I, TIE-IN

"FIRST LAW: "THE STORY MUST NEVER SERVE STUFF OVER THE AUDIENCE."

The new Will Smith vehicle, I, Robot is not so much a piece of cinema as it a stylish piece of commercial advertising. Although shameless product placement has become a staple of big-budget movies, it becomes peculiarly awkward when you are trying to hawk 2004 goods in a futuristic, sci-fi arena. The only way they could manage it here, was to make Will Smith's character anti-technology, and then hope that we would accept the idea that he has accompanying fetishes to wear hundred-year old shoes and listen to hundred year old stereo systems. I suppose this makes his character an Austin Powers kind of animal -- only here, they are trying to play it straight.

There are three (ultimately insulting to the audience) refereneces to Will's hi-top sneakers, which he proudly describes to his grandmother as being "vintage 2004." I swear, he almost winked at the camera when he said it. Too bad he didn't. It would have provided one genuine laugh for the film. We get two close-ups of the brand of his stereo system, and four or five closeups of the Audi logo on the back of his car.

This is bad for the movie because it yanks the viewer out of the story. It is bad for society, because it makes selling products feel icky and manipulative.

"SECOND LAW: STORIES THAT SERVE AN ACTOR WILL FAIL, PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY ALSO VIOLATE THE FIRST LAW."

I generally enjoy Will Smith, but this project is as close to watching him prostitute himself as I have ever seen. Several times, we get long gratuitous looks at various naked parts of his formidable physique. There is even one long slow shot of the whole of him naked in a shower --from the side, but there he is, standing in a shower, letting the water pour out the sides of the tub onto the floor, because, well, if he pulled the shower curtain shut the camera wouldn't be able to catch him standing there beautifully unclad.

There just isn't much for Will to do here except swagger around modeling clothes and selling cars and sound-systems.

"THIRD LAW: MOVIES THAT POSTURE ABSURDITIES WILL FAIL, PARTICULARLY THOSE THAT VIOLATE THE FIRST AND SECOND LAWS."

This movie is so superficial in its treatment of a big theme, that I thought for a moment I was watching a Steven Spielberg film. It starts to make a point about why robots are not as good as people, and then ends up subverting that point by coming to the conclusion that really, really well-made robots can be as good as people. They can be unique and self-sacrificing and have dreams -- as long as you use a better kind of alloy, you see.

In a society that is so very confused about what makes personhood, I, Robot is just one more thing for thinking individuals to be depressed about. Or else, one more sign of the times for apostolic souls to pray about. Whatever. If it survives at all, it will only be to stand as a marveling point for future human societies. They'll watch the film in sociology and history and theology classes and scratch their heads saying, "You mean they really thought human beings and machines had the same value! No wonder they ended up destroying themselves!"

RED (V.O.)
I have no idea to this day what
them two Italian ladies were
singin' about. Truth is, I don't
want to know. Some things are best
left unsaid. I like to think they
were singin' about something so
beautiful it can't be expressed in
words, and makes your heart ache
because of it. I tell you, those voices soared.
Higher and farther than anybody in
a gray place dares to dream. It was
like some beautiful bird flapped
into our drab little cage and made
these walls dissolve away...and for
the briefest of moments -- every
last man at Shawshank felt free.
(from The Shawshank Redemption)

BLIMEY!

Here is a new web-site for Christians in the arts and media coming from some great folks in London. They have a group that has a ministry with a vision very similar to what Act One is busy about here in Hollywood, basically to create community for Christian artists.

The principle visionary, Steve Cole, and I had an interesting discussion about exactly what are the parameters of Christian community. Act One's vision is to create community animated by the organizations keynotes: ARTISTRY, PROFESSIONALISM, TRUTH, PRAYER.

Artisan's keynotes, on the other hand are (from their web site):

UNITY – HUMILTY – PRAYER

It sounds good, but what does it mean in reality?

Unity – We need one another. Life and our relationship with God was never designed to be a solo journey.

Humility – As individuals we all have our part to play, but we are not the key. Only God can transform these industries.

Prayer – As in all of life, prayer must be central. It is so often key to seeing God breaking into nations; people; industries.

It seems to me that you can see an American - European divide in the keynotes...not that there's anything wrong with that. Still, if we are going to renew the culture (HA!) it is going to take a whole lote of different keynotes.

So, God bless the Artisans!

HOLY UNDERDOG! CBS' MAID MARCHES ON!

More kudos to Barbara Hall and her crew at Joan of Arcadia for securing an Emmy Award nom for Best Dramatic Series! In light of the fact that this was the freshman season for the series, this is already an extraordinary achievement. But when you throw in that this is a show in which God is rendered Good, and there are ongoingly positive portrayals of priests and authentic spirituality, this is a miraculous achievement.

Still, part of me can't help feeling like all of this success of and for the show is just a private exchange going on between Barbara and Jesus, who are both loving on each other with efforts and accolades that the rest of us get to enjoy as bystanders on the sidelines...

Anyway, here's a nice new piece on Barb and Joan that CNS just released.

'Joan of Arcadia' asks more questions than it answers, says creatorBy Paula Doyle

Catholic News Service

WESTWOOD, Calif. (CNS) -- Inspired as a child by the girl "icon," St. Joan of Arc, Barbara Hall grew up to eventually create and produce the acclaimed CBS television series, "Joan of Arcadia," a contemporary drama about a teenage girl's visits from God.

The show was both "jinxed and unstoppable," Hall said in a talk at St. Paul the Apostle Church in Westwood to members of Open Call, an entertainment industry spirituality group.

Hall, an award-winning writer and producer of such television shows as "Chicago Hope" and "Judging Amy," said she got the idea for the show thinking about how her daughter would talk to God if she met the creator in person. She would probably argue, Hall figured.

When Hall went to pitch the show to CBS, she had no more than three sentences out of her mouth before network executives said they wanted the show.

The quick acceptance, however, preceded a number of production challenges, including casting the demanding part of "Joan" (played by Amber Tamblyn) and coping with disasters that occurred during the filming of the pilot episode, including the heart attack a crew member suffered.

Just as bad things happen to good people in real life, "Joan of Arcadia" mirrors the kinds of tragedies that people encounter. Joan's brother, Kevin, played by Jason Ritter, lives life in a wheelchair because of injuries he suffered in a car accident.

A recent episode, titled "Death Be Not Whatever," dealt with human suffering over the death of a loved one.

Coincidentally, the script was written just days before the death of Ritter's father, popular actor John Ritter of "Three's Company" and "Eight Simple Rules."

"I wanted the series to be as dark as life is," said Hall. "The show is mainly about questions, not answers."

When Joan sees God, appearing in different disguises, ages and genders, she wrestles with the assignments she is given, many of which don't immediately make any sense.

"I have more questions about God than answers," said Hall.

Raised Methodist, Hall as a young adult was not affiliated with any religious denomination. Seven years ago she became a victim of a violent crime and afterward "sort of had an understanding of something bigger than myself," she said.

She embarked on a spiritual journey where she studied every major world religion. A couple of years ago she became a Catholic.

She decided to "make the leap and figure everything out later," she said.

An underlying principle of "Joan of Arcadia" is the belief that God is available to everyone all the time, Hall explained. Another central theme is self-discovery.

"The most important thing about 'Joan of Arcadia' to me is the idea that everybody is here (on earth) to fulfill their true nature," said Hall.

She believes that depression and alienation occur when people become separated from their nature and purpose in life.

While no one religion is held up over any other one on the show, clergy from various denominations show up to guide Joan as she tries to fulfill God's sometimes confusing requests.

"It's not going to happen that we do a show about God and not mention religion," said Hall, who stood her ground with industry executives wanting a religion-free show.

Hall believes the show's "across-the-board appeal" comes from each episode's unpredictability and, perhaps, the portrayals of God by males and females, dog walkers and punk rockers alike.

"The main thing people like is it's not what they thought it would be," said Hall.

END

ART AND THE FORMATION OF PRIESTS

I just got back from a quick trip to Chicago for a presentation to an assembly of people who work in the formation of seminarians. Here are notes of the talk I gave. The notes are sometimes succinct, sometimes verbose - it's all I have. I can't imagine ever being asked to give this talk again, so I am putting the notes here for posterity...

THE ARTISTHOOD OF THE PRIEST

I. Intro –
a) Thank you for having me. I very much appreciate the “vision” required to invite Hollywood screenwriter to speak to your assembly. I feel sure I am the only one of the invited presenters whose last published work was a bold attack on Director Sam Rami for failing to significantly advance the theme of Spiderman II from the franchise precursor.
b) My credentials – an artist, an entertainer (that is storyteller), a former formee (nine years of religious life); not a theologian, but a doctoral candidate at Fuller Theological Seminary
c) I am the Founding Ringmaster of a community of faith-centered artists primarily in Hollywood, who have come together for so many reasons:
- to find all the goods of Christian community: accountability, fellowship, friendship, mentorship;
- to try and bring some community to the heart of the industry and to the arts which are everything but communities;
- to spur one another on to creating and producing a brand of entertainment that would combine mastery of craft with responsibility in content;
- to have a fundamental option for the audience as poor at the table in the corporate, creative and marketing dominated world of entertainment;
- to identify, mentor, nurture and place the next generation of faith-centered artists;
We spend a tremendous amount of time brooding over what we call “the priesthood of the artist” and how to form the kind of artists that the world needs and will need more as mechanization and globalization continue to obfuscate the details of life wherein meaning lies.
d) I have no business talking to you about how to form priests – but I can speak about some of what we have come to in trying to form artists and in the same way that we are trying to realize the priesthood of the artist, perhaps you can begin to brood over the artisthood of the priest?

I am hoping this will be much more of a reflection or a musing on the power of the arts – and specifically what the arts bring to priestly formation. I am going to make a slight distinction between the arts and entertainment. I am going to discuss the arts for the formation of the priest himself, and I am going to spend a bit of time on the central work of art that will be of concern to the pastor of souls, that is the liturgy. Finally, I am going to speak about the role of future pastors in facilitating artistic beauty to the people of God, and even the secular world.

[CLIP from The Mission: Gabriel begins to evangelize the Guarani through playing his oboe] – How did that make you feel? Who do you want to be in this clip? Why? What kind of a pastor is Gabriel? Why does Gabriel start his ministry with the oboe? There is a work that needs to be done in the people, before he starts to use words. He is telling them who he is through his music. He is also telling them who he thinks they are by introducing himself via music.

In our context, I suggest that the young people who are in our care are the Guarani – coming as they are from a climate in which they have lost faith in everything institutional, they are looking at us askance, with more than a touch of suspicion. The arts can get around their barriers and begin to establish the filial relationship necessary for formation.

II. Why We Need the Arts in General

We need the arts because there are truths that cannot be put into words. There are spiritual journeys that are too big for our reason to process and our language to describe.

Of course, the arts are also inadequate. People told me that the movie The Passion of the Christ was too much for them. Without getting into a discussion of the artistic merit of the film, it is still worth saying that, as bad as all the violence was in the film, it still doesn’t even come near to representing with any accuracy, the horror of one venial sin. (Which seems to subvert my point today very nicely…maybe I should leave?) But I guess the point is, if the arts are inadequate at pointing to reality through symbols, parables and metaphors, how much more is theological language?

The Pope notes in his Letter to Artists, “Art must make perceptible, and as far as possible attractive, the world of the spirit, of the invisible, of God. It must translate into meaningful terms that which in itself is ineffable…[in so doing] it nourishes the intuition of those who look and listen.”

He goes on to make the pretty radical statement - particularly in this moment of ecclesial and artistic “disengagement” - that art is not just an object that proceeds from theological brooding, but is actually a source of theology.

That is, if you don’t reference the arts when you are studying the Annunciation, for example, in theology, you are missing other layers of meaning. You need to listen to the movements in Bach’s Gesu, Word of God to more completely “get” the Incarnation. I love this. It points to the fact that the sacred artists is as much a vehicle of divine inspiration as are theologians.

a) Entertainment as ‘the work between the work’ – to provide calisthenics for the soul. To stretch them so they don’t have to sin. Because Frodo lost his hand at Mordor, you won’t have to.

b) Have to say a word or two about beauty. The understanding of beauty, as with everything else in our post-modern confusion has become one more flag to wave in the strange and wonderful world of Church polarization. I was born in the mid 60’s amidst the impulse in which the Church seemed to be purging herself of dross. I grew up as a Gen Xer, mystified by the missionary zeal with which the Baby Boomers in the Church were stripping every vestige of the rituals, symbols and traditions from our faith.

“The Church that marries the spirit of the age is a widow in the next generation.” (Dean William Inge)

(We need to remember that even the immensely climactic moment of the reforms of Vatican II, are still just a moment in ecclesial history. In watching the backlash against the changes of the last forty years, I can’t help wonder with a little exhausted breathlessness, exactly what will survive. There has been so much damn suffering, I hope something makes it.)

I remember once back in 1990 as a junior professed, it was a big feast day for our community – Solemnity of St. Paul, and I was stationed for the first time away from the Motherhouse. We were celebrating the Feast day at a local parish for the friends of our community…My fellow junior and I wanted to make it as cool and beautiful as possible, and so we set out the nicest vestments and did the flowers, blah blah blah. When father came in, we asked him if he would be okay using incense and he suddenly got inappropriately irate exclaiming, ‘It took us twenty-five years to get rid of all that nonsense, and now you people want to bring it all back?!”

I didn’t know what “people” he was talking about. I wanted to use incense because it is cool and holy, and because I loved the symbol from the psalms of our prayers rising like incense. The priest was reacting against something of which I had had no experience, and associating it to incense. Incense is not the problem. The problem was formalism. More about that later.

Anyway, I think in some ways, it is easier to train artists than priests, because we have a way to tell very clearly if they are in the wrong vocation. If they don’t have talent, we gently encourage them to become a supporter of artists. The Divine Economy seems very unfair at times, but ‘if the Lord doesn’t build the artists, in vain do the gurus nurture.’ (It would be an interesting question as to whether there is a comparable “God-given sign” of vocation in the priesthood….what would mastery of craft look like in a pastor of souls?)

Here are some principles about beauty that have become part of the presuppositions of the Act One program:

1. Beauty makes us homesick for heaven. It is a “holy sadness”.

Some great quotes:

“I have always – at least, ever since I can remember – had a kind of longing for death.”

“Ah Psyche,” I said, “have I made you so little happy as that?”

“No, no, no,” she said. “You don’t understand. Not that kind of longing. It was when I was happiest that I longed most. It was on the happy days when we were up there on the hills, the three of us, with the wind and the sunshine…where we couldn’t see the village or the palace. Do you remember? The colour and the smell, and looking across at the Grey Mountain in the distance? And because it was so beautiful, it set me longing, always longing. Somewhere else there must be more of it. Everything seemed to be saying, ‘Psyche, come!’”
(from Till We Have Faces, CS Lewis)

“[When we see beauty] …in the midst of our workaday cares, we raise our heads and unexpectedly gaze into a face turned towards us, and in that instant, we see: everything which is is good, worthy of love, and loved by God…The world is not out of joint after all; everything is moving toward its appointed end; despite everything there is peace, wholeness and splendor in the depths of things; God holds in His hands the beginning the middle and the end of all things.”
(Josef Pieper, Problems of Modern Faith, 1985)

2. Beauty is not necessarily pretty.

“Heaven is revealed upon the earth both in Michelangelo’s David, and in the cup of cold water which is given to the poor.”
(from Sacred and Profane Beauty: The Holy in Art; Gerardus van der Leeuw

3. Beauty is expensive to produce: time, details, talent, money. The little things like getting the lighting just right, having the flowers arranged, rehearsing, rehearsing, rehearsing. You are going to have to pay your artists to practice and produce. (My sister is a professional opera singer. She used to get $100 a week to cantor at the local Episcopalian church which has an endowed chair for a mezzo soprano. At our parish church, they want to pay her $40 a week, and as she has said to me wth a shrug, “And they want me to sing crap.”

It has to be said. Much of the art we are making as a Church is ugly and painful. It has the opposite effect that it should. There is a problem when the Church is singing music that would be better suited to an episode of Barney, and Nora Jones is singing music that stings people to the heart.

“To put it bluntly, God is not adequately praised and adored with the showy, the pompous, the self-serving, the mawkish, the cleverly casual or the thoughtlessly comfortable forms of art.”
(from Worship and Theology, Don E. Saliers)

I teach RCIA to people in the entertainment industry. These are incredibly talented people. It is most often embarrassing to take them to Church and have them come to the realization that what they do every day professionally is much superior to the artistic expression they find in the Church that is supposed to be a gift of God inspired by the Holy Spirit.

[God accepts whatever humble offering his children make]…”But the lowliness of the origins of the music or art offered cannot be made into a rule against continuing to find forms that best serve to articulate the deeper mysteries of God and the human condition.”
(from Worship and Theology, Don E. Saliers)

4. Beauty is exclusive: it is the harmonious selection of details. There is an elitist aspect about beauty which I know from your homogeneity of age group (Baby Boomers all!) is surely disconcerting to many of you. Take a breath. The principal should be that we strive to produce the best forms to express the liturgical realities. Beauty is not an option. It is not an extra. We have to change the way we think about it.

5. Beauty is not necessarily old, but many old things are beautiful. Best notion is from the Scriptures, “Blessed is he who can bring forth from his storehouse, both the old and the new.

I want to stop and ask you to recall a powerful beautiful arts moment from your past, and what it meant to you. When Fr. Rohr said that healthy celibates NEED a moment of genuine connection with God, it is very often arts moments in which these can be found. I tell you mine, and then I want you to think of yours.

We used to have the custom of saying the rosary from May to October… We would chant the litany of Mary. I used to love it best in the Latin (I had studied Latin for two years so it was more than just the texture and the sounds, it was the meanings too.) I can still remember the power of those evening moments: the coolness of the summer evenings, the colorful flowers in the garden out of which rose the lifesize marble statue of the Madonna; the voices of the sisters, some of them always adding spontaneous harmony. I used to feel my heart swelling with the psalms, “How good it is for us to be here!”

I imagine that if it was photographed, that image of the group of us, all looking the same would remind some people of the horrible loss of individuality. But I didn’t find that ritual diminishing. I found it comforting. There was something so steadying in the knowledge that for fifty years, our sisters had been singing like this together, on a hil outside of Boston, calling down God’s love and mercy on all the hoards of people of the city and of the world.

I used to feel this way at the chanting of vespers. Singing the Salve Regina.

Remember your moment and if you come away with nothing else, recommit yourself to recreating those moments for your seminarians.

III. Seminarians Need Arts and Entertainment for Their Own Spiritual Growth
a) They need more beauty because more renunciation will be required of them. Arts can achieve a “storing up” of intimate encounters with God. They will need to bank these moments for the future. Since leaving the nuns, it has seemed to me at times ruthlessly unfair how beautiful the liturgies were in the Motherhouse…It made the real world outside seem like a vast desert of liturgical ugliness. Sometimes, I look around at the other lay sheep in church and wonder, “Why are you people coming here?” But I think it is as “unfair” as the fact the apostles had three lovely, intimate years with Jesus – tromping around fields and villages, sitting by late-night fires, sharing untold meals and prayers, before they had to all go live and die for Him.
b) Again, we have to know the kinds of things the seminarian can learn in a classroom, and the kinds of things that are learned elsewhere. When I was younger – in college, I used to go around saying, “The truth can change people. If you just expose them to the truth, they will cleave to it.” This is a naïve view. You can lead a chicken to a hen house but you can’t make him brood. The sense of “You shall know the Truth and the Truth shall make you free” is the sense of knowing in which the Scriptures also speak of sexual intimacy, “Adam knew Eve.” So, it’s the cleaving to the Truth that makes you free, not having it blare out at you from the speakers in a classroom or in black words on a white page. You can discover reasons for conviction and certitude on the pages of a textbook, but if you want compassion that will motivate someone to sacrifice, you can find it much quicker in a movie like Shine. Ethics can tell me about the disordered attractions of my own soul, but Madame Bovary will sting me to the heart. “The heart has reasons of which reason nothing knows.”

The making people cleave to things inwardly – beyond the province of language - is the terrain of the arts. Compunction, sorrow, sympathy, joy, horror, wonder – and communion besides are the powers here.

With our artists, btw, we are moving more and more out of the classroom and into small groups headed by a master or guru. The classroom is just a rite of initiation into technique. Great art doesn’t come from classrooms, anymore than do holy priests.

c) Will provide them a more profound sense of “what the world without God looks like” which should heighten pastoral urgency. A seminarian I know was deeply impacted by the film Requiem for a Dream…
d) Arts can bond the group. Experience a work of great art together can be an intimate, powerful experience that connects you to another human being in a way as unrepeatable as the moment.

“Celebration is the song of joy and thanksgiving flowing from a sense of unity, but also creating and deepening it…Nourishment comes in those moments when the whole community becomes aware of the current of life which flows through it.”
(from Community and Growth, Jean Vanier)

[CLIP from The English Patient OR Babette’s Feast]

e) The seminarians need to be given a formation to discern healthy entertainment from unhealthy. Again, this should be a common sense discussion, but it has been hijacked by the polarization of the times. So, people on the Right think anything with any sex, language and violence is bad. I spoke to a group at Steubenville and I said to them, “We never want to get to a point in which we would keep our children from looking at Michealangelo’s David. Right?” There was a dead silence in the crowd. Many weren’t too sure… Traditionalists too often over simplify by saying anything old is good. And correspondingly, anything new is bad.

The movie In the Bedroom a couple of years ago made a profound statement about forgiveness, and that we forgive not so much as a mercy for the one who wounded us, but because if we don’t forgive, we will end in doing worse things than they did to us. Yet, most of my religious friends didn’t support the film because there was a subplot of out of wedlock sex, and because in the end, the couple gets away with committing a crime…. “Yeah, but they were insane!”

On the left, people sneer at the suggestion that anything in media is really harmful. These are people who generally get the idea that eating junk food can be physically toxic, but who posture that making careful selections in media is somehow a fascist attempt to thwart the First Amendment. There’s a leftist leaning nun I know who is always getting seduced by flashy looking Hollywwod movies. Several of them have been damnably subversive in their storytelling technique. But she doesn’t see that, because I think she thinks she is immune or something.

It’s absolutely absurd.

The way through all this is to resist oversimplifying what is essentially a complex problem of modern life. We need to help our young people to live in this age in which they live moderately, prudently and pastorally. Priests need to watch media not as fans, but rather as people trying to stay alert to ‘the signs of the times.’ It would be a good thing to have some mandatory courses for pastors to be in cinema as it is the art form of our time. To demystify the screen storytelling process and techniques would serve your men well. First and foremost, it would help them get away from just seeing movies in terms of their story content.

III. Seminarians Need a Formation in Aesthetics and Entertainment for the Rest of Us
a) Once they are ordained, your seminarians will need to enter into dialogue with media-saturated sheep. They need to absorb as a strategy that they should not compete with the arts, but should instead work with them. Especially with young people. It is a pastoral necessity today to be able to talk about what the matrix means, who Joan of Arcadia is talking to and the relative odds that love found with The Batchelor won’t be unconditional and life-long. I would say, you are functionally irrelevant as a pastor in this particular moment if you cannot complete the sentence, “With great power comes…_______?”
b) They will need to minister to and with artists in their future parishes.
c) They will be the ones to commission works of art – Renaissance comes from pastors…
d) They will need to harnass the power of the arts for the Gospel
1. Definitely need musical training.
2. Absolutely they need training in Oratory – Sorry, but that is their art form – Maybe they won’t be Fulton Sheen, but they can be rendered competent. Studies in craft can lead to competence if not genius. They need to learn what it means to “speak with authority,” and what are the principles of good parables.
A. Parable principles:
-The story is enough;
- Story/Metaphor must always be Clearer than the Truth your are trying to explicate
- You say it in a story because you can’t say it in a sentence
- A good story needs Pathos, Logos, Ethos (something for the heart, something for the mind, something magical/memorable)
- A good story has a clear beginning, middle and end which all develop a central point. It ends when it is done. It doesn’t wind down agonizingly in search of a reason to exist…
- Best parables are the ones from their own lives (it will give the preaching passion because there is nothing we would rather do than talk about ourselves)
B. What is it to speak “With authority”?
- Two cardinal rules of Hollywood – and should be for every preacher: Don’t bore me. Don’t waste my time. You bore me when you tell me something that is obvious. (In order not to tell me something obvious, you have to prepare and do research). You waste my time when you tell me something irrelevant. Things that are irrelevant may be fine in themselves, it’s just not the question that is meaningful to me right now. Hence it is irrelevant. It means you need to know your audience. (Can’t speak to every age group out there. Hollywood would never do that. Speak to the adults. Let them translate down.) We tell our screenwriters, “Commerciality is in the intersection of the passion of your heart, with a cry of the world.”
- You take risks. You put what you believe out there without equivocation. I write magazine articles. After I write an article, I always go back and then cross out all the phrases like: “in my opinion”; “I think,” or the corollaries, “I feel” or “I believe”; “it might be said”; “perhaps”;

Removing these phrases gives power to speech. It also enrages people who disagree, but that’s between them and God…
- You are speaking Macro themes that have been derived from your own micro stories. “This I know to be true.”

V. Liturgy as the Priest’s Primary Art Form

“Liturgy is the common art of the People of God in which the community brings the depth of emotion of our lives to the ethos of God. In these acts, we discover who we are, but primarily, we discover who God is in this art.”
(from Worship and Theology, Don E. Saliers)

a) The liturgy doesn’t use art. It is Art. The art of worship includes formation in theology, liturgy and aesthetics.
b) Aesthetic experience is not the purpose of worship. The point is to make the ethos of God at the center with the pathos of human beings
c) We are NOT trying to create an artificial formalism that substitutes propriety for genuine encounter with the living God.
d) Liturgy as an art requires all that art requires: form, material, discipline, imagination and pain
e) The liturgy is symbolic, parabolic, metaphoric
f) It isn’t a performance around the people: The people are the players. We have to rouse them to their best creation: reverence + compunction
g) Again, ecclesial polarization is messing everything up here. On the Right, the focus in liturgy is exclusively about beauty and reverence and solemnity. On the Left, it is exclusiely about community and particularly celebration. The fact is, genuine liturgy must be both and more. It must be a meeting of the truth about God – making the holy present, with the truth about us. The awareness of God leads to awe and wonder. The awareness of our reality leads to humility, anger, sorrow, openness.

[The Liturgy in which God is not experienced] “is a spectacle and a sin.”
(Gerardus van der Leeuw)

III. End
The knowledge conferred by faith is the preeminent knowledge. Yet, it too can be enriched by artistic intuition and the sense of wonder stirred by the beautiful. In his closing of his Letter to Artists the Pope describes a progression that moves a person from beauty to wonder to enthusiasm:

“People of today and tomorrow need this enthusiasm if they are to meet and master the critical challenges which stand before us. Thanks to this enthusiasm, every time it loses its way, humanity will be able to lift itself up again and set out on the right path. In this sense, it has been said with profound insight, that “beauty will save the world.”

CRITICAL MESS

or

'THERE'S NO AGENDA LIKE SHOW AGENDA'

Here is a great compilation of the critical raves and rages for Fahrenheit 9/11 and The Passion of the Christ. Not that any of us are in doubt about the lock-step cinematic correctness that one finds in the mainstream media. It just made me feel all warm and fuzzy to be so damn right again. Thanks to Dom Bettenelli for linking to this, and to Jeff at Beautfiul Attrocitesfor putting it together.

O COME ALL YE FAITHFUL...

Passing on a message someone forwarded me...

BIG EVENT IN ANDALUSIA

Andalusia, home of the celebrated author Flannery O’Connor in Milledgeville, Georgia, will be the site for Remembering Flannery: a special commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the death of Flannery O’Connor. The Flannery O’Connor – Andalusia Foundation will host the program, which will begin with opening comments and acknowledgements from O’Connor scholar Sarah Gordon at the exact time of the writer’s death, quarter past midnight, the early morning of August 3. Activities throughout the twenty-four-hour event will include, by permission of the Mary Flannery O’Connor Charitable Trust, readings of all the stories from the collection A Good Man Is Hard To Find by scholars, teachers, students, and fans of O’Connor’s fiction who wish to participate. The readings will take place at various locations in the Main House where O’Connor lived and worked and also around the house on the beautiful grounds shaded by majestic oaks and cedars, the place that inspired many of O’Connor’s stories.

There will be an outdoor Mass under a tent on the front lawn at 6:30 p.m. followed by a blessing of the Main House. Local choral groups and musicians will provide music before and after these ceremonies. The public readings will continue until quarter past midnight on August 4, the conclusion of the event. The PBS video of O’Connor’s story, “The Displaced Person,” filmed on location at Andalusia in 1976, will be shown in the Main House at regular intervals throughout the day and night. All activities are free and open to the public; however, the Foundation always welcomes donations, which are fully tax-deductible.

The gift shop in the Main House will be open during the event and features books, shirts, hand fans, bumper stickers, note cards by Frances Florencourt (O’Connor’s first cousin), prints of the Stan Strickland Andalusia painting, Josephine King’s O’Connor Perpetual Calendar, and other unique souvenirs. Guests are encouraged to bring folding chairs, snacks, and drinks and are welcome to drop in when they can or stay for the entire event. This special commemoration is already attracting national media attention and will likely be covered by newspapers, radio, and television throughout the state. Andalusia farm is located on Highway 441 North, directly across from the sign of the Ramada Limited, in Milledgeville, Georgia. For more iiformation, call the Foundation at 478-454-4029 or visit the website at www.andalusiafarm.org.

PLEASE MAKE PLANS TO ATTEND. WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU!

Craig R. Amason, Executive Director wiseblood@alltel.net
Flannery O'Connor - Andalusia Foundation
P.O. Box 947
Milledgeville, GA 31059
www.andalusiafarm.org
478-454-4029

"WHAT IS THE USE OF A SIGN WHICH IS ITSELF ONLY ANOTHER RIDDLE?"

I have been driven back to C.S. Lewis’ Till We Have Faces lately. This is a book that I only understand in its parts, but its whole is too much for me. It sets me yearning for I know not what. I think this is what Emily was referring to when she said, “If I read a book and it makes my whole body so cold no fire ever can warm me, I know that is poetry. If I feel physically as if the top of my head were taken off, I know that is poetry. These are the only ways I know it. Is there any other way?” (As related to Thomas Wentworth Higgons, August 20, 1870)

Anyway, all that to share a piece of the greatest writing Lewis ever produced. A truly literary work.

I say the gods deal very unrightly with us. For they will neither (which would be the best of all) go away and leave us to live out our short days to ourselves, nor will they show themselves openly and tell us what they would have us do. For that too would be endurable. But to hint and hover, to draw near us in dreams and oracles, or in a waking vision that vanishes as soon as seen, to be dead silent when we question them and then glide back and whisper (words we cannot understand) in our ears when we most want to be free of them, and to show to one what they hide from another; what is all this but cat-and-mouse play, blindman’s bluff, and mere jugglery? Why must holy places be dark places?

I say therefore, that there is no creature so noxious to man as the gods.
Till We Have Faces, CS Lewis

"ONWARD DAUGHTER OF GOD!" (God to Joan of Arc)

Congrats again to Barbara Hall for winning the 2004 Humanitas Prize for hour-long episodic television yesterday. Barb won for the pilot episode of Joan of Arcadia. She was competing as a finalist against John Wells for an episode of ER, and Joy Gregory, one of the other writers on Joan. I haven't seen Barbara for nearly a year, so it was nice to have a few moments to chat with her again. I'm so proud of her and what she is doing with this show. It seems surreal because I remember hearing about the concept from her three years ago when we were meeting for RCIA. She wanted to know if it would be presumptious to make a show with God as a character. I told her, "Do what you have in your heart." It did seem like a crazy idea at the time, so it is great and weird to go to an awards banquet, packed with elite Hollywood people, and see Joan take an award away from ER! Very cool.

Of course, the viciously unfair propaganda piece Angels in America also won. But in an election year, that kind of thing has to be reckoned an irreistible temptation for the industry, so I'm not going to let it dilute Barb's award in my consciousness. Nope.

SHAKING OUT THE COBWEBS

[Note to comic book lovers: Sharpen your swords.]

I'm running too much these days for erudite blogging. But I did see the new Spidey movie, and my Sicilian nature just can't resist the opportunity for some life-affirming snarkiness.

Here's what I think about Spiderman II. I will grant that it may be considered the top comic book movie ever (althought I really enjoyed Superman with Christopher Reeve), but ultimately, that is like saying that the Whopper is the best kind of junk food. This is a fun movie to watch for a while, but there really isn't that much here in terms of theme development.

The first movie makes the point (several times, with authority) "With great power comes great responsibility." This second installment can be summed up thematically as, "Great responsibility is, well, great rsponsibility, and that's something that comes with, well, great power." The story gets repetitive as Peter Parker wrestles back and forth with being Spiderman. There is one point in the film which seemed to me to have been edited out of place because it put the character back before he had already made a decision. Can't even remember exactly whether it was his "Yes, I'll be Spiderman" or "No, I won't", because he seesaws back and forth too many times to keep it straight.

Big problem in the project is that there really isn't any suspense over the main issue of the film. No one in the theater is the least bit worried that Peter Parker is going to walk away from being Spidey. So, all the time spent on watching his dilemma is ultimately cinema without suspense.

Several times I thought the characters choices were unmotivated: why would Aunt May be mad at Peter after his confession? What woman - read MJ - would really be pining after an underachieving, schleppy little pauper who keeps letting her down? I mean, really? Why hasn't the Green Goblin's son ever put together that his father was a super villain? Does this mean that every time Peter is in a funk, he will lose his super powers?

It's a fun film. The best parts are watching Spidey fling himself from web to web. But it should have been thematically richer. It should have been funnier. It should have been scarier. It's good fast food, but that's all.

DEJA SCHOOL

We started Act One-Hollywood today. Thirty more writers from 10 states and even Australia. So far, they seem like a good group. We'll all do our part and then it will be up to them.

As this is the fifth anniversary year of Act One, I gave the keynote address for the program's Opening Luncheon. Here are a few notes from my talk. (Sorry they are a bit sketchy. It's all I've got.)

.........

(Started with the Scripture story from Luke of the multiplication of the loaves and fish. The pattern in the story is the pattern of every work of God: Invitation. Sacrifice/Offering. getting blessed and broken. Feeding of the multitudes.)

I. The Invitation

Back in 1998, I wrote the following in my retreat journal. It was the first mention of Act One in my journal, and I write it here to show how far God has taken us from our first concept of what the program was going to be...

“Protestant guy in Hollywood asked me to come up with an event to help Christian screenwriters. Yeah…. It will be two weeks sometime next year.”

“Can you ‘train’ writers? It would be neat to try and do a graduate program where God is a bigger influence than Karl Marx….What would be the main things Christians need: an appreciation for the limits and possibilities of the art form! A commitment to professionalism as an act of charity! …David thinks the point is to partner up new writers with experienced ones. Me thinks there aren’t enough Christian writers in Hollywood to go around.”

The "invitation from God" phase in any new thing seems to be identified by the recognition of new problems. So, for the apostles, the invitation brought with it the problem: “You go and feed them yourselves.”

a) Biggest problem I envisioned back in 1998 was whether we would find enough professionals in Hollywood to teach. The original meeting for the program on the Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul in 1999, four of us writers went through a list of Inter-mission's rolls and came up with thirty names of writers. None of us thought that we would coax more than ten of the professional writers out of the Christian closet back then… (We have utilized over 100 professionals in the last five years and have now taken to rotating faculty between our various programs. In that first year, twenty-nine of the writers wanted to be part. We ended up lengthening the program to fit the number of writers who wanted to be part. Twenty-nine writers, thirty days.)
b) The second problem was in finding writers worth training. One of our initial consultant thought the program should be limited to only four or five writers a year. When we got 75 applications in that first year, we kept expanding the size of the class to “as many people as could comfortably sit around a table. We figured that number was 24…so we ended up taking 30 students that first year.
c) The one problem I wasn’t conscious of in 1998 was how to raise money. It wasn’t my problem. It wasn’t something I had any experience in. It wasn’t necessary anyway. We had enough money to do our one time event.

II. The Blessings and the Brokenness

Every blessing has, in a sense, come alongside some kind of brokenness. The principal brokenness of these first five years has been in the intense labor and commitment to the establishment of starting this new thing. There has pretty much only been Actc One in my life. But I have seen the same kind of sacrifice in our faculty and mentors, staff, volunteers, donors and alumni.

But the principal blessings have come as insights. These were not things we started knowing back in 1998, but one by one, they have come to define this program. They have almost all come after a being broken, in that we found them generally by banging our head up against doors providentially closed by the Divine Will, or else by being yanked kicking and screaming through other doors opened providentially by that same Will.

I want to go through a few of them here to offer to you all to brood over in the valuable way that the study of history offers. I think this is also valuable for the new students and all of us who are writers, because each of these pretty much applies to every particular work of God with which you might be engaged.

b) A sign of growth is that you always have new problems.
c) Success in ministry, is in finding a way to give your clients more than they asked for or think they need.
d) There is no decision that can not be adjusted. The only thing that can not be harnassed and redirected is inertia.
e) Commerciality is found in the intersection of a wound of the world and the passion of my heart.
f) There is no joy without commitment. The sign of commitment is sacrifice. Sacrifice must hurt or it isn’t sacrifice. (Something has to die in a sacrifice.)
g) The best fundraiser is to do what you do anyway and see if you can get paid for it.
h) Never bridle the Spirit. If anyone in the community has a passion to start something, get out of their way and let them do what they feel called to do.
i) The community that seeks to survive for itself will founder. It is the community that seeks to survive for a need outside itself that is sustained.
j) Christian community is not in the absence of sin. It is proved in the way it reacts to sin. Accountability. Compunction. Repentance. Forgiveness.

III. The Future
a) The obvious dreams: a building. Several more programs. Recognition. The writers fellowship. The actual impact on culture. More money than we can even dream of spending.
b) A sign of the action of God is always that several people see the same light at the same time. The “light” that has been getting progressively harder for us core faculty to ignore, is the need to establish the Act One program as a facilitator of spiritual growth and maturity to our community. A chaplain? Spiritual counseling? Training in theology? Coordinated community prayer?
c) We must internalize the Act One brand: To give the audience more than it asks for. (Projects that haunt them as they walk away and enter into their framework. Scripts that are a saving line to people out in the storm. Giving the audience a seat at the table.)
d) I have to direct myself to the program alumni... (This is not for all of you. But for those for whom it applies…) We need you to be much more ugent and focussed on the task that you have been prepared for. When the Pope went to France, he said, “France, eldest daughter of the Church, what have you done with your baptism?!” Dear alumni, you can sell a few scripts and have a career, or by your determination to add to and pass on what you have learned, you can enter into the history of Hollywood. You can produce work that will feed your family. Or you can produce work that will feed a multitude. You can be a single sign post, or you can be a link in a powerful chain.

I would say to all of us in this unique and wonderful new community, we all need to do more. Being part of Act One isn’t just a nice thing. It is a grace. You either believe in this work of God, or you don’t. It will only continue and thrive, if some of you step forward to die a little, to take it to the next level.
e) Renewing the Model for Creative Christian Community. In five years, we want to see holy cells of masters and apprentices out of which great and beautiful things will come. Art doesn’t come out of classrooms. It comes out of studios. Artistic craft isn’t taught. It is handed on. The artist’s life is one of continual sacrifice: the demands of excellence; the pouring out of personal insights; the brooding over the next generation. The future is to restore artists to their place in the heart of society. To free them from the misery of their proud isolation and navel gazing, and turn their eyes outward in pastoral love.

EMILY MONDAY


1548

Meeting by Accident,
We hovered by design --
As often as a Century
An error so divine
Is ratified by Destiny,
But Destiny is old
And economical of Bliss
As Midas is of Gold --

WASTIN' AWAY...

...by a pool in Las Vegas for the next three days. Is there a better way for a former nun to celebrate Independence Day? Happy Fourth every one! God bless America -

RECONSIDERING PAC MAN


Here is an article I wrote a couple of years ago basically taking the position that video game playing is an irredeemable addiction. I got a thoughtful dissenting message the other day from blog reader, Rob, who wanted to offer a different take. I reprint his message here for two reasons: A) to help get at the truth about this new technology, and, B) as an example of what respectful discursive looks like.

"...I just came across your article, "Video Game Culture: A Harmless Addiction?" -- now, it's not that I completely disagree with all that you've said, but I thought I'd like to write and offer a point of view you didn't seem to consider when you said, "Video games produce nothing... video games teach nothing."

I would argue that on the contrary, in our modern world, computer game skill can perhaps be compared to "hunting and gathering" skills of old -- archery practice served a valuable purpose, for example, in mediaeval times. Video games, in our modern times, can likewise be the beginning of training in important life skills. We live in a progressively more computerized and "information"-based society (like it or not), and a young person without any kind of computer skills is definitely at a disadvantage in many careers... even car mechanics, today, need to be computer whizzes!

If you ask me, the first (and perhaps most important) lesson that a young person learns from video games is this: not to be afraid of computers. If you've ever worked with a middle-aged person, trying to teach them how to use Windows for the first time, you know how hard it is for them because they are so afraid of "clicking the wrong thing." Sometimes it's like they just have this block. (I can't count how many times I have heard someone tell me, "I'm afraid that if I click the wrong thing, it'll all be deleted!") Computer games, however, tend to encourage and reward such experimentation. They show that the computer isn't just some scary data-crunching monster, but a tool that can be used for recreation, as well as productivity. My three and four year-olds, thanks to some great Disney preschool games, are more adept with a mouse and less afraid of computers than many people I work with in my office!

Of course, there are those who would say that gaming has other benefits as well; here's an interesting article:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/06/1083635268977.html?from=storyrhs

So, I feel your conclusion is far too harsh. Sure, games can be an addictive "escape" from the problems of real life -- but the same can be said about just about anything. You suggest that learning sports would be a better activity for children, but I know many more fathers who neglect their family to pursue their interests in sports than I do that neglect their family to play video games. (And here in Canada, the sport to play is hockey -- and how can we talk about violent video games when real-life hockey violence is so real and tangible and applauded and cheered while our children watch and play it?) "All things in moderation," of course, and computer games are no exception to the rule.

And, like any other form of entertainment, not all games are created equal: what if we wrote off all films and novels because some people make pornography? Perhaps your Caesar game teaches you "nothing that applies to the broader world as in 'real' experience," but many games have rich stories, deeper plots, and are more than just strategy -- Role Playing Games like Ultima or Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic offer much more immersive stories that Real-Time Strategy games like Caesar (I know, I know: RPG = D&D = Evil... ) Just as you can't really compare a film like Kill Bill with The Passion of the Christ (at least not with a straight face), it's not fair to assume all games are like Caesar or Mario Bros. And if immersive storytelling has no inherent value and "produces nothing," then neither do fiction movies or books.

But if I take it a step further -- and if I may be so bold to say this without insulting you -- your statements are possibly irresponsible, coming from a champion of Catholic screenwriting such as yourself. As you yourself pointed out, games are now bigger than Hollywood -- so, we can't just say, "they're useless and/or evil," because obviously, they are too much of a force to be reckoned with. I believe it would be irresponsible for us as Christians to just ignore -- or worse, run and hide from -- computer games. And yet, as far as I can tell, that's exactly what Christians have done... (the only Christian-themed games I've seen are vapid cannibalizations of the exact sort of violent games we claim to reject... Why do they make "Christian" video games like Doom, instead of like, say, Blue's Clues Preschool...?)

I believe, very strongly, that the computer game industry is just as much in need of initiatives like your own Act One organization and Church of the Masses blog. Perhaps, arguably, even more in need of it... because, frankly, computer games look to be the future of the entertainment industry in the coming generations. So, just to get on your nerves , I'm going to pray that Act One begins to find room to include writers of computer games (who are increasingly mingling with Hollywood) under its organizational umbrella... whether you like it or not. ;)

God bless, and thanks again for your wonderful blog.... "

Thanks, Rob!

MORE ON THE NEW RENAISSANCE

Here is an article my friend Jen Waters wrote for The Washington Times. I am also cureently enrolled in one of the new Brehm Center programs.

Art, Christianity reunited, page A2, 7/1/04
By Jen Waters
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Craig Detweiler is hoping for a modern-day renaissance of the arts. He
dreams of the day when members of the Christian church will again be the
primary patrons of respected artistic endeavors, as in the era of
Michelangelo.

As a filmmaker and student at the Brehm Center for Worship, Theology and
the Arts at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, Calif., Mr. Detweiler,
40, says he believes the renewal is happening, slowly but surely. He also is
the author of "A Matrix of Meaning, Finding God in Pop Culture."

"We want to reclaim that grand lost heritage," he says. "We want to not
only be a place where artists gather, but encourage the next generation of
ministers to integrate the arts into the worship experience."

The Brehm Center is a division of Fuller Theological Seminary that aims
to better equip artists with a theological education and better inform
clergy about the arts. The Brehm Center collaborates with Fuller's graduate
schools of theology, intercultural studies, and psychology to develop
curricula.

William K. and Delores S. Brehm of McLean, Va., first pledged $2 million
in 1999 for the center and increased the amount over time to $15 million
total. Mr. Brehm is on the board of directors of SRA International Inc. in
Fairfax, Va. The money endowed by the Brehms provided funds for new classes
to be offered at the seminary.

The center was authorized officially by the Fuller Board of Trustees in
the spring of 2001, which supported the creation of six new degrees, says
the Rev. Clayton Schmit, academic director of the Brehm Center.

"Those artists who are Christians that come to Fuller Seminary tend to
want to inform their art by studying faith," he says. "They tend to be
people who do not want to be known as Christian artists, but Christians who
are thoughtful artists whose faith informs their work."

Students can now earn a doctorate in theology with a concentration in
theology and culture; a master's degree in theology with a concentration in
theology and culture; a master of arts in theology with a theology-and-arts
format; a master of arts in worship, theology and the arts; a master's of
divinity with a concentration in worship, theology and the arts; and a
master of arts with a ministry focus in ethnomusicology in mission.

Starting in the fall of 2005, students will be able to earn a doctorate
in theology with a concentration in worship and culture or a master's in
theology with a concentration in worship and culture.

"Bill Brehm realized there was a poverty of imagination and thought we
needed to affirm the faith-filled artist and equip the next generation of
ministers to affirm the artists in their midst," Mr. Detweiler says. "We
need about 10 or 20 more Bill Brehms all over the country and around the
globe to affirm the faith-fueled art. We have to rediscover that art is not
frivolous. It's essential to the human journey, to humanity's deepest
longings, needs and questions."

As a student, Mr. Detweiler is earning a doctorate in theology with a
concentration in theology and culture.

"I'm learning how to create, express and interpret more creative
metaphors for the glory and splendor of God," he says. "Unfortunately,
Protestants have done a lot of telling in their art, as in more overt
movies. I'm more interested in showing and demonstrating in my art."

As part of the Brehm Center, "Reel Spirituality: An Institute for Moving
Images" (www.reelspirituality.org) provides educational programs about film,
says Justin Bell, assistant director of the organization. On Oct. 22, "Music
to Our Eyes: Music, Film and Theology in Dialogue" will be held at the
Director's Guild of America in Los Angeles.

"We're trying to give artists better tools to do their art," says
25-year-old Mr. Bell, who is earning a master's in divinity with a
concentration in worship, theology and the arts. "We're rethinking inside
the church how we communicate theology. ... It's not just preaching from the
pulpit."

However, the main goal of the faculty is not to teach the students to
create evangelistic art, says Fred Davison, executive director for the Brehm
Center.

"When God asked the Israelites to create the Tabernacle, there were
things in the Tabernacle that didn't have any function, but to be
beautiful," Mr. Davison says. "We know from the Bible that God appreciates
beauty. We can see that all around us. It's a way we communicate as human
beings."

Instead of focusing on evangelism, Mr. Davison would rather have artists
who are Christians correctly represent the worldview they attest to believe.
Further, since he says only a person can be a Christian, he doesn't use the
word "Christian" as an adjective. He tries to discourage his students from
becoming involved in subcultures, such as "Christian music" or "Christian
dance."

"In an effort to engage in popular culture, we get 'love songs for
Jesus,' " he says. "They think the text of the songs are conveying a
biblical truth, but it's not a biblical truth. These songs may be fun to
sing, but what does the song really say? Does it say a truth we believe
about God?"

Michelle Markwart, 26, a student at Fuller Theological Seminary says she
decided to earn a master of arts in worship, theology and the arts because
she wants to display excellence and professionalism in her work. She is a
vocalist. She also plays the piano and guitar.

"If you've ever seen any amount of church drama, it can be a little
sugary, not very artistic, and very trite," she says. "That doesn't
communicate the love of Christ to anyone, because Christ wasn't trite. We're
tired of seeing the word Christian placed on art because of the stereotypes
it places on Christianity. It demeans the arts. The world doesn't want to
see it. The church has to realize it's our fault as the church for allowing
that stereotype to happen. If we can't take responsibility for our own
hypocrisies, it's really foolish."

Without a credible voice in popular culture, the American church becomes
obsolete, especially in the area of the visual arts, says Jack Hafer,
producer of "To End All Wars," staring Kiefer Sutherland. The film, which
had limited release in theaters and is available on DVD, was based on the
book by Ernest Gordon called "Through the Valley of the Kwaii." Mr. Hafer,
along with other professional artists, mentors students at the Brehm Center.

"The church in America has really been behind the times in the support of
the arts," he says. "The church needs to be part of the great conversation,
which is really the great issues of life, talked about in a great way. ...
I'm doing everything I can to encourage them to keep moving ahead in that
area."

"THE NEW RENAISSANCE WON'T START IN A CLASSROOM"

Here is my latest article from the National Catholic Register. I had excerted a paragraph a few weeks ago. Here is another snip so as to whet with...

Great art comes out of community. It was in the little community gathered around the master painter, Perugino, that Raphael’s talent was first revealed and then nurtured. At age 14, Michaelangelo was sent by his father to apprentice with the famous artist Domenico Ghirlandaio. Mozart was mentored by his father, himself an accomplished violinist.

The masters of old saw themselves as having an important place in the society. They were charged to preserve and hand on beauty-making techniques by mentoring the next generation. "Pay attention now. I am going to show you my great-grandfather’s secret for making a mosaic glitter in that special way."

Renewing this tradition will require that our older artists start seeing themselves back in the heart of the society and not on the fringes, as has been the story of the 20th century. How to induce them to bravely let go of the isolated misery they have been clinging to in the name of defining self-expression? (How about just, "Let it go, guys"?)

SAVE THE DATE

Act One: Writing for Hollywood and Inter-Mission presents,

The Story of Art: A Worldview Approach

In recent years, the Christian church’s approach to art and entertainment has often been little more than moralistic finger-wagging over things like coarse language and morally decadent content. We tend to focus on eradicating these from culture, instead of seeing them as the symptoms of something much deeper. Morality is always derivative--it stems from an underlying worldview.

Using, slides and film clips, distinguished scholar Nancy Pearcey will take us through a stunning visual critique of art history, and the worldviews that gave rise to the different trends and styles. This presentation will provide a richer view of what it means to craft a Christian approach to the arts, and give a positive strategy as to what it means to be believers a redemptive force in the artistic culture.


Monday, July 12, 2004, 7:00pm – 9:30pm

Henrietta Mears Center
First Presbyterian Church of Hollywood, 1760 N. Gower St., Hollywood, CA 90028


Speaker Bio: Nancy Pearcey is the Francis A. Schaeffer Scholar at the World Journalism Institute. After studying violin in Hiedelberg, Germany, she went to Switzerland to study Christian worldview under Schaeffer at L'Abri Fellowship. She earned an MA from Covenant Theological Seminary, followed by graduate work in the history of philosophy at the Institute for Christian Studies in Toronto. She is a Visiting Scholar at Biola University's Torrey Honors Institute and a Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute. Pearcey is the author of Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity (www.totaltruthbook.com) and has co-authored and contributed to several other books, including The Soul of Science and the award-winning, bestselling How Now Shall We Live?


(Free well-lit parking in the lot on Carlos across the street)
General Admission—$10.00; Inter-Mission Members and Act One community - $8.00

RSVP at actone@fpch.org, or by calling (323)462-8460 x333

OSCAR: STUCK BETWEEN A GOD AND A PROPAGANDA PLACE

Daily Variety Friday reports that we have just passed the halfway point for Oscar contention, and that the two strongest candidates for Best Pictre, at this point, have to be reckoned The Passion of the Christ and....(are you ready?)....(yeah, but are you sitting down?)....Fahrenheit 9/11!

I admit it, I laughed out loud last week when I read on some lefty web site a Bush-hating devotee proclaiming about Moore's film, "This movie is OUR Passion!"

Daily Variety notes, "If Academy voters nominate Fahrenheit, they;ll be criticized for furthering Hollywood's "liberal agenda" [note from Barb - emphasis theirs]; if they don't, the Acad will be charged with political cowardice. So, Oscar voters should accept the fact that no matter what, this will be an interesting year."

Indeed, indeed.

EMILY MONDAY

501

This World is not Conclusion.
A Species stands beyond --
Invisible, as Music --
But positive, as Sound --
It beckons, and it baffles --
Philosophy -- don't know --
And through a Riddle, at the last --
Sagacity, must go --
To guess it, puzzles scholars --
To gain it, Men have borne
Contempt of Generations
And Crucifixion, shown --
Faith slips -- and laughs, and rallies --
Blushes, if any see --
Plucks at a twig of Evidence --
And asks a Vane, the way --
Much Gesture, from the Pulpit --
Strong Hallelujahs roll --
Narcotics cannot still the Tooth
That nibbles at the soul --

YEAH, I THOUGHT BETTER OF IT...

In front of the full jury box. Beat.

GALVIN
You know, so much of the time we're
lost. We say, 'Please, God, tell
us what is right. Tell us what's
true. There is no justice. The
rich win, the poor are powerless...'
We become tired of hearing people
lie. After a time we become dead.
A little dead. We start thinking
of ourselves as victims.
And we become victims.
And we become weak...and doubt
ourselves, and doubt our
institutions...and doubt our
beliefs...we say for example, `The
law is a sham...there is no law...I
was a fool for having believed
there was.'
But today you are the law.
You are the law... And
not some book and not the lawyers,
or the marble statues and the
trappings of the court...all that
they are is symbols. Of
our desire to be just...
All that they are, in effect, is a
prayer... a fervent, and
a frightened prayer. In my religion
we say, `Act as if you had faith,
and faith will be given to you.'
If. If we would have faith
in justice, we must only believe
in ourselves. And act with justice.
And I believe that there is
justice in our hearts.
Thank you.
(from The Verdict,written by David Mamet)

STUCK IN THE TERMINAL

Spielberg is in a quandry. It's not unlike the quandry faced by the Tom Hanks' character in Spielberg's current offering The Terminal. The greatest populist director of our time, Spielberg has achieved everything most people could dream of in Hollywood. (Which is part of his problem. There is no greater stunt to creativity than actually getting everything you want.) He has a stack of blockbuster films. Household name. More money than Charles Foster Kane. And with Schindler's List, he won the "You're important! Yes, you are!" moniker from the industry (which, as Medved is always saying, ultimately drives the Hollywood elite more than Porche). But, just like Hanks stuck at Gate 67, Speilberg can't seem to buy the ticket for the one thing he wants most: To be a great cinematic master - an artist more than a populist. And what separates the craftsman from the artist? Theme. Spielberg wants desperately to say something original and important, but he doesn't seem to have it in him. Even Shindler's List failed in this. It was horrific, compelling, memorable -- but also devastatingly obvious.

How else to explain the cinematic meandering that Spielberg is engaged with in his last couple of cute little movies? Catch Me if You Can and The Terminal are both over-produced little stories that have elements of sweetness and light, but which ultimately feel hollow. There just isn't any there, there.

Don't get me wrong. I gasped at the beauty of the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park, and am in awe of the suspense-building technique. Spielberg s exceptionally good at what he does. But I think "what he does" just isn't enough for him anymore. So, he is wandering around, trying out little movies, to see if that is where meaning may be found.

The director has desperately tried to make himself a brilliant reputation with films like AI, (Pathetic attempt to appropriate Kubrick's spiritual distortion. On Spielberg it just felt embarrassingly pretentious.) Minority Report (Fun film. Too bad the real minorities here were the deep insights.) and Saving Private Ryan (The battle scenes are amazing. The insight into men at arms was awol.) All of these faltered under Speilberg's facile gremlin. Borrowing from Flannery O'Connor, Speilberg just can't seem to give up finding cause and effect solutions for every human problem. He has no comfort with mystery - and so his movies all end up feeling pretty pat.

The Terminal is yet another well-produced - really over-produced - vehicle that never really gets off the runway. Hanks does a great job of being cute and sympathetic, but ultimately, just like his character, he has no journey to make. The film takes more than an hour to establish the stakes for Hanks, and then, they are, well, silly.

This isn't the first time, Spielberg tries to cover a lack of conflict with the musical talents of composer, John Williams. I remember Amistad also had a swelling score in the background of what one critic described as "basically a two-hour seminar on property law." Catherine Zeta-Jones is so lovely here -- but her character too is stranded.

Speilberg is a good enough director to know when he isn't hitting the marks, so there are smatterings of atttempts to generate conflict by creating a contrived villain, and to heighten the stakes by suggesting a love-story -- but ultimately, the film fails because it never becomes what it is essentially about. That is, it should have been about being a man without a country, but these issues are skirted over completely. (There was a cool movie, Man Without a Country that I saw in high school. Made a huge impression on me.) It was like Jurassic Park never really got to the issue of "When Man Tries to Be God, He Ends Up Making Monsters." Or, in AI, the movie never gets deep into what should have been its fundamental question: "So, What Makes a Human Soul?!"

So, like most of Spielberg's recent projects, The Terminal feels just kind of episodic - Speilberg creating lots of delightful little moments that ultimately add up to very little.

Oh, if only Spielberg could, like, lose all his money, spend a few years in some public opprobrium and enter into some dark night of the soul. But, I don't think he is going to be that lucky.

I can't recommend The Terminal. Unless you like getting on two hour airplane rides that end up bringing you right back where you left.

To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.
Vanity Fair columnist, Christopher Hutchins, on Fahrenheit 9/11

JOAN TO PRIMETIME: "TAKE THAT! AND THAT!"

Excellent! The nominations for the prestigious Humanitas Prize are out. In the highly-contested 60 minutes drama category, freshman series Joan of Arcadia has won two of the three nominations. Series creator, Barbara Hall got a nomination for the Pilot episode, and staff writer Joy Gregory also got a nomination for the episode "The Uncertainty Principle". The other nominee in the category is John Wells, who will lose for his episode of ER, "Makemba".

The Humanitas Prize is highly esteemed in the industry and by writers, because it applauds not only technical mastery, but also the overall social worthiness of a project. At stake in the 60 min. category is a $25,000 prize, but much more, bragging rights that a show is responsible and good for the world.

I am actually in happy shock about the nomination - as each year, Humanitas seems to keep getting farther and farther from the Catholic values that inspired its Founder Fr. Ellwood Kieser to inaugurate the award back in the early '80s. I wasn't sure if Joan would be hip enough to get a fair hearing from the same readers who also nominated (gay propaganda ruthlessly unfair dreck) Angels in America to win in the 90 min. television movie category.

Joan is also being heavily promoted by CBS for a prime-time Emmy. The noms for the Emmy's will be released on July 15. I think Joan is probably a shoe-in for an Emmy nom. This is quite extraordinary. In an industry where Nip and Tuck, Queer Eye and The L Word have all the buzz, it's pretty much miraculous a show about a sixteen year old talking to God (and He's a nice God with - in the words of the pilot "a good personality") is finding this kind of acclaim.

I think a big part of this recognition is the power of Barbara's personality. You'd have to know her to know what I mean. Plus the fact that she has a very good show. But as we have seen in the past, having a good project doesn't guarantee anything in entertainment industry awards.

EMILY MONDAY

1203

The Past is such a curious Creature

To look her in the Face
A Transport may receipt us
Or a Disgrace --

Unarmed if any meet her, I charge him fly -
Her faded Ammunition
Might yet reply.

WHEN REAL LIFE IS CREEPIER THAN STEPFORD

A few friends and I caught a screening of the Frank Oz remake of The Stepford Wives last night. As my friend pointed out mid-way through the piece, "Satire is no longer possible in this society." I think that is very true. How can you satire a society that is addicted to Fear Factor, WWF Smackdown and thinks that breeding human babies to suck the stem cells out of their brains is (yawn), no big deal?

The original Stepford Wives was creepy, not only because the filmmakers had better creative control than Oz and collaborators, but also, because there was still some notion of normal domesticity to exploit for satire. This is not the case any more.

So, this new Stepford, conscious that it isn't hitting the same dark chords as the original, elects to satirize the only somewhat stable target still left on the cultural shelf: Christians. The new Stepford, CT is a place where Christian men - as white as the pure driven snow (READ: BECAUSE CHRISTIANS ARE RACIST!!!) - maintain a shallow, phony existence to compensate for the fact that they are all underachieving wusses.

So biting. So prescient is Hollywood!

It was amazing to me how the film - even with its premise of ridiculing middle-class morality, still had to have a gay couple in the mix. They established that the butch-gay "husband" was evil by making him a, you know, Republican. (BLECK! YUCKY! EEEEW! WHAT A PERVERSION OF ALL THAT IS PURE AND TRUE!!!).

But enough about the annoying, election year agendizing of the project.

From a purely art standpoint, this piece fails early on in the script level. It isn't funny enough. It isn't creepy enough. It isn't clever enough. It just isn't enough. It should never have made it out of the pitch stage. Someone should have said, "And after we have recreated the whole cool look of the perfect fifties suburbia - then, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN?

Pass. Major pass.

THREE THINGS I COUNT AS PET PEEVES...

...are people telling me their dreams (what are you supposed to say? "Wow, hey, that's pretty twisted. Good for your subconscious!"), people reading me their poetry (I have been eating crumbs off the table of THE Great Poet, Emily, for too long.), and people who talk about their pets (I grew up in the country, where animals primarily existed to fend off - and occasionally eat - the broad variety of pests - human and animal. We didn't worship our animals, nor speak of them like children...).

DISSOLVE TO:

SFX: TIBBY THE CAT, ATTACHED TO AN IV, FLOATS THROUGH SPACE. He is NOT amused by the indignity.

TIBBY
I don't like the Vet.
Sick dogs abound. Putrid. "Mew."
You will pay for this.

Tibby comes home today after four days in Kitty Intensive care. He is going to be fine... I'll be glad to have him back on the foot of my bed at night. So, I can stop dreaming in cat-haiku.

I AND THOU?

I came home Saturday from five weeks on the road to find that my cat, Tibby, was deathly ill. She wasn't eating, was throwing up, not using her litter box and was lethargic and weak. I tried a couple of days of, "I'm home, Sweetie" therapy, but when she didn't perk up, I took her to the Vet yesterday. Turns out Tibby has a major bladder obstruction requiring four days in the Feline Hospital (at an outrageous pricetag - I guess I am officially now a single, cat-woman...).

But there was more news too. When the Vet came to make a report to me, she also noted that Tibby the cat, my gorgeous, female, blue-eyed, seal-point Himalayan, whom I have nurtured and doted on for five years, is actually, a male! It's true. I demanded that the Vet prove it to me, and she did.

In many ways, the past couple of years for me has been a series of dreadful let-downs in which I have repeatedly, absolutely misjudged people (beings?) near to me. I have had a few mind-numbing bouts over friends whom I thought loved the same things I did, who turned out to have all the moral maturity of the average Venus fly trap. The whole Passion-Mel Gibson thing brought me face-to-face with scores of people who just wanted to use me as some kind of doorway to celebrity. There has been a very close friend who suddenly one day phased me out without explanation or apparent cause. And then there was the shockingly awful misread that happened right under my professional nose, and which has made a paradigm shift in my whole way of looking at the world.

But in all of this, there was always Tibby to come home to. Tibby was the same always...except that she wasn't at all what I thought...being a he.

I've been feeling so sorry for myself this year. But then there I was last night, standing at the Vet's laughing loud and long. It's really kind of funny. I think it will save me from the new jaded posture I was trying out.

MAKING THE UNTHINKABLE POSSIBLE

See, this is the kind of thing I mean when I say that it is immoral for artists to smear their sick fantasies all over the rest of us. It is obscuring the issue to say people have a First Amendment right to vomit in the public square. The fact is, we, the viewing public also have the right not to have the cultural air we breathe polluted. Second-hand smut is bad for us.

Nicole Kidman's latest movie, Birth - made after the soon-to-open Stepford Wives - see the Australian Oscar winner Kidman play a young widow who falls in love with a 10-year-old boy she believes is the reincarnation of her dead husband.

But executives from New Line Cinema, the production company, are reportedly considering pulling the $US50 million ($72 million) flick because of scenes showing Kidman bathing naked with the young lad.

Sources told the Enquirer that the film had undergone a string of creative battles and rewrites.

Now executives have told the film's executive producers that the two scenes - showing Kidman and the boy stripping off and kissing in the bath - are "borderline disgusting" to watch.

It is, according to the public relations company charged with promoting the film, "a publicity nightmare".

Click here for the whole story.

The good thing is, the film is garnering "outrage" from some folks in the Biz...although after The Passion controvery-success, we will never be sure again as to whether anything is genuine outrage or just a marketing strategy.

MOUSE HOUSE SHOWS IT HAS HEART AND SOUL

Time to give Disney some well-deserved kudos. They recently made a good choice and they deserve to hear plaudits from us. (I don't care WHY they made the decision they did. The point is the result.)

The executives found themselves confronted with two documentary projects that were seeking theatrical distribution. On the LEFT hand, was the latest Michael Moore snarling leftwing propaganda piece, Fahrenheit 9/11. The piece was being coddled by Miramax, a Disney subsidiary. On the RIGHT hand, they had America's Heart and Soul, a lovely, emotional and patriotic piece not geared to influence any viewers' voting patterns.

And - shockingly!!! - Disney did the right thing! What's in the water over at the Mouse-House these days?!

Disney told Miramax to duck Moore's trash (which was still hoisted up by the Weinsteins, who can never resist cinematic demagoguery), and then they green-lit America's Heart and Soul

I saw America's Heart and Soul last night and am happy to give it - and Disney - a two thumbs up. Good job guys. The feature length documentary doesn't have the emotional power (or narrative structure) of last year's Spellbound, but is still a wonderful, visually stunning glimpse into the lives of "average" Americans from coast to coast, quietly doing interesting and individualistic things. There are profiles of rugweavers in the Appalachians, the last real cowboy in Telluride, Co, cliff dancers in California, a Gospel choir in Mississippi, a metal junk artist in the Pacific Northwest, and many more. While the selection of the portraits could have been more thoughtfully done, the effect of the film is still to connect the possibility of personal passion to freedom. The film defines Americans as people of great passion for life, and for realizing big dreams. It's a good film. Take your kids, your parents, your grandparents and yourself. And then send Disney a messgae telling them, "Great call, guys! Do it again!"

"BY THIS SHALL ALL MEN KNOW YOU ARE NOT MY DISCIPLES"...

Clearly in the name of edifying the masses of nonbelievers, Icon Distribution and Regal Entertainment Group are going to court to conduct a litigious brawl about dividing up The Passion of the Christ box-office receipts. Both companies have Christians at the head. Icon is claiming that Regal owes it $40 million dollars.

I don't know who is right here. But I do know that I could almost hear a loud, smug gloating sound emanating off the June 9th headline of Hollywood Reporter: "Passion ploy - Icon vs. Regal".

Borrowing from writer Anne Lamott, I feel sure "this is the kind of thing that makes Jesus want to go lap gin out of the cat bowl."

MOORE CHEATING WESTERN UNION AGAIN

Last Tuesday, elite Hollywood continued its self-defeating, every four year practice, of swallowing a little more of its own tail, with an over-the-top, no holds barred, A-list packed celebration of Michael Moore's latest doc Fahrenheit 9/11. (The 10pm screening was post-poned for half an hour to accomodate the celebrities arriving from the overtime Lakers game...because political posturing does make us feel important, but basketball is really what life is all about.)

Falling over each other to get a place at the screening - and in the pages of the industry trades covering the event - were countless celebs including: Jodie Foster, Meg Ryan, Drew Barrymore, Demi Moore and tadpole Kutcher, Danny DeVito, David Duchovney, Tea Leoni, Jack Black, Viggo Mortensen, Spike Jonze, Ellen Degeneres, Ariana Huffington, Rosana Arquette, Leonardo DiCaprio, Billy Crystal, Sharon Stone, Matthew Perry, Garry Shandling, Chris Rock, Bill Maher, and the Weinsteins of Miramax who are apparently self-financing the theatrical release of the film in the U.S. As Lions Gates' Tom Ortenberg noted, "It's like a mini-Oscars tonight!"

Fahrenheit 9/11 will receive the biggest launch ever for a documentary, rolling out on as many as 800 screens.

And I feel absolutely certain that it's all because this film is a high work of art that doesn't have any obnoxious political agenda getting stuffed down the global viewing throat. Phew!

STUPID QUOTE OF THE WEEK

"I think this is one of the most important films ever made...There are very few films or works of art that have a profound effect on world affairs - like Uncle Tom's Cabin - but this actually has a chance to change the world." Rob Reiner, after screening Michael Moore's new documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 which asserts that President Bush is in cahoots with Osama Bin Ladin.

EMILY MONDAY

771

None can experience sting who Bounty -- have not known --

The fact of Famine -- could not be
Except for Fact of Corn --

Want -- is a meagre Art
Acquired by Reverse --
The Poverty that was not Wealth --
Cannot be Indigence.

A NEW RENAISSANCE?

Here is a snip of my next column for the National Catholic Register...

Two of my sisters have advanced degrees in music. I myself went to graduate school for cinema, and I have spent the last five years teaching writers on both the graduate and undergraduate level. The main thing I have learned in the art classroom, is that classrooms have little to do with the creation of beautiful works of art. The achievement of a Master of Fine Arts in whatever discipline, from even a top university, says nothing at all about whether an individual is an artist or even a competent craftsman.

The way to foment a second renaissance is to recreate the origins of the first. The Renaissance flowed out of studios not classrooms. It’s patrons were princes and pastors, not professors.

I am not sure for what kind of life university classrooms really prepare young people, but they certainly aren’t petrie dishes for artistic talent. If anything, the impersonal, pragmatic environment of contemporary academia – anonymous rows of young people, most half awake, subjected to long cycles of monotonous lectures in sterile rooms - seems calculated to crush the passion for life and color and texture and sound that is the seed of the arts. The most that can be achieved in a university art classroom is a disconnected handing on of the history and theory of the art forms, and possibly some rudimentary technique. The main value that one might find in a university art classroom is a community of artists. Community and art have a necessary connection.

But the one thing essential to the production of beautiful art is never going to happen in a classroom. That is, no teacher is ever going to say to a paying student, “You don’t belong here. You don’t have any talent.” Universities have a remoteness from the student, who is basically a consumer paying for services. Unable to make talent-judgments, university classrooms do a huge disservice to everyone involved.

The primary victim of the democratization of the classroom is the talentless student who moves through an expensive art program regardless of the fact that he does not have the chops to make a professional go of it. The second level of injustices are suffered by the talented student whose work cannot be elevated out of sense of giving offense to those who are mediocre. True genius will find no challenge in the leveling mediocrity of the institution, and the gifted end up with an inflated sense of their untested talents. Next, the professors of this system are victims of the futile task to try and teach art without actually cleaving to any “fascist” aesthetic standards. Ultimately the whole society is victimized by the dreadful art regurgitated on it, as mastery of craft becomes less and less of an ideal.

There is nothing egalitarian about artistic talent, a fact that is an ongoing source of outrage to the melancholic Marxists who hold sway in pretty much every Humanities department at the top universities. I remember one of my grad school professors becoming enraged at me when I asked if she thought any of my class’ final projects were ultimately any good. “How dare you hinder the right of self-expression by asking that kind of question?” Having already gotten my grades for the term, I shrugged back, “How dare this university charge me $30,000 for a transcript of meaningless grades?”

The art classroom reduces the artist to a technician, and negates the sense that art proceeds from a whole person. Paraphrasing Our Lord, “From the abundance of the heart, the artist expresses.” Art comes as much from the broodings of the heart as it does from the manipulation of the brush or chisel. A song begins in the soul, not on a keyboard. Artists need formation, not education, and formation can only happen in a one to one relationship.

For all these reasons, the classroom model is not what produced Michelangelo, Raphael and Da Vinci. Part of our journey to renew the lists of great artists in the Church will be to rediscover and then renew the methods that ultimately produced the most beautiful art of human history. Principally, we must restore the master-apprentice model of not studying the arts, but handing them on.....

CHECKING IN

...We wrapped Act One-DC last week. It was a great month. We had a really wonderful class of writers, beautiful weather, great facilities at GWU, and a faculty that was, as always, amazingly generous and profound. I have been traveling since the program ended in CT, PA and tomorrow NY for speeches here and there. Sorry, blogging has been non-existent. I am soooooooooooooo tired the idea of typing brings tears to my eyes.

...R.I.P. great Ronald Wilson Reagan. One of my heroes. A truly great orator on top of many other things. I remember hearing him give speeches when I was in high school and wanting to write down some of his phrases. I remember how disgusting the Carter presidency was. A nation perpetually embarrassed and ashamed. And then, Reagan came in with that beaming smile and reminded us who we were supposed to be.

...I saw Harry Potter III with my sisters the other night. I really liked it. It seemed to me that it is the first of the three projects that is actually a movie and not just a talking book.

...I'll be back in L.A. on Friday. Thank God. I miss my cat.