertainment industry these days. It is the whiff of anarchy.
The language in the film is also way f*ckin' coarse, if you know what I mean. I rate Inside Man gratuitous and sloppy.
Pass.
Huh? So, what happened to the Nazi papers? Huh? How come the Nazi guy never spent the diamonds? On what did he build his fortune? Huh? Why tell the mayor about the warcrimes council at the end? Huh? What exactly kind of person was the Jodie Foster character? Huh? So, crime does pay if you rob bad guys?
The movie was all clever set-up but then didn't have the clever pay-offs to match. So, the audience never gets the warm rush of satisfaction. We sat there through the credits waiting for another ending to the film, because there was so much left unresolved by the movie's end. And using the holocaust as the plot lynchpin was cheap. The suggestion is that there is no injustice that could be perpetrated against anyone who collaborated with the Nazis. This, of course, is faulty logic which messes with the morality play aspect of the story.
We are seeing more and more of this "Criminal as Hero" story from the entertainment industry these days. It is the whiff of anarchy.
The language in the film is also way f*ckin' coarse, if you know what I mean. I rate Inside Man gratuitous and sloppy.
Pass.
Monday, April 17, 2006
Amy's Coming to town!
Heads up, L.A.! Amy Welborn's coming to town to smite all things DVC! Click here for info.
I must say that it makes me a wee bit more kindly towards Dan Brown, that due to his malfeasance, he has managed to bring both Mark Shea and Amy Welborn to L.A. within a two week period.
I must say that it makes me a wee bit more kindly towards Dan Brown, that due to his malfeasance, he has managed to bring both Mark Shea and Amy Welborn to L.A. within a two week period.
EMILY MONDAY
505
I would not paint -- a picture --
I'd rather be the One
Its bright impossibility
To dwell -- delicious -- on --
And wonder how the fingers feel
Whose rare -- celestial -- stir --
Evokes so sweet a Torment --
Such sumptuous -- Despair --
I would not talk, like Cornets --
I'd rather be the One
Raised softly to the Ceilings --
And out, and easy on --
Through Villages of Ether --
Myself endued Balloon
By but a lip of Metal --
The pier to my Pontoon --
Nor would I be a Poet --
It's finer -- own the Ear --
Enamored -- impotent -- content --
The License to revere,
A privilege so awful
What would the Dower be,
Had I the Art to stun myself
With Bolts of Melody!
I would not paint -- a picture --
I'd rather be the One
Its bright impossibility
To dwell -- delicious -- on --
And wonder how the fingers feel
Whose rare -- celestial -- stir --
Evokes so sweet a Torment --
Such sumptuous -- Despair --
I would not talk, like Cornets --
I'd rather be the One
Raised softly to the Ceilings --
And out, and easy on --
Through Villages of Ether --
Myself endued Balloon
By but a lip of Metal --
The pier to my Pontoon --
Nor would I be a Poet --
It's finer -- own the Ear --
Enamored -- impotent -- content --
The License to revere,
A privilege so awful
What would the Dower be,
Had I the Art to stun myself
With Bolts of Melody!
Sunday, April 16, 2006
ACT ONE UPDATE (4/12/06)
In this issue:
ACT ONE ANNOUNCES NEW WRITING PROGRAM / REGISTRATION OPEN FOR SAN DIEGO SCREENWRITING WEEKEND / SEE BARBARA NICOLOSI IN ARIZONA, INDIANA / ACT ONE SPONSORS FORUM ON MARRIAGE AND INTIMACY IN HOLLYWOOD / ACT ONE BOOK IN STORES NOW / HAVE A HOLY EASTER!
_______________________
ACT ONE ANNOUNCES NEW WRITING PROGRAM
Act One announces a new Writing Program to launch this September, designed especially for the L.A.-based working professional with a fixed schedule. Like Act One’s renowned summer writing program, the new program will be taught by working professionals and will cover the craft, business, and spiritual dimension of writing for TV and film. Instead of one intensive month during the summer, however, the new Writing Program will run for six hours every Saturday, from September 22, 2006, through May 2007, allowing those with a fixed schedule to participate. Applications will be available via the Act One website (www.actoneprogram.com) on May 1.
"We've designed this new program to bring Act One's world class training to aspiring film and television writers who are already living and working in Southern California, many of them in entertainment industry jobs, and whose work schedules make it impossible for them to attend our month-long summer intensives," says Writing Program Director Chris Riley.
Like the summer program, the faculty for the new program will be made up of over fifty working writers and producers, including Scott Derrickson (The Exorcism of Emily Rose), Ralph Winter (X2:X-Men United, Fantastic Four), Barbara Hall (Joan of Arcadia), and David McFadzean (Home Improvement, What Women Want).
The new writing program joins Act One’s growing stable of programs and services, including the summer Writing Program and the Executive Program, which launched in 2005. Over three hundred writers have completed the month-long writing intensives in Los Angeles, New York and Washington, DC. Act One alumni include two ABC/Disney Fellows and a Cosby Fellow. They have landed jobs writing for many small to mid-level production companies, as well as at Dreamworks, Disney, Universal, CBS, PBS, and PAX. Several are represented by Endeavor and other top agencies. Act One Executive Program alumni have gone on to work for companies like Alcon Productions and Crystal Sky. Act One has been featured in Newsweek, The Washington Post, Atlantic Monthly, Details, and Premiere, among others.
designed especially for the L.A.-based working professional with limited time. Like our summer Writing Programs, the new Writing Program is taught by working professionals and will cover the craft, business, and spiritual dimension of writing for tv and film. Instead of one intensive month during the summer, however, the new Writing Program will run for six hours every Saturday, from September 22, 2006, through May 2007, allowing those with a busy work week to participate.
_______________________
REGISTRATION OPEN FOR SAN DIEGO SCREENWRITING WEEKEND
Presented by Act One, Inc. and Maranatha Chapel. To register online, visit www.actoneprogram.com/writersevents
WHEN:
June 23-24, 2006
Friday, 7:00 - 10:00 pm
Saturday, 9:00 am - 6:00 pm
WHERE:
Maranatha Chapel
10752 Coastwood Road
San Diego, CA 92127
INSTRUCTORS:
BARBARA NICOLOSI
TBA
COST:
$175
(Includes Saturday breakfast and lunch)
To register online, visit www.actoneprogram.com/writersevents
_______________________
SEE BARBARA NICOLOSI IN ARIZONA AND INDIANA!
Act One founder Barbara Nicolosi will be speaking at several upcoming events:
"Why Does God Care about Hollywood? The Role of Entertainment in Human Life"
Thursday, April 27
Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture
155 DeBartolo Hall
Notre Dame, IN 46556
7:30 pm
http://ethicscenter.nd.edu/events/HollywoodLectures.shtml
Keynote Speaker at the Christianity and the Arts conference
April 28th - 29th
Church For The Nations
11640 N 19th Ave
Phoenix, AZ 85029
Cost: $15
to register: http://www.cftn.com/arts.html
_______________________
ACT ONE SPONSORS FORUM ON MARRIAGE AND INTIMACY IN HOLLYWOOD
"it's who you sleep with that matters..."
A conversation with Christians about marriage and intimacy in Hollywood
April 22, 9:30-12:00
www.hollywoodconnect.com
brought to you by Hollywood Connect, Inter-Mission, Act One & Hollywood Prayer Network
_______________________
ACT ONE BOOK IN STORES NOW
A new book written by the faculty and staff of Act One is now available for purchase at online and neighborhood bookstores.
Behind the Screen: Hollywood Insiders on Faith, Film & Culture presents a fascinating look at the much-maligned film and television industries through the eyes of Christian writers, producers, and executives living out their faith behind TV shows, on movie sets, and in studio offices.
Writers include Scott Derrickson (Writer, Director, The Exorcism of Emily Rose), Ralph Winter (Producer, X-Men 2, Fantastic 4), Barbara Hall (Creator, Joan of Arcadia), and Dean Batali (Executive Producer, That '70s Show).
Available now at www.amazon.com.
_______________________
HAVE A HOLY EASTER!
_______________________
ACT ONE, a faith-based non-profit organization, is creating a community of Christian artists and professionals to transform Hollywood from within. To make a donation online, visit www.actoneprogram.com.
ACT ONE ANNOUNCES NEW WRITING PROGRAM / REGISTRATION OPEN FOR SAN DIEGO SCREENWRITING WEEKEND / SEE BARBARA NICOLOSI IN ARIZONA, INDIANA / ACT ONE SPONSORS FORUM ON MARRIAGE AND INTIMACY IN HOLLYWOOD / ACT ONE BOOK IN STORES NOW / HAVE A HOLY EASTER!
_______________________
ACT ONE ANNOUNCES NEW WRITING PROGRAM
Act One announces a new Writing Program to launch this September, designed especially for the L.A.-based working professional with a fixed schedule. Like Act One’s renowned summer writing program, the new program will be taught by working professionals and will cover the craft, business, and spiritual dimension of writing for TV and film. Instead of one intensive month during the summer, however, the new Writing Program will run for six hours every Saturday, from September 22, 2006, through May 2007, allowing those with a fixed schedule to participate. Applications will be available via the Act One website (www.actoneprogram.com) on May 1.
"We've designed this new program to bring Act One's world class training to aspiring film and television writers who are already living and working in Southern California, many of them in entertainment industry jobs, and whose work schedules make it impossible for them to attend our month-long summer intensives," says Writing Program Director Chris Riley.
Like the summer program, the faculty for the new program will be made up of over fifty working writers and producers, including Scott Derrickson (The Exorcism of Emily Rose), Ralph Winter (X2:X-Men United, Fantastic Four), Barbara Hall (Joan of Arcadia), and David McFadzean (Home Improvement, What Women Want).
The new writing program joins Act One’s growing stable of programs and services, including the summer Writing Program and the Executive Program, which launched in 2005. Over three hundred writers have completed the month-long writing intensives in Los Angeles, New York and Washington, DC. Act One alumni include two ABC/Disney Fellows and a Cosby Fellow. They have landed jobs writing for many small to mid-level production companies, as well as at Dreamworks, Disney, Universal, CBS, PBS, and PAX. Several are represented by Endeavor and other top agencies. Act One Executive Program alumni have gone on to work for companies like Alcon Productions and Crystal Sky. Act One has been featured in Newsweek, The Washington Post, Atlantic Monthly, Details, and Premiere, among others.
designed especially for the L.A.-based working professional with limited time. Like our summer Writing Programs, the new Writing Program is taught by working professionals and will cover the craft, business, and spiritual dimension of writing for tv and film. Instead of one intensive month during the summer, however, the new Writing Program will run for six hours every Saturday, from September 22, 2006, through May 2007, allowing those with a busy work week to participate.
_______________________
REGISTRATION OPEN FOR SAN DIEGO SCREENWRITING WEEKEND
Presented by Act One, Inc. and Maranatha Chapel. To register online, visit www.actoneprogram.com/writersevents
WHEN:
June 23-24, 2006
Friday, 7:00 - 10:00 pm
Saturday, 9:00 am - 6:00 pm
WHERE:
Maranatha Chapel
10752 Coastwood Road
San Diego, CA 92127
INSTRUCTORS:
BARBARA NICOLOSI
TBA
COST:
$175
(Includes Saturday breakfast and lunch)
To register online, visit www.actoneprogram.com/writersevents
_______________________
SEE BARBARA NICOLOSI IN ARIZONA AND INDIANA!
Act One founder Barbara Nicolosi will be speaking at several upcoming events:
"Why Does God Care about Hollywood? The Role of Entertainment in Human Life"
Thursday, April 27
Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture
155 DeBartolo Hall
Notre Dame, IN 46556
7:30 pm
http://ethicscenter.nd.edu/events/HollywoodLectures.shtml
Keynote Speaker at the Christianity and the Arts conference
April 28th - 29th
Church For The Nations
11640 N 19th Ave
Phoenix, AZ 85029
Cost: $15
to register: http://www.cftn.com/arts.html
_______________________
ACT ONE SPONSORS FORUM ON MARRIAGE AND INTIMACY IN HOLLYWOOD
"it's who you sleep with that matters..."
A conversation with Christians about marriage and intimacy in Hollywood
April 22, 9:30-12:00
www.hollywoodconnect.com
brought to you by Hollywood Connect, Inter-Mission, Act One & Hollywood Prayer Network
_______________________
ACT ONE BOOK IN STORES NOW
A new book written by the faculty and staff of Act One is now available for purchase at online and neighborhood bookstores.
Behind the Screen: Hollywood Insiders on Faith, Film & Culture presents a fascinating look at the much-maligned film and television industries through the eyes of Christian writers, producers, and executives living out their faith behind TV shows, on movie sets, and in studio offices.
Writers include Scott Derrickson (Writer, Director, The Exorcism of Emily Rose), Ralph Winter (Producer, X-Men 2, Fantastic 4), Barbara Hall (Creator, Joan of Arcadia), and Dean Batali (Executive Producer, That '70s Show).
Available now at www.amazon.com.
_______________________
HAVE A HOLY EASTER!
_______________________
ACT ONE, a faith-based non-profit organization, is creating a community of Christian artists and professionals to transform Hollywood from within. To make a donation online, visit www.actoneprogram.com.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
"Can you not read the signs of the times?"
Mark my words, the "right" to die is where it's going to be at in Primetime this year. Or, in another words, "Killing the chronic is the new gay."
Let's pray for Mike Farrell. Catholic...
<Hollywood to Turn Michael's Book on Terri Schiavo Into Biased Movie Email this article
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
April 10, 2006
Hollywood, CA (LifeNews.com) -- A group of Hollywood producers have purchased the rights to Michael Schiavo's book to produce what will likely be a biased, one-sided movie on his victorious legal battle in his efforts to euthanize his former wife Terri.
According to Variety, a group of four producers, including Mike Farrell and Lawrence Bender, purchased the movie rights to the book, Terri: The Truth. The movie could either appear in theaters or be a made-for-television special.
Farrell and Bender would produce any project in conjunction with their respective partners, Marvin Minoff and Kevin Brown.
"The story is almost Shakespearean in the warring of the families and the great love story between the (couple)," Minoff told Daily Variety. "It starts off so beautifully and then ends so chaotically."
The producers don't plan to hire a writer to work up the script for the movie until they can sell the project to a television network or film studio to finance the effort. The have indicated they plan to start the movie with the beginning of Terri and Michael's relationship.
Mike Farrell is a former "M*A*S*H*" actor who stared in several movies after the famous television series and produced the movie Patch Adams about a doctor who used humor to help in treating patients.
Lawrence Bender is a longtime movie producer and was behind such films as The Great Raid, Havana Nights, Kill Bill, Good Will Hunting and Pulp Fiction.
Any movie based on Michael's book will almost undoubtedly tell just one side of the controversial story surrounding Terri and Michael's attempts to kill her.
Michael's book presents a one-sided view on allegations that his physically abused Terri and waited to call 911 after her collapse, about his failure to follow court instructions while serving as Terri's guardian, and his ill treatment of Terri's family and preventing them from being present when their daughter died after the painful 13 day starvation and dehydration death.
Let's pray for Mike Farrell. Catholic...
<Hollywood to Turn Michael's Book on Terri Schiavo Into Biased Movie Email this article
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
April 10, 2006
Hollywood, CA (LifeNews.com) -- A group of Hollywood producers have purchased the rights to Michael Schiavo's book to produce what will likely be a biased, one-sided movie on his victorious legal battle in his efforts to euthanize his former wife Terri.
According to Variety, a group of four producers, including Mike Farrell and Lawrence Bender, purchased the movie rights to the book, Terri: The Truth. The movie could either appear in theaters or be a made-for-television special.
Farrell and Bender would produce any project in conjunction with their respective partners, Marvin Minoff and Kevin Brown.
"The story is almost Shakespearean in the warring of the families and the great love story between the (couple)," Minoff told Daily Variety. "It starts off so beautifully and then ends so chaotically."
The producers don't plan to hire a writer to work up the script for the movie until they can sell the project to a television network or film studio to finance the effort. The have indicated they plan to start the movie with the beginning of Terri and Michael's relationship.
Mike Farrell is a former "M*A*S*H*" actor who stared in several movies after the famous television series and produced the movie Patch Adams about a doctor who used humor to help in treating patients.
Lawrence Bender is a longtime movie producer and was behind such films as The Great Raid, Havana Nights, Kill Bill, Good Will Hunting and Pulp Fiction.
Any movie based on Michael's book will almost undoubtedly tell just one side of the controversial story surrounding Terri and Michael's attempts to kill her.
Michael's book presents a one-sided view on allegations that his physically abused Terri and waited to call 911 after her collapse, about his failure to follow court instructions while serving as Terri's guardian, and his ill treatment of Terri's family and preventing them from being present when their daughter died after the painful 13 day starvation and dehydration death.
Monday, April 10, 2006
EMILY MONDAY
478
I had no time to Hate --
Because the Grave would hinder Me --
And Life was not so ample I
Could finish -- Enmity --
Nor had I time to Love --
But since some Industry must be --
The little Toil of Love --
I thought
Be large enough for Me --
I had no time to Hate --
Because the Grave would hinder Me --
And Life was not so ample I
Could finish -- Enmity --
Nor had I time to Love --
But since some Industry must be --
The little Toil of Love --
I thought
Be large enough for Me --
Wichita Interview - Conclusion
Q: I get the sense you’d rather be writing instead of teaching, speaking and fundraising.
BRN: I would much rather be writing. I would much rather be writing because every day I stand in front of the mirror and say, “Why does anyone listen to you? You don’t have anything out there to prove that you are anything more than talk.” I’ve had some nasty people say to me, “Those who can do, those who can’t teach.” I had someone say it to me recently, kind of insinuating, “What do you know, you haven’t ever made a movie yet.” A couple of Christians who had made a horrible waste of money movie, grumbled to my manager that the root of my criticism of their project was jealosuy. Because they had made a movie and I haven't. Of course, then they went on and took all my notes on the rough cut! (It's still dreadful I hear, though. You can't edit crap into the beautiful.)
This is particularly ugly coming from Christians. The fact is, I took an eight year detour off my writing career, because something was offered to me that needed to be done. And it seemed to me that I had been uniquely prepared to take on the task. It's eyeball-rollingly stinging to have fellow Christians spin the founding of Act One as a financial fall-back plan because of disappointed writing career plans.
But hey, I have to consider, “Maybe God told What's-Their-Names to throw stones at Barbara,” because I do think it has kept my feet to the fire. I've never stopped writing, even when I had to let screenwriting opportunities pass by because I just couldn't do it while running around the country speaking to anybody who would listen about what we were trying to do with Act One.
Q: Probably some of the resentment you have encountered comes from the fact that you have been very hard on "Christian" movie projects. Even when other Christian critics have given a project a pass for good-intentions, you have kept your standards the same as you would for secular projects.
BRN: Thanks. I think so too. Although, I will go to my grave regretting that I didn't see all of Gods and Generals before giving it a rave. Rats. My pathological obsession with all things Civil War tripped me up in that case.
But yes, I do think I am different among the legions of Christian movie critics in that I have actually written screenplays. I've made a couple of short films and so had to look through a camera and understand how the camera can see and what is possible. I've had to be constrained by a production budget, and had to rework on the set an idea that the actor just couldn't pull off. The main way I’ve learned about the challenge of Christians trying to reflect their worldview in art is actually through my own work.
To tell you the truth, I am disgusted with the film criticism in the church very often because it is completely done by people who are not practitioners. And it shows in the way they talk about screen stories. Much of it seems worthless to me, these people who know nothing about the art form and tend to criticize movies just on the basis of story. Few of our Christian film critics have gone to film school or made movies. They basically used to report on one beat for their local Christian paper or radio station - or else they were the kid in seminary who really, really, really loved Star Wars. And then one day they got the call to be the media reporter. That is, unfortunately, the people who are telling masses of our Christians what movies to go see.
Particularly egregious are the critical passes that come from Christian critics who are effectively ga-ga over "the Hollywood thing." The p.r. folks have them go to the Four Seasons for a junket, give them a giftbag and have them touch a couple stars, and then the reviews come out with more than a bit of a soft-focus lens. Part of it is that these critics want to be invited to the next junket. I find the celebrity obsession in Christians inane and almost worthless.
Another problem in Christian critics is that they they miss the subtextual heart of a project because they can't see past its use of sin as inciting incident. Projects like In the Bedroom, or In America, get panned because “They had sex,” or “They were murderers who don’t end up in jail.”
And now, we have the recent nauseating post-modern Christian critic who is so hungering to be hip that they end up swallowing all kinds of violating movie camels to promote a few gnats of story or character substance. This is the "It's all good" crowd. The only movie they are offended by is any film that is sympathetic to Christianity. They see themselves as standing outside the church somehow, not one of the clueless bourgeois masses of Christians who are horrified by things like the Incarnate Son of God having sex (DVC) or reducing the Eucharist to less potent in its substance than a well-intentioned candy truffle (Chocolat). God save us from the sophomoric Teflon Christian critic!
Anyway, a good Christian critic takes into consideration matter and form. And has a sense of beauty as wholeness, harmony and radiance. The technique, art form, artistry and imagery needs to be considered as well as the plot points and performance. I want to start a program called Act One: Critics at some point, because I am exhausted with our Christian critics praising what should be scorned and ignoring what should be praised.
Q: Does the fact that you are giving yourself to these other areas besides writing make Act One something of a cross for you?
BRN: Act One has been a great, great blessing for me! As my novice mistress said to me years ago in the convent, "Ministry is principally saving for the minister." Most days, I can't believe how I stumbled into being a part of this wonderful thing.
If it is a cross in any sense, it is because of the money situation. Basically, my job for the last eight years has been to beg for money. I'm not the kind of person who likes to ask for things. I like to make things happen using hardwork and creativity and talent. But running a non-profit will always mean that you are not basically independent. You are always going to be dependent on people with means to get what you are doing and to help pay for those who can't pay for themselves.
And we have learned through experience in these last eight years, that we are a tough sell. And, even though I understand the instinctive Christian aversion towards things- Hollywood, I do not understand why believers out there can't see what we are doing in a missionary capacity. It is frustrating for me. To not be able to pay my staff what they deserve. To have to limit the numbers of young people we can help. To have to say "No" to wonderful pastoral ideas because I can't afford to add another staff member. Talk about my theme that God gives you the destiny but not the map! I’m sitting on this program, which I’ve seen be transformational - saving in the lives of lots and lots of artists, young and old, and now it’s starting to see it succeed on the screen. But we can't see how we are going to pay the bills three months ahead.
Q: And you are seeing the fruit at Act One?
BRN: Oh yeah. We were seeing the fruit a long time before the world was seeing the fruit because we were seeing what the community was meaning in the lives of our students and faculty. How it was making them aspire to a holy rivalry - in virtue and in heroism and in dying to self and challenging each other on, and in being there for each other. When they move: “Sleep on my couch. I can help you.” “So-and-so is sick, everyone is going to take care of them.” Wonderful things that you do not find in secular artistic or academic-based communities that have become so much about the individual expression of the artist that they are completely isolated. So we have this new model of community, which is the artist in the center of the community. I see it as the renaissance model, and I think JPII's 1999 Letter to Artists called for that: for the artist to be not on the fringe, but in the heart of the community. This fringe thing has been the 20th century story of artists–they’re freaks because they have been told that to preserve their vision, they have to be alone. If you’re alone, all you can write about is your own guts, and that’s not pretty.
Q: Especially if it misleads others.
BRN: We’ve been telling artists that the only sin is to not be honest to what is inside of them. No. There are a few other sins for artists. One of them is, not being honest about whether they really have the gifts of nature to be supported by the community as a prophet. If you’re not good enough, don’t waste our time. Your art is probably just for your own therapy.
Another sin is sloth. Many artists have natural ability, but they can not motivate themselves to do the hours and hours of scales that it will take them to develope technique. The craft takes dedication. So don’t get me to try to buy your painting, watch your movie or read your story if you’re not good, if you haven’t put the time in.
On another level, artists need to be led to see that sometimes some of the things inside of them are poisonous. They could be sick - someone who really has ideas that are disordered. Just because you’re an artist you get to disease me with your ideas? If you had a sense of responsibility, you’d be able to discern, “In my creative time, I have all of this stuff. This is kind of sick. This is kind of dark. This is actually something that is wonderful.” It is this fundamentally different view of the arts. The secular side is saying the arts are about the artistic expression of the artist. The church is saying that the arts are about service to the People of God, and to the global community.
Artists need help discerning the difference in the stuff they make that is catharthis just for them, and the stuff that is prophetic for the rest of us. I absolutely do not think the decision needs to be made by anyone outside. That’s when you talk about censorship. It’s not about that.
Q: It’s internal.
BRN: An internal censorship that says, “This is garbage.” Things can be garbage in many ways as art. They can be garbage in terms of their craft and they can be garbage in terms of their heart. To me, something like American Beauty was garbage in its heart. Movies like The Hours or Far From Heaven, or even Brokeback Mountain are pretty to look at and technically superb, but in their heart, as Jesus says, they are like whitewashed sepulchers: pretty, white, clean on the outside and full of filth and dead men’s bones on the inside.
Q: So, is the picture ahead of the Church and the arts more positive or more negative?
BRN: We aren't going to have any kind of new renaissance in the arts without the People of God intentionally calling for it and then making sacrifices to make it happen. We are not. The Church is not going to become the Patron of the Arts accidentally. It is going to require a huge rethinking, reprioritizing, and reallocation of resources. And a lot of peoples’ sensibilities are going to be hurt. A lot of people who love keeping the 1970s music alive at Sunday Mass – the stuff that is so artistically crass and unworthy is going to have to go. It's going to take the baby-Boomers - who currently have all the power in the Church - relinquishing their incessant reliving of their glory days. Okay, let’s bring back the kids sitting around the campfire, but not at our worship service! That is not worship. Worship is first fruits and it is an act of giving glory to God by the greatness and beauty of the work that we do. A new renaissance is not going to come from anywhere but from real serious commitment and sacrifice on the part of the whole church, but we can’t not do it. The stakes are just too high.
On the other side, I see this amazing groundswell of reaching towards the arts on the part of the millenial generation of young people. They want so much to be artists. They want beauty so much. Unfortunately, they are so crippled by their education and whatever we’ve done with them, that they don’t even know what beauty is. All the time, I see people from Generation X and Gen Next saying things that are alternately profound and banal and they have know way of knowing the difference. It’s because they just reveal they are educationally deficient. At the same time, I find them really, really rejecting absolute materialism. That means the arts are going to have a renewal.
I hope I see it. That's a Promised Land in which I'd love to meander.
BRN: I would much rather be writing. I would much rather be writing because every day I stand in front of the mirror and say, “Why does anyone listen to you? You don’t have anything out there to prove that you are anything more than talk.” I’ve had some nasty people say to me, “Those who can do, those who can’t teach.” I had someone say it to me recently, kind of insinuating, “What do you know, you haven’t ever made a movie yet.” A couple of Christians who had made a horrible waste of money movie, grumbled to my manager that the root of my criticism of their project was jealosuy. Because they had made a movie and I haven't. Of course, then they went on and took all my notes on the rough cut! (It's still dreadful I hear, though. You can't edit crap into the beautiful.)
This is particularly ugly coming from Christians. The fact is, I took an eight year detour off my writing career, because something was offered to me that needed to be done. And it seemed to me that I had been uniquely prepared to take on the task. It's eyeball-rollingly stinging to have fellow Christians spin the founding of Act One as a financial fall-back plan because of disappointed writing career plans.
But hey, I have to consider, “Maybe God told What's-Their-Names to throw stones at Barbara,” because I do think it has kept my feet to the fire. I've never stopped writing, even when I had to let screenwriting opportunities pass by because I just couldn't do it while running around the country speaking to anybody who would listen about what we were trying to do with Act One.
Q: Probably some of the resentment you have encountered comes from the fact that you have been very hard on "Christian" movie projects. Even when other Christian critics have given a project a pass for good-intentions, you have kept your standards the same as you would for secular projects.
BRN: Thanks. I think so too. Although, I will go to my grave regretting that I didn't see all of Gods and Generals before giving it a rave. Rats. My pathological obsession with all things Civil War tripped me up in that case.
But yes, I do think I am different among the legions of Christian movie critics in that I have actually written screenplays. I've made a couple of short films and so had to look through a camera and understand how the camera can see and what is possible. I've had to be constrained by a production budget, and had to rework on the set an idea that the actor just couldn't pull off. The main way I’ve learned about the challenge of Christians trying to reflect their worldview in art is actually through my own work.
To tell you the truth, I am disgusted with the film criticism in the church very often because it is completely done by people who are not practitioners. And it shows in the way they talk about screen stories. Much of it seems worthless to me, these people who know nothing about the art form and tend to criticize movies just on the basis of story. Few of our Christian film critics have gone to film school or made movies. They basically used to report on one beat for their local Christian paper or radio station - or else they were the kid in seminary who really, really, really loved Star Wars. And then one day they got the call to be the media reporter. That is, unfortunately, the people who are telling masses of our Christians what movies to go see.
Particularly egregious are the critical passes that come from Christian critics who are effectively ga-ga over "the Hollywood thing." The p.r. folks have them go to the Four Seasons for a junket, give them a giftbag and have them touch a couple stars, and then the reviews come out with more than a bit of a soft-focus lens. Part of it is that these critics want to be invited to the next junket. I find the celebrity obsession in Christians inane and almost worthless.
Another problem in Christian critics is that they they miss the subtextual heart of a project because they can't see past its use of sin as inciting incident. Projects like In the Bedroom, or In America, get panned because “They had sex,” or “They were murderers who don’t end up in jail.”
And now, we have the recent nauseating post-modern Christian critic who is so hungering to be hip that they end up swallowing all kinds of violating movie camels to promote a few gnats of story or character substance. This is the "It's all good" crowd. The only movie they are offended by is any film that is sympathetic to Christianity. They see themselves as standing outside the church somehow, not one of the clueless bourgeois masses of Christians who are horrified by things like the Incarnate Son of God having sex (DVC) or reducing the Eucharist to less potent in its substance than a well-intentioned candy truffle (Chocolat). God save us from the sophomoric Teflon Christian critic!
Anyway, a good Christian critic takes into consideration matter and form. And has a sense of beauty as wholeness, harmony and radiance. The technique, art form, artistry and imagery needs to be considered as well as the plot points and performance. I want to start a program called Act One: Critics at some point, because I am exhausted with our Christian critics praising what should be scorned and ignoring what should be praised.
Q: Does the fact that you are giving yourself to these other areas besides writing make Act One something of a cross for you?
BRN: Act One has been a great, great blessing for me! As my novice mistress said to me years ago in the convent, "Ministry is principally saving for the minister." Most days, I can't believe how I stumbled into being a part of this wonderful thing.
If it is a cross in any sense, it is because of the money situation. Basically, my job for the last eight years has been to beg for money. I'm not the kind of person who likes to ask for things. I like to make things happen using hardwork and creativity and talent. But running a non-profit will always mean that you are not basically independent. You are always going to be dependent on people with means to get what you are doing and to help pay for those who can't pay for themselves.
And we have learned through experience in these last eight years, that we are a tough sell. And, even though I understand the instinctive Christian aversion towards things- Hollywood, I do not understand why believers out there can't see what we are doing in a missionary capacity. It is frustrating for me. To not be able to pay my staff what they deserve. To have to limit the numbers of young people we can help. To have to say "No" to wonderful pastoral ideas because I can't afford to add another staff member. Talk about my theme that God gives you the destiny but not the map! I’m sitting on this program, which I’ve seen be transformational - saving in the lives of lots and lots of artists, young and old, and now it’s starting to see it succeed on the screen. But we can't see how we are going to pay the bills three months ahead.
Q: And you are seeing the fruit at Act One?
BRN: Oh yeah. We were seeing the fruit a long time before the world was seeing the fruit because we were seeing what the community was meaning in the lives of our students and faculty. How it was making them aspire to a holy rivalry - in virtue and in heroism and in dying to self and challenging each other on, and in being there for each other. When they move: “Sleep on my couch. I can help you.” “So-and-so is sick, everyone is going to take care of them.” Wonderful things that you do not find in secular artistic or academic-based communities that have become so much about the individual expression of the artist that they are completely isolated. So we have this new model of community, which is the artist in the center of the community. I see it as the renaissance model, and I think JPII's 1999 Letter to Artists called for that: for the artist to be not on the fringe, but in the heart of the community. This fringe thing has been the 20th century story of artists–they’re freaks because they have been told that to preserve their vision, they have to be alone. If you’re alone, all you can write about is your own guts, and that’s not pretty.
Q: Especially if it misleads others.
BRN: We’ve been telling artists that the only sin is to not be honest to what is inside of them. No. There are a few other sins for artists. One of them is, not being honest about whether they really have the gifts of nature to be supported by the community as a prophet. If you’re not good enough, don’t waste our time. Your art is probably just for your own therapy.
Another sin is sloth. Many artists have natural ability, but they can not motivate themselves to do the hours and hours of scales that it will take them to develope technique. The craft takes dedication. So don’t get me to try to buy your painting, watch your movie or read your story if you’re not good, if you haven’t put the time in.
On another level, artists need to be led to see that sometimes some of the things inside of them are poisonous. They could be sick - someone who really has ideas that are disordered. Just because you’re an artist you get to disease me with your ideas? If you had a sense of responsibility, you’d be able to discern, “In my creative time, I have all of this stuff. This is kind of sick. This is kind of dark. This is actually something that is wonderful.” It is this fundamentally different view of the arts. The secular side is saying the arts are about the artistic expression of the artist. The church is saying that the arts are about service to the People of God, and to the global community.
Artists need help discerning the difference in the stuff they make that is catharthis just for them, and the stuff that is prophetic for the rest of us. I absolutely do not think the decision needs to be made by anyone outside. That’s when you talk about censorship. It’s not about that.
Q: It’s internal.
BRN: An internal censorship that says, “This is garbage.” Things can be garbage in many ways as art. They can be garbage in terms of their craft and they can be garbage in terms of their heart. To me, something like American Beauty was garbage in its heart. Movies like The Hours or Far From Heaven, or even Brokeback Mountain are pretty to look at and technically superb, but in their heart, as Jesus says, they are like whitewashed sepulchers: pretty, white, clean on the outside and full of filth and dead men’s bones on the inside.
Q: So, is the picture ahead of the Church and the arts more positive or more negative?
BRN: We aren't going to have any kind of new renaissance in the arts without the People of God intentionally calling for it and then making sacrifices to make it happen. We are not. The Church is not going to become the Patron of the Arts accidentally. It is going to require a huge rethinking, reprioritizing, and reallocation of resources. And a lot of peoples’ sensibilities are going to be hurt. A lot of people who love keeping the 1970s music alive at Sunday Mass – the stuff that is so artistically crass and unworthy is going to have to go. It's going to take the baby-Boomers - who currently have all the power in the Church - relinquishing their incessant reliving of their glory days. Okay, let’s bring back the kids sitting around the campfire, but not at our worship service! That is not worship. Worship is first fruits and it is an act of giving glory to God by the greatness and beauty of the work that we do. A new renaissance is not going to come from anywhere but from real serious commitment and sacrifice on the part of the whole church, but we can’t not do it. The stakes are just too high.
On the other side, I see this amazing groundswell of reaching towards the arts on the part of the millenial generation of young people. They want so much to be artists. They want beauty so much. Unfortunately, they are so crippled by their education and whatever we’ve done with them, that they don’t even know what beauty is. All the time, I see people from Generation X and Gen Next saying things that are alternately profound and banal and they have know way of knowing the difference. It’s because they just reveal they are educationally deficient. At the same time, I find them really, really rejecting absolute materialism. That means the arts are going to have a renewal.
I hope I see it. That's a Promised Land in which I'd love to meander.
Saturday, April 08, 2006
Catch Ten Commandments Monday and Tuesday on ABC!
I've just been talking to a Christian Executive who works at ABC. She said the new Ten Commandments which is airing next week is very good and really deserves to be supported. I told her I would do my part to help get the word out.
Please du tune in Monday and Tuesday night with your family. ABC has spent almost $30 million on this production and the future of any similar kind of network movie or mini-series is tied to how this project does in the ratings.
Please du tune in Monday and Tuesday night with your family. ABC has spent almost $30 million on this production and the future of any similar kind of network movie or mini-series is tied to how this project does in the ratings.
Friday, April 07, 2006
Screwtape on DVC
I'm in New York hanging with some very cool Christian media professionals. Also here is the brilliant Eric Metaxas who I've been emailing back and forth for a couple years now. Eric (did I mention he's brilliant?) has written a FABULOUS parody of the whole Da Vinci Code insanity. He gave me his permission to reprint it here. Thanks, Eric. Rock on!
___________________________
Screwtape on The DaVinci Code
by Eric Metaxas
My dear Wormwood,
I trust this finds you as miserable and coarse as ever. I am pleased to take a respite from our usual tutorial and venture into something a bit broader, but vastly instructive for our larger purposes. To wit: I shall today croak a paean of praise to a particular work of middlebrow non-fiction. The genre has been particularly good to us, Wormwood! Do you remember The Passover Plot? Or that excellent hoax by Erich von Daniken, In Search of Ancient Astronauts? You may s now, but in its day even that harebrained rant proved helpful to our cause. As did most of the books on The Bermuda Triangle and “UFO’s”. And don’t get me started on Out on a Limb! Oh, but Wormwood. Those books were mere types and shadows of the one that has in these last days transported me to ecstasies of embarrassing intensity. It is a type of “romantic thriller” (penned by someone under the unwitting tutelage of an old crony of mine from the Sixth Circle); it is titled The DaVinci Code.
I surmised it should be well worth the trouble of familiarising you with it, inasmuch as it contains such a precariously towering heap of our very best non-thinking that it is quite dizzying! It has the genuine potential to mislead, confuse, and vex millions! Indeed the mystical sleight-of-hand involved in shoehorning so many cubic yards of gasbag clichees, shopworn half-truths and straightfaced howlers into a single volume simply beggars belief; and if I didn’t know that the author had had unwitting “help” from my former colleague, the venerable Gallstone, I simply shouldn’t believe it could have been done at all!
Now, Wormwood, before you object to my calling this book “non-fiction”-- since it is technically classified as “fiction”-- let me say that it is essentially non-fiction, at least as far as our purposes are concerned. That’s because it’s principle delight for our side is that in the tacky plastic shell of some below-average “fiction” the book parades as “fact” a veritable phalanx of practical propaganda and disinformation that would make our dear Herr Goebbels (Circle Eight, third spiderhole on the right) jade green with envy! Souls by the boatload are blithely believing almost all of the deliciously corrosive non-facts that are congealed everywhere in it, like flies in bad aspic, and it is that precisely which most recommends this glorious effort as worthy of our dedicated and especial study.
But where to begin in describing to you its myriad delights? First, a brief synopsis of the plot: a museum curator is murdered by a fanatical albino Christian bigot (nice opening, no?); the curator’s granddaughter and an American “symbologist” (don’t ask me, I haven’t the time) try to find the real killer and are launched on a wildly implausible and fantastically cryptical search for the proverbial Holy Grail, all the while chased by angry gendarmes and the aforementioned unhinged albino. In the process they (and the lucky reader) discover that: the Church is murderous and evil; the Bible is a hoax; Jesus is not divine, but merely a married mortal and an earnest proto-feminist (!); there is no such thing as Truth; and oh, yes... is the truest kind of prayer. Can you stand it? A virtuoso performance, no? It’s as if the author’s somehow squeezed all of hell into a walnut shell. And oh, yes, one more historical “fact”: Leonardo DaVinci’s homosexuality was “flamboyant”! Do tell.
But that’s just the irresistible plot, Wormwood. It’s the author’s technique in so many other areas that is particularly worth our attention. For example, there is the manner in which the book seduces its reader with naked flattery, holding out the carrot -- or should I say apple -- of “inside knowledge.” Make note of this, Wormwood; it worked wonders for us in Eden and works for us still. The author trots out the ageless fiddle-faddle about a parallel “reality” beside the “official” one everyone’s been sold. You know, the moth-eaten, bedraggled idea that all of history is a grand “conspiracy” conducted by some hidden elites! But wait, the lucky reader is to be let in on it all, and for the mere price of purchasing this book! He’ll learn the “real” story behind the “official” story that all the other saps have been buying for lo! these many centuries. Heady stuff, eh, Wormwood? Transparent as it might seem to us, this temptation has always been been too great for the humans to bear. They ache to be part of that “inside” group that knows what’s “really” going on, and they fall for it every time. It’s not so different from their craving for gossip or “dirt”; only better, since there isn’t the pesky nuisance of guilt to deal with. They cannot help themselves; they simply swallow it without a thought. That’s the key, Wormwood, for if actual thinking can be prevented, the humans are under our control.
There’s something about a crackpot conspiracy that makes my brown scales twinkle, Wormwood. There’s nothing like a grand conspiracy to twist truth round and round -- until the shape of the thing one ends up with is unrecognizable from that with which one began. I remember when I was young, in an immature display of rakish pique I bewitched an inept sausagemaker such that the next time he applied himself to the sausagemaker’s art he became almost instantly entangled in the entrails with which he was working. That image reoccurs to me now as I recall this great book, Wormwood. You see, this book is that hopelessly intestine-entangled sausagemaker writ large, I tell you! The reader will become snarled in the vile, greasy entrails of its thousand half-truths and will die before he extricates himself! What could be better?
But don’t let’s digress. I was speaking of the employment of flattery. Understand, Wormwood, that the successful devil -- and this devilishly clever author -- well knows his audience, and then tells that audience precisely what it wants to hear. As long as what one puts out is vaguely plausible, they’ll buy it by the yard, and at retail prices! Trust me, Wormwood, these gullible dullards are even likely to thank you for the privelege of being your customer!
I particularly admire the writer’s way of tapping into the widespread disaffection and resentment so many modern women feel toward men. This emotional woundedness is a veritable Mother Lode (pun intended) of destructive possibilities, and it is as profitably mined here as ever it has been. The author winds up his female readers by informing them that they’ve been getting the short end of the stick ever since Eve was kicked out of the garden for her assertive sassiness! History has cheated them! The Church has oppressed them and they deserve better! And he supports this wall of custard with a thousand most excellent pseudo-facts!
Really, Wormwood, the author’s pretense of taking the feminine side of things is extraordinary. For he has cleverly substituted the au courant idea of femininity for the thing itself. According to this version of things we must only know one thing about women, and that is, first and foremost, that they are hideously oppressed. Once alerted to this central fact of their identity throughout all of history, and especially of “Church” history, they’ll believe they needn’t bother about much else.
Revealed to the readers is the “fact” that in the interests of keeping power in the hands of men the Church murdered five million women in the middle ages! Don’t laugh, Wormwood. This author delivers this screaming absurdity with a deadpan that would make Buster Keaton envious. Never mind that it isn’t close to being even one percent true by any conceivable historical standard. The point is that it sounds true, at least to the ever-expanding herd of sheep who are grazing madly upon this ripping, dreamy, peachy excuse for a book! It sounds true and therefore it must be true! Every woman who has been wounded by a man will be vulnerable to this excellent strategem. Whenever and wherever possible, Wormwood, fan this outrage vigorously.
The ersatz “her-story” of the Church’s vicious oppression of women is seasoned with great steaming lumps of balderdash about Nature and “Mother Earth.” It’s a briliant connection. Men and women alike invariably eat it up with a spoon because it gives them a heady sense of being somehow “spiritual” without the annoying necessity of adopting all of those patriarchal “rules”! Never mind, Wormwood, that in this Nature goddess silliness they are worshipping deities that don’t exist! The only thing that matters is that they are not worshiping the deity that does! How we accomplish that doesn’t matter a fig! And if we can give them a sense of their own superiority, a recognition of their sober respect for Mother Earth and against all senseless violence, and against all war and for peace and harmony and tolerance and recycling, well, all the better!
I ought to mention, too, that what passes in this book for perhaps the main “argument” in favor of those pagan goddess religions is that they predate Christianity. Behold the genius of this, Wormwood! It suggests that because pagan goddess worship is older than Christianity it is somehow more pure, closer to the source of “true” spirituality. But where is the logic in this, Wormwood? A horse predates a motorcar, but who would prefer it? Monarchy predates democracy! A joey predates an elderly ‘roo! What of it?? Brilliant!
Before I go on, let me say that I have seen some execrable parodies of this book, my very least favorite being Bring in Da Vinci, Bring in Da Funk, a filthy piece of cant not to be read under any circumstances -- and I mean it, Wormwood. Don’t give me any humbug about how it will help you see how the Enemy thinks and therefore aid you in defeating him. The fact is, my callow dunderhead, that some things have the ability to corrupt the cynical likes even of you. You might well take these corruptions at face value and start having qualms about working against our enemy above, so ixnay on at-thay ook-bay, et it gay? I’m ot-nay oking-jay!
Now then, another extremely admirable facet of this book is the author’s intimate knowledge of his audience’s skyscraping ignorance, which he exploits to devastating effect. One must ever endeavor to capitalize upon ignorance, Wormwood. This is one of the chiefest weapons in our arsenal, and let me observe -- and not without some glee -- that the ignorance of contemporary Western Society in matters of history and theology both, is of an absolutely unprecedented greatness. Never before have so many known so little about so much of great importance.
Ask your average fellow in the street the slightest detail of a daft sitcom of forty years ago and he will move heaven and earth to to supply you with the answer, and then will likely prate on with other similarly inane details -- as if knowing who lived at 1313 Mockingbird Lane was his very passport to the Elysian Fields. Ha! But ask him to tell you about the Nicean Council, or ask him what are the Synoptic Gospels and you will suddenly find yourself in the presence of a weatherbeaten cigar store Injun! But then go ahead and ask him who played drums for The Monkees, or the name of that blasted itinerant peddlar on Green Acres and you will think yourself in the presence of a very Voltaire! Our television executives Down Under have been awfully successful!
As I say, this book exploits the ignorance of its readership with an exemplary elan. One particularly daring example claims that the Crusades were principally concerned with gathering and destroying information! This is bold and laughable twaddle, but it fits so nicely into ye olde conspiracy theory -- that the powerful religious hypocrites want to keep the “truth” out of the hands of their powerless subjects. And what do readers of this book know of the Crusades?
Then there’s that double whopper with cheese, about how the Emperor Constantine “invented” Christianity in the fourth century! Never mind that people had been believing it for all those years before it was “invented”. And in the same masterstroke the author undermines the authority of the Bible by declaring that what it contains arrived on a strictly “political” vote. All of those wonderful “Gospels” that didn’t fit with the “patriarchal” version of things were cruelly -- always “cruelly” -- suppressed and rejected; the oppressive messages it now contains were slipped in to fit Constantine’s political agenda! Who among this book’s readers will know that for three centuries most of those same Gospels were already considered a part of the scriptural canon? Who among his doughheaded readers even knows the meaning of the word “canonical”! My nostrils flare in admiration.
And at the creamy center of the story is the swaggeringly wild idea that Mary Magdalene (whom, incidentally, a cousin of mine once possessed briefly, only to be rudely evicted) would have married Our Chief Enemy! Oh, fatuosity! But again, it shrewdly plays into what the reader so wants to believe: that Jesus was not divine, and that all the demands that go along with his divinity may be conveniently ignored. And, perhaps most cunningly, it does not dismiss Jesus entirely, but patronizingly reduces him into a toothless sage, a veritable “nice guy.” Naturaly the author has added that requisite whiff of subversive sexuality. And oh, yes, hold onto your horns, Wormwood: Mary Magdalene is the Holy Grail! You see, her womb... oh, never mind! It’s just too rich!
As singularly brilliant as our colleague is in what concerns us most, the writing is -- alas and alack! -- scandalously slipshod and often pure giggle-fodder. I mean, the detail of a hulking albino ascetic! Named Silas! Silas! I’m wheezing with laughter this minute! Honestly, it’s too much! I’m almost surprised the author simply make him a drooling simpleton named Benji! “Must kill!” The unintentionally comic monkeyshines of this character almost spoiled my appreciation of the work. But again, it’s decidedly not the fictional elements, however ghastly, that matter here, Wormwood! Most readers won’t notice the thick prose or wafer-thin characters anyway. For many of them, paperback “romances” are like mother’s milk! What does matter is passing along cunning and doubt-sowing falsehoods as smoothly as possible. The rest is merely the narrative butter, as it were, that helps the nasty gobbets slide down the gullet all the more easily. But really, Wormwood -- an albino ascetic! Why didn’t he toss in a vicious freckled humpback? Or some cheerful peasants with goiters? I must stop.
Well, Wormwood, there we are. If you can slither past the Early Reader prose and the overcaffeinated, goggle-eyed plot I think you’ll find that you’ve a veritable textbook on your hands, one that will reward you again and again as you stagger forward and downward in mastering the grand and ignorable art of leading souls, one by one, toward a fathomlessly bleak eternity. Cheers.
Your affectionate Uncle,
Screwtape
**
Eric Metaxas is the author of the much acclaimed Everything You Always Wanted to Know About God (but were afraid to ask), of which Ann. B. Davis (Alice of the Brady Bunch) has said "I'm absolutely smitten with this book!" and which Eric himself calls "Perhaps the best Easter present imaginable! For anyone!! Have you tried amazon.com? My goodness, what are you waiting for??
___________________________
Screwtape on The DaVinci Code
by Eric Metaxas
My dear Wormwood,
I trust this finds you as miserable and coarse as ever. I am pleased to take a respite from our usual tutorial and venture into something a bit broader, but vastly instructive for our larger purposes. To wit: I shall today croak a paean of praise to a particular work of middlebrow non-fiction. The genre has been particularly good to us, Wormwood! Do you remember The Passover Plot? Or that excellent hoax by Erich von Daniken, In Search of Ancient Astronauts? You may s now, but in its day even that harebrained rant proved helpful to our cause. As did most of the books on The Bermuda Triangle and “UFO’s”. And don’t get me started on Out on a Limb! Oh, but Wormwood. Those books were mere types and shadows of the one that has in these last days transported me to ecstasies of embarrassing intensity. It is a type of “romantic thriller” (penned by someone under the unwitting tutelage of an old crony of mine from the Sixth Circle); it is titled The DaVinci Code.
I surmised it should be well worth the trouble of familiarising you with it, inasmuch as it contains such a precariously towering heap of our very best non-thinking that it is quite dizzying! It has the genuine potential to mislead, confuse, and vex millions! Indeed the mystical sleight-of-hand involved in shoehorning so many cubic yards of gasbag clichees, shopworn half-truths and straightfaced howlers into a single volume simply beggars belief; and if I didn’t know that the author had had unwitting “help” from my former colleague, the venerable Gallstone, I simply shouldn’t believe it could have been done at all!
Now, Wormwood, before you object to my calling this book “non-fiction”-- since it is technically classified as “fiction”-- let me say that it is essentially non-fiction, at least as far as our purposes are concerned. That’s because it’s principle delight for our side is that in the tacky plastic shell of some below-average “fiction” the book parades as “fact” a veritable phalanx of practical propaganda and disinformation that would make our dear Herr Goebbels (Circle Eight, third spiderhole on the right) jade green with envy! Souls by the boatload are blithely believing almost all of the deliciously corrosive non-facts that are congealed everywhere in it, like flies in bad aspic, and it is that precisely which most recommends this glorious effort as worthy of our dedicated and especial study.
But where to begin in describing to you its myriad delights? First, a brief synopsis of the plot: a museum curator is murdered by a fanatical albino Christian bigot (nice opening, no?); the curator’s granddaughter and an American “symbologist” (don’t ask me, I haven’t the time) try to find the real killer and are launched on a wildly implausible and fantastically cryptical search for the proverbial Holy Grail, all the while chased by angry gendarmes and the aforementioned unhinged albino. In the process they (and the lucky reader) discover that: the Church is murderous and evil; the Bible is a hoax; Jesus is not divine, but merely a married mortal and an earnest proto-feminist (!); there is no such thing as Truth; and oh, yes... is the truest kind of prayer. Can you stand it? A virtuoso performance, no? It’s as if the author’s somehow squeezed all of hell into a walnut shell. And oh, yes, one more historical “fact”: Leonardo DaVinci’s homosexuality was “flamboyant”! Do tell.
But that’s just the irresistible plot, Wormwood. It’s the author’s technique in so many other areas that is particularly worth our attention. For example, there is the manner in which the book seduces its reader with naked flattery, holding out the carrot -- or should I say apple -- of “inside knowledge.” Make note of this, Wormwood; it worked wonders for us in Eden and works for us still. The author trots out the ageless fiddle-faddle about a parallel “reality” beside the “official” one everyone’s been sold. You know, the moth-eaten, bedraggled idea that all of history is a grand “conspiracy” conducted by some hidden elites! But wait, the lucky reader is to be let in on it all, and for the mere price of purchasing this book! He’ll learn the “real” story behind the “official” story that all the other saps have been buying for lo! these many centuries. Heady stuff, eh, Wormwood? Transparent as it might seem to us, this temptation has always been been too great for the humans to bear. They ache to be part of that “inside” group that knows what’s “really” going on, and they fall for it every time. It’s not so different from their craving for gossip or “dirt”; only better, since there isn’t the pesky nuisance of guilt to deal with. They cannot help themselves; they simply swallow it without a thought. That’s the key, Wormwood, for if actual thinking can be prevented, the humans are under our control.
There’s something about a crackpot conspiracy that makes my brown scales twinkle, Wormwood. There’s nothing like a grand conspiracy to twist truth round and round -- until the shape of the thing one ends up with is unrecognizable from that with which one began. I remember when I was young, in an immature display of rakish pique I bewitched an inept sausagemaker such that the next time he applied himself to the sausagemaker’s art he became almost instantly entangled in the entrails with which he was working. That image reoccurs to me now as I recall this great book, Wormwood. You see, this book is that hopelessly intestine-entangled sausagemaker writ large, I tell you! The reader will become snarled in the vile, greasy entrails of its thousand half-truths and will die before he extricates himself! What could be better?
But don’t let’s digress. I was speaking of the employment of flattery. Understand, Wormwood, that the successful devil -- and this devilishly clever author -- well knows his audience, and then tells that audience precisely what it wants to hear. As long as what one puts out is vaguely plausible, they’ll buy it by the yard, and at retail prices! Trust me, Wormwood, these gullible dullards are even likely to thank you for the privelege of being your customer!
I particularly admire the writer’s way of tapping into the widespread disaffection and resentment so many modern women feel toward men. This emotional woundedness is a veritable Mother Lode (pun intended) of destructive possibilities, and it is as profitably mined here as ever it has been. The author winds up his female readers by informing them that they’ve been getting the short end of the stick ever since Eve was kicked out of the garden for her assertive sassiness! History has cheated them! The Church has oppressed them and they deserve better! And he supports this wall of custard with a thousand most excellent pseudo-facts!
Really, Wormwood, the author’s pretense of taking the feminine side of things is extraordinary. For he has cleverly substituted the au courant idea of femininity for the thing itself. According to this version of things we must only know one thing about women, and that is, first and foremost, that they are hideously oppressed. Once alerted to this central fact of their identity throughout all of history, and especially of “Church” history, they’ll believe they needn’t bother about much else.
Revealed to the readers is the “fact” that in the interests of keeping power in the hands of men the Church murdered five million women in the middle ages! Don’t laugh, Wormwood. This author delivers this screaming absurdity with a deadpan that would make Buster Keaton envious. Never mind that it isn’t close to being even one percent true by any conceivable historical standard. The point is that it sounds true, at least to the ever-expanding herd of sheep who are grazing madly upon this ripping, dreamy, peachy excuse for a book! It sounds true and therefore it must be true! Every woman who has been wounded by a man will be vulnerable to this excellent strategem. Whenever and wherever possible, Wormwood, fan this outrage vigorously.
The ersatz “her-story” of the Church’s vicious oppression of women is seasoned with great steaming lumps of balderdash about Nature and “Mother Earth.” It’s a briliant connection. Men and women alike invariably eat it up with a spoon because it gives them a heady sense of being somehow “spiritual” without the annoying necessity of adopting all of those patriarchal “rules”! Never mind, Wormwood, that in this Nature goddess silliness they are worshipping deities that don’t exist! The only thing that matters is that they are not worshiping the deity that does! How we accomplish that doesn’t matter a fig! And if we can give them a sense of their own superiority, a recognition of their sober respect for Mother Earth and against all senseless violence, and against all war and for peace and harmony and tolerance and recycling, well, all the better!
I ought to mention, too, that what passes in this book for perhaps the main “argument” in favor of those pagan goddess religions is that they predate Christianity. Behold the genius of this, Wormwood! It suggests that because pagan goddess worship is older than Christianity it is somehow more pure, closer to the source of “true” spirituality. But where is the logic in this, Wormwood? A horse predates a motorcar, but who would prefer it? Monarchy predates democracy! A joey predates an elderly ‘roo! What of it?? Brilliant!
Before I go on, let me say that I have seen some execrable parodies of this book, my very least favorite being Bring in Da Vinci, Bring in Da Funk, a filthy piece of cant not to be read under any circumstances -- and I mean it, Wormwood. Don’t give me any humbug about how it will help you see how the Enemy thinks and therefore aid you in defeating him. The fact is, my callow dunderhead, that some things have the ability to corrupt the cynical likes even of you. You might well take these corruptions at face value and start having qualms about working against our enemy above, so ixnay on at-thay ook-bay, et it gay? I’m ot-nay oking-jay!
Now then, another extremely admirable facet of this book is the author’s intimate knowledge of his audience’s skyscraping ignorance, which he exploits to devastating effect. One must ever endeavor to capitalize upon ignorance, Wormwood. This is one of the chiefest weapons in our arsenal, and let me observe -- and not without some glee -- that the ignorance of contemporary Western Society in matters of history and theology both, is of an absolutely unprecedented greatness. Never before have so many known so little about so much of great importance.
Ask your average fellow in the street the slightest detail of a daft sitcom of forty years ago and he will move heaven and earth to to supply you with the answer, and then will likely prate on with other similarly inane details -- as if knowing who lived at 1313 Mockingbird Lane was his very passport to the Elysian Fields. Ha! But ask him to tell you about the Nicean Council, or ask him what are the Synoptic Gospels and you will suddenly find yourself in the presence of a weatherbeaten cigar store Injun! But then go ahead and ask him who played drums for The Monkees, or the name of that blasted itinerant peddlar on Green Acres and you will think yourself in the presence of a very Voltaire! Our television executives Down Under have been awfully successful!
As I say, this book exploits the ignorance of its readership with an exemplary elan. One particularly daring example claims that the Crusades were principally concerned with gathering and destroying information! This is bold and laughable twaddle, but it fits so nicely into ye olde conspiracy theory -- that the powerful religious hypocrites want to keep the “truth” out of the hands of their powerless subjects. And what do readers of this book know of the Crusades?
Then there’s that double whopper with cheese, about how the Emperor Constantine “invented” Christianity in the fourth century! Never mind that people had been believing it for all those years before it was “invented”. And in the same masterstroke the author undermines the authority of the Bible by declaring that what it contains arrived on a strictly “political” vote. All of those wonderful “Gospels” that didn’t fit with the “patriarchal” version of things were cruelly -- always “cruelly” -- suppressed and rejected; the oppressive messages it now contains were slipped in to fit Constantine’s political agenda! Who among this book’s readers will know that for three centuries most of those same Gospels were already considered a part of the scriptural canon? Who among his doughheaded readers even knows the meaning of the word “canonical”! My nostrils flare in admiration.
And at the creamy center of the story is the swaggeringly wild idea that Mary Magdalene (whom, incidentally, a cousin of mine once possessed briefly, only to be rudely evicted) would have married Our Chief Enemy! Oh, fatuosity! But again, it shrewdly plays into what the reader so wants to believe: that Jesus was not divine, and that all the demands that go along with his divinity may be conveniently ignored. And, perhaps most cunningly, it does not dismiss Jesus entirely, but patronizingly reduces him into a toothless sage, a veritable “nice guy.” Naturaly the author has added that requisite whiff of subversive sexuality. And oh, yes, hold onto your horns, Wormwood: Mary Magdalene is the Holy Grail! You see, her womb... oh, never mind! It’s just too rich!
As singularly brilliant as our colleague is in what concerns us most, the writing is -- alas and alack! -- scandalously slipshod and often pure giggle-fodder. I mean, the detail of a hulking albino ascetic! Named Silas! Silas! I’m wheezing with laughter this minute! Honestly, it’s too much! I’m almost surprised the author simply make him a drooling simpleton named Benji! “Must kill!” The unintentionally comic monkeyshines of this character almost spoiled my appreciation of the work. But again, it’s decidedly not the fictional elements, however ghastly, that matter here, Wormwood! Most readers won’t notice the thick prose or wafer-thin characters anyway. For many of them, paperback “romances” are like mother’s milk! What does matter is passing along cunning and doubt-sowing falsehoods as smoothly as possible. The rest is merely the narrative butter, as it were, that helps the nasty gobbets slide down the gullet all the more easily. But really, Wormwood -- an albino ascetic! Why didn’t he toss in a vicious freckled humpback? Or some cheerful peasants with goiters? I must stop.
Well, Wormwood, there we are. If you can slither past the Early Reader prose and the overcaffeinated, goggle-eyed plot I think you’ll find that you’ve a veritable textbook on your hands, one that will reward you again and again as you stagger forward and downward in mastering the grand and ignorable art of leading souls, one by one, toward a fathomlessly bleak eternity. Cheers.
Your affectionate Uncle,
Screwtape
**
Eric Metaxas is the author of the much acclaimed Everything You Always Wanted to Know About God (but were afraid to ask), of which Ann. B. Davis (Alice of the Brady Bunch) has said "I'm absolutely smitten with this book!" and which Eric himself calls "Perhaps the best Easter present imaginable! For anyone!! Have you tried amazon.com? My goodness, what are you waiting for??
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Pt. IV - Wichita Interview
Q: Talk about your own creative experience. For instance, I know you’ve written before that Eucharistic adoration is a great cure for writer’s block.
BRN: Indeed. This is another reason I think that the Church needs to put itself in artists’ faces. We have an answer for them in our proximity to the sacred which is the font of inspiration. Right now, to get inspired an artist goes into his room, shuts the door and tries to get focused. But again, they are looking inside of their own guts, which is an unenlightened place. It’s another thing to sit in Eucharistic adoration with Jesus and the Holy Spirit. You’re looking at your history and psychology, but you are not doing it in isolation. You’re getting God’s perspective.
I have a weird thing in my personal creative life that I always only seem to get the answer to any problem when I'm sitting in church. It's God’s way of making sure I never leave the Church from a purely pragmatic standpoint. Honestly, I have this weird experience where the best solutions to creative problems come to me at Mass or during meditation at church–not even at home when I’m praying.
Q: You’re not even necessarily thinking about the problem when the answer comes to you.
BRN: No. I'll be sitting there paying attention and all of a sudden I'll get the answer to something that I've been puzzling over outside in my work. It's even funnier when I get sudden answers to things that I didn't even realize were problems in my work!
I bring a notebook into church all the time. I always have one in my purse. It’s kind of like God is saying to me, “Just so you know, anything cool you ever manage to come up with really comes from me.” That’s good for me....Ask my family!
This points to one of those stimbling blocks that artists have to learn to watch or it sidetracks us. When we come up with something really cool in our creative isolation, it’s a holy thing to say “Now, that’s really cool!” It’s another thing to say “I’m cool.” You have to be careful. We artists are always on the verge of arrogance - walking around peering down at all the other people on the planet thinking, “How can I bear to be with these simians? I am a giant of understanding and depth.”
Q: You talk a lot about how community can save artists from this kind of temptation.
BRN:
I think about it more and more – almost exclusively lately. What is the relationship between community and creativity? It is in my mind all the time as the executive director of Act One which, according to our mission statement seeks to foster truly creative community for disciples of Christ.
The arts are a genius-driven arena. Basically, the Church should be busy readying all kinds of these systems ready for the next genius. That means we are going to have to work with a lot of people who are not geniuses, but one of them might be.
Having said that, we want to create a community that would be there to take the genius to the next level of holiness and skill as an artist for all of us. What kind of community is that? It is going to be a mix of the pragmatic and the ethereal - a place of psychology, prayer and patience. On some days we are very chastening to our students. I will literally say to them, “What is this slop you gave me to read? What were you thinking? Do you want me to read a first draft that is full of sloppiness? What are you doing here with your life!?” On some days I have to be that way, and on the inside I’m thinking “I hope I’m not hurting them too much.”
On other days we can see they are really in need of more affirmation. So we say things like, “I think you have an amazing potential here. I think you have a real voice, and I see touches of brilliance in some of your stuff.” Sometimes you have to say that too. Some days, my students just need me to say, “Okay, we are going to loan you the money for your car payment this month because you need a car.” And that might be enough for them.
So when we talk about the Church being the patron of the arts, it’s all of the above. And then it’s prayer. Honestly, every day when that part of the Mass comes up, “Pray for the Church around the world,” I pray for my students, that they will have the grace and inspiration to persevere, to work hard, that doors open in front of them and they have luck and opportunity and everything they need. That is also part of being a patron of the arts.
Q: You’ve said before that your experience in some of your own writing has taught you that sometimes it is necessary to handle religion in a very straightforward manner, whereas previously you had often assumed it was better handled in a roundabout way. Can you expand on that?
BRN: I have come full circle on this question. It is really a huge issue that has many ramifications for consideration. As with most other things, most voices in the Church oversimplify it.
I used to be part of a constituency in Hollywood that has been telling Christians we need to stop writing overtly Christian stuff because it is our subculture and that it will make drama that is unintelligible to the masses. We used to say that overt Christian stuff is uncommercial.
Well, then The Passion of the Christ comes along. You can’t get more overt and in-house than The Passion. To paraphrase St. Paul, it was foolishness to the critics at the New York Times and a scandal to Daily Variety.
So, I had to step back and say that sometimes we need to be overt.
What times are those? I think there is definitely a need for sacred art. There is a need for us to tell our stories in an overt way. With my St. Josemaria Escriva movie, what I was more worried about was writing a saint’s story that would be intelligible to the secular mind.
It’s been done before. You have movies with Hollywood distribution like The Song of Bernadette or A Man for All Seasons, The Mission or even Ghandi, that are overt stories. I found that downplaying the role of religious faith in the story to make it mainstream actually turned the saint into a social worker. But then, his ultimate choices do not make sense because there was nothing to die for.
Plato is right. He said that the only thing that does not make sense is dying for something because we do not know. Of course, he willingly died.
But that was my problem. Can you write a mainstream movie about a saint? It seemed to me that in parts, I had to just say to the audience, “Go with me here. There is another character in this saint’s life that you don’t know. You can’t perceive Him, but the saint lives in His presence.” God has to be an unseen but absolutely present character in a saint’s movie. Because that person is present to them, there may be choices that do not otherwise make sense. It has been said that Christians should live as though their lives would not make any sense if Jesus was not in the universe. I think it is the same thing with an overtly Christian story. The movie should not make sense if God isn’t real. That is the tricky thing.
But there is nothing more uncinematic than watching someone pray or read the bible. How many of those shots can you do before it gets very boring? And yet, I found some Christians who read the early drafts pressuring me for more of that: “Can’t you put a homily in it? Can’t you have more shots of him praying?”
Well, these things are not fun for the audience. They are not compelling, it is not dramatic, there is no pulse to it. It is just us being nervous. It was a very challenging thing. I know I succeeded in some parts through the use of intercutting. Again, using the whole pallet of the cinema, what can a movie do to communicate? It can cut from this picture to that picture and there is a lot of power in the juxtaposition of images.
That is different than what most Christians think. How do most Christians try to get their point across when they write a movie? Dialogue, which is the least effective. Conversations are the worst thing to do in a saint movie. It is the paradoxical choices that the character makes and then it is the intercutting, the juxtaposition of images that suggest “We’re looking at this, but it means that.” And it’s very, very hard.
Because I am kind of out there, if this movie gets made–it looks like it will–I am going to get nailed to the wall by some Christians because it is not going to be perfect. I have it coming. I've been hard on everybody else! Something else to look forward to!
I am hoping it is a step in the right direction. I know enough about movie writing to know that I am not one of those artistic geniuses we are all waiting for. I am good. Someone is going to be better.
But I can tell you, this movie is nothing like Therese or Left Behind. It is trying to do something else. It is trying to be a movie, not a radio show.
Q: What’s it called?
BRN: The Work is its working title.
Q: Aren’t you collaborating on something?
BRN:I’m collaborating with Benedict Fitzgerald, who is sort of Flannery O’Conner’s Godchild.
Q: Do you want to talk about any of that stuff in the pipeline?
BRN: It is so tricky to talk about stuff because you don’t want to spook things. There are two things I am negotiating to write now. I’ll tell you what I would love to write. I would love to write A Severe Mercy. I would love to do With God in Russia. I would love to do One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. I really feel like we haven’t seen them. The Gulag was 70 years of persecution of the Church and of faith, and there are amazing stories there, stories that we do not even know yet from the gulag years, and I want to tell some of those stories. I love With God in Russia because it has the American angle that we need. But somebody has to pay me to write those.
I am writing a book now. It started as spirituality for writers. I am not a theologian, so it is basically just a practitioner talking about the church and the artist. How did we get where we are? I can’t do much on that because I am not an art historian, but I can say what the attitudes in the Church are towards the arts, how we need to get past them to grow, what the artists need from the Church and what the Church needs from the arts. The second half of the book is specific spiritual challenges that come with the artists’ territory that the Church needs to help them turn–as Fr. Benedict Groeschel would say–from stumbling blocks into stepping stones. Isolation, creativity, insufficiency, rejection, collaboration, success, instability are all particular realities that come from the artists’ experience doing art.
BRN: Indeed. This is another reason I think that the Church needs to put itself in artists’ faces. We have an answer for them in our proximity to the sacred which is the font of inspiration. Right now, to get inspired an artist goes into his room, shuts the door and tries to get focused. But again, they are looking inside of their own guts, which is an unenlightened place. It’s another thing to sit in Eucharistic adoration with Jesus and the Holy Spirit. You’re looking at your history and psychology, but you are not doing it in isolation. You’re getting God’s perspective.
I have a weird thing in my personal creative life that I always only seem to get the answer to any problem when I'm sitting in church. It's God’s way of making sure I never leave the Church from a purely pragmatic standpoint. Honestly, I have this weird experience where the best solutions to creative problems come to me at Mass or during meditation at church–not even at home when I’m praying.
Q: You’re not even necessarily thinking about the problem when the answer comes to you.
BRN: No. I'll be sitting there paying attention and all of a sudden I'll get the answer to something that I've been puzzling over outside in my work. It's even funnier when I get sudden answers to things that I didn't even realize were problems in my work!
I bring a notebook into church all the time. I always have one in my purse. It’s kind of like God is saying to me, “Just so you know, anything cool you ever manage to come up with really comes from me.” That’s good for me....Ask my family!
This points to one of those stimbling blocks that artists have to learn to watch or it sidetracks us. When we come up with something really cool in our creative isolation, it’s a holy thing to say “Now, that’s really cool!” It’s another thing to say “I’m cool.” You have to be careful. We artists are always on the verge of arrogance - walking around peering down at all the other people on the planet thinking, “How can I bear to be with these simians? I am a giant of understanding and depth.”
Q: You talk a lot about how community can save artists from this kind of temptation.
BRN:
I think about it more and more – almost exclusively lately. What is the relationship between community and creativity? It is in my mind all the time as the executive director of Act One which, according to our mission statement seeks to foster truly creative community for disciples of Christ.
The arts are a genius-driven arena. Basically, the Church should be busy readying all kinds of these systems ready for the next genius. That means we are going to have to work with a lot of people who are not geniuses, but one of them might be.
Having said that, we want to create a community that would be there to take the genius to the next level of holiness and skill as an artist for all of us. What kind of community is that? It is going to be a mix of the pragmatic and the ethereal - a place of psychology, prayer and patience. On some days we are very chastening to our students. I will literally say to them, “What is this slop you gave me to read? What were you thinking? Do you want me to read a first draft that is full of sloppiness? What are you doing here with your life!?” On some days I have to be that way, and on the inside I’m thinking “I hope I’m not hurting them too much.”
On other days we can see they are really in need of more affirmation. So we say things like, “I think you have an amazing potential here. I think you have a real voice, and I see touches of brilliance in some of your stuff.” Sometimes you have to say that too. Some days, my students just need me to say, “Okay, we are going to loan you the money for your car payment this month because you need a car.” And that might be enough for them.
So when we talk about the Church being the patron of the arts, it’s all of the above. And then it’s prayer. Honestly, every day when that part of the Mass comes up, “Pray for the Church around the world,” I pray for my students, that they will have the grace and inspiration to persevere, to work hard, that doors open in front of them and they have luck and opportunity and everything they need. That is also part of being a patron of the arts.
Q: You’ve said before that your experience in some of your own writing has taught you that sometimes it is necessary to handle religion in a very straightforward manner, whereas previously you had often assumed it was better handled in a roundabout way. Can you expand on that?
BRN: I have come full circle on this question. It is really a huge issue that has many ramifications for consideration. As with most other things, most voices in the Church oversimplify it.
I used to be part of a constituency in Hollywood that has been telling Christians we need to stop writing overtly Christian stuff because it is our subculture and that it will make drama that is unintelligible to the masses. We used to say that overt Christian stuff is uncommercial.
Well, then The Passion of the Christ comes along. You can’t get more overt and in-house than The Passion. To paraphrase St. Paul, it was foolishness to the critics at the New York Times and a scandal to Daily Variety.
So, I had to step back and say that sometimes we need to be overt.
What times are those? I think there is definitely a need for sacred art. There is a need for us to tell our stories in an overt way. With my St. Josemaria Escriva movie, what I was more worried about was writing a saint’s story that would be intelligible to the secular mind.
It’s been done before. You have movies with Hollywood distribution like The Song of Bernadette or A Man for All Seasons, The Mission or even Ghandi, that are overt stories. I found that downplaying the role of religious faith in the story to make it mainstream actually turned the saint into a social worker. But then, his ultimate choices do not make sense because there was nothing to die for.
Plato is right. He said that the only thing that does not make sense is dying for something because we do not know. Of course, he willingly died.
But that was my problem. Can you write a mainstream movie about a saint? It seemed to me that in parts, I had to just say to the audience, “Go with me here. There is another character in this saint’s life that you don’t know. You can’t perceive Him, but the saint lives in His presence.” God has to be an unseen but absolutely present character in a saint’s movie. Because that person is present to them, there may be choices that do not otherwise make sense. It has been said that Christians should live as though their lives would not make any sense if Jesus was not in the universe. I think it is the same thing with an overtly Christian story. The movie should not make sense if God isn’t real. That is the tricky thing.
But there is nothing more uncinematic than watching someone pray or read the bible. How many of those shots can you do before it gets very boring? And yet, I found some Christians who read the early drafts pressuring me for more of that: “Can’t you put a homily in it? Can’t you have more shots of him praying?”
Well, these things are not fun for the audience. They are not compelling, it is not dramatic, there is no pulse to it. It is just us being nervous. It was a very challenging thing. I know I succeeded in some parts through the use of intercutting. Again, using the whole pallet of the cinema, what can a movie do to communicate? It can cut from this picture to that picture and there is a lot of power in the juxtaposition of images.
That is different than what most Christians think. How do most Christians try to get their point across when they write a movie? Dialogue, which is the least effective. Conversations are the worst thing to do in a saint movie. It is the paradoxical choices that the character makes and then it is the intercutting, the juxtaposition of images that suggest “We’re looking at this, but it means that.” And it’s very, very hard.
Because I am kind of out there, if this movie gets made–it looks like it will–I am going to get nailed to the wall by some Christians because it is not going to be perfect. I have it coming. I've been hard on everybody else! Something else to look forward to!
I am hoping it is a step in the right direction. I know enough about movie writing to know that I am not one of those artistic geniuses we are all waiting for. I am good. Someone is going to be better.
But I can tell you, this movie is nothing like Therese or Left Behind. It is trying to do something else. It is trying to be a movie, not a radio show.
Q: What’s it called?
BRN: The Work is its working title.
Q: Aren’t you collaborating on something?
BRN:I’m collaborating with Benedict Fitzgerald, who is sort of Flannery O’Conner’s Godchild.
Q: Do you want to talk about any of that stuff in the pipeline?
BRN: It is so tricky to talk about stuff because you don’t want to spook things. There are two things I am negotiating to write now. I’ll tell you what I would love to write. I would love to write A Severe Mercy. I would love to do With God in Russia. I would love to do One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. I really feel like we haven’t seen them. The Gulag was 70 years of persecution of the Church and of faith, and there are amazing stories there, stories that we do not even know yet from the gulag years, and I want to tell some of those stories. I love With God in Russia because it has the American angle that we need. But somebody has to pay me to write those.
I am writing a book now. It started as spirituality for writers. I am not a theologian, so it is basically just a practitioner talking about the church and the artist. How did we get where we are? I can’t do much on that because I am not an art historian, but I can say what the attitudes in the Church are towards the arts, how we need to get past them to grow, what the artists need from the Church and what the Church needs from the arts. The second half of the book is specific spiritual challenges that come with the artists’ territory that the Church needs to help them turn–as Fr. Benedict Groeschel would say–from stumbling blocks into stepping stones. Isolation, creativity, insufficiency, rejection, collaboration, success, instability are all particular realities that come from the artists’ experience doing art.
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Act One Newsletter
ACT ONE UPDATE (4/04/06)
In this issue:
ACT ONE SPONSORS DA VINCI CODE EVENT APRIL 11 / SEE BARBARA NICOLOSI IN ARIZONA, INDIANA / ACT ONE SPONSORS FORUM ON MARRIAGE AND INTIMACY IN HOLLYWOOD / SHORT FILM PROJECT UNDERWAY / NEW INTERNSHIP FOR EXECUTIVE PROGRAM / ACT ONE BOOK IN STORES NOW
_______________________
ACT ONE CO-SPONSORS DA VINCI CODE EVENT APRIL 11
"Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction?"
April 11, 7:00-9:30 PM
featuring:
Mark Shea
Josh McDowell
Craig Detweiler
Craig Smith
Hollywood Presbyterian Church (sanctuary)
1760 North Gower Street
Hollywood, CA 90028
for more information, visit http://inter-mission.net/events_la.html
Is Jesus really God?
Did Mary Magdalene birth his child?
Is The Da Vinci Code book/movie a dangerous challenge to the Christian faith, a ripe opportunity or both?
Are you prepared to answer these questions and more?
With over 42 million copies in print, The Da Vinci Code is a runaway bestseller, but are the so-called facts in this book truth...or are they fiction?
The novel is written as fact, but on Tuesday, April 11, international authors and speakers JOSH MCDOWELL, MARK SHEA, CRAIG DETWEILER AND CRAIG SMITH explain the truth behind this popular story.
Inter-Mission, Mastermedia International and Act One are inviting entertainment professionals, as well as the general public for this rare opportunity.
_______________________
SEE BARBARA NICOLOSI IN ARIZONA AND INDIANA!
Act One founder Barbara Nicolosi will be speaking at several upcoming events:
"Why Does God Care about Hollywood? The Role of Entertainment in Human Life"
Thursday, April 27
Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture
155 DeBartolo Hall
Notre Dame, IN 46556
7:30 pm
http://ethicscenter.nd.edu/events/HollywoodLectures.shtml
Keynote Speaker at the Christianity and the Arts conference
April 28th - 29th
Church For The Nations
11640 N 19th Ave
Phoenix, AZ 85029
Cost: $15
to register: http://www.cftn.com/arts.html
_______________________
ACT ONE SPONSORS FORUM ON MARRIAGE AND INTIMACY IN HOLLYWOOD
"it's who you sleep with that matters..."
A conversation with Christians about marriage and intimacy in Hollywood
April 22, 9:30-12:00
www.hollywoodconnect.com
brought to you by Hollywood Connect, Inter-Mission, Act One & Hollywood Prayer Network
_______________________
SHORT FILM PROJECT UNDERWAY
Act One is pleased to announce that producers for the Peter Glenville Short Film Project have been selected. Anna Littles (Writing Program, L.A. 2002) will produce PIE 'N' BURGER, from a screenplay written by Clare Sera (Writing Program, L.A., 1999). Monica Jimenez-Grillo and Thomas Deason (both from the Executive Program, L.A. 2005) will produce THE PHILANTHROPISTS, from a screenplay written by Douglas McKelvey (Writing Program, Washington, D.C., 2004).
Named after the late director/filmmaker, Peter Glenville who was known for a number of highly acclaimed films including “Becket” and “The Comedians,” the Peter Glenville Short Film Program’s primary goal is to give a group of Act One alumni the opportunity to be involved in the production process from concept to distribution. The secondary goal is to produce two laudable, well-produced short films, which will be entered into film festival competitions around the world.
_______________________
NEW INTERNSHIP FOR EXECUTIVE PROGRAM
The Executive Program is pleased to announce that Guy Walks Into A Bar (Elf) has joined the list of top Hollywood entities accepting interns from our program this summer.
_______________________
ACT ONE BOOK IN STORES NOW
A new book written by the faculty and staff of Act One is now available for purchase at online and neighborhood bookstores.
Behind the Screen: Hollywood Insiders on Faith, Film & Culture presents a fascinating look at the much-maligned film and television industries through the eyes of Christian writers, producers, and executives living out their faith behind TV shows, on movie sets, and in studio offices.
Writers include Scott Derrickson (Writer, Director, The Exorcism of Emily Rose), Ralph Winter (Producer, X-Men 2, Fantastic 4), Barbara Hall (Creator, Joan of Arcadia), and Dean Batali (Executive Producer, That '70s Show).
Available now at www.amazon.com.
_______________________
In this issue:
ACT ONE SPONSORS DA VINCI CODE EVENT APRIL 11 / SEE BARBARA NICOLOSI IN ARIZONA, INDIANA / ACT ONE SPONSORS FORUM ON MARRIAGE AND INTIMACY IN HOLLYWOOD / SHORT FILM PROJECT UNDERWAY / NEW INTERNSHIP FOR EXECUTIVE PROGRAM / ACT ONE BOOK IN STORES NOW
_______________________
ACT ONE CO-SPONSORS DA VINCI CODE EVENT APRIL 11
"Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction?"
April 11, 7:00-9:30 PM
featuring:
Mark Shea
Josh McDowell
Craig Detweiler
Craig Smith
Hollywood Presbyterian Church (sanctuary)
1760 North Gower Street
Hollywood, CA 90028
for more information, visit http://inter-mission.net/events_la.html
Is Jesus really God?
Did Mary Magdalene birth his child?
Is The Da Vinci Code book/movie a dangerous challenge to the Christian faith, a ripe opportunity or both?
Are you prepared to answer these questions and more?
With over 42 million copies in print, The Da Vinci Code is a runaway bestseller, but are the so-called facts in this book truth...or are they fiction?
The novel is written as fact, but on Tuesday, April 11, international authors and speakers JOSH MCDOWELL, MARK SHEA, CRAIG DETWEILER AND CRAIG SMITH explain the truth behind this popular story.
Inter-Mission, Mastermedia International and Act One are inviting entertainment professionals, as well as the general public for this rare opportunity.
_______________________
SEE BARBARA NICOLOSI IN ARIZONA AND INDIANA!
Act One founder Barbara Nicolosi will be speaking at several upcoming events:
"Why Does God Care about Hollywood? The Role of Entertainment in Human Life"
Thursday, April 27
Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture
155 DeBartolo Hall
Notre Dame, IN 46556
7:30 pm
http://ethicscenter.nd.edu/events/HollywoodLectures.shtml
Keynote Speaker at the Christianity and the Arts conference
April 28th - 29th
Church For The Nations
11640 N 19th Ave
Phoenix, AZ 85029
Cost: $15
to register: http://www.cftn.com/arts.html
_______________________
ACT ONE SPONSORS FORUM ON MARRIAGE AND INTIMACY IN HOLLYWOOD
"it's who you sleep with that matters..."
A conversation with Christians about marriage and intimacy in Hollywood
April 22, 9:30-12:00
www.hollywoodconnect.com
brought to you by Hollywood Connect, Inter-Mission, Act One & Hollywood Prayer Network
_______________________
SHORT FILM PROJECT UNDERWAY
Act One is pleased to announce that producers for the Peter Glenville Short Film Project have been selected. Anna Littles (Writing Program, L.A. 2002) will produce PIE 'N' BURGER, from a screenplay written by Clare Sera (Writing Program, L.A., 1999). Monica Jimenez-Grillo and Thomas Deason (both from the Executive Program, L.A. 2005) will produce THE PHILANTHROPISTS, from a screenplay written by Douglas McKelvey (Writing Program, Washington, D.C., 2004).
Named after the late director/filmmaker, Peter Glenville who was known for a number of highly acclaimed films including “Becket” and “The Comedians,” the Peter Glenville Short Film Program’s primary goal is to give a group of Act One alumni the opportunity to be involved in the production process from concept to distribution. The secondary goal is to produce two laudable, well-produced short films, which will be entered into film festival competitions around the world.
_______________________
NEW INTERNSHIP FOR EXECUTIVE PROGRAM
The Executive Program is pleased to announce that Guy Walks Into A Bar (Elf) has joined the list of top Hollywood entities accepting interns from our program this summer.
_______________________
ACT ONE BOOK IN STORES NOW
A new book written by the faculty and staff of Act One is now available for purchase at online and neighborhood bookstores.
Behind the Screen: Hollywood Insiders on Faith, Film & Culture presents a fascinating look at the much-maligned film and television industries through the eyes of Christian writers, producers, and executives living out their faith behind TV shows, on movie sets, and in studio offices.
Writers include Scott Derrickson (Writer, Director, The Exorcism of Emily Rose), Ralph Winter (Producer, X-Men 2, Fantastic 4), Barbara Hall (Creator, Joan of Arcadia), and Dean Batali (Executive Producer, That '70s Show).
Available now at www.amazon.com.
_______________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)